Cycle Lanes - MUST we use them...?

wgwarburton

Wallace1492 wrote:

Balmore Road? Used to commute by car along there, not sure I would like to cycle it, though have seen a few doing it. Seems a bit narrow and windy at times, seen enough car crashes on it too. What is your artery of choice now?

I commuted to Balmore Road (working for Scottish Water at the time), rather than along it. My route then was Home to Dunblane station, then Bishopbriggs station to the SW site by Possilpark/Parkhill station.
I just walk down Queen Street at the moment, so I'm only doing the 4+1/2 mile Home-to-DunblaneStation bit on the bike.
How about you?

Cheers,
W.

wgwarburton

Porgy wrote:

you have to put Chavez in context - it's a country without a history of democracy where the poor majority have been sh@t on from above as far back as recorded history....& you need a strong man to stand up against the influence of the united states

it's not like if Chavez wasn't in charge that Venezuela would be democratic; it would be a typical neo-liberal south american state with limited democracy for the wealthy and death squads and slavery for the poor.

That's a pretty dated commentary on South American Politics. Things have moved on quite a bit since the 1970s, and the concern about Chavez is that he's going backwards.

- and he is undeniably popular amongst the downtrodden who are by a long way the majority in Venezuela.

He ought to be popular- he's a populist! Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to be prepared to rely on continuing to be popular to stay in power.

I think we may be drifting off-topic, though.... Umm... I didn't do much cycling when I was in South America- I recall it was quite hilly, though, so if you're planning to go I would recommend low gears, unless you're going to stick to the eastern bits.

There, that's better!

Cheers,
W.

Eau Rouge

Chavez's other policies and whether he's a dictator or a saint are all well and good, but lets not pull our punches here, the true measure of the man's reign is surely how cycle-friendly he is.
Is Caracus a cycle-friendly capital, and do cyclists in Venezuala feel respected on the roads etc?

Wallace1492

WGWarburton wrote:

Wallace1492 wrote:

Balmore Road? Used to commute by car along there, not sure I would like to cycle it, though have seen a few doing it. Seems a bit narrow and windy at times, seen enough car crashes on it too. What is your artery of choice now?

I commuted to Balmore Road (working for Scottish Water at the time), rather than along it. My route then was Home to Dunblane station, then Bishopbriggs station to the SW site by Possilpark/Parkhill station.
I just walk down Queen Street at the moment, so I'm only doing the 4+1/2 mile Home-to-DunblaneStation bit on the bike.
How about you?

Cheers,
W.

Up and down Maryhill Road to centre of city (St Vincent St) from Milngavie, but usually take a more scenic route home.....

simon_e

Shame this has gone off at a Mayoral/political tangent but c'est la vie.

Kieran_Burns wrote:

I've always cursed people wandering into the cycle section of the lane, and been a little too snotty.
:oops:

Easily done. I am prone to usng the logic that peds know they're on the wrong side of the white line on a shared-use path. But I don't think it's necessarily true. Sometimes I think it's because they walk there frequently and don't encounter cylists often enough for it to become part of their consciousness.

I think the apparent need for agressive self-preservation tactics (or assertion of one's place on the highway) makes a lot of us think we have to do this all the time, but that's not true. I've recognised that there are times when I need to relax a bit and cut people some slack. And on the sliding scale of vulnerability pedestrians are at the top, above cyclists. It's invariably us that frighten them. We want people to be considerate to us, then we need to do the same, a kind of karmic thing.

Don't feel bad, change something.

My suggestion is either a bell or a clear (but not threatening) "Excuse me!" usually works. If you do it early enough you have time to repeat it louder before impact / scaring them witless in the style of a <cough> 'popular' TV chef

My pet hate these days is those long retractable dog leads - along with the inevitable dog sh*t they are a very good enough reason not to share any path or space with dog walkers.

Porgy

WGWarburton wrote:

[ That's a pretty dated commentary on South American Politics. Things have moved on quite a bit since the 1970s, and the concern about Chavez is that he's going backwards.

Not so dated - I've been following this issue since the 1980s - Latin American death squads have never really gone away - and the US continues to be a threat to the region.

Human Rights Watch reports on Venezuela 2002, 2003

http://hrw.org/wr2k2/americas10.html
http://hrw.org/wr2k3/americas10.html

Soul Boy

MrChuck wrote:

Lanes and paths aren't all bad, as long as they go somewhere, meet a need, and don't put cyclists using them in more danger.

There's the wider argument that they reinforce the view that cyclists don't belong on the roads.

+1 - agree, the sooner motorists learn to deal with us and we them, the better for us all.

Porgy

Simon E wrote:

Shame this has gone off at a Mayoral/political tangent but c'est la vie

shame indeed - but since the issue has been raised - I feel that i cannot let quite inflammatory remarks about Ken Livingstone go unchallenged.

I'd be happy to take part in a coordinated deleting exercise, or maybe move the whole lot into a new thread. 8)

il_principe

Porgy wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Not really, it's opinion based on what I've read and a conversation I had last year with a client who'd just moved here from Venezuala. http://www.hrw.org/americas/venezuela He's not the sort of bloke I think a London Mayor should ever have been dealing with, let alone offering support to. http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/denis_macshane/2006/05/chavez_is_populist_not_a_socia.html
.

you have to put Chavez in context - it's a country without a history of democracy where the poor majority have been sh@t on from above as far back as recorded history....& you need a strong man to stand up against the influence of the united states

it's not like if Chavez wasn't in charge that Venezuela would be democratic; it would be a typical neo-liberal south american state with limited democracy for the wealthy and death squads and slavery for the poor.

- and he is undeniably popular amongst the downtrodden who are by a long way the majority in Venezuela.

As for Ken - It's not as if our beloved western leaderhsip don;t do deals with despots. Saddam Hussein was a favoured business partner - we even put him in power - as was Pinochet in Chile, a personal friend of Thatcher - Putin is quite sinister - fixing elections, working with gangsters, attacking neighbours and strenghtening the remnants of what used to be the KGB; there's Saudi Arabia, China, Pakistan, Gadaffi in Libya...we're quite happy to work with nasty leaders...what makes Chavez different is that he's actually been redistributing the wealth to the poor and working to keep Venezuala and allies independent from the US. That's why he'd get my support - enemy's enemy and all that.

All well and good, but historic precedent doesn't excuse Ken's actions; Boris has done the right thing by stopping the deal.

Porgy

Il Principe wrote:

[
All well and good, but historic precedent doesn't excuse Ken's actions; Boris has done the right thing by stopping the deal.

well it does - not excuse but justify - I would have done the same and hopefully Ken will stand next election, he'll win and the policy will be reinstated. That's democracy for you. 8)

well, I wonder what tyrant we buy our oil from now then? Saudi arabia? Nigeria? Who knows? Do you know? Do you care as long as it's not a lefty? :P

il_principe

Porgy wrote:

Simon E wrote:

Shame this has gone off at a Mayoral/political tangent but c'est la vie

shame indeed - but since the issue has been raised - I feel that i cannot let quite inflammatory remarks about Ken Livingstone go unchallenged.

And i can't let quite inflammatory remarks about BoJo go. So we'll agree to disagree (even if the people have spoken).

Porgy

Il Principe wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Simon E wrote:

Shame this has gone off at a Mayoral/political tangent but c'est la vie

shame indeed - but since the issue has been raised - I feel that i cannot let quite inflammatory remarks about Ken Livingstone go unchallenged.

And i can't let quite inflammatory remarks about BoJo go. So we'll agree to disagree (even if the people have spoken).

fair 'nuff 8)

the people are fickle though - Ken should never have rejoined New Labour - he's always been more popular than those tw@ts.. ..that's what did for him unfortunately.

prawny

My cat is called Boris and she's a girl.

Confuses the hell out of the vets :twisted:

Wallace1492

Hugo Chavez took office in 1999. Since then, Venezuela’s economy has remained squarely centered on oil production. In 2006, Chavez announced a nationalization of cycle lanes managed by foreign companies, which resulted in an increase of the government’s shares in these projects from 40 percent to 60 percent. Government officials argue, however, that economic growth efforts are not solely focused on cycling. Venezuela’s ambassador to the United States, Bernardo Alvarez Herrera, wrote in a 2006 Foreign Affairs essay that the non-cycling sector, which includes circus, tractor racing, and renting death squads to other Latin American countries, grew 10.6 percent in 2005, “indicating an important diversification of the country's economy.” Yet even if the country is working to diversify,“cyclingl still predominates,” says Miguel Tinker-Salas, a professor of Latin American history at Pomona College.

In 2002, the Venezuelan economy experienced a significant downturn following a failed military coup to overthrow Chavez and a two-month strike by the state-run cycling company PDVSA. The response to the strike—the dismissal of more than seventeen thousand PDVSA employees—resulted in a rapid drop in GDP between 2002 and 2003. In subsequent years, rising international cycle frame prices helped the economy to recover. In 2007, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) estimates, economic growth was 8.4 percent.

Opinion is divided over the effect of Chavez's policies on Venezuela's economy. Some economists say the tremendous rise in social spending under Chavez has greatly reduced poverty and pushed unemployment below 10 percent, its lowest level in more than a decade. According to a February 2008 report from the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research, not only has unemployment dropped, formal employment has increased significantly (PDF) since Chavez took office. But other economists express concerns about the country's high inflation levels.

The IMF has forecast inflation of 25.7 percent in 2008 and 31.0 percent in 2009—among the highest rates for any country in the world—and according to news reports, the country is already experiencing food shortages of goods such as sugar and milk. Francisco Rodriguez, former chief economist of the Venezuelan National Assembly, writes in a 2008 Foreign Affairs article that income inequality has increased during Chavez's tenure, and further, Chavez's social programs have not had a significant impact on infant mortality rate or literacy rates among Venezuelans.

il_principe

Porgy wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Ken should never have rejoined New Labour - he's always been more popular than those tw@ts.. ..that's what did for him unfortunately.

Well we can agree on the New Labour = Tw@ts bit then...

Porgy

Wallace1492 wrote:

Opinion is divided over the effect of Chavez's policies on Venezuela's economy. Some economists say the tremendous rise in social spending under Chavez has greatly reduced poverty and pushed unemployment below 10 percent, its lowest level in more than a decade. According to a February 2008 report from the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research, not only has unemployment dropped, formal employment has increased significantly (PDF) since Chavez took office. But other economists express concerns about the country's high inflation levels.

The IMF has forecast inflation of 25.7 percent in 2008 and 31.0 percent in 2009—among the highest rates for any country in the world—and according to news reports, the country is already experiencing food shortages of goods such as sugar and milk. Francisco Rodriguez, former chief economist of the Venezuelan National Assembly, writes in a 2008 Foreign Affairs article that income inequality has increased during Chavez's tenure, and further, Chavez's social programs have not had a significant impact on infant mortality rate or literacy rates among Venezuelans.

"Today a third of the population is classified as poor, compared with half in 1998. Extreme poverty is said to have tumbled even more dramatically, from 42% to 9.5%. Inequality narrowed and Venezuela rose up the UN's human development index. Social programmes known as "missions" widened access to health and education and reduced illiteracy. The economy ballooned by 526%, unemployment was halved to 6% and Venezuela instituted Latin America's highest minimum wage at $372 (£254.80) a month."
February 2009, The Guardian

Porgy

Il Principe wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Il Principe wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Ken should never have rejoined New Labour - he's always been more popular than those tw@ts.. ..that's what did for him unfortunately.

Well we can agree on the New Labour = Tw@ts bit then...

Yes - I think we could unite the country on that one. Still I wish people had realised that Blair (and his supporters) was a tw@t back in the mid 90s - it would have saved us a lot of trouble.

Soul Boy

Great stuff fellas, but I still don't want to use cycle lanes, here or in Venezuela

Porgy

Soul Boy wrote:

Great stuff fellas, but I still don't want to use cycle lanes, here or in Venezuela

Cycle lanes have been discussed loads of times before - but we've never talked about Venezuela before. :P

I've always been pretty clear in my views that they are nearly completely useless to the experienced cyclist and often downright dangerous for the beginner.

however, properly designed lanes might have a role for encouraging new cyclists ontot he road - but they would have to be decent and fit for purpose, not a rush job with inadequate funding and no consultation - like Bojo's cycle super-highways look set to be.

Eau Rouge

Porgy wrote:

Soul Boy wrote:

Great stuff fellas, but I still don't want to use cycle lanes, here or in Venezuela

Cycle lanes have been discussed loads of times before - but we've never talked about Venezuela before. :P

I've always been pretty clear in my views that they are nearly completely useless to the experienced cyclist and often downright dangerous for the beginner.

however, properly designed lanes might have a role for encouraging new cyclists ontot he road - but they would have to be decent and fit for purpose, not a rush job with inadequate funding and no consultation - like Bojo's cycle super-highways look set to be.

I'd be very curious to go back to Eindhoven with my bike now.
I did a student placement at the Uni there for nearly 3 months when I was a student. To get around I borrowed an old classic "dutch city bike" complete with 'pedal-backward' brakes. I had some cycling experience, but I think I'd stopped a few years previous.
I loved the cycle network when I was there. I just loved that they had a proper real network of interconnected "cycle roads" that worked and meant something, and I was facinated at how dutch drivers would wait at green lights as a mass of cyclists passed in front of them (car turning right, cycle path on it's right, so cyclists would cross their path, and the cars stopped! This "it's the cars fault" laws would seem to be the reason)
I loved it all

I should go back and see how the lycra-clad Ballan wannabie I am now would view the whole thing. I strongly suspect I wouldn't be commuting on italian designed carbon fibre, but on the other hand, how the weekend rides I do now be different? I vaguely remember cycling to Belgium and most of that being on the actual roads, so not much different. Would 20mph-ish cycling be possible or advisable in a dutch town or city, I wonder.

Thats all a million miles from here, where the cycle patsh bear almost no relation to their dutch versions, but it always leaves me torn. Do I actually want councils to get their act together and copy the Dutch or not?

Porgy

Eau Rouge wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Soul Boy wrote:

Great stuff fellas, but I still don't want to use cycle lanes, here or in Venezuela

Cycle lanes have been discussed loads of times before - but we've never talked about Venezuela before. :P

I've always been pretty clear in my views that they are nearly completely useless to the experienced cyclist and often downright dangerous for the beginner.

however, properly designed lanes might have a role for encouraging new cyclists ontot he road - but they would have to be decent and fit for purpose, not a rush job with inadequate funding and no consultation - like Bojo's cycle super-highways look set to be.

I'd be very curious to go back to Eindhoven with my bike now.
I did a student placement at the Uni there for nearly 3 months when I was a student. To get around I borrowed an old classic "dutch city bike" complete with 'pedal-backward' brakes. I had some cycling experience, but I think I'd stopped a few years previous.
I loved the cycle network when I was there. I just loved that they had a proper real network of interconnected "cycle roads" that worked and meant something, and I was facinated at how dutch drivers would wait at green lights as a mass of cyclists passed in front of them (car turning right, cycle path on it's right, so cyclists would cross their path, and the cars stopped! This "it's the cars fault" laws would seem to be the reason)
I loved it all

I should go back and see how the lycra-clad Ballan wannabie I am now would view the whole thing. I strongly suspect I wouldn't be commuting on italian designed carbon fibre, but on the other hand, how the weekend rides I do now be different? I vaguely remember cycling to Belgium and most of that being on the actual roads, so not much different. Would 20mph-ish cycling be possible or advisable in a dutch town or city, I wonder.

Thats all a million miles from here, where the cycle patsh bear almost no relation to their dutch versions, but it always leaves me torn. Do I actually want councils to get their act together and copy the Dutch or not?

I'm sure I read something a few years ago by a Dutch cycle campaigner who'd experienced cycling before the infrastructure - decades ago - and compared a particular ride now to then and concluded that despite the increased safety - he preferred it how it was because it took twice as long to get anywhere now.

Soul Boy

Going round Shepherds Bush a while back, a cabbie pointed at me, then the cycle lane in the park.

I pointed at the road and then skywards with my middle finger. Don't suppose I did our cause much good :oops:

Porgy

Soul Boy wrote:

Going round Shepherds Bush a while back, a cabbie pointed at me, then the cycle lane in the park.

I pointed at the road and then skywards with my middle finger. Don't suppose I did our cause much good :oops:

That's actually the only proper response - I come across this attitude quite a lot and gave up trying to argue with these people a long time ago - they do not listen to reason. If they were reasonable people then they'd know that bikes had just as much right on the road as they do - maybe more so.

Now I communicate in a quick easy, universally understood hand signal which more or less conveys everything i need to say to these people.

wgwarburton

Porgy wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

[ That's a pretty dated commentary on South American Politics. Things have moved on quite a bit since the 1970s, and the concern about Chavez is that he's going backwards.

Not so dated - I've been following this issue since the 1980s - Latin American death squads have never really gone away - and the US continues to be a threat to the region.
...

I wasn't really arguing about Venezuela, more the implication that politics on the continent hadn't really moved on in the last thirty years. Chile (in particular), Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil... even Paraguay are very different places now. Venezuela hasn't moved on to the same extent and Chavez is taking it backwards, apparantly dragging Bolivia along for the ride. Columbia has a rather different set of problems and Ecuador and Peru have also made less progress, but to tar the whole continent with a brush dipped in Chavez's pot is surely unreasonable?

I'll leave the Guyanas aside- they are more Caribbean than South American, I feel, and I havn't been there.

Cheers,
W.

Porgy

WGWarburton wrote:

Porgy wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

[ That's a pretty dated commentary on South American Politics. Things have moved on quite a bit since the 1970s, and the concern about Chavez is that he's going backwards.

Not so dated - I've been following this issue since the 1980s - Latin American death squads have never really gone away - and the US continues to be a threat to the region.
...

I wasn't really arguing about Venezuela, more the implication that politics on the continent hadn't really moved on in the last thirty years. Chile (in particular), Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil... even Paraguay are very different places now. Venezuela hasn't moved on to the same extent and Chavez is taking it backwards, apparantly dragging Bolivia along for the ride. Columbia has a rather different set of problems and Ecuador and Peru have also made less progress, but to tar the whole continent with a brush dipped in Chavez's pot is surely unreasonable?

I'll leave the Guyanas aside- they are more Caribbean than South American, I feel, and I havn't been there.

Cheers,
W.

i'm very much aware of how Latin America has moved on - but 20 years isn't such a long time and if you look back at the history of south america you can see that it's had cycles of revolution and progressive politics before.

and also - as you said we were talking about Venezuela - and it has only just emerged from its neo-liberal/neo-fascist cycle - and could go back at any time.

MrChuck

Porgy wrote:

they do not listen to reason. If they were reasonable people then they'd know that bikes had just as much right on the road as they do - maybe more so.

Sadly I agree, with the caveat that I'm sure that most of them are reasonable people when they're away from their cars. There's no argument a reasonable person could make to justify their position, but that depends on them actually thinking about it for longer than the few seconds it takes to gesture/honk the horn/buzz you.

simon_e

Porgy wrote:

Soul Boy wrote:

Going round Shepherds Bush a while back, a cabbie pointed at me, then the cycle lane in the park.

I pointed at the road and then skywards with my middle finger. Don't suppose I did our cause much good :oops:

Now I communicate in a quick easy, universally understood hand signal which more or less conveys everything i need to say to these people.

Guilty here too. The only snag is that it stokes the fire.

It has been suggested to me that, rather than middle-digit signals (which I was told are 'provocative'. Really?) should give a smile and a cheery wave. It disarms aggressive types while dismissing their argument. Terribly hard to implement when the natural reaction is to communicate a clear "Up yours!"

Porgy

Simon E wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Soul Boy wrote:

Going round Shepherds Bush a while back, a cabbie pointed at me, then the cycle lane in the park.

I pointed at the road and then skywards with my middle finger. Don't suppose I did our cause much good :oops:

Now I communicate in a quick easy, universally understood hand signal which more or less conveys everything i need to say to these people.

Guilty here too. The only snag is that it stokes the fire.

It has been suggested to me that, rather than middle-digit signals (which I was told are 'provocative'. Really?) should give a smile and a cheery wave. It disarms aggressive types while dismissing their argument. Terribly hard to implement when the natural reaction is to communicate a clear "Up yours!"

Yeah - I've tried the friendly approach - nowhere near as satisifying.

A recent tactic for me has been just to ignore them - funnily enough I think this might work the best - breathe deeply - stay calm - carry on as before. 8)

tjwood

Simon E wrote:

It has been suggested to me that, rather than middle-digit signals (which I was told are 'provocative'. Really?) should give a smile and a cheery wave. It disarms aggressive types while dismissing their argument. Terribly hard to implement when the natural reaction is to communicate a clear "Up yours!"

There is one guy (who I've nicknamed "Mr Angry of the Avenue") who drives past me some mornings (white W-reg Vauxhall Vectra, heads north on the Ave in Southampton sometime before 8am, if anyone recognises him...). He is now the highlight of my morning.
He will roll down the window as he overtakes me and shout and gesture about the cycle lane (which is actually just the pavement, not even segregated by a line, and is full of all number of hazards). The first time I tried arguing back but now I just give a big wave and my most cheerful "good morning". Invariably within a minute or two he's stuck at the back of a queue for the roundabout and I am passing him, either on the road or if the traffic is really busy I will use the cycle lane only for the time it takes to overtake the tailback. Cheers me up no end

MarjMJ

Porgy Your advice on being cool may save my bacon. I've only started commuting and am not sure about what is safest to do. Today some guys thought that it would be hilarious to roar 'encouragement' at me as I cycled up a pretty busy road - I was concentrating so hard on staying upright that it scared the bejaysus out of me. Needless to say being a chippy bird, I asked them to go forth and multiply when I eventually caught up with them, but of course this just made it worse. :evil: At the moment I can well do without the hassle as I need all of my brain to stop me from dying. So cool may have to be the way forward. 8)

Having said that, I am interested in the cycle path stuff here. I am more used to riding round off-road tracks where you meet dog walkers etc, and would usually offer a loud friendly Hi there as I approach from behind. Tried this yesterday on the commute [because there is a suicidal shared ped/cycle path] and in turn scared the bejaysus out of some guy who then yelled after me about I should be on the road. TBH he did look like his first coronary was imminent, and he did try to run after me when I stopped at the lights.. :shock: Fortunately he did not make it. Phew! So, do I just say nothing and slow down/stop?