Cyclecraft is "destroying" UK cycling

[OldGreyBeard]

Results like these for example...?
http://homepage.ntlw...month/index.htm

Do you really think this sort of thing is designed by people who advocate vehicular cycling?



Well sadly rather a lot of the farcilities featured in the website linked to above are part of the National Cycle Network... and that is what happens when people insist segregation is the only true way, but can't answer dellzeqq's "show us the drawing" challenge, so they end up demanding what isn't practicable or affordable, so they end up accepting comprises on the "anything is better than nothing" assumption, which all too often leads to something we'd be better off without.

I don't deny that the NCN has led to development of some very attractive, well used, traffic-free trails, some of which are useful for everyday utility cycling as well as for leisure. Indeed, I've even helped fundraise and maintain some of those routes. But you can't build leafy railway paths everywhere people want to cycle, so sooner or later you have to deal with how people are going to cycle along the road corridors. So while there are some nice routes away from the road, I'm afraid I can't think of a single example on the NCN in my part of the world where it has provided an intervention along a road corridor that offers any significant benefit over what was there previously.

Meanwhile, in Oxford and Cambridge, there are large numbers of people cycling for everyday journeys in their normal clothing, just as they do in Copenhagen, but without a huge network of segregated paths that we couldn't afford to build even if someone could provide a workable drawing. So why not look at what works best in those places and how it might be most cost-effectively applied elsewhere?

I think it's often designed by Highways engineers with no experience or understanding of cycling. We've been lucky here in having a young & female Highways engineer with fewer preconceived notions designing our facilities.

As for Oxford, which I know quite well, if we had a large population of young, fit, cash poor people where I live then I would expect cycling to be higher. The same is true in Cambridge & York.

What would be interesting to know is the proportion of cycling in Oxford due to the transient student population. Don't forget as well that Oxford bans cars from the centre and has a great many buses and several Park & Rides

I am in the end a practical person which is why I've campaigned for 20mph zones, HGV bans and all the rest looking at a solution made of different elements looking for better rather than perfect.

The spoke roads where I live are often wide enough to allow segregation and busy enough to put people off cycling. My solution would be a 20mph zone in the Victorian core, 20mph between the spoke roads and segregated paths further out in the 30mph (more like 50mph) bits. This is in an area about the size of a N London borough.

 

[OldGreyBeard]

I think I disagree with Dell on segregation per se. But what I do agree with him is there is currently no way of getting from where we are now to a Dutch/Danish model. It isn't even cost or size of streets. Its political will. And if you haven't noticed - there isn't any to do anything serious - and if there was we have no idea how to engineer such a culture change.

So talking roadschemes CycleCraft or CycleLanes is just tinkering with the present. Any change in the future isn't going to come from CTC/LCC/Sustrans/CEGB et al. Its going to come when the RAC/AA & Daily Mail start campaigning for car control.

When the oil runs out and London finally gridlocks that's a possibility. Problem is all this TfL traffic smoothing stuff is working quite well at keeping the old structure running, and it may run a good number of years yet. Probably my lifetime.

I'm just going to enjoy my cycling and not worry to much about what I can't control or change. Life is too short.

When I last cycled n Germany about 25 years ago the facilities were about the same as they are here now. Judging from what I read on Blogs etc they are now much much better.

I never expected to see so many banks nationalised so I've given up thinking things would never happen!

 

[jonesy]

I think it's often designed by Highways engineers with no experience or understanding of cycling. We've been lucky here in having a young & female Highways engineer with fewer preconceived notions designing our facilities.

Nonetheless, a lot of the sub-standard attempts at segregation are only there because someone has demanded segregation at all costs... Earlier you claimed that the UK had followed an 'integrationist' approach, but this isn't borne out by an awful lot of the practice, is it?

As for Oxford, which I know quite well, if we had a large population of young, fit, cash poor people where I live then I would expect cycling to be higher. The same is true in Cambridge & York.

What would be interesting to know is the proportion of cycling in Oxford due to the transient student population. Don't forget as well that Oxford bans cars from the centre and has a great many buses and several Park & Rides

It isn't. Oxford and Cambridge have high modal shares for cycling to work. And the cycling population of Oxford and Cambridge are certainly not poor! Nor are they all young.

http://cyclinginfo.c...rd-50-pictures/

As regards banning cars, that is only true of a small part of the road network, though I'd certainly agree that the restrictions on car movement, congestion and lack of parking are very important factors in making cycling competitive. As you say, it also has a lot of buses, and a high modal share for bus travel, but this makes it even harder to fit Copenhagen type segregation... One of the busiest cycling corridors in Oxford is Cowley Rd, which is also one of the most important bus routes. It is also a single carriageway, much of it comparatively narrow, and with narrow pavements; also lots of shops and cafes needing deliveries. This sort of road is not untypical of those in our cities where the "show us the drawing" challenge needs to be faced up to.

 

[Red Light]

Whilst you can reasonably argue that cycling in the Netherlands and Denamrk etc had declined as it did in the the UK up to the 1970's it hadn't declined as far and there is plenty of evidence that cycling has increased since then.

But it hasn't increased from the late 80s to mid 90s which is when the majority of their network was built. The increase since the seventies occurred in the UK too and was primarily due to the oil shocks of the 1970s. when petrol rationing books were issued in the UK (although not actually used)

The UK has pretty much always persued an integrationist approach with the results we see.

It pursued the segregationist approach in several "new towns" - Stevenage, Milton Keynes, East Kilbride - with outcomes far worse than we see elsewhere. Of course you get the age old segregationist excuse that they built it wrong and next time it will be better, an excuse they have been using for decades and yet never yet seeming to manage to build them right.

My main problem with Cyclecraft is that it presents its approach as the only one and Mr Franklin actively speaks against segregation, no doubt because he has convinced himself it is dangerous. Why doesn't he try and persuade the Dutch?

Because the Dutch don't need persuading?

I don't have a better way to cycle on our roads but I do have a better way to cycle which would suit more people and that is Dutch standard cycleways.

But what about for now? What do you suggest cyclists do until your cycling utopia comes to fruition. Stay off the roads? Or follow Franklin's advice for what we actually have to deal with.

It isn't impossible to build such a network. Afterall the position of cycling here in the 1970's was absolutely dire compared to what it is today for which Sustrans must be awarded quite a lot of the credit for building routes people will use.

Sustrans had done very little for cycling - its mainly used for leisure pootles, not as an alternative to a road journey. But if you want to build a Dutch style segregated network I believe the bill for their network started in the late 80s and finished in the mid 90s was about £10Bn so probably £22Bn in today's money. Triple that because our road network is three times the length of theirs so that takes us to £66Bn for your solution even if you could fit them into our narrow town and city streets without knocking half the buildings down. And if you did all of that Leeds University have estimated you would increase cycling by 50%.

So don't hold your breath for your solution any time soon and meanwhile you might think about how to advise cyclists to make the best of what we do have for the foreseeable future. Maybe they could read Franklin while they're waiting.

 

[Red Light]

It is also a single carriageway, much of it comparatively narrow, and with narrow pavements; also lots of shops and cafes needing deliveries. This sort of road is not untypical of those in our cities where the "show us the drawing" challenge needs to be faced up to.

When I was at Oxford I shared digs with an American student whose Dad came over to visit from Galveston*. After his first foray out into Oxford his comment was "You need to get rid of all those old buildings and get some decent roads put in this place"

*Galveston is famous even in the US for the number of highways through the city.

 

[Red Light]

When I last cycled n Germany about 25 years ago the facilities were about the same as they are here now. Judging from what I read on Blogs etc they are now much much better.

Yes, they tripled the length of their cycling network in that time but it didn't result in any increase in cycling. Of course you know the origins of the German cycle network?

 

[dellzeqq]

my optimism is founded on the dawn of a new realisation - addmittedly confined to some major cities - that the car is running out of steam. It's expensive, slow and dirty. This, coupled with the competitive advantage offered to cycling and bus use by bus lanes holds out the prospect of a critical mass. How that happens is sometimes obscure - the A3/A24 corridor is rammed with bikes, the A206 not far behind and the A404 some ten miles away and sharing many characteristics..........sweet fanny adams.

Now some experience of civic priorities in mid-size towns, generally gleaned from planning and transport officials when preparing large-ish planning applications, is less happy. Parking is seen as the key to commercial success. If in doubt build on the outskirts of town, generating more car traffic. How long that's going to change I've no idea, but my guess is that access to cars is probably going to be less widespread ten years from now because inequality will be greater, insurance will cost a mint, and, who know, the price of fuel may have zoomed up.

I do think, however, that towns with good public transport and low car use will set benchmarks of prosperity. Every south coast town looks at Brighton with envy and resentment, and Brighton is probably the south coast town with the greatest investment in public transport and the greatest degree of restriction on car movement - and the difference between Brighton and the other south coast towns is likely to widen with the recent change in the composition of the Council. As Brighton gains from low car use, others along the coast may follow.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

It's the influence it has when arguing for segregated cycleways that people will actually use that is the problem.

That is one of the arguments being presented here. However, there are quite a few posts claiming that Cyclecraft and Bikeability present an adversarial approach and that this is putting people off taking up cycling. It is this assertion that I was responding to when pointing out that most people have never even heard of Cyclecraft or Bikeability.

 

[Red Light]

As I said before I doubt very much if even the top cycleway designers from the Netherlands could convince you so I doubt that I would be able to.

Funny then that the people who audit the cycling provision in the Netherlands think they are irrelevant* and do not consider them in their Cycle Balance audit.

* I know because I asked them, given the Netherlands fame for its cycle facilities, why they did not feature in the audit.

 

[Richard Mann]

I'd add that the interesting thing about Oxford is that it is a place that's "done something" for nearly four decades. The arguments have reverberated, stuff has been tried, guidance has been interpreted and sometimes disregarded. Mistakes have been made; some of them have been corrected. Sometimes money has been splurged; often stuff has been done on the cheap. Sometimes people have said no, then later said yes.

But slowly the drawings have been done, costed, and the political battles have been fought.

Every city is unique, of course, but Oxford isn't that peculiar. It's urban form and road-form are recognisably British. I think Oxford is just further down the line than most places in adapting it's road-form to contain/discourage the car.

And what have we evolved in Oxford: squeezed main roads, a lot of cycle lanes, a semi-separate quiet network, a lot of buses, some of the slowest traffic in the country, no multi-lane roads or gyratories, and a tortuous road network for cars.

Maybe you'll have the space, money and politics to do it differently. But doing it the same wouldn't be a bad option.

 

[OldGreyBeard]

Yes, they tripled the length of their cycling network in that time but it didn't result in any increase in cycling. Of course you know the origins of the German cycle network?

When people start trotting out the Nazis it's time to bow out. Good night & good luck.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

my optimism is founded on the dawn of a new realisation - addmittedly confined to some major cities - that the car is running out of steam. It's expensive, slow and dirty. This, coupled with the competitive advantage offered to cycling and bus use by bus lanes holds out the prospect of a critical mass.

I have to say I share this hope and optimism. Greater Manchester is not noted for its cycling (or pedestrian) friendliness, so I have been delighted to see that a main route through Salford into Manchester is right now being changed from two lanes plus bus lane in either direction with one pelican crossiing and fences down the middle between the carriageways, to one lane plus bus lane in either direction, a wide pedestrian area between the carriageways and four pelican crossings, plus integrated cycle provision that looks to be shaping up nicely.

I take great delight in praising the scheme to others, who can't believe that I, or anyone else could be in favour of this "lunacy".

It is particularly pleasing since congestion chargng was rejected in a badly organized referendum, so this looks like a good plan B that is even better. I'll post pictures once it is all finished. (I don't have any before pics unfortunately.)

 

[dellzeqq]

I wish you well. I've always thought the multi-centred arrangement of Greater Manchester would present the stiffest challenge to those of us who hope for the car's demise.

 

[dellzeqq]

I'd add that the interesting thing about Oxford is that it is a place that's "done something" for nearly four decades. The arguments have reverberated, stuff has been tried, guidance has been interpreted and sometimes disregarded. Mistakes have been made; some of them have been corrected. Sometimes money has been splurged; often stuff has been done on the cheap. Sometimes people have said no, then later said yes.

But slowly the drawings have been done, costed, and the political battles have been fought.

Every city is unique, of course, but Oxford isn't that peculiar. It's urban form and road-form are recognisably British. I think Oxford is just further down the line than most places in adapting it's road-form to contain/discourage the car.

And what have we evolved in Oxford: squeezed main roads, a lot of cycle lanes, a semi-separate quiet network, a lot of buses, some of the slowest traffic in the country, no multi-lane roads or gyratories, and a tortuous road network for cars.

Maybe you'll have the space, money and politics to do it differently. But doing it the same wouldn't be a bad option.

Fair play. In terms of street pattern Oxford isn't that different to Colchester, or the Medway towns. In terms of politics, and the effect that has on the streets, they're light years apart.

 

[Tommi]

Results like these for example...?
http://homepage.ntlw...month/index.htm

Do you really think this sort of thing is designed by people who advocate vehicular cycling?

Now that you mentioned it, yes. It clearly shows no understanding of cycling infrastructure, and by actually building something like that you can continue driving the point that segregated infrastructure doesn't work. (I don't claim that is actually the case, but since you asked...)