|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
I'm wondering. Given the comments on urc about the farcilities that are
foisted on us, the jealousy directed at us by motorists because they believe that they are paying for these farcilities, and the opinions often voiced that cycle lanes are unmaintained with dangerous junctions, how do we view cycle lanes as a group? Are we, as cyclists, in favour of or against cycle lanes as they are today? How should they be? David Lloyd |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
David Lloyd wrote:
I'm wondering. Given the comments on urc about the farcilities that are foisted on us, the jealousy directed at us by motorists because they believe that they are paying for these farcilities, and the opinions often voiced that cycle lanes are unmaintained with dangerous junctions, how do we view cycle lanes as a group? Are we, as cyclists, in favour of or against cycle lanes as they are today? How should they be? I think the essential/risible divide in views on the usefulness of cycle lanes comes about because there different kinds of cyclists. There are cyclists who ride as an alternative to walking and those who ride as an alternative to driving. Lanes, even shared use ones, might genuinely help a "little old lady" potter to her local shop but they are no good for a 10 mile fast commute to work. I suspect the latter group are disproportionately represented in u.r.c On balance I am mostly anti (except for those neat little bike-only cut throughs that can really shorten town journeys) because I don't see why we should put my stereotypical little old lady to the extra risk of badly-designed paths; and because the longer these things are left lying around the greater the risk of eventual compulsion to use them. I would prefer the money to be spent on training. Peter -- www.amey.org.uk |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
David Lloyd wrote on 10/06/2007 10:36 +0100:
I'm wondering. Given the comments on urc about the farcilities that are foisted on us, the jealousy directed at us by motorists because they believe that they are paying for these farcilities, and the opinions often voiced that cycle lanes are unmaintained with dangerous junctions, how do we view cycle lanes as a group? Are we, as cyclists, in favour of or against cycle lanes as they are today? How should they be? No need for them and they encourage poor behaviour - gutter riding by the cyclist, passing too close by the motorist. Just get rid of all the farcilities apart from those that provide genuinely new route options and spend the money on cycle training instead. -- Tony "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 11:31:28 +0100, Peter Amey
wrote: Lanes, even shared use ones, might genuinely help a "little old lady" potter to her local shop but they are no good for a 10 mile fast commute to work. I suspect the latter group are disproportionately represented in u.r.c Quite probably. And is it not the former group who we want to encourage to take up cycling as a means of transport rather than using their cars? My view is that sensibly-designed facilities should be built (preferably in the kind of way the Dutch do where they are wide enough and properly laid out - or in any new development things like the Milton Keynes Redways which, like it or not, do result in quite a bit of leisure cycling that you don't as much get elsewhere) but it should remain optional to use them, as the former group will be more at home on the road. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
in message , David Lloyd
') wrote: I'm wondering. Given the comments on urc about the farcilities that are foisted on us, the jealousy directed at us by motorists because they believe that they are paying for these farcilities, and the opinions often voiced that cycle lanes are unmaintained with dangerous junctions, how do we view cycle lanes as a group? Are we, as cyclists, in favour of or against cycle lanes as they are today? How should they be? I think it would be wrong to say that no cycle lanes, anywhere, are any good. But the overwhelming majority - 95% or more - are at best useless, at worst actively lethal. -- (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ Just as defying the law of gravity through building aircraft requires careful design and a lot of effort, so too does defying laws of economics. It seems to be a deeply ingrained aspect of humanity to forever strive to improve things, so unquestioning acceptance of a free market system seems to me to be unnatural. ;; Charles Bryant |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
in message , Neil Williams
') wrote: On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 11:31:28 +0100, Peter Amey wrote: Lanes, even shared use ones, might genuinely help a "little old lady" potter to her local shop but they are no good for a 10 mile fast commute to work. I suspect the latter group are disproportionately represented in u.r.c Quite probably. And is it not the former group who we want to encourage to take up cycling as a means of transport rather than using their cars? My view is that sensibly-designed facilities should be built (preferably in the kind of way the Dutch do where they are wide enough and properly laid out - or in any new development things like the Milton Keynes Redways which, like it or not, do result in quite a bit of leisure cycling that you don't as much get elsewhere) but it should remain optional to use them, as the former group will be more at home on the road. It's worth pointing out that, according to John Franklin who has studied them extensively, substantially more dangerous for cyclists than the Milton Keynes road network. See http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/redway.html http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/2decades.html Milton Keynes was a new town built on a greenfield site with provision of cycle lanes as part of the original design. If it doesn't work there, it isn't going to work an cities which have grown organically. A cycle network separate from the roads is not generally possible. Furthermore I'd argue very strongly that it's not desirable. The more cyclists are persuaded not to use the roads, the more dangerous the roads will be for cyclists. The way to make roads safer, as London has amply demonstrated, is to get more cyclists on them, not get cyclists off them. -- (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/ ;; Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:57:54 +0100, Simon Brooke
wrote: It's worth pointing out that, according to John Franklin who has studied them extensively, substantially more dangerous for cyclists than the Milton Keynes road network. This may well be the case, partly due to the poor quality of cycling that takes place on them. However, this is to an extent a self-fulfilling prophecy because they encourage inexperienced cyclists who wouldn't otherwise take to the grid system (which carries very fast traffic and can be a bit scary if not actually unsafe when used correctly). Perception is as important as actual safety when encouraging more cycling, though, which I'm sure we'd all agree is a desirable thing. Looking at the Redways in a different way, many people won't walk them at night because they believe they are unsafe because of their relative secludedness. However, the crime statistics suggest that the majority of attacks actually take place in the estates and not on the isolated Redways. Thus, the Council are spending a fair bit of money cutting down trees and the likes to make the Redways *feel* safer even if in actual fact it makes almost no difference. http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/redway.html http://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/digest/2decades.html Will have a nose in more detail, but for a start:- "The risk of personal attack is probably lower in Milton Keynes than in many towns of a similar size, but attacks have taken place and more often than not on Redways." is factually incorrect. I don't have a reference to hand, but the attacks on Redways are *not* disproportionately high. Furthermore I'd argue very strongly that it's not desirable. The more cyclists are persuaded not to use the roads, the more dangerous the roads will be for cyclists. The way to make roads safer, as London has amply demonstrated, is to get more cyclists on them, not get cyclists off them. Cycling in London is a scary prospect for the inexperienced cyclist. If you don't provide for them properly on fast/busy roads, inexperienced cyclists will just go by car. You could argue for blanket 20mph speed limits and such to make cycling easier (note I say easier/less scary, not safer) but realistically that is not a particularly feasible option. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
Neil Williams wrote on 10/06/2007 13:42 +0100:
Perception is as important as actual safety when encouraging more cycling, though, which I'm sure we'd all agree is a desirable thing. Which is why continually telling people that they need special protective equipment and facilities to protect them is a very bad idea. Cycling is not actually unsafe, its just the perception the road safety lobby create. Cycling in London is a scary prospect for the inexperienced cyclist. In parts of London. There are large parts I cycle in central London where you meet almost no cars or taxis. You could argue for blanket 20mph speed limits and such to make cycling easier (note I say easier/less scary, not safer) but realistically that is not a particularly feasible option. Why not? -- Tony "The most savage controversies are those about matters as to which there is no good evidence either way." - Bertrand Russell |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
On Sun, 10 Jun 2007 14:23:04 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote: [blanket 20mph] Why not? Because people need to get places more quickly than that, and unless you have an entirely segregated rapid transit rail system in every city to fulfil that role at least the buses will need to do so, even if you take the view that you want to make car use so inconvenient that nobody will want to bother. Neil -- Neil Williams Put my first name before the at to reply. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Are cycle lanes any use?
"Tony Raven" wrote in message ... Which is why continually telling people that they need special protective equipment and facilities to protect them is a very bad idea. There is just one thing that I am confused about here. You say that telling people they need special equipment is bad yet people on here have called me stupid because I don't wear gloves. Which is correct - do people need special equipment (gloves) or not? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
petitions.pm.gov.uk - cycle lanes | [email protected] | UK | 55 | November 22nd 06 12:02 AM |
Now we know what cycle lanes are for | David Hansen | UK | 10 | June 22nd 05 02:29 PM |
Cycle lanes on roundabouts | Tim Woodall | UK | 70 | April 23rd 05 09:53 AM |
Cycle lanes in New Towns | MartinM | UK | 5 | April 5th 05 10:10 AM |
Cycle Lanes | AndyP | UK | 33 | December 8th 03 01:43 PM |