Cycle campaigning

I don't get the "go Dutch" thing. On my last visit to 'dam I saw very little segregation outside the main streets, lots and lots of very close shaves, and behavior from both cyclists and drivers which would have led to shouty slanging matches and fisticuffs in London.

Which leads me to conclude that it's the attitude of all the population which makes the difference, not the "rules".

+1

I don't get the "go Dutch" thing. On my last visit to 'dam I saw very little segregation outside the main streets, lots and lots of very close shaves, and behavior from both cyclists and drivers which would have led to shouty slanging matches and fisticuffs in London.

Which leads me to conclude that it's the attitude of all the population which makes the difference, not the "rules".

nobody (not even the 'kerb nerds') wants segregation outside of main streets. everyone prefers traffic reduction / filtered permeability on minor roads to a point where it's comfortable for everyone to cycle on these roads, where it's possible..

the argument is only about roads where motor traffic can (possibly) be slowed, but not reduced to a point that's comfortable for most cyclists - and where there are still large numbers of buses and hgvs.. which are (as you say) segregated in amsterdam. that's the point of go dutch.

so, for example, the mile end rd - which, due to canal/ river/ road crossings, is the only useful route between stratford and the city - skydancer, oliver schick, dancing james would all ask for on-carriageway cycling here, and a 20mph limit. the 'kerb nerds' argue that no amount of training and encouragement, or speed limits will make old people, disabled cyclists, children, families with children happy to cycle with buses and hgvs on the carriageway here, and you need protected space. i suspect they're right..

so, for example, the mile end rd - which, due to canal/ river/ road crossings, is the only useful route between stratford and the city - skydancer, oliver schick, dancing james would all ask for on-carriageway cycling here, and a 20mph limit. i suspect they're right..

We agree then.

Why slowed? What is the average speed along that stretch

At peak congestion, traffic barely moves. You'd have something like 3-4mph. At peak flow, it would site somewhere between 15-20mph. As traffic density decreases it would get to something close to 30mph depending on the light timings. At night it will easily bump up towards 35mph between lights.

The night time speeds are an issue in themselves but probably need handling differently. The uncongested speeds, although higher, will be at a time where there is better visibility and more freedom of vehicular movement so, to me, offer less threat than speeds of more congested traffic where turns and movements are likely to be unpredictable and opportunistic.

We agree then.

or you can explain to me how you can make 10mph granny on sit-up-and-beg bike feel comfortable and safe cycling on the carriageway on the mile end rd, off-peak, amongst 35mph hgvs.. (or even 20mph hgvs..)

(and why your position isn't a bit elitist, effectively restricting transport cycling to the fit and the brave..?)

this video is all sorts of awesome, just for the lack of helmets and high viz, and the fact everyone who is riding a bike is just getting on with it, not a trace of lycra anywhere.
ps all the kids riding in traffic..

GLC Cycling for London - YouTube

Weird to see how much of the cycling infrastructure in london is from the 80's and the GLC, plus shout outs to the efforts of the CTC and LCC..

yes nice thanks for the link,
and lets not forget- Ken bikes

or you can explain to me how you can make 10mph granny on sit-up-and-beg bike feel comfortable and safe cycling on the carriageway on the mile end rd, off-peak, amongst 35mph hgvs.. (or even 20mph hgvs..)

(and why your position isn't a bit elitist, effectively restricting transport cycling to the fit and the brave..?)

A cultural change, for. All road users. Where people respect notions of priority, give adequate clearance when overtaking, understand cyclists taking the lane (and cyclists taking the lane to ensure people don't try to squeeze past.

As we had agreed 20mph seems to be a more sensible urban speed, so the speed differential is not so great, so talking of 35mph lorries seems fairly irrelevant. Also the lower speed limit can help to smooth traffic flow enabling people to get to their destinations faster.

Tackle the source of the problem through better education and enforcement of the law. This is not about excluding people but about encouraging a more tolerant road culture. As this happens more people will be travelling by bike.

amazing that cyclists weren't allowed in bus lanes pre 1981

Copenhagenize should be ashamed of himself

https://twitter.com/copenhagenize/status/436146758016831488

Evidence, perhaps, of a certain smug elitism amongst some of those whom tweet prolifically about cycle campaigning.

what was his offensive tweet? i find it hard to follow that thread of twittery

gossip, does it matter?
no-
one good thing about twitter is getting links like this
http://t.co/vtAYeZzNXU
while 'the regions' engineers and planner struggle to know wtf to do, London makes changes before anywhere else,

If the Pope of Urban Cycling is such a big celebrity now, what with being on the telly courtesy of the esteemed cook Mr Fearnley-Whittingstall, why does he bother twittering to a mere English neo-classical composer with but a thousand followers?

Hold kæft for helvede, Mikael Colville-Andersen! Vi hører nok fra dig, tak.

That said, there is no shortage of smug elitism, or at least nauseating self-centredness, among the upper echelons of England’s cycling campaigners.

Copenhagenize should be ashamed of himself

https://twitter.com/copenhagenize/status/436146758016831488

Evidence, perhaps, of a certain smug elitism amongst some of those whom tweet prolifically about cycle campaigning.

I don't understand any of the recent posts. At times it appears cycle campaigning is just this all over again

The People's Front - YouTube

Very important campaign against another motorway link in London:

https://www.lfgss.com/thread122437.html

Don't be fooled by it being in a tunnel, the drip-drip of road schemes like this extremely damaging. No more urban motorways.

David, Someone of your stature in cycling campaigning doesn't need to reply to baseball fans with 50 followers

Comment about someone who has a different view to David.

Copenhagenize knows nothing about the individual in question and the work they do, yet assumes they're not worthy of discussion for David due to their twitter follower numbers & other interests.

In other words, if you're not a prominent campaigner you have no voice, says international voice of campaigning.

The thing with Mikael is that he is very much mocked the whole "vehicular cycling" as he put it, anything that encourage you to ride with other motorised traffic will be considered draconian by him.

good answer and info from CTC
the last paragraph sums a lot up, there isnt enough senior bods who have the bollocks to start saying 'choose another way than driving'
could do with Norman Tebbit back saying 'get on your bikes'
http://www.ctc.org.uk/blog/chris-peck/cycle-safety-fund-and-bedford-turbo-roundabout-some-facts

quoted and highlighted for all J

Ultimately, this is the sort of compromise solution that we
end up with when there is insufficient political will to reduce
traffic, and a lack of adequate regulations to permit the
approach that would be taken as standard in the
Netherlands.

Been reading this too this evening, plus a couple of blogs (ott calls for all staff involved in this scheme to resign etc).

Very important campaign against another motorway link in London:

http://www.lfgss.com/thread122437.html

Don't be fooled by it being in a tunnel, the drip-drip of road schemes like this extremely damaging. No more urban motorways.

There's another tunnel scheme being promoted here - put the A4 underground:
https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Directory/News/Hammersmith_flyunder_options_to_be_revealed.asp#4

The A4 and Hammersmith gyratory blight the surrounding area so there is a certain attraction to sticking them underground and out of sight... but this would mean spending billions on car journeys into central London just so they can crawl along at a few mph.

LBH&F don't give a shit about cycling but I'll bet the developers are crawling all over them about this scheme given the potential to release land for development.

I can't see it happening - the Chiswick NIMBYs will be out in force against the big fuck-off Crossrail-like construction that would be needed in W4.

'a kerb nerd protests':

http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/a-kerb-nerd-protests/

There's another tunnel scheme being promoted here - put the A4 underground:
https://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Directory/News/Hammersmith_flyunder_options_to_be_revealed.asp#4

The A4 and Hammersmith gyratory blight the surrounding area so there is a certain attraction to sticking them underground and out of sight... but this would mean spending billions on car journeys into central London just so they can crawl along at a few mph.

LBH&F don't give a shit about cycling but I'll bet the developers are crawling all over them about this scheme given the potential to release land for development.

I can't see it happening - the Chiswick NIMBYs will be out in force against the big fuck-off Crossrail-like construction that would be needed in W4.

my impression was they were claiming they could fund it by developing the land freed up by knocking down the flyover. is that wrong?

'a kerb nerd protests':

http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2014/02/21/a-kerb-nerd-protests/

Just because something works in Holland doesn't mean it will here. Using an example from that post, imagine how much fun this would be for everyone with London's famous Cat 6 racing.