Cyclists taking over paths!!

[malumbu]

?? Confused me, all I did was refer to. Beautiful South song 

I rode both a Dutch bike and a tandem in The Hague many years ago.

[mr.chicken]

1 hour ago, Rockets said:

After Malumbu and Mr Chicken foolishly called me out about parts of Amsterdam banning cycling I dug out this article

This is deja vu all over again! We've had this conversation before. You're presenting an anti-cyclist slant on it which is not actually correct. And that article is super biased too: you'll get honked at if you step out onto a road in front of a moving car, bus or tram. You'll get yelled at if you step right across someone's path when they're walking too. So why does getting the same treatment from a cyclist on a bike path warrant a special mention? Probably because there are some bike shaped, Lycra clad axes to be ground.

Pedestrians are about the most efficient use of space in terms of people per hour, with mass transit able to be a close second. No one's going to deny that bikes are a less efficient use of space and cars less so still. It's rational design to prioritise the most efficient use of space when things get crowded, and Amsterdam has a consistent record of doing this. This is why trams and buses are prioritised over bikes at traffic lights.

So you are correct that more pedestrianised areas have been created. What you're not correct about is the anti-cyclist slant of "problems caused by cyclists". This is obvious from the way they have spent a lot of money on underground bike parking to free up very valuable and limited surface space for people rather than objects, and they way they are still trying to replace cars with bikes.

 

Your post is anti-LTN playbook through and through. Make a very broad claim, then support it by linking to support for a much narrower claim and pretend REALLY HARD that your entire claim is supported.

[first mate]

Rockets, what an insightful article. I especially noted the bit below. Amsterdam is held up as the cycling model to move towards. It is hoped their mistakes are at least noted and learned from. It is already patently obvious that some cycling behaviour on pavements in ED, including hire cycle dumping, is deeply alienating and stressful for some sections of society and not at all in line with Southwark's Equal streets policy and proclamations.

"group of students from Hong Kong studying public policy at the University of Amsterdam’s summer school this summer found that people with disabilities experience these areas as stressful and dangerous, and go out of their way to avoid them. The people they interviewed said that drivers and cyclists do not slow down or take other road users into account, exploiting their relative speed and the lack of formal traffic regulations to ignore more vulnerable pedestrians."

 

[Rockets]

Mr Chicken...you know I didn't write the Bloomberg article right? Fascinating piece isn't it and so many of the problems seen in Amsterdam seem to have found their way to other cities like London too, wouldn't you agree?

How do you think we mitigate the issues around cyclists and bad cycling?

[exdulwicher]

15 hours ago, Rockets said:

How do you think we mitigate the issues around cyclists and bad cycling?

Firstly, beyond a bit of inconvenience and irritation, what issues actually ARE there? Pedestrians are not being scattered to the winds, mobility scooters are not being overturned and, while I absolutely agree that some cyclists jump red lights, they're not barrelling through at 20mph forcing emergency stops all around them.

And secondly, in answer to your question - more and better infrastructure, defined and segregated. The (very few) issues that arise in Amsterdam as per the Bloomberg article are usually as a result of people being outside "their" zone. Ride a bike along a car-priority road (and there are plenty of those) you'll get arrested (after being thoroughly hooted at for ages.

Walk in a cycle lane, you'll get dinged at and told to walk on the pavement. The issues come solely from areas that haven't fully benefitted from retrofitting proper infrastructure. Sometimes from creating a shared space that, initially, was absolutely fine with lower numbers but now doesn't work as well and needs some re-design.

In the UK, because so many "zones" are very ill-defined, we end up with the pavement issue where cyclists are allowed on some sections (thanks councils for painting that white line there!) and not on other sections but it's not clear, it's not enforced and neither pedestrians nor cyclists are clear on the issue.

And that's before you look at the other pavement clutter like parked cars, street furniture, bins, uneven pavements and advertising boards.

Edited July 30, 2023 by exdulwicher

[Nigello]

Pedestrians don’t saunter in cycle lanes, so cyclists ought not to ride on footpaths. Not cycling on footpaths is polite, rational, reasonable, hazard-reducing and orderly so why is there support for pavement cyclists? It’s a vote for selfishness and inconsiderateness which we don’t need any more of. It’s endemic, which suggests to me that those who do it are indeed anti-social, even if they think that because they are helping reduce congestion and pollution, they can do as they please and disregard the rights of pedestrians and wheelchair users. 

[malumbu]

Yes they do, in quieter times the Thames embankment cycle lane is used by runners.  On Peckham Lane shoppers cross without looking.  Countless times pedestrians walk out in front of me, either on their phone or relying on their ears rather than eyes.  And on occasionally I have been guilty too.  😊

Ps cyclists as a rule should not cycle on the pavement 
 

Edited July 30, 2023 by malumbu

[first mate]

But they do, and in increasing numbers.

[Froglander]

A woman with a young child on back of her bike told me that it was ok for her to ride on the pavement because she had the child on the bike.  I said that wasn’t correct and she then told me that the dog I was walking should not be on the pavement.  

Edited July 30, 2023 by Froglander

[Spartacus]

51 minutes ago, Froglander said:

A woman with a young child on back of her bike tell me that it was ok for her to ride on the pavement because she had the child on the bike.  I said that wasn’t correct and she then told me that the dog I was walking should not be on the pavement.  

That's a bit ruff 

[malumbu]

Too many dogs on the pavement, safer for me to cycle with the cars.

Don't start me on the werewolves on London.  Owwwwwooooh 

[snowy]

Good to see the current Work and Pensions secretary is clearly an EDF reader - today they're suggesting the over fifties might like to work as Deliveroo riders.

[legalalien]

On the subject of Amsterdam and elderly Deliveroo drivers, did anyone see the article in the Times this week about Dutch research suggesting it might not be such a good idea for older folk to ride electric bikes?

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/e-bikes-cause-head-and-spine-injuries-in-over-50s-dutch-warned-8pbhnrkl2

[CPR Dave]

So cyclists can do whatever they want because other people sometimes do bad things too. Cyclists don't need to own their bad behaviour until everyone else is perfect.

Imagine if we applied cyclist logic to all aspects of human interaction. 

No wonder so many people dislike cyclists.

[snowy]

[Nadine Dorries has entered the chat]

[Spartacus]

19 hours ago, snowy said:

[Nadine Dorries has entered the chat]

Blimey Snowy/Nardine I never had you pegged as the same person.

You Live and Learn.

Do you have insider knowledge on when BoJo will join too ? 

[malumbu]

Wondering who advises Mel Stride, do they just make it up or think that middle England will lap this stuff up

So (a) supporting the gig economy with all the shit that comes with it. 

(b) failing to recognise that Deliveroo and no doubt others place the responsibility on the delivery rider to use legal transport, be a competent rider, adhere to the Highway Code including lights at night.

Mind you there is an interesting side line in dealing drugs which can make it very lucrative, there's the entrepreneurial spirit that Britain so needs. 

(Informed in part by a member of family who did a few months for Deliveroo.)

[DuncanW]

20 hours ago, CPR Dave said:

So cyclists can do whatever they want because other people sometimes do bad things too. Cyclists don't need to own their bad behaviour until everyone else is perfect.

Imagine if we applied cyclist logic to all aspects of human interaction. 

No wonder so many people dislike cyclists.

Do you dislike cyclists, Dave?

Straight yes or no will do just fine

[malumbu]

I don't like people who dislike cyclists. 

[Spartacus]

56 minutes ago, DuncanW said:

Do you dislike cyclists, Dave?

Straight yes or no will do just fine

How did you arrive at that question? CPR Dave was pointing out that "many people dislike cyclists" due to the behaviour of some. 

It is interesting that when someone raises a question of behaviour and points out what would happen if the Gander (all other road users) does as the Goose (cyclists) then they get slammed as either cycle haters or talking rubbish. 

Its about time both cyclists and other road users talked sensibly and agreed that all should act the same to ensure safety on our roads.

Edited August 4, 2023 by Spartacus

[malumbu]

I doubt  whether most people dislike cyclists.  I expect most aren't that bothered.  More road user culture wars stoked up by the right wing press and beloved government, and some of you here who blame cyclists for LTNs, ULEZ, CPZs and the Russia invasion of Ukraine.

Survey from last year https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/new-survey-shows-public-back-action-encourage-cycling-and-public-transport-remain-attached-their 

Whilst their was no question on whether you liked cyclists, those surveyed were generally warm to encouraging more cycling

• 44% say they would like to cycle more than they currently do
• 71% say they support actions to encourage more people to walk or cycle instead of driving a car…
• …but the same proportion (also 71%) feel they need a car to suit their current lifestyle
• While there is more support (45%) than opposition (33%) for schemes charging road users a fee to drive around towns and cities, support has weakened since 2020

It's IPSOS and as far as I know such respected organisations have not been infiltrated by Marxist cyclists.  Others will no doubt beg to differ

[Spartacus]

As always, the devil is in the detail 71% of 2,240 people questioned (equivellent of a few roads in an area) is a small sample size. Why its almost as honest as "9 out of 10 cars are ulez compliant according to our 106 cameras" 

Technical Note

• Ipsos interviewed a representative sample of 2,240 people aged 16+ in the UK. Interviews were conducted using Ipsos’ UK KnowledgePanel, a random probability panel which provides gold standard insights into the UK population, by providing bigger samples sizes via the most rigorous research methods, between 3-9 February 2022.
• Data are weighted to match the profile of the population.
• All polls are subject to a wide range of potential sources of error.
• Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) were described as “areas where bollards, planters and roadblocks are installed to stop motor traffic using some local roads”.
• The 2020 survey referred to above was conducted using the same methodology and involved 911 UK adults aged 16+ between 12-18 November.

[mr.chicken]

19 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

• Data are weighted to match the profile of the population.
• All polls are subject to a wide range of potential sources of error.

Yeah yeah we know. I mean sure, polls have people in support. But those are wrong. And the actual local election saw a swing away from anti-LTN parties (including the lib dems who are not associated with the unpopular Tories) towards the party implementing LTNs. That's wrong too, I'm sure.

The only possible non flawed results it one that shows that the majority hate cyclists and LTNs.

One day we'll get one, but since we know the answer already we can simply assume it's true without a poll.

[Bic Basher]

It's all too easy to tar all cyclists as lycra clad, green loving, anti car activists who'll stop at nothing to remove the hated motor vehicle from roads to live in a cycle utopia where only cycles and cargo bikes are allowed on the road.

The reality is that while there are some who are extreme in their viewpoint, others want to share the road with cars with sensible provision for bikes which may well included shared use for pavements, cycle lanes etc.

[Rockets]

https://youtu.be/WLbInJdm4pc

 

Some more classics in here. I wonder if the council/police need to do some cycle interventions at the Dulwich library junction, time to start issuing a few fines perhaps?

Edited August 6, 2023 by Rockets