Cycle campaigning

She highlights Hackney as somewhere where changes have been implemented that move towards that goal. Though I think it is important to realise that borough has not been dominated by campaigns for strict segregation, Rachel picks a good example of a road that has been freed up for bikes but car access has been restricted as somewhere where infrastructure is working.

Rachel has had more to with formulating LCC policy than most, so you should be reassured.

I was, hence my linking to her blog. She comes across as someone who understands the required compromises and has a realistic expectation as to what may be achieved.

a chance to object to westminster council's very cyclist-unfriendly plans for haymarket and lower regent st, and ask for some sensible improvements:

http://rachelaldred.org/writing/westminster-cycling-squeezed-out-in-piccadilly/

november 8th deadline

Why is this not better known?

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/free-flow-vehicle-speeds-in-great-britain-2012

Between 2011 and 2012, the percentage of cars exceeding the 30 mph speed limit remained unchanged at 47%.

I think I shall be bringing this up the next time someone says "all you cyclists jump red lights".

Because nearly everyone exceeded the 30mph limit nowadays to the point that it become the norms sadly.

It wasn't long ago that there was a lots of advert addressing the difference between 30 and 35mph is a difference between life and death.

But drivers generally understood the risk of red light jumping, and seeing cyclists doing this maneuver they feel they have every right to bring it up with a cyclists every time they want to argue.

Try and bring up that 47% of drivers exceed 30mph and you'll get a blank look.

The last time someone said to me that all cyclists jump red lights I replied with "in general all drivers speed" he smirked and said "what do you mean?" I asked if he ever speeds, his response was "you've got me there, I am going on a speed awareness course next week".

I don't think this kind of debate helps much, but can't resist having replies to the usual accusations.

On law-breaking- there are a million regular cyclist commuters in the Uk. There are 1.2m uninsured cars on the roads. So, law-breaking by drivers is larger than any possible law-breaking by cyclists (even assuming every cyclist breaks the law) before you even start including speeding, driving on a mobile, drunk or drugged, whatever.

It's probably unhelpful as James said though.

It wasn't long ago that there was a lots of advert addressing the difference between 30 and 35mph is a difference between life and death.
.

I imagine they were made by the Central Office of Information, which was scrapped by this government.

Interesting thoughts about cycle advocacy from Dave Horton on his blog
like the pics too:

Some detailed opinion about 20mph 2000pcu here.

http://rachelaldred.org/writing/20mph-2000pcu-using-it-for-local-campaigning/

She highlights Hackney as somewhere where changes have been implemented that move towards that goal. Though I think it is important to realise that borough has not been dominated by campaigns for strict segregation, Rachel picks a good example of a road that has been freed up for bikes but car access has been restricted as somewhere where infrastructure is working.

Does this essentially mean of the 2000pcu 85% must be under the speed limit for it to qualify as succesful ?

Bow again, roundabout again, HGV again.

How can we try and get TfL responsible for that death?

I don't usually frequent this thread.
I'll leave it to those more knowledgeable, articulate and well thought through then myself.

But fucking hell.
4 fatalities in 1 week.

When do we do this...?

It looks like there may be more today...
I've never seen the R.D. forum more active on a day.

RIP riders. Heal up to the others.

I don't usually frequent this thread.
I'll leave it to those more knowledgeable, articulate and well thought through then myself.

But fucking hell.
4 fatalities in 1 week.

When do we do this...?

This. Where do I sign.

RIP riders. Quick recovery to others, though I can understand if they dont want to get back out on the streets.

Just found the short the above image reminds me of, if you haven't seen this short documentary on Dutch cycling infrastructure, I do suggest you go here.

To summarise:

Changes occurred to Dutch transport polices due to:

1. Cities steadily grew more and more unable to cope with the increase in road traffic.
   
2. Public outrage grew at space given to motorised traffic.
   
3. The intolerable and ever-increasing amount of road traffic deaths lead to mass public protests under the banner of "Stop Der Kindermord" ("Stop the child murder).
   
4. An ongoing oil and economic crisis leading to gas shortages and high prices for energy.
   
   

Solution:
A political will on both national and municipal level with decision makers and planners working together to deal with the situation, leading to the turning away for car centric policies and making way for alternative transports, such as cycling.

How much of the above can be applied to London and the UK?

1. Public outrage grew at space given to motorised traffic.
   
   
   

I never seen those sort of thing happened
apart from campaigning group.

1. The intolerable and ever-increasing amount of road traffic deaths lead to mass public protests under the banner of "Stop Der Kindermord" ("Stop the child murder).
   
   
   

Not sure what they meant by mass public protests, but it clearly worked for them, but never for us (like that go-dutch ride which seemed to disappear).

So far only 1 & possibly 4. 2 in selected groups e.g. regular cyclists. 3 protests via the occasional flash ride but not in such numbers as to make this an electoral issue (perhaps the only thing that mp's will really act upon)

When they said public outrage, I assumed from the sound of it that there were a lots of newspaper headline about it as big as the foot and mouth disease.

So do we need to have more deaths, into the thousands in one year, for change to happen, or does drastic change need to happen if conditions are not as bad as they were in 70's Netherlands? In my book, one is too many. As many deaths occurred in Afghanistan to British soldiers in a week as have happened on the streets of London to cyclists. The difference being this is not a war zone and these deaths are entirely preventable should a fraction of the military budget be applied to planning for alternative and safer transport methods for all, not just cyclists.

So do we need to have more deaths, into the thousands in one year, for change to happen?

No, we just need a well-known politician/politician's relative to get killed while riding a bicycle in order to get it to happen.

not to be disrespectul or cold-hearted but
i vote boris (for cycling matyr)

If only princess Diana had ridden a bike, but her lack of seatbelt use when she died is rarely mentioned, she could have worn a helmet

Bow again, roundabout again, HGV again.

How can we try and get TfL responsible for that death?

Apparently multiple friends of mine have got in touch with TFL regarding the light phase at that section of the roundabout being incorrect, so that cars travelling around the roundabout heading towards the southern exit have a green light, and the cyclists heading west also do.

(this terrible diagram might illustrate what im trying to say)

I noticed this twice but thought it was just cars running reds!!

If this was the direction the vehicle who killed the cyclist was travelling in, I think there would be liability there? They had been informed of a safety issue and made no change to it.

If it was just left turning vehicle as usual, then it'll be business as usual...

Apparently multiple friends of mine have got in touch with TFL regarding the light phase at that section of the roundabout being incorrect, so that cars travelling around the roundabout heading towards the southern exit have a green light, and the cyclists heading west also do.

(this terrible diagram might illustrate what im trying to say)

I noticed this twice but thought it was just cars running reds!!

If this was the direction the vehicle who killed the cyclist was travelling in, I think there would be liability there? They had been informed of a safety issue and made no change to it.

If it was just left turning vehicle as usual, then it'll be business as usual...

Re the lights described above. Even if a light is green, you still need to check to see if it is clear to go.

There are many junctions with light phases like the above.

I am in no way apportioning blame, just trying to explain the issue raised.