beards

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
Though it grieves me to agree with anyone who lives in the suburban hell that is Orpington I have to say Ian's PoV matches mine pretty well; excuses, excuses, excuses.

If you, and ten's of thousands of folk like you can daily happily do 10 mile trips across London by bike, and other people claim they can't, surely the problem lies in the mindset of the other people not in the infrastructure or on the roads.

We have nothing to fear but fear itself. 16 Londoners died on the roads last year. Tragic waste. How many Londoners died of diseases related to obesity?
 
OP
OP
dellzeqq

dellzeqq

pre-talced and mighty
Location
SW2
No I don't think so, so I will take that with a huge pinch of proverbial salt.
and there's nothing wrong with that. We have a great bus system, a decent underground and a decent suburban railway system (south of the river). If cycling doesn't appeal to individuals then that's fine by me.

Cars are now pretty thin on the ground within zones 1 and 2, and there is no way to reasonably reduce commercial traffic. The clever bit will be to beef up public transport in the suburbs (bus lanes being the most likely option) which is precisely what Johnson has set himself against.
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
and there's nothing wrong with that. We have a great bus system, a decent underground and a decent suburban railway system (south of the river). If cycling doesn't appeal to individuals then that's fine by me.

Cars are now pretty thin on the ground within zones 1 and 2, and there is no way to reasonably reduce commercial traffic. The clever bit will be to beef up public transport in the suburbs (bus lanes being the most likely option) which is precisely what Johnson has set himself against.
A visitor from Paris commented on this to me a week or so ago.
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
Cars are now pretty thin on the ground within zones 1 and 2
I've just looked out of the window. It's the height of rush hour on a main road in EC3. During one phase of the traffic lights there were:
3 private cars (one of which may have been a minicab)
3 motorbikes
1 bus
1 London cab
...
and 10 bikes.

I'm quite used to drawing up at the lights at Holborn circus and passing 4 buses and 6 taxis.
 

angus h

Active Member
1.5m comes from 25% of all Londoners who say they'd like to travel by bike but are put off by road danger. Doesn't necessarily mean commuting. Probably does mean a lot of the sub 5 mile car trips that show up in the DfT statistics, and the army of chubby secondary school kids jamming the buses where I live.

A similarly unrepresentative sample in my office gives road danger - or, you might say, road unpleasantness - as by far the #1 reason (although as they're healthy under 35s in Z2+3, shame on anyone who complains of distance). Danger is not just the outright risk of being killed or injured, it's the mindset you have to maintain to stay safe.

Mindset vs actual situation is not black & white, I don't think people are that dense (at least when presented with the carrot of saving huge sums of money). It's perhaps more that they don't want to deal with the threat level, even if they know they're capable of doing so safely (after all, it's easier to not crash in to anything on a bike than it is in a car - something most people apparently think they can do).

Was at a talk given by LCC the other night. They are by no means anti-vehicular. Far from it, in fact. What they reject is one-size-fits-all solutions and dogma - what works in the Square Mile (narrow roads, slow traffic, adult commuters & couriers) isn't going to work around Orpington (wide roads, fast cars, 7-year-olds who'd like to cycle to school & grannies pootling to the shops), and vice versa. "Go Dutch" seems to be more of a campaign hook than anything else - they have been doing this stuff for years & know the (time, money) realities of rolling out that kind of engineering.

The reason LoB doesn't take sides in the infra debate is that, first and foremost, no solution (regulatory-vehiculal, infrastructure based or both) can be made to work well enough for all the people who would like to cycle without substantial political will behind it. Beyond that, we're just a bunch of people who ride bikes, so we in no way have the expertise or authority to recommend Dutch over Danish infrastructure, or the specifics of how Strict Liability would be implemented under UK law. What we are is a mechanism for building political will, by showing there's crucial votes to be won in a tightly fought election.
 

ianrauk

Tattooed Beat Messiah
Location
Rides Ti2
1.5m comes from 25% of all Londoners who say they'd like to travel by bike but are put off by road danger.

Where did this info come from & who undertook this massive poll?
Where can we see the results of this poll
It must have been a bloody substantial bit of work to poll that many people.
 

angus h

Active Member
That's not how polling works & you know it! Will get the source for you when I see the organisers on monday.
 

ianrauk

Tattooed Beat Messiah
Location
Rides Ti2
That's not how polling works & you know it! Will get the source for you when I see the organisers on monday.


Then don't come out with quotes such as "1.5m comes from 25% of all Londoners who say they'd like to travel by bike but are put off by road danger" Put the exact amount of people polled ie 4 out of the 10 people we polled etc which we can then inflate to 1.5million people.
 
OP
OP
dellzeqq

dellzeqq

pre-talced and mighty
Location
SW2
What we are is a mechanism for building political will, by showing there's crucial votes to be won in a tightly fought election.
whatever that means - and no you're not. 3000 votes (and that includes Martin who signed it because he's a nice chap) is nothing. It's akin to writing 'PLEASE IGNORE' on your forehead. It's an embarrassment.
 
Top Bottom