Cyclecraft is "destroying" UK cycling

[MrHappyCyclist]

I do see your point, thugh I think you also may be simplifying things too much here. There are some people in this discussion who believe segregation (in towns and cities) is wrong.

It isn't a right or wrong, black or white, issue.

Yup, as I said:

(There are probably many other points of view as well)

=======================

Many of those in the 'anti' camp are saying segregation of public space is undesirable because it is uncivilised.

Yes, again. That is the reason why it is considered wrong. (And I agree with it.)

=======================

Others are saying 'great idea in principle now show me (the drawing of) how it is going to work on the ground in reality and who is going to pay for it?'

And that would be my third group:

Then there are those of us who used to dream of a wonderful cycling infrastructure 30 years ago, have seen how far we have got in 3 decades and realise that we will be long dead before anything even half decent has any hope of being implemented even if it were desirable, so take a more pragmatic view, which is to remove the harmful crap that is in place now and don't replace it until such time as it can be done properly.

=======================
I think we are in agreement.

 

[Red Light]

I'd be very interested in any objective evidence that cycle tracks have no bearing on the number of cyclists in Holland. To state that the highest per capita bicycle use in a western country and its adoption among almost all ages and classes with bicycles overwhelmingly suited to utility riding coincidentally happens to have the most efficient cycle network, requires compelling counter-intuitive evidence.

You could start by looking at the change in cycling levels between mid 1980 and mid 1990 which is when a large amount of the cycle track construction took place in the Netherlands under the Bicycle Master Plan. It cost $15Bn and cycling levels didn't change.

And this is the problem. You are promoting a solution where you do not know even the basic evidence for or against it working. If you did we could discuss the evidence and iterate to a conclusion possibly but at the moment your side is based on faith alone, not evidence. And its a tall ask to ask us to trust in your faith when we know the evidence and that it is indeed counter-intuitive as you put it.

 

[User482]

I must confess, I haven't trawled through all of this thread, but in case this hasn't been posted: http://road.cc/content/news/36715-i...rted-say-academics-masses-continue-shun-bikes

Interesting conclusion, but it brings us back to the same problem: segragationists (and I lean in this direction in terms of getting new bums on saddles) are never going to get their wish for Dutch style facilities, so we'll end up with more white lines on pavements. On that basis, the case for making the roads more convivial places to be, seems inarguable.

 

[dellzeqq]

Yup, as I said:


=======================


Yes, again. That is the reason why it is considered wrong. (And I agree with it.)

=======================


And that would be my third group:


=======================
I think we are in agreement.

can I be the first to claim all three grounds?

 

[blockend]

And this is the problem. You are promoting a solution where you do not know even the basic evidence for or against it working.

I first used Holland's cycle routes in the mid-70s and have done so at intervals since. I also know Dutch cyclists who are utility riders and those who cycle for utility and tour on road in other countries and I can guarantee none of them would write off cycle paths as inconsequential to the development of cycling in that country.

I'm afraid your dedication to statistics is clouding your common sense.

 

[dellzeqq]

I'm afraid your dedication to statistics is clouding your common sense.

ah. That would be it.

Why am I not in the ranks of utility cyclists? Just asking....

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

can I be the first to claim all three grounds?

I think you are!

 

[blockend]

ah. That would be it.

Why am I not in the ranks of utility cyclists? Just asking....

Don't ask me, I'm 'bitter' apparently.

 

[MrHappyCyclist]

I'm afraid your dedication to statistics is clouding your common sense.

Too right! All these damn facts clouding the issue. My mother-in-law smoked all her life and lived to be 82, but they still keep feeding us all this BS about smoking being bad for your health!

 

[blockend]

Too right! All these damn facts clouding the issue. My mother-in-law smoked all her life and lived to be 82, but they still keep feeding us all this BS about smoking being bad for your health!

If you look at the history of Dutch cycling seriously, from the development of Napoleonic roads, the separation of horse traffic on rural roads and the ban on motor vehicles making incursions onto them in 1905, to their continued development from the 1970s - 90s and still insist their evolution has nothing to do with that society's view of the bicycle as practical transport, you'll need more evidence than one cherry picked paper and a smoking MiL.

 

[dellzeqq]

lets leave MrHappyCyclist's mother-in-law's cherry out of this!

 

[GrumpyGregry]

That simple, indeed admirable statement conceals a lot of what-ifs. Of course cyclists should be allowed on all roads but many are dangerous to cyclists in the real world. I was discussing the death of a mutual acquaintance with a cycling friend at the weekend.......

Genuinely sorry for your loss. It doesn't seem right to fence over the specifics of this case other than to say that, on face value, national speed limit trunk road+a level of cycling leading to bad fatality/accident stats makes a powerful case for reduced enforced speed limits on that road.

Round here, many, many roads that were NSL when I passed my test, and were a joy to ride a fast motorbike along, are 40mph today.....

 

[Richard Mann]

If you look at the history of Dutch cycling seriously...

Well the honest answer is that some infrastructure is probably necessary, but that more (when you've already got quite a lot) is ineffective. Which is pretty standard "diminishing marginal returns", so entirely believable.

I don't think there's conclusive evidence from the Netherlands about what type of infrastructure is required, just that a lot of segregated stuff works pretty well (if you've got the money/space).

As I've said, I think there are other options, which focus more on slowing the traffic down (to <30mph on main road links), rather than segregating. That can get perceived safety into the tolerable range. Once you've satisfied that requirement, take-up depends on the competition.

 

[blockend]

Well the honest answer is that some infrastructure is probably necessary, but that more (when you've already got quite a lot) is ineffective. Which is pretty standard "diminishing marginal returns", so entirely believable.

I don't think there's conclusive evidence from the Netherlands about what type of infrastructure is required, just that a lot of segregated stuff works pretty well (if you've got the money/space).

As I've said, I think there are other options, which focus more on slowing the traffic down (to <30mph on main road links), rather than segregating. That can get perceived safety into the tolerable range. Once you've satisfied that requirement, take-up depends on the competition.

FWIW the same stretch of road has claimed the lives of two other cyclists I have ridden with and another road with similar speeds and traffic volumes saw the death of another chap I knew. It may be I'm statistically unlucky in knowing so many riders die on local dual carriageways, or it could mean such roads are extremely chancy to ride bicycles on. It's possible that all such routes might be slowed to 30mph and the limit enforced but as it's a major N.E./S.W. traffic artery the chances are negligible.

 

[SavageHoutkop]

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

What is not an infrequent sight in Oxford are old professors cycling about in their suits (to halls for dinner, no doubt); as well a number of people cycling to/from the station to work in other cities, oddly.
The parts of Oxford I know well are not studenty and cycling is still quite high. And the number of children ferried about on child seats or other cycling contraptions is much higher than I see in Manchester.

For my cycle into Oxford, cycle is by far the fastest way to go if there's any sign of traffic (which there often is). Heading the other way, I can still usually give the bus a run for its money.