- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Quietway 2 (picture credit TfL)London's Quietway 2 from Walthamstow to Bloomsbury opens
Transport for London (TfL) has officially unveiled Quietway 2, running from Walthamstow in the north east of the capital to Bloomsbury, with a separate Quietway 2 West section continuing from Notting Hill to East Acton. Once linked by a proposed route through Westminster, they will form a 23-kilometre continuous cycle route.
The Walthamstow to Hackney section was opened yesterday morning by London’s Cycling & Walking Commissioner Will Norman, who said: “We’re striving to get as many people as possible walking and cycling in the capital.
“Creating these Quietway routes to build a genuinely London-wide network is vital to give more Londoners the confidence to take to two wheels.
“An amazing 730,000 trips are made by bike in the capital every day and I look forward to building on that further through the Quietway routes, which have already helped to boost the numbers cycling in our city.
“Our focus is on ensuring that Quietways are high-quality, with low traffic volumes and speeds, enabling all ages and abilities to enjoy cycling.”
Developed in partnership with the London boroughs of Islington, Hackney and Waltham Forest, Quietway 2 is 12 kilometres in length and from Bloomsbury heads through Angel, Haggerston, London Fields and Clapton on its way to Walthamstow.
It also links with the existing Cycle Superhighway 1 in De Beauvoir Town and Cycle Superhighway 6 in Bloomsbury, and proposed routes including Quietway 13 at London Fields – where there is also access, via nearby Broadway Market, to the Regent’s Canal towpath – and Quietway 10 near Angel.
However, as with Quietway 1, which runs south of the Thames from Greenwich to Waterloo and was unveiled in 2016, reaction to parts of the new route from campaigners has highlighted some shortcomings, the following tweets being just two examples.
> London's first cycling Quietway officially opens from Greenwich to Waterloo
The ‘Quietway’ route here is an indistinct smudge on some new paving. It looks like a cycle route to people cycling, while looking like a pavement to people walking. A recipe for conflict. pic.twitter.com/ycYzWfRDK5
— Mark Treasure (@AsEasyAsRiding) August 29, 2018
New quietway 2 map shows that if you want to cycle to a train station, the cinema, a hospital, etc then it will bypass all of those places! (as does CS1) pic.twitter.com/DaAHhXTYiA
— Hackney Cyclist (@Hackneycyclist) August 29, 2018
According to Transport for London, “Quietways are continuous, direct and clearly signed cycle routes on less-busy streets across London,” designed to complement the Cycle Superhighway network and encourage more of the city’s residents and visitors to take up cycling as well as improving conditions for pedestrians.
But in the past, London’s former cycling commissioner Andrew Gilligan – appointed to the position by Boris Johnson when he was mayor – has described the programme as a failure partly because some boroughs would not block streets on Quietway routes to rat-running motorists.
> Gilligan: Quietways programme is a failure
His concerns sadly proved justified in June when cyclist Antonio Marchesini was killed on Quietway 1 in Deptford with the driver of the Mercedes car that struck him abandoning the vehicle at the scene and fleeing. He handed himself in at a police station three days later.
> Driver abandons car and flees after killing cyclist on London’s Quietway 1
Simon Munk, infrastructure campaigner at the London Cycling Campaign, told road.cc after Mr Marchesini’s death that the fatal crash had happened at “one of the notoriously weakest points on Quietway 1.” Originally, it had been proposed to block the road to through traffic, but that plan was scrapped following consultation.
TfL highlights though that Quietway 1 has resulted in more people cycling, with an increase of 54 per cent since it opened, and the proportion of women taking to the route on bikes rising from 29 per cent to 35 per cent.
Three other routes have also been opened recently – Quietway 3 from Gladstone Park to Kilburn Station, Quietway 5 from Oval to Clapham Common, and Quietway 15 from Belgravia to Earl’s Court.
Sustrans helped TfL and the boroughs develop the new route and the sustainable transport charity’s head of infrastructure delivery, Kelly Clark, said: “It is wonderful to see Quietway 2 officially open.
“We have created a route which invites people to cycle rather than drive. It would be fantastic to see people who have previously been nervous about riding in London, dust off their bike and try out the route too.
“By creating an environment which encourages people to walk and cycle, we can make a huge difference to all of our lives. Building active travel into our day helps us get fitter and healthier.”
She added: “If we drive less, the air we breathe becomes cleaner and with fewer vehicles on the road, there’s less congestion so our road network becomes much more efficient, so with every Quietway that opens, that is great news for Londoners.”
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- rogerwb 1 sec ago
Generalisations are valid in this case; there are enough boomers with negative attitudes to young people to be able to block good things like this....
- mattw 4 hours 58 min ago
This risks turning me into a hanger and flogger....
- wtjs 8 hours 58 min ago
In SE London, psychopath riders are the majority of people on bicycles Oh dear! another festive stealth anti-cyclist ☃️
- wtjs 9 hours 3 min ago
Well, you know the BMW drivers' saying: knock that house (hospital, social housing, care home, hospital...) down, could save 30 seconds on the trip!
- Spangly Shiny 10 hours 38 min ago
I had the pleasure of owning two of the featured builders here, in my history. When I joined the Army in 1971, I took with me my curly Hetchins:...
- Username 11 hours 43 min ago
Could Siobhán paint it red and noone would notice it?
- Spangly Shiny 1 day 2 hours ago
To paraphrase Field of Dreams, "Build it right and they will come: and use it!"
- Rendel Harris 1 day 4 hours ago
And a Happy Christmas to you, road.cc staff!
- Rendel Harris 1 day 5 hours ago
The odds of not being able to find a single pedestrian - just one, note, "any pedestrian" - in an area containing more than about ten of them who...
Add new comment
29 comments
The comments about Sustrans are unreasonable & wrong.
As a Sustrans Ranger, I am well aware of the efforts of a large number of volunteers & the few paid staff to improve facilities for all interested in active travel.
A great deal of our time is spent collecting litter ,signing,clearing vegetation & distributing maps & information.
Many of the problems noted are the responsibility of Local Authorities who are frequently indifferent or ignorant of the needs of cyclists.
Unfortunately many areas lack a Coordinator & a keen group of volunteers.
That's all well and good, but when a trail/path/lane is marked as a Sustrans facility, then you expect the name Sustrans to be associated with the quality of those facilities i.e. not always good.
I don't think anyone wants to denigrate the efforts of the volunteers, but saying of our alleged 'national cycle provision' that the volunteers work hard surely points out the problem - you'd be rather taken aback if the answer to compaints about the M6 were 'our volunteers do their best'.
My issue with Sustrans is not about how hard volunteers work, but about the management's willingness to label rubbish as 'national Infrastructure' - surely it would be preferable to stop this and instead campaign for real improvement?
I don't think anyone wants to denigrate the efforts of the volunteers, but saying of our alleged 'national cycle provision' that the volunteers work hard surely points out the problem - you'd be rather taken aback if the answer to compaints about the M6 were 'our volunteers do their best'.
My issue with Sustrans is not about how hard volunteers work, but about the management's willingness to label rubbish as 'national Infrastructure' - surely it would be preferable to stop this and instead campaign for real improvement?
Multiple post sort of deleted!
This is worth repeating.
This is worth repeating.
Sorry about that - I clearly don't understand how my the mopuse pad on my wife's Apple works!
Don't forget about all the pre-existing cycle ways built in the 1930s: http://www.bikeboom.info/cycletracks1930s/
Glad someone linked to this.
Why aren't sustrans all over this campaign?
Sustrans problem is it's too nice. It's willing to take scraps from the motoring table instead of campaigning hard for proper segregated infrastructure and not taking no for an answer.
It seems that I inadvertently cycled along part of Quietway 2 last week. I was on my way from Liverpool Street Station to Bloomsbury and decided to leave the route I knew and explore instead. At the time I was thinking "how long has London had Quiet Ways?" and presuming that they were the urban equivalent of Quiet Lanes. I was displeased, but not surprised to find a part blocked by a delivery lorry, and another part blocked by roadworks, without any sign indicating an alternative (although a quick look at a map showed me one). Apart from the two annoyances, it seemed like a good idea and a lot nicer to cycle along than a "Super Highway", as I can't see its twists and turns appealing to the heads down racers and unrestricted e-motorcycle riders. In fairness, there are already good cycle routes in parts of London, that use quiet backroads with cycle "gates" that prevent wide vehicles from following the route. (Unsurprisingly, Google maps doesn't understand them:( come on Google, where are the Google Spy-Bikes?)
I thought that the white markers of a stylised bicycle and a letter "Q", that I rode over, were adequate. I wonder whether they'll still be visible next year.
If I go to the Wathamstow Garden Party again I'll compare the new Quietway with the somewhat disconcerting* route that CycleStreets sent me on last year.
*Not the mini-Holland bits which were very nice!
What a joke. What a cheap, lazy, half-arsed joke.
The involvement and endorsement from Sustrans (worst sustainable transport campaign group of all time) says it all - this is at best a half-hearted attempt to create cycle infrastructure, which falls miles short of what is adequate let alone Copenhagen standards, yet which is being spun by local government, Sustrans and others as somehow gold standard, and thus they can tick a box saying that they have provided cycle infrastructure.
Cycling in the UK would be far better if Sustrans was abolished. That way, there would be no organisation actively lobbying for deeply inadequate infrastructure, and we could have a decent minimum standard.
Oh can you expand on that please? I give money to Sustrans after being stopped by them on my cycle home. Figured why not. What makes them so bad? I'll do some research myself but clearly need to know if my money isn't going somewhere good!
Yes please do. While creating Dutch cycle infrastructure over the length & breadth of the country might be the desired goal I suspect Sustrans, with their years of experience working on these projects know what is achievable.
As with any project in our crowded isle, big change meets big opposition (HS2?) but continually making small improvements (like this) eventually leads to greater things. If you went back 25/30 years ago and said there'd be segregated cycle lanes in London & 700,000 journeys a day no one would have believed you
Have a google. Sustrans are notorious for providing bodged up cycle routes, often putting cyclists in conflict with pedestrians and vice versa. They then leave whatever they come up with to degrade ungracefully.
I'm sure they do some good stuff now and then, but I've seen too much crap to have much respect tbh. They are utterly terrified of inconviencing motorists so will massively inconvienience cyclists AND pedestrians instead. Tis not sustainable...
Three points
-the london improvements have not occured elsewhere in the UK to any extent. And they have occured despite, not because of Sustrans.
-sustrans have been around for ages, have created miles of notional paths, but there hasn't been a sea change
-most importantly, the dutch infrastructure happened relatively recently (since the 70s) and BECAUSE of in-your-face demands for high quality infrastructure (google kindermoord), the exact opposite of the Sustrans softly-softly wet tissue limp wristed lets not offend approach
That latter point has nothing whatsoever to do with Sustrans. And, frankly, if you went back 25/30 years and said that's the best you'd get - some segregated lanes but only in London - even after 30 years it would have been rather disappointing, especially when compared with what the Netherlands achieved in a shorter time period.
Sustrans maybe do some useful things, but it's not got much to do with cycling as a mode of transport. Shared rural leisure paths more suited for walking, maybe?
Poor quality of signage. It's mainly where the "cycle lane" stops and the route continues over side roads/pavements. It could equally be my poor direction finding abilities though.
Poor quality of routes. I think it would be useful if there was advance notice of the quality of the route. If I'm on my road bike and following a nicely tarmac-ed path, I tend to get annoyed if the route suddenly becomes a stone and gravel laden mud bath.
Poor information about routes. My wife and I decided to go along the Strawberry Line and were happily pootling along on our MTBs when the route was suddenly blocked by ongoing works by a utility company (water IIRC). The signs detailed the months of disruption to the route, but those signs should have been at the beginning of the Strawberry Line and at various points to keep people informed. We detoured through a small woodland where we met a couple of blokes trying to push their road bikes through the mud. Then on a steep uphill section, we met a family that were really struggling with a bike and trailer for transporting their old, infirm dog. None of them knew about the closure of the route until they got to the blockage.
Restrictions on their routes to "prevent motorcycles". Also prevents hand-cycles, tricycles or people with mobility issues.
A very close acquaintence of mine (a transport planner with several decades experience) knows much of the leadership of Sustrans, although some of the leadership has changed recently.
In sum, their explicit strategy was to maximise the number of lines on the map labelled as cycle paths, particularly as part of their national cycle network, irrespective of the quality. They were explicitly interested in maximising quantity over quality. They also had the explicit strategy of never criticising the quality of a cycle lane, so as not to create friction with local government. So there are many, many instances of 'cycle infrastructure' which are Sustrans approved, but which are in effect not cycle-able, or have no additionality. Cycle lanes which have steps, bus shelters etc in them, or where it is actually illegal to cycle. So valuable funding and political capital is spent creating pointless painted lines and other rubbish, which have no benefit for cyclists.
Google "notional cycle network" for some good critiques of Sustrans' "national cycle network"
^
This. You’d need to be on horse to negotiate much of their bullshit national network. However...
As for the London quietways, a small part of my regular backstreet commute for the last 5 years became a chunk of Q1. Bad for me, but much better for the cycling masses than the awful Superhighways.
I rode Q1 from Bermondsey to Deptford the other week. Think it’s ace. Probably far from perfect, but with many motor traffic restrictions on the road sections and nice wide off road tarmac cycle lanes. Bar one shared-space-park section, I was a fan.
If Q2 is more of the same, we should be overwhelmingly positive with suggestions of improvement here and there.
Not abolished, just renamed to clarify they have little to do with sustainable tranport. Maybe 'Leisurekludge' or 'Tokenbodge'?
i'd be happy to see them abolished and the funding given instead to finish off and make better known the National Byway which, whenever I've toured on part of it has been utterly idyllic and charming.
https://www.thenationalbyway.org/about-the-project/
lol, that sweeping statement just shows how little you know or understand about delivering cycling infra in the U.K.
Grow up and work with the grownups. You do realise that there was *nothing* quite literally *nothing* for cycling infra before Sustrans and the NCN. You have no idea the battles that have been fought for the little we have. There’s no-one that has filled that space.
Where you moan about an off road route with a less than perfect surface, without them you’d either be riding on a duel carriageway or in prison for trespassing on private land. Let’s remember the whole resurgence in road riding is very new. 20 years ago when the NCN was conceived everyone was only riding MTBs.
On your three points:
-the london improvements have not occured elsewhere in the UK to any extent. And they have occured despite, not because of Sustrans.
Again. You gave no idea, I can vouch that the London branch of Sustrans lobbied heavily and successfully behind the scenes to get those segregated lanes that we all now take for granted.
-sustrans have been around for ages, have created miles of notional paths, but there hasn't been a sea change
I would say that the establishment of a National Cycle Network encompassing thousands of miles of separate cycle lane (some better than others) was a massive sea change.
-most importantly, the dutch infrastructure happened relatively recently (since the 70s) and BECAUSE of in-your-face demands for high quality infrastructure (google kindermoord), the exact opposite of the Sustrans softly-softly wet tissue limp wristed lets not offend approach
Again, it’s U.K. politics. Blame the game not the players. Sustrans has worked with the system rather than against it. It has delivered real product where there was none before. Sure there’s space for the ‘direct action’ people that make a big fuss occasionally but they are the ones out there with spades and shovels making the physical difference. No-one else does that.
I'm presuming you aren't being sarcastic here.
Hmmm, just as well this forum is anonymous and you have no idea of my history, professional qualifications, etc.
Of course there was no one campaigning before sustrans (established 1977). Except CTC (established 1878). And British Cycling (established 1959). And National clarion (estalished 1895). And plenty, plenty other local campaigns.
And of course, no cycle infrastructure. Apart from all the stuff that existed.
Cool story, now tell me how many miles of safe protected cycling infra have CTC (established 1878), British Cycling (established 1959) etc actually physically delivered? CTC now Cycling U.K actually campaigned to stop the delivery of protected cycling routes in the 1930s, which explains the mess we’re in now.
How many miles of cycling infrastrucure have Sustrans delivered? If you consider blue lines on a map, and blue signposts, as infrastructure, then we have loads here in West Yorkshire, in the form of the national cycle network. If you define infrastructure as physical changes which lead to a route which is demonstrably safer, more convinent, and can be used year round by cyclists of all abilities in all weathers, then we have zero.
The Sustrans national cycle network round here was built either by the canal companies centuries back (all Sustrans have done have added some blue signs to some muddy towpaths. And ironically some barriers which make it impossible for bikes with child trailers to access the route), or by the local council highways department who built the A and B roads (all Sustrans have done is added blue signs and campaigned for a thin dotted line of road paint which makes no legal nor practical difference to cycling convinience or safety). Elsewhere in the UK, bits of the national cycle network were not created by Sustrans but by millions of years of geology - because it takes them across a beach! I would argue that there is a good argument that these can't be called cycling infrastructure. If Sustrans were to put a blue sign up in a wolf-infested minefield, that wouldn't be cycling infrastructure.
I've sat through enough meetings and consultations to know that Sustrans will never, NEVER, publically criticise a specific piece of cycling 'infrastructure' as inadequate. Only recently have they begun to make vague allusions to general inadequacies of cycling projects.
Sustrans may have had some purpose in 1977. But what is their purpose in 2018? What are they doing to actually drive forwards cycling infrastructure that meets the basic defintion of cycle infrastructure? What are they doing that can meaningfully create high modal shares for cycling? They should either enforce decent minimum standards, or they should bugger off and let someone else (vocal, local campaigns) have a go.
Thanks Prospero. The stupidly inadequate cyling infrastructure in the UK is certainly not the fault of Sustrans. Sustrans were brave guys swimming against a tide of treacle.
Little Onion: Without Sustrans and the LCC and a few others like Cambridge and York councils, what cycling infrastructure do you think we'd have had in 2018?
BTW Prospero, 20 years ago, mountain bikes were popular, but still outnumbered by utility cyclists. Even today I suspect that there are more utility cyclists than would-be roadies in the UK.
I've seen this with my own eyes in several cities (Edinburgh, Leeds, elsewhere) - local campaigns propose good infrastructure, Sustrans propose weak, inadequate stuff and undermine the local campaigns. For example, with the Leeds-Bradford cycle superhighway and associated developments in West Yorkshire, the local campaign (LCC) were much more robust in arguing for decent infrastructure, Sustrans decided to support a weaker option, which allowed the council to claim cyclists' support for the weaker option.
I hold that it we would have seen better infrastructure in the last 10-15 years if it had been these local campaigns, not Sustrans, getting the funding and involvement.