London East-West and North-South Cycle Superhighways

[subaqua]

I am more concerned about how the new cyclists will get to the start and from the finish of their route.

along crap infrastructure which will put them off. maybe it is a road for Bankers on Brommies who can commute into London on the C2C etc to Tower Hill Thats not rhyming slang either as I am seriuosly considering a Brommie on the C2W scheme my employer is offering at the moment.

 

[Glow worm]

No. I've put piece of evidence after piece of evidence in front of you in this thread - all of which demonstrate that the infrastructure is only one small part of what contributed. Go on believing if you like, but at least have the humility to recognise that others who recognise evidence disagree with you.

Is it not possible that the high rates of cycling in London are happening in spite of the road conditions rather than because of them? Hell, I'd rather walk than stand rammed up against some bloke's stinking armpit on the tube while paying £100 a week or whatever for the privilege!

The modal share in London of journeys by bike is still pathetically low.

Apart from the same old same old 'we just need to make the roads safer' cobblers and snide remarks that get us nowhere - what else are the likes of you and Adrian proposing to get the novice, nervous, or child cyclist on their bikes ?

 

[srw]

It's hardly a small piece: it's the single most important one by far. You can argue against that all you like, but look at Denmark if you don't like the Netherlands: infrastructure was provided and the cyclists followed.

And I've pointed out that it's not actually evidence. The Dutch situation is that many things happened, of which infrastructure was a late introduction. Copenhagen is another tiny city within a small country. You're turning into a monomaniacal evangelist, which isn't healthy.

 

[srw]

The figures regarding cyclists entering central London are very encouraging. But I see no evidence that this was achieved by TFL, rather than by external events such as demographic changes, transport overcrowding, terrorism, etc

Ah. Now, we're getting somewhere. If things improve despite TFL inaction (actually, I think there's been a lot of TFL action, but that's another story), shouldn't we be looking at what's happened and encourage more of it, rather than go out on an extremely expensive limb?

Politicians love grands projets. But they're expensive, and don't always work. Which, perhaps, is why the City, with its collection of petits projets, is working better - it's run by business people, not politicians. The City has very explicitly looked at who uses its roads, and worked out that it's mainly pedestrians and cyclists, plus taxi-drivers and bus-drivers. So policy is geared towards making life more difficult for private cars, and easier for pedestrians. If only Westminster could do the same.

 

[srw]

Apart from the same old same old 'we just need to make the roads safer' cobblers and snide remarks that get us nowhere - what else are the likes of you and Adrian proposing to get the novice, nervous, or child cyclist on their bikes ?

Maybe we should take inspiration from the Dutch (see the LCC link I posted above), and start a political campign called "Stop de Kindermoord". Of course, we'd have to do it in English - "Stop Killing Children". 20mph zones everywhere in cities, shared space, removing parking spaces (or making them expensive), charging people for getting into city centres in cars - it would result in much less traffic on the roads. We could even campaign for increased priority for cyclists at junctions (perhaps we could call them "Advanced Stop Lanes"), and make it much easier for people to cycle to railway stations - some double-decker bike parks would help, and where station layouts permit put bike racks inside barriers for security. We could even just encourage people to cycle more - "cycle to work day", perhaps, or perhaps find some heroes for people to look up to - internationally successful cyclists who become campaigners for utility cycling, perhaps even a round-Britain bike race. We could even campaign for tax breaks for people to buy bikes to get to work. We could even encourage individuals to point out to their friends and colleagues how safe cycling is - provide them with easy access to the stats on safety - rather than encourage them to believe that cycling is dangerous and that cyclists need special protection.

Unfortunately for you, I've got no desire or time for political activity, and I've got a rather sceptical approach to large-scale top-down interventions. So I limit myself to the bottom-up. I cycle everywhere in London - I'm regularly seen in all sorts of meetings with professional colleagues (and I'm talking some of the most senior people in my specialism in my industry in the City) with my Brompton. I do it cheerfully, on the roads that are the quickest for getting from A to B. I do it wearing my suit, and without any special gear apart from a raincoat and overtrousers when it's raining and a pair of (ratty woollen) gloves when it's cold. I can say (and I do say), with absolute sincerity, that I've been doing it for 18 years, and in all that time I've only seen the aftermath of one accident, and only been involved in two, very minor, accidents myself. I encourage anyone who expresses an interest to think about riding, offering training myself or encouraging them to get their own training. I demonstrate that cycling in the city is normal and safe.

 

[stowie]

And I've pointed out that it's not actually evidence. The Dutch situation is that many things happened, of which infrastructure was a late introduction. Copenhagen is another tiny city within a small country. You're turning into a monomaniacal evangelist, which isn't healthy.

Many things happened in the Netherlands for sure. For instance infrastructure was actually put in place for cyclists very early in - before the widespread uptake of cars - and then started to get ripped out when car-centric policies were adopted in the 60's. I think the existing infrastructure actually helped the Dutch to implement the cycling infrastructure they have now - something the UK doesn't have.

The question is can a country get significant increases in cycling with cycling being adopted as a transport option for a large proportion of the population without implementing infrastructure? I am unconvinced that you can - at the very last the reversal of some of the road treatments that have been implemented on a completely car-centric basis need to be reversed.

 

[srw]

at the very last the reversal of some of the road treatments that have been implemented on a completely car-centric basis need to be reversed.

Oh yes. Yes please. This would be cheap, and we know it works, for all sorts of desirable outcomes.

 

[CopperBrompton]

Copenhagen is another tiny city within a small country.

Newsflash: segregated cycle paths exist throughout Denmark, not just in Copenhagen. You need to visit more of these places and you'll see for yourself the strength of the evidence that it works.

(None of this is anywhere near Copenhagen)

 

[RhythMick]

There seems to be some debate about whether these are the BEST solutions to these problems.

Personally I think we need to get to the point where cycling is accepted as a key if not default mode of transport. Anything that moves us closer to that is a great move.

 

[srw]

(None of this is anywhere near Copenhagen)

And unless London has changed an awful lot since Wednesday when I was last there, none of it has anything at all to do with segregated paths in London. I picked on Copenhagen because it's the nearest thing Denmark has got to London.

PS - I see that, now that your version of the Dutch story is getting too difficult to defend you're picking on the other fabled success story. Let's widen the debate.

Flanders - not a great deal of segregation, most of the paths and the signage are poor even by British standards, loads and loads of cyclists.
MK - a model set of segregation (which, incidentally, I think is extremely well designed) - no-one uses it to speak of.
Oxford - almost no meaningful off-road cycle lanes, horrific road surfaces, traffic which is god-awful and not very observant - cycling is the most common mode of transport.

Segregated paths have their place. I'd be delighted to see them built along urban near-motorway like the A40 in West London, the A3 from Kingston to Guildford, the Euston/Marylebone Road. But they're neither necessary nor sufficient to increase cycling or cyclists' safety.

 

[srw]

There seems to be some debate about whether these are the BEST solutions to these problems.

Personally I think we need to get to the point where cycling is accepted as a key if not default mode of transport. Anything that moves us closer to that is a great move.

And when do we get there? When every visitor to London who hasn't been for a while comments how many cyclists there are? When policy is made by local authorities to increase the number of cyclists? When there are hire bikes available that you can use for the price of a coffee? WHen every station has racks upon racks of bikes in their parking?

 

[Glow worm]

. I encourage anyone who expresses an interest to think about riding, offering training myself or encouraging them to get their own training. I demonstrate that cycling in the city is normal and safe.

I agree with all of that. I do the same, not owning a stitch of Lycra. My view is that its not enough, yours is that it is. I guess that's where we'll have to differ.

I'll be riding my Brompton from Kings Cross to Waterloo next week to get to a train to Sussex for work. I'm quite looking forward to it as I enjoy riding in London.

 

[Glow worm]

Does it matter what I think, seeing as any disagreement with your preferred thinking is dismissed as "snide remarks"?

No offence intended. It was the flying carpets thing someone mentioned above. If I'm honest I thought it quite funny.

 

[srw]

I agree with all of that. I do the same, not owning a stitch of Lycra. My view is that its not enough, yours is that it is. I guess that's where we'll have to differ..

No, I agree with you. It's not enough. Read my first paragraph a little more critically, and you'll discover all sorts of other things that could be done.

 

[Glow worm]

No, I agree with you. It's not enough. Read my first paragraph a little more critically, and you'll discover all sorts of other things that could be done.

I did. It looks like a list of stuff that's been happening in the UK for years.