Would you use a floating bicycle toll road along the Thames?

OldRidgeback wrote:

y

In terms of cost, there are far cheaper and simpler ways of adding capacity to London's cycling facilities.

yeah, but they might inconvenience motorists and wouldn't be profit making toll road type things...

OldRidgeback wrote:

...it'd need a carefully designed surface so as not to become treacherous in the wet and even worse, in cold weather. Bear in mind that being along the riverit'd suffer heavy moisture and heavy frosting/ice, even when the rest of the city would be free from such hazards. It'd also have to have psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control from pitching into the riiver.

While I completely agree that it isn't a practical, cost effective or sensible suggestion, these three criticisms don't hold water:

1) "carefully designed surface as as not to be treacherous in wet weather" - not very hard: there are plenty of boardwalks, bridges and so on which have similar levels of friction to any other road surface - the designers refer to an 'anti-skid' surface for the deck.

2) "heavy frosting/icing" - central London hardly has any frost, let alone icing, but in any case, if it was sitting in the water, the chance of sub-zero temperatures would be small. If it was a bridge quite a way above the water, this might be more of a problem.

3) "psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control" - I'd have thought that the designers of a floating deck way might have thought of providing reasonable rails!

Clearly the best long term solution is to better restrict traffic in London, but there are places where sections of deckway (publically funded and openly accessible) might be a useful way of providing a better route for cyclists, while also opening up the river frontage, particularly in the east, where so much of it is blocked by (private) converted wharves and warehouses, and the alternative roads parallel to the river are narrow and circuitous.

croissantlune wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

...it'd need a carefully designed surface so as not to become treacherous in the wet and even worse, in cold weather. Bear in mind that being along the riverit'd suffer heavy moisture and heavy frosting/ice, even when the rest of the city would be free from such hazards. It'd also have to have psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control from pitching into the riiver.

While I completely agree that it isn't a practical, cost effective or sensible suggestion, these three criticisms don't hold water:

1) "carefully designed surface as as not to be treacherous in wet weather" - not very hard: there are plenty of boardwalks, bridges and so on which have similar levels of friction to any other road surface - the designers refer to an 'anti-skid' surface for the deck.

2) "heavy frosting/icing" - central London hardly has any frost, let alone icing, but in any case, if it was sitting in the water, the chance of sub-zero temperatures would be small. If it was a bridge quite a way above the water, this might be more of a problem.

3) "psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control" - I'd have thought that the designers of a floating deck way might have thought of providing reasonable rails!

Clearly the best long term solution is to better restrict traffic in London, but there are places where sections of deckway (publically funded and openly accessible) might be a useful way of providing a better route for cyclists, while also opening up the river frontage, particularly in the east, where so much of it is blocked by (private) converted wharves and warehouses, and the alternative roads parallel to the river are narrow and circuitous.

Good anti skid surfaces are indeed available but cost rather more than conventional surfaces due to the higher quality of materials needed. Wear rates are also higher as a rule, so regular maintenance would be required to ensure they stayed within accepted safety standards.

Bridges typically suffer far more frost or ice than normal stretches of road and it would seem likely that similar issues would afflict any structure built on the river.

Guard rails along the side of such a structure would have to be constructed to a minimum height requirement so as to ensure safety and as this would be a dedicated cycleway, would also have to feature some sort of impact absorbing properties (perhaps with plastic coverings over the steel guard rail).

Exit and entry ramps would have to be placed at regular intervals along the route and these would need to have some sort of barrier to allow use by only those paying the necessary toll fee. As the river is tidal, those on/off ramps would have to be sufficiently long enough to ensure that they would not be too steep to use at high or low tide while also being designed so as not to impede river traffic.

A key design issue would be to provide the cycleway with sufficient protection so as not to be at risk from impact with any river traffic and not to pose a safety danger to users in the event of such an impact. Some fairly large vessels do use the River Thames and given the heavy currents at some stretches, controlling those vessels can be tricky so it is almost inevitable that any structure would be hit at some point. Existing bridges across the Thames do suffer from 'bridge bashing'.

The design would have to allow vessels to dock at various points along the bank, requiring raised sections but without having steep gradients for users cycling along the route so as to optimise safety. The artist's impression envisages a floating structure but any raised section would have to be supported.

When you start looking at the practicalities of this concept, there are a lot of better, cheaper and more efficient wayds to boost capacity for cyclists in London.

OldRidgeback wrote:

croissantlune wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

...it'd need a carefully designed surface so as not to become treacherous in the wet and even worse, in cold weather. Bear in mind that being along the riverit'd suffer heavy moisture and heavy frosting/ice, even when the rest of the city would be free from such hazards. It'd also have to have psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control from pitching into the riiver.

While I completely agree that it isn't a practical, cost effective or sensible suggestion, these three criticisms don't hold water:

1) "carefully designed surface as as not to be treacherous in wet weather" - not very hard: there are plenty of boardwalks, bridges and so on which have similar levels of friction to any other road surface - the designers refer to an 'anti-skid' surface for the deck.

2) "heavy frosting/icing" - central London hardly has any frost, let alone icing, but in any case, if it was sitting in the water, the chance of sub-zero temperatures would be small. If it was a bridge quite a way above the water, this might be more of a problem.

3) "psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control" - I'd have thought that the designers of a floating deck way might have thought of providing reasonable rails!

Clearly the best long term solution is to better restrict traffic in London, but there are places where sections of deckway (publically funded and openly accessible) might be a useful way of providing a better route for cyclists, while also opening up the river frontage, particularly in the east, where so much of it is blocked by (private) converted wharves and warehouses, and the alternative roads parallel to the river are narrow and circuitous.

 

Good anti skid surfaces are indeed available but cost rather more than conventional surfaces due to the higher quality of materials needed. Wear rates are also higher as a rule, so regular maintenance would be required to ensure they stayed within accepted safety standards.

Bridges typically suffer far more frost or ice than normal stretches of road and it would seem likely that similar issues would afflict any structure built on the river.

Guard rails along the side of such a structure would have to be constructed to a minimum height requirement so as to ensure safety and as this would be a dedicated cycleway, would also have to feature some sort of impact absorbing properties (perhaps with plastic coverings over the steel guard rail).

Exit and entry ramps would have to be placed at regular intervals along the route and these would need to have some sort of barrier to allow use by only those paying the necessary toll fee. As the river is tidal, those on/off ramps would have to be sufficiently long enough to ensure that they would not be too steep to use at high or low tide while also being designed so as not to impede river traffic.

A key design issue would be to provide the cycleway with sufficient protection so as not to be at risk from impact with any river traffic and not to pose a safety danger to users in the event of such an impact. Some fairly large vessels do use the River Thames and given the heavy currents at some stretches, controlling those vessels can be tricky so it is almost inevitable that any structure would be hit at some point. Existing bridges across the Thames do suffer from 'bridge bashing'.

The design would have to allow vessels to dock at various points along the bank, requiring raised sections but without having steep gradients for users cycling along the route so as to optimise safety. The artist's impression envisages a floating structure but any raised section would have to be supported.

When you start looking at the practicalities of this concept, there are a lot of better, cheaper and more efficient wayds to boost capacity for cyclists in London.

Wow, I bet they haven't thought of any of that shit.......................... 

PaulBox wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

croissantlune wrote:

OldRidgeback wrote:

...it'd need a carefully designed surface so as not to become treacherous in the wet and even worse, in cold weather. Bear in mind that being along the riverit'd suffer heavy moisture and heavy frosting/ice, even when the rest of the city would be free from such hazards. It'd also have to have psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control from pitching into the riiver.

While I completely agree that it isn't a practical, cost effective or sensible suggestion, these three criticisms don't hold water:

1) "carefully designed surface as as not to be treacherous in wet weather" - not very hard: there are plenty of boardwalks, bridges and so on which have similar levels of friction to any other road surface - the designers refer to an 'anti-skid' surface for the deck.

2) "heavy frosting/icing" - central London hardly has any frost, let alone icing, but in any case, if it was sitting in the water, the chance of sub-zero temperatures would be small. If it was a bridge quite a way above the water, this might be more of a problem.

3) "psecially designed rails to prevent cyclists losing control" - I'd have thought that the designers of a floating deck way might have thought of providing reasonable rails!

Clearly the best long term solution is to better restrict traffic in London, but there are places where sections of deckway (publically funded and openly accessible) might be a useful way of providing a better route for cyclists, while also opening up the river frontage, particularly in the east, where so much of it is blocked by (private) converted wharves and warehouses, and the alternative roads parallel to the river are narrow and circuitous.

 

Good anti skid surfaces are indeed available but cost rather more than conventional surfaces due to the higher quality of materials needed. Wear rates are also higher as a rule, so regular maintenance would be required to ensure they stayed within accepted safety standards.

Bridges typically suffer far more frost or ice than normal stretches of road and it would seem likely that similar issues would afflict any structure built on the river.

Guard rails along the side of such a structure would have to be constructed to a minimum height requirement so as to ensure safety and as this would be a dedicated cycleway, would also have to feature some sort of impact absorbing properties (perhaps with plastic coverings over the steel guard rail).

Exit and entry ramps would have to be placed at regular intervals along the route and these would need to have some sort of barrier to allow use by only those paying the necessary toll fee. As the river is tidal, those on/off ramps would have to be sufficiently long enough to ensure that they would not be too steep to use at high or low tide while also being designed so as not to impede river traffic.

A key design issue would be to provide the cycleway with sufficient protection so as not to be at risk from impact with any river traffic and not to pose a safety danger to users in the event of such an impact. Some fairly large vessels do use the River Thames and given the heavy currents at some stretches, controlling those vessels can be tricky so it is almost inevitable that any structure would be hit at some point. Existing bridges across the Thames do suffer from 'bridge bashing'.

The design would have to allow vessels to dock at various points along the bank, requiring raised sections but without having steep gradients for users cycling along the route so as to optimise safety. The artist's impression envisages a floating structure but any raised section would have to be supported.

When you start looking at the practicalities of this concept, there are a lot of better, cheaper and more efficient wayds to boost capacity for cyclists in London.

Wow, I bet they haven't thought of any of that shit.......................... 

If the team putting forward this proposal is led by architects as I suspect, then I bet they haven't thought of it.