London's first Quietways to be built by next May

Not Sustrans... there's no hope then.
Just more Boris talk-not-action.

To paraphrase Spinal Tap:

"Quiet ways? Shite ways...."

Nooooo, not Sustrans. Everything they touch turns to... well, yes, I'm not overly encouraged by their involvement at any rate.

If they do what they do in hackney and close off through traffic this could allow the Quietways to become actual liveable streets, without that this is a waste of money.

My heart sank when I read this. Sustrans have a poor reputation for providing high quality cycle routes, accepting (and indeed promoting) substandard infrastructure, if we can call it that. The archetypal “Sustrans route” has become something of a sick joke among anyone who rides a bike: far too narrow with sharp blind bends, obscured with all manner of obstacles, “shared “ with pedestrians and going nowhere you want to go.

Quietways are a wonderful idea in principle but they will only work if they provide genuinely safe, reasonably direct routes that feel attractive to ordinary people (i.e. non-cyclists).

That can only be achieved by following Dutch practice of closing roads to through traffic, restricting parking and ensuring traffic levels are low and junctions can be safely negotiated by anyone on a bike, even an 8-year old.

The current busy routes lined with parked cars and choked with cars speeding down aren’t going to attract anyone, regardless of how many signs you put up.

It would have been far better if TfL had instead employed people who actually know about building World-class cycling infrastructure.

This "Quite Roads" can easily been discovered spending a little bit of time on Google Map.

When I started cycling to work few years ago from Merton to the City I only used the CS7. I then started to look for alternative routes and now 40% of my commute is on shared path, and parks the remaining in low traffic road with the only busy bit being Embankment and the final bit in the city.

On the other side I much prefer this sort of low key initiatives than the mega-solutions proposed by mainstream Cycling organizations.

Of course it would be beautiful to have segregate cycling lane everywhere but realistically I don't think this is ever going to happen as the key factors fro success are currently not available: Budget and Political will.

Besides I believe that segregated facilities can easily be mistaken by roads users as a licence to abuse cyclists outside the "segregated facilities". Just think how many time they yell at you for not using a cycling lane (because it is maybe ruined or unsuitable) .

I'm interested in the Croydon bit. Unfortunately it starts close to London Road, at which point the regular roads are generally fine to use for cyclists; the real problem is getting there from South Croydon where you're essentially forced to use a fast three lane road, as well as the difficulty in getting across Croydon with all those one way streets. No help there, so I don't know that this will improve things greatly.

Interesting. 123£million cycle funding will sound good in the electioneering, will resurface a lot of rat runs and update a lot of paving and street lights, sustrans will pop up their signs and take the fee and Royal Haskoning will get a wee fee too and some political goodwill for their HS2 work.

Or maybe it'll be quite good - a big concrete No Through Road bollard on most of those streets would do wonders.

Delancey Street (NW1) a QUIETWAY?

What are these people on?

It's a three lane, one-way, race-track - 20 mph zone notwithstanding.

http://goo.gl/AgDIWQ

I'm now in favour of putting bollards up for filtered permeability on every single road that's not a red route so that they're ALL access only if residential.

Would only inconvenience the rat runners, residents would then have slower traffic with drivers that actually (hopefully) care about their neighbours' safety. Kids could (shocker) play safely on the streets, old people with walkers would be able to cross without being terrorised... we could get some streets back for people instead of metal boxes at speed.

Then the police would be less stretched and may even be able to police the red routes somewhat effectively.

If they are well signposted then it will be a big help to me personally. Obviously on my commute and travels to places I know well, it won't be. But going to a part of town I don't know so well now either involves taking a long time looking for a quiet route, and then being slowed down en route checking I'm still on route; or it involves going the quickest and most direct route, which is usually a major road that's horrible.

The best solution would be to have proper separated infrastructure on direct routes, but until then their proposals seem some practical help.

If they could also put a load of bollards halfway down the residential roads to stop them being rat runs, but still open to access for residents, then this would make a seemingly shite proposal into something quite good.

This doesn't seem to have been communicated very well, as to me these new quietways look an awful lot like the old LCN (London Cycle Network). If this is simply upgrading and expanding some LCN routes, why confuse matters?

Some of the old LCN routes were actually very useful, but an awful lot of cyclists aren't even aware of them. Try to even find an online map of the LCN routes.

My own experience of the LCN is that it can be a useful guide to quiet roads, more so in outer London, inner London doesn't really have quiet roads. But, even for slow cyclists some of the infrastructure choices are annoying (a cycling route with a cyclists dismount sign is a failure). If this program is addressing those problems and poor choices, then great, but I'm not sure that is what it is doing.

Most accidents happen at junctions. Esp I suspect with drivers not giving way to cyclists. A good route should, IMO, have as few junctions as possible. Thats why, certainly in rush hour, I tend to stick to the truck roads rather than 'quiet' back roads.

When traffic is light and fast, then back roads are more favourable.

Removing chicanes does nothing to help cyclists on these roads, just lets motorists keep the speed up.

As long as there's through-traffic, rat runners will be a real risk, and even worse perceived risk. Especially for new cyclists, who are the targeted users of the Quietways.

And... Sustrans is sounding more and more like a corporation proud of a new engineering contract.

This will set campaigning back, not further it.

just looked at the map, isn't hyde park one of the royal parks and isn't it the one where Mr Vine got done for speeding....

So that is going to be a very inviting route to cycle then!

I also note the comment, subject to discussion with royal parks as are a large number of areas. So this is a wish list with very little substance.

Can't help thinking this is a total waste of money and time.

Really, really hope to be proved wrong...but I 'use' part of the london cycle network (90% of which is under parked cars) and apart from a couple of signs that nobody ever notices and occasionally some non mandatory cycle lanes (see parked cars comment, above) they are useless.

And the bit about 'smoothing traffic flow' - I hope they are talking about smoothing flow for cyclists only, because otherwise we're talking about making a route quicker for cars MEANING A ITS A LOT LESS SAFE FOR CYCLISTS.

But I'm sure they've thought this through, really I am.

I'm confused. The article mentions a route from Waterloo to Greenwich, but Greenwich doesn't even feature on the map!

The detailed TFL proposed routes map is at https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/plugin-central-london-gr...

Sustans will probably dump a load of gravel, mud and bits of old railway sleepers on the road. That's what they do.

There's a bit more clarity on what will actually be built from Matthew Beard in the Evening Standard today:

The main interventions on the vast majority of the network will be waymarking, surfacing improvements where necessary, removing barriers such as chicanes and improving the flow of the route.

However, where directness demands the Quietway briefly join a main road, full segregation and direct crossing points will be provided, wherever possible, on that stretch.

So I think probably not much help to existing regular cycle commuters on those routes, but might be really good for either new cyclists or cyclists going somewhere they don't know the way to.

https://www.tfl.gov.uk/cdn/static/cms/documents/plugin-central-london-gr...

I have similar fears about using "rat runs" as quiet routes. Hopefully they'll block through traffic...

What's the point in having pictures in an article that can't be expanded?

It's even referred to in the article, but I can't see jack on that thing because it's only a tiny thumbnail.

These look like the roads I already use, and have to sprint down to get out of the way of white vans, black cabs and mini cabs whose drivers are determined to run me down. Unless there are bollards to stop through traffic, this is pointless. And I see it includes Russell Square, Theobalds Rd, and Clerkenwell Road among other massively busy thoroughfares.