Parliamentary Inquiry
Discussion
Hi
At the risk of prompting more red light jumping, non helmet wearing debate (see Point 3 in Peter Walker's piece linked) I think this is a timely and balanced piece that give a good account of the issues around getting more folk on their bikes...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/20...
At the risk of prompting more red light jumping, non helmet wearing debate (see Point 3 in Peter Walker's piece linked) I think this is a timely and balanced piece that give a good account of the issues around getting more folk on their bikes...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/bike-blog/20...
This in the comments section struck a chord:
"while I love cycling on bicycle only paths (The Bristol-Bath cycle path for example), I cannot see how segregated bicycle tracks can work in British cities (except on old canal paths or railway tracks).
When the segregated cycle paths run parallel to a road, they are incredibly dangerous at side roads. Cars turning left onto the side road do not see you, as you are effectively undertaking them (something you should never do). Equally cars coming from the side road tend to drive out onto the cycle lane and stop to see if any cars on coming before joining the traffic on the main road - once again leaving the cyclist very little time to react."
"while I love cycling on bicycle only paths (The Bristol-Bath cycle path for example), I cannot see how segregated bicycle tracks can work in British cities (except on old canal paths or railway tracks).
When the segregated cycle paths run parallel to a road, they are incredibly dangerous at side roads. Cars turning left onto the side road do not see you, as you are effectively undertaking them (something you should never do). Equally cars coming from the side road tend to drive out onto the cycle lane and stop to see if any cars on coming before joining the traffic on the main road - once again leaving the cyclist very little time to react."
Indeed.
There simply isn't space for proper segregated cycle lanes in most British cities. To be better than what we have now they would need to be at least a car-width wide and would require proper "flow" at junctions which I think would be impossible to engineer.
What I have found useful is dedicated, marked lanes for cyclists (i.e. the London superhighways). This brings more cyclists together (safety in numbers), and provides dedicated (but not segregated) areas which drivers tend to be more aware of. We need more of these, properly integrated, and more importantly, properly enforced to protect cyclists (that goes for the "bike boxes" too). Maybe these facilities can be made better, for example with dedicated traffic lights for cyclists and better integration at junctions (i.e. not just spitting cyclists out into the side of left turning vehicles).
Strict liability is a completely stupid and aggravating suggestion, contrary to basic legal principles and fairness in my opinion.
I would suggest making road-cycling a (small) part of the driving test - it would not be hard nor expensive to do, and provides a whole new level of understanding to new drivers about other road-users. Certainly my driving has improved since I've been a regular road-cyclist. It might also show people that many journeys can easily be done by bike, reducing congestion and obesity.
There simply isn't space for proper segregated cycle lanes in most British cities. To be better than what we have now they would need to be at least a car-width wide and would require proper "flow" at junctions which I think would be impossible to engineer.
What I have found useful is dedicated, marked lanes for cyclists (i.e. the London superhighways). This brings more cyclists together (safety in numbers), and provides dedicated (but not segregated) areas which drivers tend to be more aware of. We need more of these, properly integrated, and more importantly, properly enforced to protect cyclists (that goes for the "bike boxes" too). Maybe these facilities can be made better, for example with dedicated traffic lights for cyclists and better integration at junctions (i.e. not just spitting cyclists out into the side of left turning vehicles).
Strict liability is a completely stupid and aggravating suggestion, contrary to basic legal principles and fairness in my opinion.
I would suggest making road-cycling a (small) part of the driving test - it would not be hard nor expensive to do, and provides a whole new level of understanding to new drivers about other road-users. Certainly my driving has improved since I've been a regular road-cyclist. It might also show people that many journeys can easily be done by bike, reducing congestion and obesity.
y. It would solve a lot of it without needing to change anything physical. will_ said:
I would suggest making road-cycling a (small) part of the driving test - it would not be hard nor expensive to do, and provides a whole new level of understanding to new drivers about other road-users. Certainly my driving has improved since I've been a regular road-cyclist. It might also show people that many journeys can easily be done by bike, reducing congestion and obesity.
Ironically, I imagine this could never happen due to health and safety reasons. Imagine if someone died because they were "forced" to cycle on those busy roads full of cars....will_ said:
I would suggest making road-cycling a (small) part of the driving test - it would not be hard nor expensive to do, and provides a whole new level of understanding to new drivers about other road-users. Certainly my driving has improved since I've been a regular road-cyclist. It might also show people that many journeys can easily be done by bike, reducing congestion and obesity.
I'm fond of a slight variant whenever people moan about 'cyclists should be licensed [etc]' - authoritarian, but fair - cycling licensed for ages over say 16, and a cycle license must be held for at least, say, 6 months - 1 year before a driving license can be applied for. Muppet-ish adult cyclists are dealt with, children still allowed to learn to ride (as they should be), and everyone gets at least some experience and knowledge of being a vulnerable road user before getting in a car (I'm sure many would forget, but it would still be an improvement). No doubt far too expensive.paranoid airbag said:
will_ said:
I would suggest making road-cycling a (small) part of the driving test - it would not be hard nor expensive to do, and provides a whole new level of understanding to new drivers about other road-users. Certainly my driving has improved since I've been a regular road-cyclist. It might also show people that many journeys can easily be done by bike, reducing congestion and obesity.
I'm fond of a slight variant whenever people moan about 'cyclists should be licensed [etc]' - authoritarian, but fair - cycling licensed for ages over say 16, and a cycle license must be held for at least, say, 6 months - 1 year before a driving license can be applied for. Muppet-ish adult cyclists are dealt with, children still allowed to learn to ride (as they should be), and everyone gets at least some experience and knowledge of being a vulnerable road user before getting in a car (I'm sure many would forget, but it would still be an improvement). No doubt far too expensive.But adding cyclist safety to the driving test isn't a bad idea, nor hard to implement. And in my view the best way of doing that is to put new drivers onto a bike so they know what it's like. It's also good experience for learning the daft things that motorists will do - which helps whether you're driving or on a bike.
So it's not a cycling test really at all - it is cycling experience as part of learning to drive.
Good posts chaps.
I agrees that an element of bike, pedestrian and motorbike awareness training in the testing regime would be useful.
But I see the main challenges being overcoming the political and social inertia about the issue - away from bike forums is it on people's radar, and see places on here for examples of pure cycling hatred - and the infrastructure problems. I guess the first one is the one to deal with to get cycling more mainstream and with it more understanding.
Did I hear someone at the back whisper chicken and egg?
I agrees that an element of bike, pedestrian and motorbike awareness training in the testing regime would be useful.
But I see the main challenges being overcoming the political and social inertia about the issue - away from bike forums is it on people's radar, and see places on here for examples of pure cycling hatred - and the infrastructure problems. I guess the first one is the one to deal with to get cycling more mainstream and with it more understanding.
Did I hear someone at the back whisper chicken and egg?
crisisjez said:
I said this before but got boo'd from the back row.......
There needs to be a larger cycle awareness campaign and some mistruths about the cyclists right to be there addressed at a National level.
You're right, of course.There needs to be a larger cycle awareness campaign and some mistruths about the cyclists right to be there addressed at a National level.
But the problem is, that is best achieved by getting people on bikes.
People won't get on bikes because they think it's dangerous.
There aren't enough people on bikes to make it politically beneficial to make the required investment to make it safer (or even appear safer)...
....so, not enough people ride bikes. And round it goes.
In some respects I think it will be the stick rather than the carrot that makes cycling work in the UK. People priced out of their cars or trains, or looking for work more locally, will perhaps start cycling instead of driving. Then there will be the demand and the political will to actually make cycling mainstream. That has driven the cycling demand in London in the last 10-15 years, leading to Boris Bikes and cyle superhighways.
That doesn't help the fundamental lack of space in our cities though.
will_ said:
I'm just not in favour of any sort of licences at all - too complex and expensive to introduce and enforce. There are better things to focus on.
But adding cyclist safety to the driving test isn't a bad idea, nor hard to implement. And in my view the best way of doing that is to put new drivers onto a bike so they know what it's like. It's also good experience for learning the daft things that motorists will do - which helps whether you're driving or on a bike.
So it's not a cycling test really at all - it is cycling experience as part of learning to drive.
Ultimately, I suspect you're right - it's not necessarily a serious suggestion. But given one of the biggest obstacles to popular support for pro-cycling policies is the perception that only a tiny minority of elitists in weird clothing benefit, policies that show that doesn't have to be the case are desirable.But adding cyclist safety to the driving test isn't a bad idea, nor hard to implement. And in my view the best way of doing that is to put new drivers onto a bike so they know what it's like. It's also good experience for learning the daft things that motorists will do - which helps whether you're driving or on a bike.
So it's not a cycling test really at all - it is cycling experience as part of learning to drive.
As I commented: a key element is NOT building segregated lanes. It's recognising that I do have a right to be on the road, and on the (rare) occasions that it means a car driver must wait for me to complete a manoeuvre, that's tough titty.
No one suggests building separate horse and cart lanes, banning horses from the road or telling horse riders they don't pay road tax.
No one suggests building separate horse and cart lanes, banning horses from the road or telling horse riders they don't pay road tax.
On reading this I am a little surprised there are no mentions of the general state of the roads we are currently riding. Am I the only one who feels like I am riding in some third world country when I take to the roads in Surrey/Hants?
I tend to stick to a tried and tested route for my regular ride and one of the major reasons is that I know where all the potholes and sunken/raised drains are. Even then you feel the difficulty in sharing the road with the motorist when you have to ride some two feet from the kerb or white line to avoid them.
Surely a little more attention to the state of the roads we use now might give some impetus to getting more people on bikes?
I tend to stick to a tried and tested route for my regular ride and one of the major reasons is that I know where all the potholes and sunken/raised drains are. Even then you feel the difficulty in sharing the road with the motorist when you have to ride some two feet from the kerb or white line to avoid them.
Surely a little more attention to the state of the roads we use now might give some impetus to getting more people on bikes?
will_ said:
Indeed.
There simply isn't space for proper segregated cycle lanes in most British cities. To be better than what we have now they would need to be at least a car-width wide and would require proper "flow" at junctions which I think would be impossible to engineer.
.
But many cities can. For many years my local council has used this "no space" excuse and has put in stupid stop \start excuses for cycle lanes. We do have many miles of dedicated bus and taxi lanes around all of the town. Remove these stupid lanes and replace with dedicated cycle lanes. There simply isn't space for proper segregated cycle lanes in most British cities. To be better than what we have now they would need to be at least a car-width wide and would require proper "flow" at junctions which I think would be impossible to engineer.
.
Gooby said:
will_ said:
Indeed.
There simply isn't space for proper segregated cycle lanes in most British cities. To be better than what we have now they would need to be at least a car-width wide and would require proper "flow" at junctions which I think would be impossible to engineer.
.
But many cities can. For many years my local council has used this "no space" excuse and has put in stupid stop \start excuses for cycle lanes. We do have many miles of dedicated bus and taxi lanes around all of the town. Remove these stupid lanes and replace with dedicated cycle lanes. There simply isn't space for proper segregated cycle lanes in most British cities. To be better than what we have now they would need to be at least a car-width wide and would require proper "flow" at junctions which I think would be impossible to engineer.
.
I doubt there is the political will to hamper public transport to turn bus lanes into cycle-only lanes, nor realistically the demand. Not everyone can cycle so there also needs to be proper provision for public transport and cars of course.
Gizmoish said:
As I commented: a key element is NOT building segregated lanes. It's recognising that I do have a right to be on the road, and on the (rare) occasions that it means a car driver must wait for me to complete a manoeuvre, that's tough titty.
No one suggests building separate horse and cart lanes, banning horses from the road or telling horse riders they don't pay road tax.
+1No one suggests building separate horse and cart lanes, banning horses from the road or telling horse riders they don't pay road tax.
I really cannot fathom this obsession with wanting more segregated cycle lanes. My experience of some junctions where there are segregated lanes is that they are slower and usually filled with so much dirt and detritus that punctures would become almost daily occurences.
I suspect that what people mean when they ask about encouraging more people to cycle is encouraging old ladies and little children, because these are the only people who would benefit from segregated cycle lanes. It certainly won't be the 15mph+ commuters currently.
oyster said:
+1
I really cannot fathom this obsession with wanting more segregated cycle lanes. My experience of some junctions where there are segregated lanes is that they are slower and usually filled with so much dirt and detritus that punctures would become almost daily occurences.
I suspect that what people mean when they ask about encouraging more people to cycle is encouraging old ladies and little children, because these are the only people who would benefit from segregated cycle lanes. It certainly won't be the 15mph+ commuters currently.
When we were promised "cycle superhighways" in London, I thought they would be residential roads closed to everything except cycles, and cycle-lanes alongside railway lines and along old railway routes. These are great. I really cannot fathom this obsession with wanting more segregated cycle lanes. My experience of some junctions where there are segregated lanes is that they are slower and usually filled with so much dirt and detritus that punctures would become almost daily occurences.
I suspect that what people mean when they ask about encouraging more people to cycle is encouraging old ladies and little children, because these are the only people who would benefit from segregated cycle lanes. It certainly won't be the 15mph+ commuters currently.
What we don't need are routes marked out on pavements or hard up against the kerb... but this is what we got.
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff