pwa wrote:Maybe restricting access might work in a small number of urban fringe situations, but not in the wider countryside. The narrow lanes are the great mass of the road network there, and the main roads are the minority. When I drive from my home I use the main roads where appropriate, but there are journeys where it would take me twice as long if I avoided every bit of narrow road. So I pick-and-mix, making sensible decisions. Only one of our local lanes is a bit of a rat run, so it is almost a non-issue here.
Any restrictions on access will only work if Sat Nav systems can take them on board. All delivery drivers are only able to do their jobs with the aid of Sat Nav. They punch in the postcode and follow the instructions. If the software could accommodate an "access only" factor it might work, but that is a technical issue that I'm not qualified to comment on. Sticking bollards halfway down a lane (with the provision of a turn-around for vehicles) already happens, but can only be appropriate in a small minority of cases.
Hackney in London has done a very good job of blocking side roads to through traffic while allowing local traffic access so that they become pleasant places to cycle. And the results are there. Basically they block a road at key point so that you can get in from one end or the other for access but you cannot drive end to end to transit.
Satnavs are quite capable of dealing with current no-through roads so I don't see why they should be a problem. They have already developed in the haulage sector to avoid the old problem of HGVs getting stuck down narrow lanes thanks to inappropriate short cut routing. Market pressure will do the same if side roads are closed to through traffic because any satnav that persistently causes drivers to have to turn round and backtrack their route will quickly go in the bin.
pwa wrote:Maybe restricting access might work in a small number of urban fringe situations, but not in the wider countryside. The narrow lanes are the great mass of the road network there, and the main roads are the minority. When I drive from my home I use the main roads where appropriate, but there are journeys where it would take me twice as long if I avoided every bit of narrow road. So I pick-and-mix, making sensible decisions. Only one of our local lanes is a bit of a rat run, so it is almost a non-issue here.
Any restrictions on access will only work if Sat Nav systems can take them on board. All delivery drivers are only able to do their jobs with the aid of Sat Nav. They punch in the postcode and follow the instructions. If the software could accommodate an "access only" factor it might work, but that is a technical issue that I'm not qualified to comment on. Sticking bollards halfway down a lane (with the provision of a turn-around for vehicles) already happens, but can only be appropriate in a small minority of cases.
Hackney in London has done a very good job of blocking side roads to through traffic while allowing local traffic access so that they become pleasant places to cycle. And the results are there. Basically they block a road at key point so that you can get in from one end or the other for access but you cannot drive end to end to transit.
Satnavs are quite capable of dealing with current no-through roads so I don't see why they should be a problem. They have already developed in the haulage sector to avoid the old problem of HGVs getting stuck down narrow lanes thanks to inappropriate short cut routing. Market pressure will do the same if side roads are closed to through traffic because any satnav that persistently causes drivers to have to turn round and backtrack their route will quickly go in the bin.
Yes, closing off through routes works well in some urban situations. In practice it is less appropriate in most rural situations. The Tesco driver travelling between small villages will quite reasonably want to use a route that is efficient. When you are doing door to door deliveries in rural communities you are not using lanes as rat runs. The lanes are your network.
Saying the lanes are the network is simply accepting the status quo of allowing motor vehicles access everywhere without asking whether it's reasonable. But all this talk of deliveries is a bit of a red herring, IMO, most of the traffic on such lanes is cars.
Bmblbzzz wrote:Saying the lanes are the network is simply accepting the status quo of allowing motor vehicles access everywhere without asking whether it's reasonable. But all this talk of deliveries is a bit of a red herring, IMO, most of the traffic on such lanes is cars.
I can only speak with authority about the lanes around here in the Vale of Glamorgan. The motor traffic on most of the lanes (almost all) is either locals going about their business, or deliveries such as the Postie and Yodel / Tesco, etc, all of whom probably have a good reason to be there. Getting to and from villages, schools, etc. I can think of two lanes that are used (not that heavily) by drivers wanting to cut out a major road junction. I'd still feel okay cycling along those lanes, though I rarely do so because they link to the busy and unattractive A48 trunk road. The other lanes are lightly used because it is quicker to stick to the A and B roads for most journeys.
reohn2 wrote:I don't think anyone is thinking of blocking necessary rural lanes where tens of miles are needed to circumnavigate them.
Network Rail has few qualms about blocking rural lanes and requiring five mile diversions by closing level crossings... but heaven help that we should gate roads to help residents, cyclists and walkers rather than rail passengers thundering through!
Delivery firms use smart software that adapts routes to deal with closures. They would cope.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
pwa wrote:The Tesco driver travelling between small villages will quite reasonably want to use a route that is efficient. When you are doing door to door deliveries in rural communities you are not using lanes as rat runs. The lanes are your network.
I'm sure their routing software will learn to cope. It may take a bit longer but so what? Most of our problems with lanes is drivers in too much of a rush.
On the lanes of Wilts, Glos and Somerset I see more cars (and agricultural vehicles) than delivery vans. One thing's for sure though, the number of delivery vehicles is only going to rise with the growth in internet shopping and particularly supermarket deliveries. I don't know whether the cars I see are mostly locals or long-distance traffic avoiding main road congestion spots. I expect they're mostly locals using the lanes they know as short cuts, and that is the problem. For instance, on this map you can see a lane paralleling the B4040 heading southwest from Malmesbury: http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?X=38 ... &ay=185953
That's the kind of lane where traffic heading for, say, Alderton from Malmesbury, should be taking the B road rather than the lanes.
Perhaps closing the lanes will encourage Yodel & Tesco to switch to drone delivery. Of course we'd then all have to wear helmets cycling against the drones falling out the sky or bags of Tesco potatoes rupturing at 5,000ft
TonyR wrote:Perhaps closing the lanes will encourage Yodel & Tesco to switch to drone delivery. Of course we'd then all have to wear helmets cycling against the drones falling out the sky or bags of Tesco potatoes rupturing at 5,000ft
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
simonineaston wrote:Too many humans, full stop. This morning, I was listening to Bill Gates, on DID - nice bloke, don't get me wrong, but he was banging on about ending malaria and saving lives and I thought, "Weird - for a bright bloke, you just don't get it... we don't need more people on this earth, we need LESS, so spend all that money thinking of ways we could get rid of them some of them!"
Lets keep politics out of this forum; it's surely meant to be about bikes.
But Simons point is relevant and not really political as it affects anyone of any political view. But returning to bikes, surely if we give everyone, in poor/undeveloped nations, bikes then one day they'll want motorbikes/scooters then cars..... they're all human and will follow the same progression as the western nations where the car is impinging on quality of life for many. So the bike could be its own worst enemy. I think china is sort of going that way, quite worrying. But the fewer people then the fewer cars so population needs to be kept in check..... from Hans Roeslings stats it looks to peak at 11 billion and plateau but we're at 7 billion now another 4 billion is crazy. Not good.
pwa wrote:The Tesco driver travelling between small villages will quite reasonably want to use a route that is efficient. When you are doing door to door deliveries in rural communities you are not using lanes as rat runs. The lanes are your network.
I'm sure their routing software will learn to cope. It may take a bit longer but so what? Most of our problems with lanes is drivers in too much of a rush.
I have friends who live in places accessible only down partly single track lane. No main road option. Obviously you cannot prohibit delivery vehicles in such locations. Tesco, the Royal Mail, BT and all the rest serve customers living alongside narrow lanes. Farmers use the lanes to get from field to field. The lanes are not just there for us cyclists, or drivers who don't really need to use them. They are there for the local residents who use them for practical purposes and who get their goods and services via them. Of course there are a small number of lanes that have such a rat run problem that some sort of bollard answer might suit the locals.
pwa wrote:The Tesco driver travelling between small villages will quite reasonably want to use a route that is efficient. When you are doing door to door deliveries in rural communities you are not using lanes as rat runs. The lanes are your network.
I'm sure their routing software will learn to cope. It may take a bit longer but so what? Most of our problems with lanes is drivers in too much of a rush.
I have friends who live in places accessible only down partly single track lane. No main road option. Obviously you cannot prohibit delivery vehicles in such locations. Tesco, the Royal Mail, BT and all the rest serve customers living alongside narrow lanes. Farmers use the lanes to get from field to field. The lanes are not just there for us cyclists, or drivers who don't really need to use them. They are there for the local residents who use them for practical purposes and who get their goods and services via them. Of course there are a small number of lanes that have such a rat run problem that some sort of bollard answer might suit the locals.
This is precisely the point! No one should be prohibited from using such lanes. Reducing the amount of non-essential motor traffic, ie traffic which could take a different route, will make life better for the residents, farmers and delivery drivers as well as cyclists, walkers and horse riders.
Mmmm. It's a bit contentious to describe the journeys of delivery vehicles as non-essential yet imply (if I am reading it correctly) that cyclists and horse riders are on "essential" trips.
Let's be clear. I am all for selective use of bollarding on very specific lanes where it will do a lot of good and not much harm. By that I mean that the displaced traffic will not be sent on much longer journeys, and the restriction is because of a specific, intense problem.
What I would not like to see is a widespread use of bollards on a large proportion of lanes. And I don't think any of us are proposing that.
I don't think anyone's described delivery vehicles as non-essential, either. (Whether or not they are essential could be become a philosophical debate on the nature of society etc etc but that's certainly not for here!) Delivery vehicles have to deliver to all sorts of places.
