I am at a conference in Telford. Being a Shropshire lad, I am very aware of the wonderful cycling that the county has to offer. However Telford town centre offers a typical new town car oriented experience. There are separated cycle lanes on the basis that many might advocate. However I saw no cyclists whatsoever. I am not sure what's not working.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
meanwhile in Telford
(28 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
People don't want to cycle for reasons other than the traffic?
Or, put another way - the corollory is that *more* cyclists use Leith Walk *because* they have to deal with three lanes of fast-accellerating, no-mercy traffic on Picardy Place and London Rd roundabouts. Seems unlikely.
There's a really good article somewhere about why the dismal failure of cycle facilities in Milton Keynes (or somewhere like that) is a bit of a straw man for other infrastructure. Anyone remember where we saw that?
Posted 11 years ago # -
I think John Franklin has made the "Redways are of no help, and are actually dangerous" argument.
The Cycle Embassy has countered that.
Whilst John's Cyclecraft presents the best way to handle hostile roads (in my opinion), I think he's mistaken on segregated infrastructure (but I can't really speak for the Redways).
Crowriver brought back a first hand report of the Redways recently.
Amir, it would be interesting to many if you could describe Telford more, based on your experience - did you take any photos?
Robert
Posted 11 years ago # -
Hmm, it was neither of those. It was a recent (long) blog post by someone, with pictures.
Curses, I'll need to spend some time digging this evening.
Posted 11 years ago # -
'Twas not the Cycling Embassy. They merely copied and pasted this (rather better laid out) blog post:
http://manchestercycling.blogspot.co.uk/2011/10/milton-keynes-redways.html
Posted 11 years ago # -
Almost certainly coincidence married to my unusually slothful time of rise this morning, but this morning's commute was the busiest I've seen for velocipedes.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The chap behind Manchester cycling is one of the Cycling Embassy board, hence it appears in both places.
Unfortunately the Cycling Embassy CMS makes it quite difficult to lay posts out nicely. People tend to do the work in their own blogs and then transfer it to the site.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@Dave - was it this one? http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2012/04/26/they-built-it-and-they-didnt-come-the-lesson-of-milton-keynes/ (another Cycling Embassy bod)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yes! Excellent, thanks.
Should be mandatory reading IMO, especially if you've recently been exposed to a bit of the John Franklin.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I'll see if I can get Mark to add it to the Embassy site
Posted 11 years ago # -
Empty infrastructure
Taking a quick look at Cyclestreets, I don't see an immediate explanation - is it that the paths don't go anywhere? That is, they don't run where people wish to travel? There's a strong north-south predominance, so conceivably most journeys could be east-west.
As suggested above, I'd appreciate your opinion!
Robert
Posted 11 years ago # -
I will try to get some evidence but time will be short at this conference (talk tomorrow)
Posted 11 years ago # -
In the spirit of t'internet, hyperlinking from one page to the next, I came across this amazing (and slightly sweary) anti-John Franklin rant from the not-entirely-kosher Department for Transport blog.
It's made me wonder if the rising tide against Franklin has come about because he has long proselytized vehicular cycling because of his own experience and the times in which he has lived: a boom time for car driving in urban planning, and survival methods in that environment. Even I don't actively enjoy cycling amongst cars and lorries and buses, but until we can have a real alternative we have to learn to cope. It ought to be no more than that: a panacea, not a goal.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yes, I'm as vehicular as the next man but I don't *aspire* to it. It's what you need to do because there's no alternative.
If the North Edinburgh path network extended to Blackford Hill, there's no chance at all I'd bother going on the QBC.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The thing is, I as a cyclist want both. I want to cycle on the road because for me it is the quickest and most convenient way to get from A to B. I fear being banned from the road because then I would have to go the long way round, I'd have to share space with pedestians and dogs, I'd have to keep slowing down for all these people who are even more vulnerable than I am. So I want to go on the road and make other vehicles slow down for me.
But, I also see that the 8 year old cycling to school, or the person returning to cycling who maybe doesn't have the fitness that I have, doesn't necessarily want these things. They're happy to slow down and avoid the dogs and what have you.
Yet, somehow there seems to be a sense that you can't be both an advocate of vehicular cycling and ask for good cycling facilities, and I'm not sure why this is. Or is it just me who feels like this?
Posted 11 years ago # -
fimm: its not just you. See Strava
Posted 11 years ago # -
It's certainly a puzzle that people fear being banned from the roads. If cycling ever becomes popular enough that politicians commit to building segregated infrastructure on a wide scale, it will be far too popular to ban cycling on the roads.
However, it's also worth pointing out that road cycling (as a sport, carbon frames and shaved legs ahoy) is apparently significantly more popular in the Netherlands than it is here, and Hembrow at least believes that you can ride at a higher average speed on segregated paths than on the roads, in practice.
When going up to Roseburn from Leith I used to set a target of averaging 20mph (uphill). My average getting to the top of Leith Walk, on the other hand, is about 10mph, however much I ride in front of the buses ;-)
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Or is it just me who feels like this?"
Nope.
Far from it.
And you've outlined the two 'sides' well.
And the way it needn't/shouldn't be either or.
New thread someone?
Posted 11 years ago # -
I don't think the 8-year olds want to have to deal with dogs or go the long way round either. If we build stuff that's good enough, it should be good enough for both, and wide enough for the roadies to overtake the 8-year olds (for the average value of 8-year old) and direct enough that everyone uses them. It's only in the UK that we seem to feel that off-road automatically has to mean slow, circuitous and shared with pedestrians.
That said, I don't that means banning bikes from the roads either. After all we have fully segregated pedestrian facilities, aka pavements, but we don't have any jaywalking laws - pedestrians can walk where they choose. They just mostly don't choose to walk in the road when there's a good pavement to use instead. As, I suspect, most cyclists will choose to use decent segregated paths when they're made available.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"It's certainly a puzzle that people fear being banned from the roads."
This dates back to the days when there were some genuinely separate cycle paths alongside (usually) out of town main roads.
Then organisations such as the CTC (and presumably time trial people) campaigned against a road riding ban. I'm sure that there was a genuine threat to ban bikes on main roads with parallel paths.
I think this is unlikely to be tried these days.
BUT - don't forget - cyclists are banned from the main road to the Forth Bridge and there STILL isn't a decent alternative.
Posted 11 years ago # -
No need to overthink all this. Cycling is simply a way of getting about (excluding sport and recreation for a minute). If it is easy, safe and convenient then people will consider it, if it isn't then most people won't.
Cycling is far better suited to high density towns and cities than New Towns, which are generally based on US suburban/exurban designs, which involve long distances between facilities that are linked by high speed roads.
Posted 11 years ago # -
BUT - don't forget - cyclists are banned from the main road to the Forth Bridge and there STILL isn't a decent alternative.
One could easily make the case that there wasn't a decent way to get there before - not even I would ride on the A90 in winter with 90mph traffic trying to pick me out in the spray.
In fact the opposite argument seems just as strong - because of resistance to segregated paths, nothing was built beside the A90 until the current goat-track which accompanied the ban, whereas with active support for a segregated facility, a really decent one might have been built, then who would care whether they could ride on the motorway-by-another-name or not?
Posted 11 years ago # -
"not even I would ride on the A90 in winter with 90mph traffic trying to pick me out in the spray"
No!
I can't remember if anyone/organisations were against the ban on the basis that bikes should allowed on principle. But Spokes ( and presumably others) wanted a decent alternative first.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Some history here...
http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/documents/members-campaigning/edinburgh/a90-forth-bridge/
Doesn't go back far enough to answer the question, but from memory there was a 'path' there even before cycling was banned on the A90, and Spokes had always argued for that to be upgraded decently. I think we did oppose the A90 cycling ban, but we didn't advise anyone to use the A90 even though the path was even grottier than now - certainly not after one of our active members was hit from behind by a lorry whilst cycling along the A90 (no junctions involved, just hit from behind). Luckily he was thrown onto the verge without too serious injury.
Some token improvements were made to the route when cycling was banned, but there was nothing like sufficient political/public interest to obtain the kind of money that would have been needed for the kind of top class route that should be there. Unfortunately current ministers in charge of transport money (John Swinney, Alex Neil etc) also totally uninterested in this issue and passing the buck entirely to Edinburgh council despite spending many £m's on new bridge and approach roads. Various individuals and MSPs Sarah Boyack, Alison Johnstone, Helen Eadie have been lobbying very recently, following the parliamentary cycling debate, but Ministers uninterested.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"you can ride at a higher average speed on segregated paths than on the roads"
What slows you down is interaction with others - be it junctions, traffic lights, getting stuck behind buses. If the segregated paths are of a good standard (well laid and smooth, unlike so many cyclepaths like the A90 path, the front at Newhaven etc...) and well designed, these interactions will be limited so you maintain a good speed.
The Netherlands also has a lot of out of town segregated path, along which you often see roadies cycling. You'd be able to get a fair head of speed up along those.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Fimm, I cite myself on many occasions but including one less than half an hour ago, as an example of that you mean. I habitually ride the Union towpath to the wee Tesco near my flat and bimble along surprising people by giving them lots of notice that I'd like to be pass once it's convenient, but can rarely be bothered with that once I've got to get the shopping back, so I use the road.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Sorry no photos yet. The explanation might be in the weirdness of the new town design. I think, but am not sure, that the town centre just has shopping and services but most of the employment is sited elsewhere. I have been walking pre 9am and post 6pm so that might explain why there have not been that many people around, never mind cycles. All a bit strange for me. It would good to get some comparative stats though, new towns vs proper places.
Posted 11 years ago # -
New thread here: http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8343
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
