It’s easy enough to criticise when things aren’t quite right from a cycling perspective, whether they be permanent features or just temporary ones. But I also believe that it’s important to acknowledge when a good job has been done as well.
A few weeks ago I was heading down Waltham Rd near my place and encountered some building works that encroached on the footpath and required everything else on the street to be shifted over. And, to their credit, this is precisely what they did; the footpath moved to the cycle lane space, the cycle lane (protected by cones) moved next to it, and the traffic lane moved over as well:
Providing for cycling through temporary traffic management (TTM) has historically been problematic or overlooked, with the classic issue being the temporary sign placed in the path of the cycleway. Nearly 10 years ago during the initial rebuild, lack of cycle provision was quite the frustration and meetings were held between advocates and SCIRT to address the issues – from this came some quite useful cycling-specific TTM guidance for Christchurch, and generally improved performance.
At the national level, TTM is also currently undergoing an overhaul, with the previous Code of Practice now being replaced with various sector-specific guides that take on a more risk-based assessment of the safety issues present. Hopefully this will lead to a more consistent approach to providing safely for getting bikes through work sites.
What do you think of temporary traffic management practices for cycling?