The Future

[srw]

Have definitely seen an increase in bikes on the road even in a hilly area like High Wycombe. Unfortunately the provisioning of facilities is abysmal.

Oh, I don't know. All the cyclists I've ever seen going down Amersham hill seem to be quite happy with the facilities - a good half-mile of 1-in-10 gives you a good lick of speed.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

I'm not sure.

Things seem to be going - slowly - in the right direction in London.

But what makes me depressed is the amount of inertia that has to be overcome in the rest of the country. Two things in particular -

1) Out of town shopping centres are a disaster for the high street, and consequently/also for cycling.

2) The number of cars on the road has grown by 30% over the last decade. If you're a "glass half full" type person, I suppose you can say that means more congestion, and more of an incentive to get out of your car. If you're a "glass half empty" person, that means a vast increase in people who have now chosen to use cars for journeys that could easily be made by bicycle or by foot. What incentive do they have to switch back?

 

[Davidc]

What facilities do you want? All I really need is a road and there are plenty of those. It's useful to have some cycle only paths but they're not really needed.

More decent bike parking would be nice though.

My observation is that both at home and in south London I'm having more problem finding space on bike stands, and around supermarkets it's getting to be a serious problem parking a bike. There seem to be more people cycling for both leisure and utility (including commuting) reasons just about everywhere.

The future is difficult to judge, with reducing government support both locally and nationally, and a government which has shown itself less committed to road safety and to be more car friendly than the last one. I suspect that the effects of rising fuel and other motoring costs combined with the economic depression will increase cycling generally.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

What facilities do you want? All I really need is a road and there are plenty of those. It's useful to have some cycle only paths but they're not really needed.

I'm not talking about facilities - or at least, not wholly about facilities.

I'm talking about a road environment that is far less hostile to cycling, especially for those who do not, at present, use a bicycle at all. Particularly children.

 

[girofan]

Members of the Forum should come to Oswestry, Shropshire, where the average age of drivers is about 90!!!

Can't see! Can't hear! Don't care!!!!

It's not facilities which are needed it's wholesale education of motorists which is needed. A driving licence is a privilege, not a right, do you not agree?

 

[StuartG]

When petrol gets more affordable again will bikes be retired to the garden shed?

It is interesting to look at the Department of Transport's statistics on their website. It indicates that while fuel costs have increased in real terms the total cost of car travel has decreased because cars have become cheaper to buy (in real terms). Hence the modal shift towards car travel and with another nudge from the rail/bus increases depite the vat/fuel changes we can expect that to continue. Not helped by last week's announcement that parking rules are to be relaxed. Oh and the amazing subsidy we are all going to pay people rich enough to afford an electric car.

Where is Robin Hood when you need him?

 

[dellzeqq]

this week's announcements are about creating more and more suburban sprawl. The irony is the developers rarely press for more parking - it's the councillors (and by no means exclusively Tory councillors) who react to objections from local residents and sometimes insist on parking levels in excess of their own LDF standards.

I think that, in a general way, the outlook for public transport is pretty darn bleak - but I'm not sure how that affects cycling except in so far that cycling capitalises on bus lanes. Jonesy.......?

 

[StuartG]

Personally, I think the key is local activism.

Why do you think this?

I have failed completely with activating my own family. All have bikes - have biked - all now hanging in my garage (the bikes that is). The reason? Going by car/public transport is just so much easier. Stuck in a jam? - just turn the music up or phone a friend.

If I can't enthuse them, if my example fails - how come the local LCC/CTC branch can get them back in the saddle?

Frankly for most people cycling is not attractive. For women doubly so. There are a few who by nature will defy tradition and come to enjoy it. But very few. Unlike if we were in Amsterdam or Copenhagen when I'm confident my ladies would all be riding without any urging by me.

Will local activists change our car-centric culture? Convince me!

 

[theclaud]

For example of good local activism, look at London, or Cambridge, or Oxford.

These are cities (and there are many other towns and cities as well) which have seen a resurgance in cycling. This resurgance has a common factor - motivated local campaigners.

London owes much of its cycling renaissance to the London Cycling Campaign and its local groups, and to the CTC local groups. It was these people who got involved in things like CRISPS and CRIMS, who went to the planning meetings locally to push the case for cyclists, who campaigned for the introduction of the Congestion Charge Zone and Boris Bikes, who are pushing local authorities to increase facilities and who are making their mark by simply cycling around the city. It's the same with other places like Cambridge, Oxford and Sheffield.

It wasn't the national organisations like CTC National Office or Sustrans who have brought about these changes. It was the local activists, who have kept plugging away, holding their local councillors to account, bringing pressure to bear on planners and who hold the festivals and rides that attract new cyclists.

Want contraflow cycling? Priority on busy roads? Planning that is beginning to put cyclists first (e.g. on the Hills Road bridge)? Come to Cambridge.

Want to see kids cycling to school? Parents cycling with their kids? Supermarkets, schools and hospitals providing good quality cycle parking? Come to Cambridge.

This has all happened because of local activists using the clout that they have. It's all too easy to sit there and say that you can't change anything. You can.

Hear hear. A splendid motivational New Year post!

CRISPS and CRIMS?

 

[theclaud]

CRISP = Cycle Route Implementation and Stakeholder Plan
CRIM = Cycle Route Inspection Meeting - an on-site meeting looking at the existing conditions and considering possible solutions.

Thanks - good acronyms!

 

[dellzeqq]

I'm not so convinced by CRISPs and CRIMs. They tend to create routes that people either use already or don't want to use (Andrews Road in Hackney, anybody?). I do believe that reasoned responses to traffic consultations or planning applications can make a difference, and that local LCC and CTC branches have had an effect on the way that Councillors think, but, to be honest, I think cycling is a cultural thing that depends on opportunity, and that most of the opportunities are accidental.

Bonnie Greer described cyclists as vermin. She's got a point. We grow in numbers as our surroundings allow. There are historical and political factors, mostly centred on a kind of intuitive greenness, and I still think that the anitipodean population of south west London had a kind of kickstart effect, and the 7/7 bombings gave cycling in London a boost. I reckon that you might it's perfectly possible that in some cities cycling will grow like topsy and in others it will stagnate - just as some roads will see big numbers of cyclists and similar roads nearby will see very few. The clever thing is to work out what makes the difference.

 

[StuartG]

For example of good local activism, look at London, or Cambridge, or Oxford.

Errr I have commuted in London for nearly 40 years and I know Cambridge & Oxford.

Oxbridge is nearly unique in maintaining a high modal share of bikes over the century and for special reasons - both are flat, full of students who were forbidden cars in the past. Currently car garaging around the colleges is nigh on impossible. So lots of bikes despite the infrastructure I would say. Contrast that with my University built in a park (and large car parks) in the 1960s. Today blessed with cycle infrastructure superior to Cambridge that few use 'cos cars are an option. Indeed I would expect Boy George's tuition fee hike to do more for cycling than any activism/infrastructure.

But feel free to disagree if you have some evidence to knock my assertions into touch.

Now London had few commuters and still has few commuters. Yes there are more but it is still insignificant in modal share for 35 years of LCC advocacy. Cycling in London has improved over that time despite traffic getting heavier. The one thing that has changed it for me and cyclists I speak to is Bus Lanes. A happy accident. I can't think of one bus lane I would trade out for any cycle infrastructure. Again most of my fellow cyclists regard most cycle infrastructure as dangerous and to be avoided. And most non-cyclists I speak to are not going to be persuaded into the saddle by me or my local LCC group for whom I have great respect otherwise. They do fix dodgy junctions and are good at advocacy for existing cyclists. They do try hard to get people cycling but I fear their success can be measured in dozens not thousands.

Do you move in different circles with different cyclists?

 

[jonesy]

Errr I have commuted in London for nearly 40 years and I know Cambridge & Oxford.

Oxbridge is nearly unique in maintaining a high modal share of bikes over the century and for special reasons - both are flat, full of students who were forbidden cars in the past. Currently car garaging around the colleges is nigh on impossible. So lots of bikes despite the infrastructure I would say. Contrast that with my University built in a park (and large car parks) in the 1960s. Today blessed with cycle infrastructure superior to Cambridge that few use 'cos cars are an option. Indeed I would expect Boy George's tuition fee hike to do more for cycling than any activism/infrastructure.

But feel free to disagree if you have some evidence to knock my assertions into touch.
...

As pointed out in the other thread,modal share for cycling in both cities is high as measured on the journey to work. There is more to it than just the students. I'd fully agree however that the lack of car parking and constraints on driving more generally help to tip the balance in favour of cycling, along with reasonably short travel distances. The presence of students helps maintain a critical mass of course, and being university towns has also brought about development and employment patterns that are conducive to cycling, so I wouldn't dispute that there is a link, but it certainly isn't just the students who cycle.

 

[spen666]

what timescale are we talking of?

 

[srw]

Errr I have commuted in London for nearly 40 years and I know Cambridge & Oxford.

Oxbridge is nearly unique in maintaining a high modal share of bikes over the century and for special reasons - both are flat, full of students who were forbidden cars in the past. Currently car garaging around the colleges is nigh on impossible. So lots of bikes despite the infrastructure I would say. Contrast that with my University built in a park (and large car parks) in the 1960s. Today blessed with cycle infrastructure superior to Cambridge that few use 'cos cars are an option. Indeed I would expect Boy George's tuition fee hike to do more for cycling than any activism/infrastructure.

But feel free to disagree if you have some evidence to knock my assertions into touch.

1. The students of today were not forbidden cars in the past. When I was at university the students of today were mere ideas in the minds of their parents.
2. Most students in Oxbridge still live in or near the colleges - within walking distance of labs and lectures. If they go to lectures.
3. When I were a lad, only one of my contemporaries had a car at university. He was considered odd. That was rather later than the 1960s. But then we weren't used to getting loans. I suspect today's students will find it (emotionally) easier to get more into debt than we did.

Now London had few commuters and still has few commuters. Yes there are more but it is still insignificant in modal share for 35 years of LCC advocacy. Cycling in London has improved over that time despite traffic getting heavier. The one thing that has changed it for me and cyclists I speak to is Bus Lanes.

The main thing that has changed in London (zone 1 at least) is the advent of the congestion charge. There is both anecdotal and, I believe, hard evidence that traffic levels plummeted after its implementation, and have never recovered.