Have we become a nation of cycle haters?
Discussion
vsonix said:
oyster said:
vsonix said:
otolith said:
vsonix said:
but the number of times that cyclists persist on using the road when there is a separate, protected cycle track running PARALLEL
Does it have priority at side roads? Is it shared with pedestrians? Is it suitable for cycling at 20mph on? If they aren't using it, it's probably because it is inferior to the road.Not a nation of cycle haters, but there is a small minority, like this guy http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/yoursay/letters/1136507...
paranoid airbag said:
vsonix said:
I'm not *blaming* the cyclists, merely wondering why they don't use it, but then I am not a regular cyclist so don't always understand their motivations. So in essence, we'd all be better off if they excised that bit of path altogether and widened the road so that it wasn't quite such a bottleneck?
If you're not a regular cyclist, what makes you think you're qualified to call it "perfectly good", or say that it's there "for your safety and convenience"?You're not qualified, and you've gotten your answer from people who are: it's not perfectly good at all, it's horribly inconvenient and not particularly safe, for a multitude of reasons, and I really hope it isn't there for cyclist safety or convenience, because the idea that that was "designed" with that aim genuinely in mind by a "professional" is just depressing.
I appreciate you're coming from what seems quite a logical and fair position - but you come across as arrogant when you make statements like that from a position of ignorance as to how those "facilities" actually work. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant - we are all unavoidably ignorant about most things. But there is something wrong with acting as though you aren't.
You inferrence using quotation marks that you don't believe the designers are professional shows your ignorance. I've had many, MANY schemes f
ked around with, cancelled, ruined by the cycling bunch, it's the 2 wheeled fools that are really to blame for the fk ups. Half want on-road routes, half want off-road routes, neither back down and both sides want £££ spending on them, using such tabloid comments as "anti-cyclist" or "pro-car" in the local tabloid news to try and force the argument. Then, you provide the facility and they get ignored. Meanwhile the cyclists are still riding on pavements, across red lights, the wrong way up 1-way streets, etc. The assumption that infrastructure designers are all political, anti-bike jobsworths is as false as the assumption that lycra clad cyclists are steaming
s that shouldn't be on the road as they don't pay tax. I ride a bike. I also design stuff. OpulentBob said:
paranoid airbag said:
vsonix said:
I'm not *blaming* the cyclists, merely wondering why they don't use it, but then I am not a regular cyclist so don't always understand their motivations. So in essence, we'd all be better off if they excised that bit of path altogether and widened the road so that it wasn't quite such a bottleneck?
If you're not a regular cyclist, what makes you think you're qualified to call it "perfectly good", or say that it's there "for your safety and convenience"?You're not qualified, and you've gotten your answer from people who are: it's not perfectly good at all, it's horribly inconvenient and not particularly safe, for a multitude of reasons, and I really hope it isn't there for cyclist safety or convenience, because the idea that that was "designed" with that aim genuinely in mind by a "professional" is just depressing.
I appreciate you're coming from what seems quite a logical and fair position - but you come across as arrogant when you make statements like that from a position of ignorance as to how those "facilities" actually work. There's nothing wrong with being ignorant - we are all unavoidably ignorant about most things. But there is something wrong with acting as though you aren't.
You inferrence using quotation marks that you don't believe the designers are professional shows your ignorance. I've had many, MANY schemes f
ked around with, cancelled, ruined by the cycling bunch, it's the 2 wheeled fools that are really to blame for the fk ups. Half want on-road routes, half want off-road routes, neither back down and both sides want £££ spending on them, using such tabloid comments as "anti-cyclist" or "pro-car" in the local tabloid news to try and force the argument. Then, you provide the facility and they get ignored. Meanwhile the cyclists are still riding on pavements, across red lights, the wrong way up 1-way streets, etc. The assumption that infrastructure designers are all political, anti-bike jobsworths is as false as the assumption that lycra clad cyclists are steaming
s that shouldn't be on the road as they don't pay tax. I ride a bike. I also design stuff. TheLemming said:
Regardless of how it gets that way, the end result is pretty much not fit for purpose.
I think it's hard to define a single "purpose" for cycling facilities. The requirements of a cycle commuter are largely different to the requirements of a family out for a ride. One facility is unlikely to satisfy both sets of requirements (although old railways often can). Unfortunately plenty of non-cycling road users see a cycle facility, assume it is suitable for all cyclists and then get irate when some cyclists don't use it.Most people commenting on this thread have no idea what's involved. In this pompous city (Cambridge), you get called out constantly by "experts" who have ridden a bike twice, and now think they have got an engineering degree... "Hello, I've done some research and now I think your design is wrong. My research? Yes, ten minutes on google, and a referral from a friend of a friend who probably doesn't exist, and a photo of what they've done in Anderlecht." (facepalm and headbutt the wall)
Try putting out a consultation suggesting the construction of an off-road (or on-road) cycle way. Do it, then sit back and wait for the phone calls from the lycra warriors telling you that you're targetting them, deliberately and personally, and you obviously want their kids to die. It doesnt matter WHAT you suggest, it's never enough. And then you get the drivers, pedestrians and other non-cyclists who (rightfully, IMO) complain about the amount of money that goes towards the 2-wheelers. Even the 20's Plenty campaign has been infiltrated by the CTC/right to cycle lobbyists, who strangely want 20mph blanket limits across entire cities, but are adamant that the limit will NOT apply to them. Along, apparantly, with red lights, give way junctions, ped crossings etc. It's an easy 50/50 split here on how many cyclists obey the rules and how many don't. Then you get a 16 year old girl wiped out, riding on the wrong side of the road, at night without lights, and everyone points the finger at the infrastructure. Not the fact the girl was a fking idiot incapable of riding safely on a public road.
Cyclists don't do anything to garner sympathy. Most people here want cycling law enforced many times more regularly than it actually is. I've actually seen people point and laugh when a cyclist has been punted off when he rides out without stopping, or runs a red light in front of a taxi etc.
Try putting out a consultation suggesting the construction of an off-road (or on-road) cycle way. Do it, then sit back and wait for the phone calls from the lycra warriors telling you that you're targetting them, deliberately and personally, and you obviously want their kids to die. It doesnt matter WHAT you suggest, it's never enough. And then you get the drivers, pedestrians and other non-cyclists who (rightfully, IMO) complain about the amount of money that goes towards the 2-wheelers. Even the 20's Plenty campaign has been infiltrated by the CTC/right to cycle lobbyists, who strangely want 20mph blanket limits across entire cities, but are adamant that the limit will NOT apply to them. Along, apparantly, with red lights, give way junctions, ped crossings etc. It's an easy 50/50 split here on how many cyclists obey the rules and how many don't. Then you get a 16 year old girl wiped out, riding on the wrong side of the road, at night without lights, and everyone points the finger at the infrastructure. Not the fact the girl was a f
king idiot incapable of riding safely on a public road.Cyclists don't do anything to garner sympathy. Most people here want cycling law enforced many times more regularly than it actually is. I've actually seen people point and laugh when a cyclist has been punted off when he rides out without stopping, or runs a red light in front of a taxi etc.
OpulentBob said:
How are YOU qualified to talk about the design process/designers of the infrastructure? Do you know anything about cycling infrastructure design? And how the schemes are requested, promoted and, to an extent, pre-engineered with lots of input from cycle action groups, charities, lobbyists etc?
You inferrence using quotation marks that you don't believe the designers are professional shows your ignorance. I've had many, MANY schemes fked around with, cancelled, ruined by the cycling bunch, it's the 2 wheeled fools that are really to blame for the fk ups. Half want on-road routes, half want off-road routes, neither back down and both sides want £££ spending on them, using such tabloid comments as "anti-cyclist" or "pro-car" in the local tabloid news to try and force the argument. Then, you provide the facility and they get ignored. Meanwhile the cyclists are still riding on pavements, across red lights, the wrong way up 1-way streets, etc.
The assumption that infrastructure designers are all political, anti-bike jobsworths is as false as the assumption that lycra clad cyclists are steamings that shouldn't be on the road as they don't pay tax. I ride a bike. I also design stuff.
Well you've convinced me that at least one is not professional or interested in providing good cycling facilities at all.You inferrence using quotation marks that you don't believe the designers are professional shows your ignorance. I've had many, MANY schemes f
ked around with, cancelled, ruined by the cycling bunch, it's the 2 wheeled fools that are really to blame for the fk ups. Half want on-road routes, half want off-road routes, neither back down and both sides want £££ spending on them, using such tabloid comments as "anti-cyclist" or "pro-car" in the local tabloid news to try and force the argument. Then, you provide the facility and they get ignored. Meanwhile the cyclists are still riding on pavements, across red lights, the wrong way up 1-way streets, etc. The assumption that infrastructure designers are all political, anti-bike jobsworths is as false as the assumption that lycra clad cyclists are steaming
s that shouldn't be on the road as they don't pay tax. I ride a bike. I also design stuff. Yes I am qualified to say what infrastructure works and in used, because I've actually tried using it. Those "2 wheeled fools" fund your designs, if they aren't using them that's your f
k up. Believing otherwise is pretty much the definition of "jobsworth".And it's really quite staggering that you're stupid enough to think that tirade of lame excuses and blaming everyone but yourself would convince anybody otherwise.
Edit: oh I see, you're the one responsible for the absolutely awful infrastructure in Cambridge. Maybe you should get a less demanding job, like designing a parking lot, if you can manage it.
heebeegeetee said:
vsonix said:
I'm not *blaming* the cyclists, merely wondering why they don't use it, but then I am not a regular cyclist so don't always understand their motivations. So in essence, we'd all be better off if they excised that bit of path altogether and widened the road so that it wasn't quite such a bottleneck?
How about we use roads for y'know, roads, and not storage facilities for cars? Here we have a classic example of parked cars causing obstruction and delay and forcing oncoming traffic into conflict with each other - but someone wants to blather on about the cyclists.
oyster said:
heebeegeetee said:
vsonix said:
I'm not *blaming* the cyclists, merely wondering why they don't use it, but then I am not a regular cyclist so don't always understand their motivations. So in essence, we'd all be better off if they excised that bit of path altogether and widened the road so that it wasn't quite such a bottleneck?
How about we use roads for y'know, roads, and not storage facilities for cars? Here we have a classic example of parked cars causing obstruction and delay and forcing oncoming traffic into conflict with each other - but someone wants to blather on about the cyclists.
paranoid airbag said:
OpulentBob said:
How are YOU qualified to talk about the design process/designers of the infrastructure? Do you know anything about cycling infrastructure design? And how the schemes are requested, promoted and, to an extent, pre-engineered with lots of input from cycle action groups, charities, lobbyists etc?
You inferrence using quotation marks that you don't believe the designers are professional shows your ignorance. I've had many, MANY schemes fked around with, cancelled, ruined by the cycling bunch, it's the 2 wheeled fools that are really to blame for the fk ups. Half want on-road routes, half want off-road routes, neither back down and both sides want £££ spending on them, using such tabloid comments as "anti-cyclist" or "pro-car" in the local tabloid news to try and force the argument. Then, you provide the facility and they get ignored. Meanwhile the cyclists are still riding on pavements, across red lights, the wrong way up 1-way streets, etc.
The assumption that infrastructure designers are all political, anti-bike jobsworths is as false as the assumption that lycra clad cyclists are steamings that shouldn't be on the road as they don't pay tax. I ride a bike. I also design stuff.
Well you've convinced me that at least one is not professional or interested in providing good cycling facilities at all.You inferrence using quotation marks that you don't believe the designers are professional shows your ignorance. I've had many, MANY schemes f
ked around with, cancelled, ruined by the cycling bunch, it's the 2 wheeled fools that are really to blame for the fk ups. Half want on-road routes, half want off-road routes, neither back down and both sides want £££ spending on them, using such tabloid comments as "anti-cyclist" or "pro-car" in the local tabloid news to try and force the argument. Then, you provide the facility and they get ignored. Meanwhile the cyclists are still riding on pavements, across red lights, the wrong way up 1-way streets, etc. The assumption that infrastructure designers are all political, anti-bike jobsworths is as false as the assumption that lycra clad cyclists are steaming
s that shouldn't be on the road as they don't pay tax. I ride a bike. I also design stuff. Yes I am qualified to say what infrastructure works and in used, because I've actually tried using it. Those "2 wheeled fools" fund your designs, if they aren't using them that's your f
k up. Believing otherwise is pretty much the definition of "jobsworth".And it's really quite staggering that you're stupid enough to think that tirade of lame excuses and blaming everyone but yourself would convince anybody otherwise.
Edit: oh I see, you're the one responsible for the absolutely awful infrastructure in Cambridge. Maybe you should get a less demanding job, like designing a parking lot, if you can manage it.
QED. You've ridden on Cambridges roads, so you think you're qualified to talk about the procurement and design of such infrastructure. I rest my case. I wouldn't be surprised if you've got an ac.uk email address too!
The 2 wheeled fools do NOT fund my designs any more than any other tax-paying citizen, myself included. The fact they get the facilities at the expense of additional facilities for motorists and pedestrians shows just how much clout they have got, considering the proportion of cycles compared to cars and peds. You'd probably be surprised at the schemes I've designed and installed. They've done a lot more for (rule breaking) cyclists than they have for (lovely law abiding) drivers and peds.
(I'm a private sector worker, by the way, before you accuse me of being some sort of socialist caancil scum)
OpulentBob said:
Mr Gear said:
Wow. Have you considered a different career? Perhaps this job isn't for you.
Yep, I now don't do poxy cycle jobs and stick to nice juicy highways projects.
I'm not sure I've ever seen someone with less of a sense of professional responsibility. Not suprised you're "private sector", not the type of private sector where you don't accept taxpayer money of course, just the type that avoids any sort of democratic accountability whilst raking it in. And you call other people pompous!
paranoid airbag said:
Off to butcher the A14 next, then?
A14? Been there, done that. 
No challenge when you've got 3 lanes and only one-way traffic.Regarding democratic responsibility, I'm an engineer, not a politician. I'm not voted in or out. I wonder if people realise this when they talk about local authorities etc? My employment is based on technical skill and project management. What I think, say or do about members of the public has zero bearing on my job, in the same way it doesn't if you're a dentist, a cold drink vendor, or a professional shark fisherman. Equally, I don't decide how the money is spent. That comes from elected representatives, hence my comments about the cycling lot sticking their fingers in too much. The elected ones are wanting to keep the lycra vote, so they say yes to everything, not realising that it's not possible to keep everyone happy. (i.e. keeping a 7.3m carriageway, 2x1.0m on-road cycle lanes, a 2.5m segregated cycleway, all within 10.5m of available space. You can't fit a pint in to a half-pint pot) Then you get the pompous emails and letters coming in telling you that this or that Councillor promised x, y and z, and why hasn't it happened yet, because they agreed to it last tuesday, oh yes, that's right, because you're anti-cycle etc etc.
Anyway, carry on. I'm going to do my timesheet and expenses then head home, roof down, for a bike ride and a happy sunny weekend.
Have a nice afternoon
OpulentBob said:
QED. You've ridden on Cambridges roads, so you think you're qualified to talk about the procurement and design of such infrastructure. I rest my case. I wouldn't be surprised if you've got an ac.uk email address too!
The 2 wheeled fools do NOT fund my designs any more than any other tax-paying citizen, myself included. The fact they get the facilities at the expense of additional facilities for motorists and pedestrians shows just how much clout they have got, considering the proportion of cycles compared to cars and peds. You'd probably be surprised at the schemes I've designed and installed. They've done a lot more for (rule breaking) cyclists than they have for (lovely law abiding) drivers and peds.
(I'm a private sector worker, by the way, before you accuse me of being some sort of socialist caancil scum)
PetulantBob said:
A14? Been there, done that. No challenge when you've got 3 lanes and only one-way traffic.
Regarding democratic responsibility, I'm an engineer, not a politician. I'm not voted in or out. I wonder if people realise this when they talk about local authorities etc? My employment is based on technical skill and project management. What I think, say or do about members of the public has zero bearing on my job, in the same way it doesn't if you're a dentist, a cold drink vendor, or a professional shark fisherman. Equally, I don't decide how the money is spent. That comes from elected representatives, hence my comments about the cycling lot sticking their fingers in too much. The elected ones are wanting to keep the lycra vote, so they say yes to everything, not realising that it's not possible to keep everyone happy. (i.e. keeping a 7.3m carriageway, 2x1.0m on-road cycle lanes, a 2.5m segregated cycleway, all within 10.5m of available space. You can't fit a pint in to a half-pint pot) Then you get the pompous emails and letters coming in telling you that this or that Councillor promised x, y and z, and why hasn't it happened yet, because they agreed to it last tuesday, oh yes, that's right, because you're anti-cycle etc etc.
Anyway, carry on. I'm going to do my timesheet and expenses then head home, roof down, for a bike ride and a happy sunny weekend.
Have a nice afternoon
For a start, a lot of the A14 is two lane, with 50mph average speed limits (which frankly were necessary). Given that and some of the interchanges you clearly managed to find a challenge. No challenge when you've got 3 lanes and only one-way traffic.Regarding democratic responsibility, I'm an engineer, not a politician. I'm not voted in or out. I wonder if people realise this when they talk about local authorities etc? My employment is based on technical skill and project management. What I think, say or do about members of the public has zero bearing on my job, in the same way it doesn't if you're a dentist, a cold drink vendor, or a professional shark fisherman. Equally, I don't decide how the money is spent. That comes from elected representatives, hence my comments about the cycling lot sticking their fingers in too much. The elected ones are wanting to keep the lycra vote, so they say yes to everything, not realising that it's not possible to keep everyone happy. (i.e. keeping a 7.3m carriageway, 2x1.0m on-road cycle lanes, a 2.5m segregated cycleway, all within 10.5m of available space. You can't fit a pint in to a half-pint pot) Then you get the pompous emails and letters coming in telling you that this or that Councillor promised x, y and z, and why hasn't it happened yet, because they agreed to it last tuesday, oh yes, that's right, because you're anti-cycle etc etc.
Anyway, carry on. I'm going to do my timesheet and expenses then head home, roof down, for a bike ride and a happy sunny weekend.
Have a nice afternoon
Honestly, how do you get employed for a "major project" when you literally can't design a cycle path properly? I smell corruption.
And yes, I'm aware that it's not possible to please everyone. That doesn't mean it's okay to not take responsibility, which you have not done. Yours is the paycheck, yours is the responsibility.
I await the inevitable post in a years' time complaining about drivers who won't just instantly merge from four lanes into one, and it's their fault there are 40 mile tailbacks and accidents everywhere.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff