Cities fit for cycling
MattSparkes
Posts: 36
The Times is running a very special front page tomorrow, sneak peek here: http://twitpic.com/8ehuh2
They're launching a cycle safety campaign called Cities Fit for Cycling, with this manifesto:
* Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit censors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
* The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
* A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
* Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
* The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
* 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
* Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
* Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.
You can sign up and support it here:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cy ... y/contact/
They're launching a cycle safety campaign called Cities Fit for Cycling, with this manifesto:
* Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit censors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
* The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
* A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
* Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
* The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
* 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
* Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
* Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.
You can sign up and support it here:
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cy ... y/contact/
0
Comments
-
Apparently a big 'manifesto' style piece on cycle safety in London (arguing very pro-cycle).
Will read at lunch, but figured I'd let you guys know.0 -
It's one the front page of the website as well.
http://www.thetimes.co.uk
They have a campaign you can sign up for, don't know if it'll do any good but I've signed up. The more that sign the better.0 -
The 8 point manifesto...
1 - Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit sensors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
2 - The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
3 - A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
4 - Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
5 - The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
6 - 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
7 - Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
8 - Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.
Seems sensible.0 -
-
-
Signed up...Invacare Spectra Plus electric wheelchair, max speed 4mph
0 -
Yes, it looks serious and well thought out. Signed up but I've yet to draft a letter to my local MP - a job for tomorrow, I think.0
-
Signed up, shall think about something to write on the way home..0
-
As a cyclist, motorcyclist and car driver I think the default 20mph limit is utterly barking. It is frankly too slow. Outside schools and the like at key times, yes - and a couple of other examples as well. But a general default of 20? No way.
Such campaigns also need to tread very carefully as they may actually end up painting a picture of cycling being dangerous when it is nothing of the sort. "Cities fit for cycling" is a good headline......"save our cyclists" is not and is rather irresponsible.
Having said that I do of course support actions which will increase the safety of cyclists. As long as they don't start banging on about helmets I'll support it completely.You only need two tools: WD40 and Duck Tape.
If it doesn't move and should, use the WD40.
If it shouldn't move and does, use the tape.0 -
I'll stick my neck out.
Bad plan, in general. Pulling in the helmet debate, this presupposes that cycling is so dangerous that special measures are needed. Disagree with that big time; it would be useful to remember that there are rural cyclists not just the metropolitan set.
The list may specifically refer to restrictions applying only to cities but Joe Public won't see that, he'll just see special measures just for cyclists.
National audit? Come off it. Either a meaningless Do You Cycle? Yes or No? which won't be worth the web space it takes up; the alternative is something like one of those awful surveys that layabout students stick up on here from time to time in the guise of garnering study data.
2% of HA budget on cycle paths? To reinforce the need for separation, that cyclists don't belong on the roads with traffic? No thanks.
Training's a good idea but unless BikeAbility is made compulsory (a good thing actually) and everyone taking a driving test has to ride a bike it seems a bit pie in the sky.
Default 20mph limit - this is just bonkers. 30 is safe. 20 is glacially slow in a car and most times there are no peds or kids about, and not every residential street has 7 schools & a million kids walking & cycling between the high speed traffic. If you want to alienate motorists for no good reason, make them do 20 everywhere. Barmy.
Etc. The whole thrust of this is 'cyclists are special people, they need to be treated specially with lots of extra facilities and everyone else must cater for them'. No. Whether I'm on the bike or in the car I'm just part of the traffic. I'd prefer to keep it that way if that's ok.0 -
So lorries have to fit SENSORS, but cyclists don't have to take responsibility and not be stupid enough to go up the left of large vehicles (noting not all such scenarios are the cyclists fault, but in the significant majority of cases the sensible cyclist just wouldn't)?Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0
-
Read the article, don't like it. Assumes that Cyclists have no real right to be on the road and require more protection rather than using current jurisdiction with tougher penalties on drivers. It will spark the helmet debate effectively killing Boris bikes if it becomes mandatory.
I am all for improving our lot, but this is reactionary. Some of the points they raise are fair but what we need is a sea change in political and public thinking to cycling, not some patch over of the symptoms without dealing with the cause. I already have completed a driving test, a direct access course, bikesafe; and when I was caught by a speed camera, a driver awareness course, I think I am at the point of more training than 90% of the UK public on the road already.+++++++++++++++++++++
we are the proud, the few, Descendents.
Panama - finally putting a nail in the economic theory of the trickle down effect.0 -
CiB wrote:I'll stick my neck out.
Me too.London-Red wrote:The 8 point manifesto...
1 - Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit sensors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
Generally good. Bit of hyperbole in the last 8 words. Don't understand why this shouldn't apply to all trucks.
2 - The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
Why is this necessary in light of 1?
3 - A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
Surely to be done prior to, and in order to justify the other measures. Pointless if other measures to be implemented.
4 - Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
Perhaps put ten times that into promoting CO2 emissions. Warm the place up a bit, so we don't have weeks like this. More seriously, there just isn't the money for this, and roads are just fine.
5 - The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
"Must improve". How? Cycling licence, anyone?
6 - 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
Stupid. Blatant attempt to hijack a cycling agenda.
7 - Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
Invitation declined?
8 - Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.
"Cycling commissioner". Yes, because we need more public appointments like that.
What hacks me off though is why The Times is doing this. According to its front page, it is because one of its journos got knocked off. Great. Well, not great for him, but FFS, does something like this only become a newspaper issue when it is dropped right in the middle of their desks?0 -
I thinks its a great idea that a large paper like the Times is helping to promote cycling awareness.
However, I (somewhat) share CiB's remarks, and agree with the above, because something like this can be a double-edged sword. Any cycling campaign needs to be done well, we don't want it to backfire and simply end up as marking all cyclists as "special".
IMO we only need a few things:-
- Better infrastructure in some places
- Lorries/Vans with adequate mirrors and visibility.
- Cars need to be
would stop many of our problems
- Drivers need to understand that they must give us room! That sometimes we need to ride primary and that they can't just simply overtake us when they want, or slam their brakes or left-hook us etc.
- Some cyclists need to behave better. Poor cycling, RLJ etc infuriates car drivers and helps no one.
- Some cyclists need some real-world training for their own safety.
What we dont need:-
- is to be forced to use sh:t cycle paths - don't get me wrong some cycle paths are really good, but there are some that are shockingly bad examples out there.
- give the idea to motorists that we should
When I'm commuting I wear hi-viz out of -choice- because there are many things going on, like
dark nights, bad weather, suicidal pedestrians, and chimps in vans.
When I'm on my weekend ride I wear what I like! And that's how it should stay. All I need from
drivers is that they give me room, and actually look carefully at junctions!
That said, I will sign up and write to my MP.0 -
Greg66 wrote:
What hacks me off though is why The Times is doing this. According to its front page, it is because one of its journos got knocked off. Great. Well, not great for him, but FFS, does something like this only become a newspaper issue when it is dropped right in the middle of their desks?
too right.
have you ever watched the news when a journo in a war zone gets killed? the media does think that the media is the most important thing.
slightly OT but i do remember how this can lead to farcial reporting. remember when pope jp2 took ages to die and all the news24 channels spent a week hanging around outside the vatican desperately trying to fill dead air? (how many different ways can you say "he's not dead yet!") The papal correspondent of the beeb, actually interviewed Sky's papal correspondent.....0 -
It is a list aimed more toward nodders and no sweat cyclists but should lead to improvements for all IF common sense prevails.1 - Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit sensors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
Sure why not but better training would be better as seen in 5.
2 - The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
Fantastic, outlines what the the Tour de Danger campaign has been doing in its identification of London's 10 most dangerous spots. Who here would object to a head start at certain junctions?
3 - A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
Didn't the Census already ask these questions [first part].
4 - Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
Requires common sense, risk of bad infrastructure being created because it has to be but there is certainly scope for creating bold facilities like the removal of a car lane and on road cycle path that is CS8 [in parts], more of this please!
5 - The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
Good good but should be emphasised experience in all vehicle types is important.
6 - 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
A bit OTT but there is scope for pedestrainising and 20mph limits in certain parts of London for the improvement of everybody.
7 - Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
blah
8 - Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.
As long as its not Boris.0 -
My two-penneth...The 8 point manifesto...
1 - Trucks entering a city centre should be required by law to fit sensors, audible truck-turning alarms, extra mirrors and safety bars to stop cyclists being thrown under the wheels.
Generally good. Bit of hyperbole in the last 8 words. Don't understand why this shouldn't apply to all trucks.
2 - The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
Why is this necessary in light of 1?
> Because dangerous junctions should be made less dangerous. It's not just lorries that can cause mayhem.
3 - A national audit of cycling to find out how many people cycle in Britain and how cyclists are killed or injured should be held to underpin effective cycle safety.
Surely to be done prior to, and in order to justify the other measures. Pointless if other measures to be implemented.
4 - Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
Perhaps put ten times that into promoting CO2 emissions. Warm the place up a bit, so we don't have weeks like this. More seriously, there just isn't the money for this, and roads are just fine.
> Come on, roads aren't fine. In London, most cycle paths an an afterthought, painted in order to tick a few boxes. They often end abruptly with little warning, or are squeezed onto pavement. Loads of improvements can be made here.
5 - The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
"Must improve". How? Cycling licence, anyone?
> No, but there's nothing wrong with a few evening or weekend sessions offered by the local authorities to improve awareness of the dangers, as well as best practice (when to hold primary, for e.g.). Heck, you could probably even get Halfords or Evans to sponsor them. Much of the danger I see on the road is cyclists, not drivers.
6 - 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
Stupid. Blatant attempt to hijack a cycling agenda.
> Agreed. But 20's plenty...
7 - Businesses should be invited to sponsor cycleways and cycling super-highways, mirroring the Barclays-backed bicycle hire scheme in London.
Invitation declined?
8 - Every city, even those without an elected mayor, should appoint a cycling commissioner to push home reforms.
"Cycling commissioner". Yes, because we need more public appointments like that.I am all for improving our lot, but this is reactionary. Some of the points they raise are fair but what we need is a sea change in political and public thinking to cycling, not some patch over of the symptoms without dealing with the cause. I already have completed a driving test, a direct access course, bikesafe; and when I was caught by a speed camera, a driver awareness course, I think I am at the point of more training than 90% of the UK public on the road already.
I'm not sure this is reactionary. Campaigns have to start somewhere and for some reason. Having the Times, and News International, on the side of cyclists is not bad news. Also, some of the suggestions do look at the cause.0 -
1. Agree with G66
2. Some junctions are just badly designed, and no amount of sensors and extra mirrors will make them easier to negotiate for cyclists - I'm thinking of ones where multiple lane changes are needed.
3. Agree that this needs doing first, and repeated at sensible intervals so that measures are based on something objective rather than token gestures.
4. Nice idea, can't see it happening and not keen on the general lean towards segregation.
5. Cycling proficiency was more or less mandatory when I was at school. Can't see that it would be that hard to rejuvenate this now. That leaves the grown-ups who missed out. Bikeability courses aimed at 'returning' cyclists are fairly well publicised and subsidised in my borough (the not particularly wealthy Sutton) - I'm sure others could find the funds to offer this if they wanted to.
6. Don't have a problem with this as a starting point in urban areas, but useless without enforcement (this is already the case in Islington I believe).
7. Not as daft as it might sound - I can think of a few stations, where presumably local businesses have contributed to some platform upgrade in return for getting their name on the signage.
8. Not sure we need more under-employed civil servants, but on the other hand, if no one person is answerable, then it's easier for councils to push it to the bottom of the list.1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
Pinnacle Monzonite
Part of the anti-growth coalition0 -
London-Red wrote:My two-penneth...
2 - The 500 most dangerous road junctions must be identified, redesigned or fitted with priority traffic lights for cyclists and Trixi mirrors that allow lorry drivers to see cyclists on their near-side.
Why is this necessary in light of 1?
> Because dangerous junctions should be made less dangerous. It's not just lorries that can cause mayhem.
Is there any evidence, I wonder, that certain junctions are dangerous purely because of cars and not lorries/trucks?
4 - Two per cent of the Highways Agency budget should be earmarked for next generation cycle routes, providing £100 million a year towards world-class cycling infrastructure. Each year cities should be graded on the quality of cycling provision.
Perhaps put ten times that into promoting CO2 emissions. Warm the place up a bit, so we don't have weeks like this. More seriously, there just isn't the money for this, and roads are just fine.
> Come on, roads aren't fine. In London, most cycle paths an an afterthought, painted in order to tick a few boxes. They often end abruptly with little warning, or are squeezed onto pavement. Loads of improvements can be made here.
I may be in a minority, but I like riding on the road. I don't like cycle paths and I'm not a massive fan of cycling superhighways. IME when there are cyclepaths/CS around, motorists are more likely to see those as for cyclists and the rest of the road for them. And they don't be liking trespassers too much...
5 - The training of cyclists and drivers must improve and cycle safety should become a core part of the driving test.
"Must improve". How? Cycling licence, anyone?
> No, but there's nothing wrong with a few evening or weekend sessions offered by the local authorities to improve awareness of the dangers, as well as best practice (when to hold primary, for e.g.). Heck, you could probably even get Halfords or Evans to sponsor them. Much of the danger I see on the road is cyclists, not drivers.
OK - I can see the sense in that, BUT if it is not mandatory, how much use is it really going to be? If you are involved in an RTA, would you like your lack of formal albeit voluntary training as a cyclist to be held against you as a contributing factor?
6 - 20mph should become the default speed limit in residential areas where there are no cycle lanes.
Stupid. Blatant attempt to hijack a cycling agenda.
> Agreed. But 20's plenty...
In a car, I disagree. On a bike, I disagree. More to the point, speed limits on the road almost never apply to bikes (something many motorists don't appreciate). I routinely ride at >20mph, so these limits will have motorists resenting me for apparently speeding. Not what I want.0 -
I think this is great and it's good that a national newspaper is taking this stance.
I think the seemingly inevitable rise of fuel prices will help more though. I definitely see a lot more people commuting this year than I have in the past. People are beginning to see just how much money they can save by commuting.My commute:
0 -
Merged."Do not follow where the path may lead, Go instead where there is no path, and Leave a Trail."
Parktools :?:SheldonBrown0 -
yay, its going to be a very quiet thread now
The astute ibikelondon sums this up nicely on why its a great move:
http://ibikelondon.blogspot.com/2012/02 ... t-for.html0 -
Not a great idea to move this thread to the commuter ghetto :P0
-
I commute through Islington. One thing to note is they're pushing for making all roads in Islington 20mph (apart from the TFL run ones.) Madness.FCN 9 || FCN 50
-
I think 20mph zones could be appropriate for a lot of residential roads - I'm thinking the ones that are used as cut-throughs, back routes etc, where know-it-all locals see the chance to get off the main road and put their foot down in totally inappropriate circumstances. You know, residential streets with cars parked up either side, that sort of thing.
20mph across the board would be a pain though, for the reasons G66 has mentioned - try cycling in Richmond Park, when the cars actually obey the speed limit its a right pain having to constantly overtake!0 -
Yeah 20 mph across the board is just plain dumb, but on narrow residential streets where there are many parked cars it would make sense.0
-
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/28/mortality-statistics-causes-death-england-wales-2010
gives a idea how the risks pan out, like CIB and others I think and seem to be broadly supported by data that cycling is fairly safe. bare in mind that even the netherlands people die on bikes, inspite of all the bike lanes etc, and a much smaller population for that year it was 200ish.
the times piece is dreadful, misleading stats, more killed than soliders, and so on. hell even says 'something must be done' didn't say 'think of the childern' though which is something!0 -
roger merriman wrote:http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2011/oct/28/mortality-statistics-causes-death-england-wales-2010
gives a idea how the risks pan out, like CIB and others I think and seem to be broadly supported by data that cycling is fairly safe. bare in mind that even the netherlands people die on bikes, inspite of all the bike lanes etc, and a much smaller population for that year it was 200ish.
the times piece is dreadful, misleading stats, more killed than soliders, and so on. hell even says 'something must be done' didn't say 'think of the childern' though which is something!
It's about time cycling got on the same level as motorists.
They get a lot of success out of being irrational.0
