Good morning David,The problem for me is that I don't agree with your starting premise. I mean the definition of the problem. Your opening post says that "The mix of cycle and scooter types, sizes and speeds in segregated cycle lanes is becoming a significant safety problem and in 20mph zones in urban areas it has been accepted that the cycle lanes can be removed and the whole road space made available to create a better and fairer balance between the demands of all road user types."The first problem here is that CHR is not your classic 20mph zone, like, say, Devonshire road. And it goes back to my point that most small roads in the medieval city centres of places like Antwerp, Hague and so on don't have a cycle lane but are also traffic-restricted and, crucially, one-way only. The other point I don't agree with is that "The mix of cycle and scooter types, sizes and speeds in segregated cycle lanes is becoming a significant safety problem"which I'd like to challenge on two accounts:1) proof. Where is the proof that, on the cycle lane, mixing of cycles/scooters is a safety risk. 2) how is removing the lane making this any safer? If mixing bikes and scooters is inherently dangerous (it isn't) then how is it adding cars, vans, trucks, lorries, buses and motorbikes to the mix going to make it any safer? Have a wander around High Street Ken, which at rush hour looks more like Beirut than London. How is it safer? There sure is a problem with scooters on pavements, and that ought to be addressed. But removing the lane won't change that. As it won't make traffic any less clogged. Case in point, the queue of cars that fits, bumper-to-bumper, from the Italians all the way down to the Chiswick Roundabout, and from side streets, every afternoon.
Francis Sheehan ● 1477d