"The issue is of course to figure out WHO TO BLAME"
I imagine that's irony, but who knows? This is the internet.
"if we're creative about this maybe we could offer some positive recommendations"
Well that's been tried before - in a general way.
http://www.politecycling.info
This was an initiative from Spokes, it probably could and should be revived/updated.
I seem to remember that Spokes hoped that someone would 'take the idea on'. Spokes has no staff and not the sort of resources available to many other organisations.
There's nothing new in all this. Children from Craiglockhart Primary had a campaign about speeding on the canal about 10 years ago. There were similar 'slow down' posters in Roseburn Park, which I think originated at the local school.
Local initiatives are generally a 'good thing'. Of course it's possible to imagine a class project initiated by a teacher who 'hates cyclists' BUT I very much doubt if that's remotely the case in any of the examples.
Teachers (and parents) may well regard children as 'more important' than 'cyclists' - and they may well be right.
This isn't about a 'misguided attack on all cyclists for the actions of a few' - the 'many' (including 'us' of course) shouldn't see this an attack on our 'right to behave reasonably'.
Perhaps this poster campaign is misguided/counterproductive (I'm not saying it is), but it's unlikely to be the result of one cyclist coming 'a bit close' to one pupil.
There's clearly a problem at this location. Given CEC's recent record of calling meetings (Jawbone Walk, Barnton golf courses path etc. - with mixed reactions, not least because of the feeling that CEC sometimes reacts 'too' fast to 'small' complaints and fails to see a bigger picture. Yesterday's decision on buslanes encourages that view!!!) I hope it can 'engage' here.
The bigger picture is that more people are walking and cycling which is a GOOD THING, but existing and new infrastructure sometimes isn't good/enough. In addition there is a need for some sort of addressing of 'anti-social behaviour'.
Yesterday's transport committee voted on 'harmonising' bus lane times. It also discussed dog mess - as it does. Once it was normal for dogs to do 'what they do, where they do it' and that was it. Then there were bins and 'pick it up campaigns', attitudes changed. Now the Council is putting great efforts into catching and fining "persistent offenders" (well their owners) - including using CCTV.
I hope that never happens for 'cycling' but it might be useful to put cameras in some locations and see what 'really' happens - and see if anything can be learned.
'We' (well some if not all) were VERY critical of the Nice Way Code which was based on the notion of cyclists and motorists just being nice to each other...
It is more reasonable to consider that 'pedestrians' and 'cyclists' are 'closer' - certainly both disadvantaged by the continuing 'advantages' assumed for motor vehicles.
On Monday there was a Living Streets meeting attended by quite a few CCEers, where there was some 'anti-cycling feeling'.
So still much to do as people (adults and children) to reduce 'misunderstanding', encourage 'responsible behaviour' - inappropriate speed isn't responsible, unconctrolled dogs and 'unaware' pedestrians too. Though there is difficult balance between 'sharing use' and 'the 'most vulnerable' being able to expect the most respect...
Paths are not the same as roads, both have rules and expectations - which are not always met.
It's good that 'we' discuss things and hope to influence behaviours and institutions. It's perhaps time that some (with staff and money) - council(s), Sustrans, Cycling Scotland, Paths for All etc. - looked harder at some of the 'issues'.
Better designs and maybe some creative promotion/advertising...
At present councils in Scotland have money for Smarter Choices, Smarter Places projects. Perhaps some of this could be used locally and nationally to improve the awareness and practice of "shared use".
posts
