Read this today:
BBC News - Testing a London 'Cycle Superhighway'
This sems to me a bit like a joke: there's still the same space sharing with cars issues as a normal cycle path, why did they bother?
And I bet they also stop where they're most needed, i.e. narrow roads, junctions and bus stops.
Anything short than a segregated bicycle route can hardly be considered as a improvement on the patchy terracota "cycle lanes" that typically stop where one needs them most: at junctions, bus stops, etc....
The current state of cycling infrastructures is simply pathetic when compares to most European countries and an those blue lanes are nothing short of expensive joke.
The government taxes very heavily motorists, mostly because they can and justifying itself on environmental values. Apart from the fact it's both wrong (CO2 is not a pollutant) and unfair (housing and industry are biggest polluters), the most frustrating is that little of this hoard goes back towards improving the infrastrucure and public transport.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Friday, July 02, 2010
Here's the rationale: why indeed would builders move out when they're so well accomodated on a site?
And there are the proofpoint:
- the North Sheen recreation grounds, 4 portakabin, well over 9 months into building a new pavillion
- the Barnes railway bridge refurb, 6? Portakabins and the towpath blocked on the southside for over 6 months
- the Kew embankments works, 3 portakabins and over 9 months into it
- the Lower Richmond rd pavement works, 2 portakabins since 3 months and not much visible work done
If you're laughinhg, just think it's all your taxpayers money that is spent on overruns and metal containers, with kettles and tv to watch the footie during tea breaks...