dumbass LCC bike lane on Stratford High Street

[knocksofbeggarmen]

Bear in mind that Camden didn't need the LTDA to tell them to make the lanes as narrow as possible. They had loads of cyclechatters trying to achieve the same thing- in just the same way that an effort is being made to wreck current segregated infra.

Cyclist shoots himself in foot, blames Taxis.

 

[Dan B]

Yes that's precisely what I meant by 'self defeating'.

Vehicular cyclists, which of you lot asked for this treat? If the person responsible does not own up up, the whole class will stay behind!

 

[Dan B]

Bear in mind that Camden didn't need the LTDA to tell them to make the lanes as narrow as possible. They had loads of cyclechatters trying to achieve the same thing

Yes, I keep forgetting the potent political force that is CycleChat. It's a complete puzzle why Shaun hasn't been knighted yet

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

Vehicular cyclists, which of you lot asked for this treat? If the person responsible does not own up up, the whole class will stay behind!

The answer is ALL of them helped produce this- precisely by arguing that we would be better not even trying.

 

[mjr]

PS the same arguments from Vehicular Cycling fans that hampered Torrington are damaging Elephant & Castle now. What happens is you argue that lanes are only for 'slow cyclists', and presto, they build them too narrow for fast ones. It's a self defeating and circular argument: http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/08/21/dual-network-strikes-again/

I've read the Elephant and Castle consultation report. Did anyone actually make that argument or did TfL pull it out of their backside? I've had similar things said locally and I feel it could be a tactic to divide and conquer the local cycling groups.

 

[Dan B]

The answer is ALL of them helped produce this- precisely by arguing that we would be better not even trying.

They asked for the kerbs, did they? Someone must have done, I doubt they put them in just for fun

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

The answer is ALL of them helped produce this- precisely by arguing that we would be better not even trying.

Except that 'vehicular cyclist' isn't the right name here. We're all vehicular cyclists, with our well thumbed copies of cyclecraft, trying to survive with what we've got. But there is something distinctive about those that make of this a religion.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

I've read the Elephant and Castle consultation report. Did anyone actually make that argument or did TfL pull it out of their backside? I've had similar things said locally and I feel it could be a tactic to divide and conquer the local cycling groups.

Absolutely they made that argument- I'm not clear if the consultation responses are published in full for that one, but on any project at all where they are, you find echoes of DZ (could be DZ himself) making arguments of that stamp.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

They asked for the kerbs, did they? Someone must have done, I doubt they put them in just for fun

You know what I'm saying, but I'll repeat it anyway. They asked that less money be spent on this, and that less road space be given to it. The argued that it would spoil a 'perfectly good ride'. And so they helped it to spoil rides.

It's incontestable that division within the UK cycling community is a factor in the @bollocksinfra we get served by the ministry of off-fob. I realise that some would rather this was solved by NO INFRA AT ALL, but the arguments to support this preference, extending even to the bizarre claim that the netherlands is more dangerous than the UK for cycling in, are frequently just daft.

 

[theclaud]

I just bothered to look up cycling levels in Bracknell and Stevenage in the Cycling and Walking release from DfT, which are often claimed on this site to have the least cycling, alongside MK. I already posted that MK (18% cycling) is above the 15% average. Apparently Stevenage is below average at 11% and Bracknell Forest is higher at 21%. How does the claim they're all low keep getting repeated unchallenged? The actual places with least cycling are Luton, Barking and Dagenham, Hillingdon, and Blackburn, none of which are famous for their infrastructure.

Swinley is a major mtb destination - all great fun but bugger all to do with how people get around towns.

 

[Pete Owens]

There isn't any doubt at all who owns the execution. The council do, in this case.

The reason they put it in as narrow as that is that vehicular cyclists argued- as they have on this tread -that the lane would be unattractive to anyone wanting to get quickly from A-B,

Do yoiu have the faintest idea what the term vehicular cycling means - other than a term of abuse?

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

Do yoiu have the faintest idea what the term vehicular cycling means - other than a term of abuse?

I expect you are the authority. I've only got a copy of Cyclecraft and a badge. I suppose what I should have said is- 'those who make a religion out of vehicular cycling' -given that I am. myself, a vehicular cyclist.

 

[mjr]

Could you possibly explain what you mean by the first two words in that sentence?

"At worst"? It means that I feel this was the most LCC could reasonably be blamed, that they had enough weight to make something happen but not enough weight to make the council ensure it was done right.

I don't agree with the argument that crap is worth having because it'll demonstrate demand. There are other ways to demonstrate demand.

Where I may differ from many on this forum is that I think good cycle lanes are possible... but in London, it's going to need reallocating some mixed lanes and I don't know if the authorities have the backbone to do it.

 

[knocksofbeggarmen]

Where I may differ from many on this forum is that I think good cycle lanes are possible... but in London, it's going to need reallocating some mixed lanes and I don't know if the authorities have the backbone to do it.

Right. So they need that backbone stiffening- while in this forum at least (its a place of sorts) quite a lot of effort is going the other way.

 

[Pete Owens]

Pete, I found the report very interesting. Sorry if you've covered this already on this thread, but are you aware of any similar studies for rear lights that have 'laser lane' facility, where a red line shines either side of the bike?

Before reading the reports you linked, I considered them a good idea, now I'm not so sure.

And since then there has been more research on the subject:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457509001997

I doubt anyone has gone to the trouble of conducting research on such a little used gimmick - I think the projection would have a negative effect if anything as the projected virtual cycle lane is even narrower. However, I doubt there would be a significant effect as the driver would be so close by the time they saw the projection that they would already be commited to their overtaking trajectory.