CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Cycle Network

(360 posts)
  • Started 10 years ago by Simon Parker
  • Latest reply from wingpig

1…8910…12

  1. ARobComp
    Member

    I have remained out of this until now, however I've been trying to follow this within the spare time I have. The reason I post this is because I want to, in some way, encourage Simon, but not because I know/think/hope that his approach might work, but because I'm pleased there is someone out there that has the passion to spend so long pursuing a dream, and as many campaigns have shown in the past we need all parts of the spectrum to be covered so that the right ideas filter to the right places.

    This however, comes with a caveat... Bearing in mind I would consider myself a student of science, and, based on my varied successes in the past and the nature of my work, at least understanding of human behaviour within the confines of the place we would consider the internet.

    Simon - I find the way you put across your argument, the structure of your posts, and the general way you have approached this incredibly off putting.
    The endless quotes from books and people who, as a cyclist first (for 8 years) and activist second (2 years) I don't know about, are at best something to skim over and do not in my books constitute evidence, as much as they constitute "something that someone wrote once".

    For anything to succeed it needs clear structure, actions and popular support and this is why I support POP, it is something that has shown that it can make changes and put on pressure, while still reflecting the needs of the many.

    I struggle to see how your plan could work without what @IWRATS has outlined above. There are huge issues with liability, understanding, and funding, not to mention how we would measure success. As much as we hate the system as is, we have to work to change that system within it's own confines (sure at a top level but that starts with local stuff) and not seek to create a new one because we're spitting the dummy out the pram. That is why the "occupy" movement failed, it's why Russell Brand is not prime minister after his Paxman interview and it's why I hope that we won't become independent. I don't want to create a new system, I want to fix the one we've got!

    Hope that this can be taken constructively as possible. Cheers. I only wish I had more time to actively be involved in some sort of actual debate (which I don't think is what is happening in this thread)

    Yours,
    A post recession graduate

    Posted 10 years ago #

  2. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    @ARobComp - all graduates are post recession now. Just pick your recession - they happen often enough. I'm not sure I've ever quite recovered from 1992.

    I do admire your patience. Pop quiz - who on here knows their Myers-Briggs type? I'll bet £100 that mine and Simon's are the same. That's why his posts make me want to amputate and eat my own leg. Nothing like having your own failings projected in hideous detail.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  3. le_soigneur
    Member

    If Simon's online persona/style is so ofputting to us bike-OCD types, the chances of winning over non-cycling people with it must be minute. Seshadri on the squash forum always supports his arguments with pithy Shakespeare quotes like "the fault lies not in ourselves but in ous stars" which just makes me cringe. Simon has become my Seshadri here - I tuned out of this thread long ago rather than become negative.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  4. ARobComp
    Member

    I suppose I was being self indulgent with the recession chat. However I'd suggest that the current one has made it slightly worse for myself (mostly self funded through uni, trying to make his way in independent businesses and a pint now costs £2 more than it did when I started uni in 2005, no chance of getting on the property ladder and earning 10k less doing the same job or more than someone in the same position 5 years ago) than perhaps some of the other recessions in the last 50 years!

    I always figure these things are more about the Dunning-Kruger effect. But I don't even know enough to suffer from that ;)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  5. wingpig
    Member

    "One does not simply walk into Mordor."
    ~Boromir

    Similarly one does not simply introduce a cycle network, no matter whether it's emboldened, italicised, capitalised, underlined or even made to flash using the deprecated <blink> tag, when this introduction requires either paint on roads or signs on poles. There is, loathe it or despise it, a long-winded process for getting these things emplaced, as Morningsider pointed out more than once.

    Requesting local knowledge (such as that required to point out snags on a map) seemed fair enough, whilst the advice appeared to be being accepted. Ignoring or rejecting other (more specialised, and harder to gain by simply trundling to a specific location and observing road layouts) local knowledge came across as a bit hoity.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  6. Simon Parker
    Member

    You remind me of other campaigners who blame lack of progress in cycle provision on, for example, lycra, cycle-helmets, high-vis, adherence to the advice in Cyclecraft and non-standard specialist bikes.

    Before I go any further, you need to know that I have never worn lycra in my life. I walk my bike up hills, as well. But I did used to cycle to school, and I am fairly comfortable riding a bike amongst traffic.

    I got involved in this after a summer hiring out bikes in Richmond Park. I got such pleasure from seeing all of the big smiles on the customers' faces as they returned the bikes, and it looked like it would be a really good way to make a living as well.

    So I thought I would have a look at London's other parks. Hyde Park wasn't big enough, so one day I went over to Victoria Park (East London). After that I headed down the canal to the Isle of Dogs, and then via the foot tunnel to Greenwich. It was whilst I was trying to get home from here that I became lost, and which resulted in me having the idea for compass colours.

    My central point is network first, and then a separation of functions. Nobody has said anything against this. All of the criticism has been directed at me personally, or at the way I have tried to present my case.

    * * *

    How do people find out if they are in the 10% if not by trying the routes and, nine times out of ten, discovering that it's not designed for their needs, or their children's?

    Cycling: the way ahead says (page 35):

    A large number of potential cyclists are already thinking about cycling today. But they are simply waiting for a sign from the public authorities before they get back on their bicycles along the lines of ‘it’s safe to ride a bike — your area authority is taking care of what needs to be done’.

    Perhaps you are not persuaded by this. But in the long run, it wouldn't be a problem, I suggest, so long as Edinburgh Council were fully committed to Step 5 - which is, Develop the network further "on the basis of priority interventions and a timetable". (The key here is sustained investment, progressively reprioritising the urban environment in favour of more active forms of travel.)

    Edinburgh has a target for a 10% mode share for cycling, right? If the Council were serious about this, there oughtn't to be any problem for them to publish a timetable.

    * * *

    If you ask for high quality bits and pieces, you will probably get high quality bits and pieces, and not much else. But if you ask for high quality routes to be developed within the framework provided by a functioning cycle network ... then you will truly be Going Dutch.

    The more people can see and understand the bigger picture, the more supportive they will be (Dave Horton).

    No one would have a problem with people planning and studying a network, I guess. But what does it mean to introduce a network? And how long does it take? Ricardo Marques Sillero from Seville's cycling group A Contramano has said that getting the basic network to work very quickly was one of the keys for their success. Can this be translated to the current situation in Edinburgh? How?

    How do you interpret the above? What does it mean to you?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  7. Instography
    Member

    "My central point is network first, and then a separation of functions. Nobody has said anything against this."

    I think I expressed some serious scepticism about the idea. I said that there was a real risk that we would get chalk and then paint and then nothing more. You pointed out to me that someone else had already made that point. Gembo, I think. I can't be bothered to go back and check.

    How do I interpret "level of minimum functioning". I interpret it as meaningless gibberish. Jargon. On its own it means nothing. What does it mean to you?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  8. Simon Parker
    Member

    What it means to me is a way of getting around the planning process quickly and cost-effectively in order that a comprehensive, city-wide cycle network can be made to work. I regard it as a means to an end.

    With permaculture - which deals with whole systems thinking - it is best practice to begin by making the minimum change for the maximum effect.

    Thus, the way to develop an amenable environment for cycling is not with a few lunging strides, but with lots and lots of little steps.

    Just out of interest, Instography, what do you think is the best way to proceed, given where we are now? Only asking.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  9. Instography
    Member

    Well, no one could argue against making the minimum change for the maximum effect. That's self-evidently a good thing but as with all abstractions it doesn't mean anything in itself and any particular minimum change / maximum effect proposal will be too much for some, not enough for others in one direction or the other.

    If I were in charge I'd probably go for this sort of network - making drawings with colourful routes. But then if I was in charge I wouldn't need to worry about who was in charge and whether they'd do it properly. I wouldn't need to get political support and I could ignore all the opposition.

    If I was just an ordinary Joe cyclist (which I am) and fancied a network, and I was sceptical of the guys in charge, I'd maybe still have the drawings with the colours and stuff but I'd probably focus on some key routes and connections to existing routes. The ones that are most likely to be used and I'd want those routes made to a good standard because we've seen what they do when they're allowed to put down paint and call it a route. So call me a lunger.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  10. Simon Parker
    Member

    Thanks for your comments, Instography. I think a lot of people would agree with what you have written. I do as well, except don't call me a lunger!

    A few lunging strides is equivalent to a revolution, whereas lots and lots of little steps is equivalent to evolution.

    Call me an evolutionist :o)

    This is taken from one of my blogs:

    In the race against the hare, the essential thing was to take that first step, as the tortoise was only too well aware. Having taken that first step, the tortoise knew enough just to keep on plodding along, gently and purposefully and patiently and resolutely. We must do the same, with a meaningful programme of investment which is sustained over time.

    The following is from Cycling: the way ahead (pages 40, 41, 44 and 45):

    The creation of infrastructures to encourage people to take up cycling again does not inevitably give rise to a mass of insoluble problems regarding the distribution of space.

    Quite apart from the creation of signposted cycle routes on roads where through traffic is low or has been reduced, some physical installations carried out at key places can make a powerful contribution to improving cyclists’ safety.

    These include:

    • the quality of road surfaces (reducing the risks of falling or sudden turns so that cyclists can concentrate their attention on traffic),

    • bright lighting at crossroads (leading to fewer conflicts),

    • changes to the phasing of traffic lights (fewer conflicts),

    • an increased use of small roundabouts (which should reduce conflicts and enable cyclists to waste less time),

    • cycle lanes

    Cycle tracks (conceived as spaces reserved for cyclists, separate from the main roadway) require space. They cannot usually be introduced everywhere (it is impossible to construct an entire network of cycle tracks in an existing town). They must be therefore be planned carefully depending on the connections that have to be made and in accordance with the rules of the art.

    Nowadays we know that cycle tracks are only a realistic solution in some situations and that they only improve safety for cyclists under certain very strict conditions. Indeed, badly conceived cycle tracks increase the risks of accidents.

    Reproducing apparently effective action taken elsewhere could have negative consequences if the concerted and coherent programme on which such actions have been based is not taken into account. On the contrary, it is preferable to draw inspiration from known examples with due caution and, bearing in mind some of the constant factors of a thoroughly understood cycling policy, have recourse to the imagination, local resources and cautious experimentation.

    The ideal situation would be for the political authority to decide to introduce a policy in favour of cycling, to set aside a budget for this policy, to organise a team of staff to carry out practical measures and to ensure that selection criteria which promote cycling are applied at all levels of the administration.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  11. chdot
    Admin

    "
    The ideal situation would be for the political authority to decide to introduce a policy in favour of cycling, to set aside a budget for this policy, to organise a team of staff to carry out practical measures and to ensure that selection criteria which promote cycling are applied at all levels of the administration.

    "

    Er, well, yes.

    Edinburgh did that years ago.

    Could do more/better/different, and the last 10 words of that quote remain a problem.

    Of course all this has been 'encouraged' and (where possible) supported by "cycle campaigners" - essentially the extraordinary, dogged, work of Spokes over THIRTY SIX (and a half) years.

    This site has added to the mix with individuals being motivated to make PoP happen and 'engage' with the Council (and recently Fife Council too) over things like potholes, dropped kerbs and policy - with increasing degrees of success.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  12. Simon Parker
    Member

    The point you are missing, chdot, is the importance of getting a network to work.

    There wasn't a "concerted and coherent programme" in place thirty-odd years ago, and there still isn't one now. We can do something about this.

    “The hardest thing about the road not taken is that you never know where it might have led.”

    Posted 10 years ago #

  13. SRD
    Moderator

    "We can do something about this."

    Okay. leaving aside that a number of people on here - not least chdot himself - have been doing this for 30 years or more*, what exactly is it we are supposed to be doing, that we're not doing?

    I have followed this thread backwards and forwards and still don't understand what you think I should be doing.

    * not me obviously. i'm a johnny-come-lately

    Posted 10 years ago #

  14. Simon Parker
    Member

    What exactly is it we are supposed to be doing, that we're not doing?

    I am sorry if people have been upset by me. Clearly I haven't done the best job in getting my ideas understood.

    As I have explained, this is a five-step plan:

    1. Think in terms of a network
    2. Plan the network
    3. Study the network
    4. Introduce the network
    5. Develop the network further "on the basis of priority interventions and a timetable."

    I accept that the planned network probably still needs a bit of tweaking, but I believe the proposed design is substantially a good one. The next thing to be done, therefore, once the design has been finalised to everyone's satisfaction, is to study the feasibility of the network.

    This means, I would suggest, identifying all of the non-functioning bits and all of the functioning bits (including those which function at an unacceptably low level).

    Once the network has been studied, it is then possible "to truly grasp the situation".

    What should be done with the non-functioning bits, and what should be done with the functioning bits? Answering the second question is probably something which Spokes etc are better placed to answer than the City Council, because Spokes etc use these functioning parts every single day.

    At the end of the study period, it would be really helpful to have a clear view as to what "the basic network" would look like, remembering how important it is that this network is made to work "very quickly".

    The introduction of high-density low-engineered network should be sufficient to double the cycling population, but then what happens next? Not stasis, surely. Please not stasis.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  15. fimm
    Member

    OK. I have to agree with SRD that I was struggling to understand what it was you were hoping we might do for you (and remember, we're just a bunch of people who happen to use this forum and don't represent anyone other than ourselves).

    If I've understood your last post correctly, we are on steps 2 and 3 of your process. If we wish to contribute, what you would like is comments on which parts of your suggested network (which is linked to back at the beginning of the thread) are "functioning".

    A definition of "functioning" might be useful.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  16. SRD
    Moderator

    Following up on fimm's point. I also do not know how to evaluate it. There are three east-west routes through Southern edinburgh that I might use,but actually I use a different through route that runs between the two most northern ones (and the pink most southerly route). I may be the exception and everyone else would want to use your recommendation routes, but I don't know how you came up with them.

    The yellow one that runs out into colinton road, then down and thru Ashley terrace to slateford etc baffles me. If I was coming a cross to. Colinton that way (and the connectors to there are a bit fiddly), I would go across gillsland to Harrison road and thence down to Russell road (like e turquoise route does) and/or murrayfield. Or through the path from slateford green towards Balgreen junction by cut thru and then onto the Balgreen path - which is what the yellow path does.

    But how /why am I to claim that my suggestions are better?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  17. wingpig
    Member

    I've still not had a chance to go over all the map in detail, partly due to the main thrust of the thread being redetermined.

    The bit where #27blue crosses the West Approach Road is illegal/impossible. Instead of going to the end of Morrison Link it needs to go along Morrison Crescent, across the toucan then use the two bits of shared-use path and Brandfield Street to get to Fountainbridge.

    The bit where the troubled #5yellow goes from Queensferry Street to Lothian Road currently involves walking, to be legal. Likewise turning right out of King's Stables Road to Lothian Road as the current crossing is not a toucan.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  18. SRD
    Moderator

    Well spotted. (Anyone else finding map crashes if you Zoom in close enough to see street names?)

    The red line coming up Gorgie road onto fountainbridge includes that dodgy uphill crossing WAR access that is on our list of 'worst junctions'.

    Would that rule it out from network inclusion?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  19. neddie
    Member

    This is the maddest thread ever. I'm just waiting for the whole thing to implode in a giant circle of madness

    Posted 10 years ago #

  20. Simon Parker
    Member

    Thanks fimm. Yes, I think we're pretty much finished on Step 2. (If people want to make any last-minute adjustments, they can sign into Google and edit the map as they see fit.)

    I do have some software which would enable the network to be studied (Step 3). Unfortunately, I have not been able to pay the Internet Service Provider's bill, and so the software is currently offline.

    The main thing about it is the photomap. So you take a photo, you locate it on the map, and you then decide whether the thing you have photographed is functioning or non-functioning. I can't remember the exact details, but depending whether or not it is functioning or non-functioning, you would be required to determine the level of functioning (good / ok / poor), or how much work is needed to get the non-functioning parts to work (not much / quite a lot / a helluva lot).

    There's a whole load of other stuff, as well, including a facility which enables people to plot their most common journeys.

    I think the thing to do would be to "give" this software to Spokes (if they are okay with this) and for it to be adapted to the situation in Edinburgh. This is something that would need to be done in concert with the software programmer.

    The front page would need changing - it's mostly about London at the moment - but the header would have to remain the same. (When all's said and done, this website has been funded by GeoVation, after all.)

    There's other stuff I want to say about this, but I would like to hear from Spokes first, if that's okay.

    Regarding a definition of "functioning", it means it works. The level at which it works is something which can be gauged with the GeoVation-funded software.

    And now to answer the other comments which have come up since fimm asked her questions.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  21. Simon Parker
    Member

    wingpig / SRD

    I updated the design about a month ago (map here). It has had more than 4500 views in this time. I am guessing that you are still referring to the first draft.

    The design is not finalised. It can still be changed. If there are parts which are non-functioning, these can be identified during the feasibility study.

    If some of the non-functioning parts are too difficult to resolve in the short-term (i.e. within the first year), then either the route needs to be re-routed or a temporary measure needs to be considered.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  22. Simon Parker
    Member

    SRD

    To answer another one of your questions, I am (to a large extent) employing another principle of permaculture design, which is to design from patterns to details. Of course, I want to incorporate routes which people are most likely to use, so if you think I have missed a trick, please adjust the map accordingly (you will need to sign into Google first).

    edd1e_h

    You turn up to a wedding, say, and there's no wine to drink. What to do? Everyone knows that it is simply not possible to enjoy yourself at a wedding without getting completely plastered. So what to do?

    It is a wonderful part of being human to realise that we can improve our situation simply by changing our attitude.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  23. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    Line 9 out of Portobello would be better if it used Fishwives' Causeway to Portobello Road, then Restalrig Avenue and Marionville Road to reach the top of Easter Road. If you insist on taking it south to Milton Road then make use of the cut-through in Mountcastle Crescent to connect with the above route.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  24. I were right about that saddle
    Member

    Yeah, the dog leg at Restalrig Avenue...

    Mornington Crescent?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  25. SRD
    Moderator

    there's a thread for that http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=1274

    Posted 10 years ago #

  26. Simon Parker
    Member

    Google falls down if there is too much route information on one map. I was able to code a route which incorporated Restalrig Avenue (in orange), but it's not showing at the moment.

    Other changes have been made ... (here)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  27. neddie
    Member

    @Simon.

    You still haven't defined what 'functioning' & 'non-functioning' means, as per fimm's original request

    Posted 10 years ago #

  28. Simon Parker
    Member

    As I said above, Google falls down if there is too much route information. This is a screenshot of all the routes together. Is anything missing, do you think?

    edd1e_h

    I wrote above:

    Regarding a definition of "functioning", it means it works. The level at which it works is something which can be gauged with the GeoVation-funded software.

    I hope that's sufficient.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  29. neddie
    Member

    Regarding a definition of "functioning", it means it works

    This is so vague as to be meaningless.

    By that definition, every single road and every single footpath in Edinburgh is functioning. We already have a network by that definition.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  30. chdot
    Admin

    "screenshot of all the routes together"

    Looks mostly like a map of Edinburgh's main roads.

    I wonder how motorists manage without suitable signs?

    As many people have said on this thread, even if such a network was agreed (by the council) AND suitably signed very quickly it would be unlikely to make many people think that the roads had become 'safe' without a lot of work on the bits 'we' keep complaining about - and gradually/sometimes get addressed.

    Meanwhile the council is pressing ahead with its Family Network - parts of which are a genuine improvement (and signed too).

    Map here.

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

1…8910…12

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin