Sorry, Tadej, but as an engineer myself (of many professional persuasions, a civil engineering discipline included), and having spent a lifetime in capital projects, the cost of including cycle facilities in the project scope does not necessarily increase overall costs.  Indeed, in many cases the marginal cost only amounts to the materials; that is a few tonnes of concrete and tarmac, occasionally a bit of steel.  

When planners and engineers leave them out (as most highways engineers in this country do) the cost of retrofitting can be very high......but still not as high as many would have you believe (see Lions Gate bridge in Vancouver as a good example).  And, again in the UK, there's some really expansive crap facilities around (I'm sitting here watching one, breathtakingly expensive, being built whilst I write this!)

High cost of cycling provision is a myth........

I would also note that, if you look at Dutch high level policy documents (National Spatial Plan 2000 and corresponding Transport Plan, cycling warrants barely a mention.  In the UK you have to fight to get any sort of inclusion through the entire policy/plan/project cycle.

Cheers

John Meudell
C.Eng, MIMechE








-----Original Message-----
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tadej Brezina
Sent: 31 July 2014 12:32
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cycling's limited imagination

(going back to the write above mode)

Shure, If cycling infrastructure were to be build in a serious manner, that would mean a big piece of the cake as well.
But, I wrote, as a civil engineer as well: industry, not craft. In German there's a very well carved-out distinction between industry (big corporate units with big banking interests in the background) and craft (small to mid-scaled businesses). Large scale business call for large scale endeavors out of economy of scale logic. Where can one use it's tunneling, excavator and other large machinery better? Huge spectacular therefore expensive infrastructure projects, or continuous subsequent work on bike paths/lanes where one's limited to small scale applications and a higher proportion of manpower?

BTW, politicians strive for "large monuments" that they can open with big media coverage! ;-)

best regards from the home country of the new tunneling method ;-)
T+

> Yes, constructions industry definitively a big "driver". Also: it is always easier to stick with the status quo, than do / try / envisage something new. I actually somewhat disagree with the statement that cycling is "small grain". As a civil engineer I know that if we took cycling (and hence building bike infrastructure) seriously in this country / city, it would require some major construction activity and serious funding.
>
> Later,
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 31 Jul 2014, at 12:11, Tadej Brezina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> On 31.07.2014 12:49, Peter Wood wrote:
>>> The Mayor of London has just launched the consultation for a 2050 
>>> infrastructure plan. Lots of indicative diagrams for new orbital 
>>> train networks, underground ring roads, new bridges over the river, 
>>> cross-city rapid rail lines and extensions to the tube. Nothing much 
>>> for cycling though. A few mentions of planning to upgrade the 
>>> existing cycle infrastructure, but no pictures of an aspirational 
>>> 2050 network, or a narrative explaining how a number of piecemeal 
>>> projects link up to a cohesive vision. (I think, I only scanned the 
>>> document.)
>>>
>>> Just wondering if anyone had any thoughts/research on why cycling tends to get left out of these grand visions? There have been a few recent proposals for utopian schemes released by the Mayor, such as elevated cycle routes strung alongside train lines. These were generally received as quite impractical and relatively expensive ways to support cycling.  But I can't see why they are less plausible than proposals for completely new underground road and rail.
>> Quite easy, although only a very educated opinion and not research results: Construction industry's interest in public funds.
>> regards from Vienna
>> T+

--
WED, THU & FRI at the University.
--
Tadej Brezina, Univ.Ass. Dipl.-Ing.
Research Center of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering Institute of Transportation Vienna University of Technology Gußhausstraße 30/230-1 | A-1040 Wien
--
[log in to unmask]
Tel: +43-(0)1-58801-23127
Fax: +43-(0)1-58801-23199
http://www.ivv.tuwien.ac.at
http://www.facebook.com/IVV.TUW
DVR: 0005886
--
(PC TUW-IVV)