Martin Rich wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004 21:47:42 GMT, (Neil
Williams) wrote:
Seriously, some of the things suggested on that site, in particular
the segregated cycle and footpath network, are in use in Milton
Keynes. It is possible to get from anywhere to anywhere in MK (more
or less) without having to cross a main road on the level.
They do, however, have their own problems, such as the amount of glass
and other tyre-puncturing debris that tends to accumulate on them, and
the general "unsafe" feeling that isolated paths, bridges and
underpasses tend to bring after dark - even if there's no basis in
fact for such a feeling.
The idea of segregating different types of traffic - particularly
pedestrians and cars - at different levels was favoured by planners in
the 1960s and 1970s. You can see this put into practice in the
highwalks around the Barbican. The problem is that the pedestrian
ways, far from being the attractive green lanes described on the
func-junc site, become bleak and windswept. Also, this is easy enough
to implement if you are developing an area almost from scratch, but
very difficult to impose on an existing built-up area within a city
Martin
A further problem with segregated cycle and pedestrian facilities is
that, in areas where they predominate such as Milton Keynes, people do
not have the exposure to road traffic that they really need in order
to develop what is often called "road sense". The design of
segregated routes is often poor and the standard of maintenance often
low. All this can result in high rates of casualties both on and off
the segregated network.
Drivers are also likely to be more aware of the needs of pedestrians
and cyclists if they encounter a lot of them rather than very few.
Segregation may have a role to play at 'nightmare' junctions (and
motorways, of course) but I understand there is plenty of evidence to
suggest that cyclists and pedestrians are generally safer on
non-segregated roads.