[Closed] Why I won't let my 8yo cycle on the road - Chris Boardman

Have you lived in Holland?

No, Finland and Germany though. Plenty of infrastructure there that would be considered 'good' but I didn't use. And some that I did too.

The point is that I support additional infrastructure, but I am very concerned that it would lead to ghettoisation.

That's why driver's attitudes are the first thing to change. People speak favourably about cycling in France and Belgium - why? Is it because of the infrastructure, or driver attitudes?

I think people's attidues would be very easy to change. Most people bear litle animosity towards strangers, you just need to show them that cyclists are real people and not scumbag RLJing lycra pervs.

The key thing though is that a public information campaign would cost peanuts compared to building a couple of cycleways, and would reach the entire country - city and country, B roads and High Streets. I also think that the biggest factor in the uptake of cycling would be the 'normalisation'. That is, you don't have to be poor, a lycra clad weird or on a health kick - it's just a normal thing to do. That's the biggest difference between the NL and here I reckon.

My experience in London has me thinking that critical mass is the key issue. And you don't need that many more cyclists to achieve it.

Change mostly, although the cost is also questioned. The perception that the cost of cycling infrastructure is somehow frivilous, or pandering to some pastime, rather than a relevant mode of transport is a big issue.

The other issue I've found is any perceived reduction in either road space for motor vehicles, loading areas around shops/businesses or parking areas around shops, homes etc can lead to problems. As soon as you start to threaten those, then the Councillors support wanes IME.

Not all cycle lanes are segregated on the continent, it's just everyone has mutual respect for each other and gives each other time and room.

[quote=howsyourdad1 ]Why does cycle friendly infrastructure not have support?

Because people are thick. It's not a pleasant exercise to wade through the comments on articles, but useful to get an idea what people are thinking, and the prevailing attitude seems to be that spending money on cycling provision takes it away from budgets for improving roads, which is what we need to be able to get about better (along with all the usual claptrap about drivers paying for roads and cyclists not paying their way). It doesn't seem people can make the connection that improving cycling provision results in more people cycling, results in less people driving, results in less congestion for those who are still driving. All at far less cost than by spending the money directly on new roads.

Why does cycle friendly infrastructure not have support?

People don't like change or having to make an effort unless there is something in it for them.

Obviously there are huge benefits to everyone of good cycling infastructure but that isn't imediately evident since we are so far away from it. I think that is CB's point "I'm the bloody policy advisor and even I can't see it's right for my daughter to cycle on the road. Imagine how hard it is for everyone else"

Therefore to make the leap above the glass ceiling to a place where cycling is seen a normal and worthy of investment can't rely on populist support. I needs someone strong willed enough to say "We are going to invest in this as it's the right thing to do, even though you oiks can't see it yet"

aracer - Member
howsyourdad1 » Why does cycle friendly infrastructure not have support?
Because people are thick.

But people are people. Are people in the UK thicker than those in Holland, Sweden, Germany? haha maybe don't answer that but again people always say 'oh it works in holland it won't work here' BS of course it will. Yes slightly altered for cultural differences but basically the same

jfletch - Member

Why does cycle friendly infrastructure not have support?

People don't like change or having to make an effort unless there is something in it for them.

Obviously there are huge benefits to everyone of good cycling infastructure but that isn't imediately evident since we are so far away from it. I think that is CB's point "I'm the bloody policy advisor and even I can't see it's right for my daughter to cycle on the road. Imagine how hard it is for everyone else"

Exactly, political will. someone to say 'this is right, this is whats best for the people and if i'm wrong vote me out'.

GavinB - Member

Change mostly, although the cost is also questioned. The perception that the cost of cycling infrastructure is somehow frivilous, or pandering to some pastime, rather than a relevant mode of transport is a big issue.

The other issue I've found is any perceived reduction in either road space for motor vehicles, loading areas around shops/businesses or parking areas around shops, homes etc can lead to problems. As soon as you start to threaten those, then the Councillors support wanes IME

yes it's exactly this.

I'm surprised that CB doesn't ride with his daughter, there are plenty of quietish roads near where he lives.

Having said that one has to invest a good deal of energy in managing a child on a road shared with cars, so I can see why some would not bother.

As someone who now lives in Sweden I often find myself thinking that the reason that cycling is mostly accepted here is because we're segregated and therefore just have less contact with other roadusers. Get outside the infrastucture of a town-centre and onto the road (or off it) and you'll meet the same dangers and abuse, from other users, that seem to get posted here on the forum every few days. There's a marked difference here in Sweden between attitudes towards the kinds of cyclists you see in the Utrecht video and the people, probably like us here on the forum, who self-identify as 'cyclists'.

[quote=richpips ]I'm surprised that CB doesn't ride with his daughter, there are plenty of quietish roads near where he lives.

Me too. My nephew who's that age and lives nearby certainly rides on the roads, as did his sister when she was that age.

@howsyourdad - the video explaining the reason for the difference in Holland was posted a bit earlier.

@howsyourdad - the video explaining the reason for the difference in Holland was posted a bit earlier.

I dont understand what you mean? Am I being thick? 😀

 

Would be interesting to know more about the types and lengths of bike commutes. I'm guessing not many of those in the video have ridden 20+ miles through drizzly conditions on country lanes to get to where they are going.

In countries I've lived where cycle infrastructure is meant to be good, there's no getting around that you are often crossing many many driveway entrances and you're very close to them which puts you at risk of low visibility

There is even a cyclist moaning about road bikes and going fast, I mean FFS, if we can't all be 'cyclists' together rather than pigeonholing every convcievable type of cycling there is, there is no hope.

There's a marked difference here in Sweden between attitudes towards the kinds of cyclists you see in the Utrecht video and the people, probably like us here on the forum, who self-identify as 'cyclists'.

I think CB made a point of wearing no helmet and all black clothing

He had a pair of brown brougues on, so maybe that makes it OK?

Drivers in this country aren't thick; what they are is aggressive, ignorant and distracted. Sadly so are some cyclists, and that puts the back up of the peds.

You don't need a huge amount of infrastructure change if everyone could get along. But they can't.

Also wanting to copy Holland, or saying we can't be a cycling nation like Holland because of our differences is naive. Holland is like it is now because of what happened 30/40/50 years ago.

Holland aren't a nation of cyclists becuase the all have short comutes, they all have a short comutes becuase they are a nation of cyclists.

The Dutch don't shun out of town supermarkets becuase they are Dutch, the just don't work there because they are all cyclists.

The lesson is that we should just go ahead and invest in cycling, it will facilitate real change but over a long time. Not just list the reasons why it won't work. It won't work today, but by doing it now it will start the process of evolution and change now.

Invest now so that in 10 years time when an employer is choosing where to locate their office they will look at how close it is to where people live and how easy it is to access by bike rather than how close it is to the ring road.

Invest now so that in 20 years time when they are planning a new railway station they choose to put it close to where people live and work rather than near a motorway and a big carpark (Sheffield HS2 I'm looking at you)

I don't think I'm underestimating things when I say that cycling infastructure could be the key to unlocking a more pleaseant comuninity based nation rather than the impersonal, out of town, car bassed society we have now.

@warpcow whereabouts in Sweden? I'm in Göteborg

I which case you ride at a speed which is appropriate for that section of cycle path, if you want to rip your legs off in a chaingang then get on the road and mix it up with the cars.

Exactly. But when all that money gets spent on infrastrcuture, you get "Get off the roads and onto the cyclepath!" from drivers. And possibly also legislators - see Germany.

On the helmety debate, the reason i wear one ISN'T to prevent MAJOR injury, it's to prevent MINOR ones! I mean, get hit by a car or run-over by a lorry and clearly, a small polystyrene helmet isn't going to prevent you becomeing a traceable statistic. BUT, have a minor topple and a your helmet gets a minor scuff or another dent, but your head doesn't. And that means there is no visit to A&E and hence no statistic for the anti-helmeters to warble on about!

Put is this way, i can think of probably 5 or 10 crashes in which i have hit my head (or had it hit by something (branch, rock or my bike!) gently, and wearing a helmet meant NO injury what so ever to me. I'm pretty sure if i said to you i'm about to hit you round the back of the head with a nice set of [s]ally[/s] [s]carbon[/s] Enduro handlebars, you'd rather put a helmet on first, no?

Now granted, road riding is very different environment with less minor dismounts and more probability for a single major impact but considering the total lack of drawbacks to wearing a helmet it seems ok to put one on to me (you of course are welcome to headbutt the pavement as much as you like without one 😉

molgrips - Member

But when all that money gets spent on infrastrcuture, you get "Get off the roads and onto the cyclepath!" from drivers.

If they want to give me infrastructure good enough that I can do my trips effectively without using the road, I will not complain tbh. But we get that "use the cyclepath" anyway right now even with appalling paths.

When you look at the Dutch example you need to realise that in the 1970s the situation then was similar to the current situation in the UK. It began to change with the "stop the child murders" campaign (I may have got the translation wrong but it's roughly that sentiment). It took several decades before things got to their current state.

It will take that long in the UK as our politicians at all levels of government from local councils to parliament have such short term interests that it isn't something they will sign up to as it will be their successors or (heaven forbid) their political opponents who will be in office when the benefits are realised. Look how long the drink-drive campaign took to really grab hold, the first act prohibiting being drunk in charge of a motorised vehicle was introduced in 1925 (Yes you read that correctly!) though the drink-drive limit and associated breath/blood testing wasn't introduced until 1967 and there are still new laws/regulations being added to deal with drunk drivers.

This is probably one of those things that needs to be approached on several fronts:

[b]better infrastructure[/b] - it's been shown that spending money on increasing road capacity leads to increased congestion. These invariably rely on huge capital expenditure so you have vested interests such as the government department spending the money because the treasury won't give them money next year if they don't spend this year's allowance and the construction companies who are the recipients of that money.
[b]driver attitude:[/b] aggression to other road users, in particular so-called vulnerable road users such as pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders, needs to be associated with social irresponsibility in the same way that drink driving was.
[b]public campaign[/b]: It's not a "war on drivers", it's a "campaign against bad drivers". Of course everyone thinks they are a good driver, calling someone (especially a man) a bad driver is tantamount to calling them a paedophile.

No easy answers, certainly no short term quick fixes.

howsyourdad1 - Member
@warpcow whereabouts in Sweden? I'm in Göteborg

Uppsala. Göteborg is one of the few places I haven't been despite everyone's descriptions of it sounding excellent.

[quote=jfletch ]Also wanting to copy Holland, or saying we can't be a cycling nation like Holland because of our differences is naive. Holland is like it is now because of what happened 30/40/50 years ago.

So when are we going to start? It should even be a bit quicker if we're prepared to learn from their mistakes rather than repeat them (by installing "Dutch style" infrastructure of a type they abandoned years ago, which is what seems to happen here if anybody ever tries). Here's a counter on the blog I linked before, waiting for the UK to start doing what Holland did [s]40[/s]41.6 years ago http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/search/label/we%20are%20n%20years%20behind

Oh, and whilst looking for that, I found this which explains why molgrips' experience of German infrastructure isn't equivalent to having experience of Dutch infrastructure:
http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2010/05/german-cycle-paths-vs-dutch-cycle-paths.html

(yes, having previously disliked bike paths, like any recent convert I'm now an evangelist).

warpcow - Member
howsyourdad1 - Member
@warpcow whereabouts in Sweden? I'm in Göteborg
Uppsala. Göteborg is one of the few places I haven't been despite everyone's descriptions of it sounding excellent

It's nice yes. Sh*t for cyclists . Nah kidding it's cool, some decent trails. I only know Uppsala for Velotek the bike shop

I think the answer to the political debate is about numbers. More potential voters are car drivers and don't like traffic jams. The irony being if more were cyclists there would be less jams but that's not going to sway the ignorant masses.

We have an organisation really pushing for better cycling/public transport where I live. The local rag ran an article about an improvement to the cycle infrastructure resulting in a contraflow along a main road for a fortnight while works were undertaken. The comments are all similar to the example below:

It is pointless complaining, the imbeciles in the road planning dept, are obsessed with turning Lincoln into a car free zone, they seem to think this is Amsterdam where cyclists rule the roads. Had the money wasted on unused cycleways been spent on over used congested road systems, we may achieve something, until then chaos will remain.

To the vast majority of the people commenting the idea of riding a bike hasn't even crossed their mind, what with all the danger and disruption to their day it would cause.

I commute on said road and its 10 minutes faster by bike than car to cover 4 miles and I am still alive (just)

@richpips

"Having said that one has to invest a good deal of energy in managing a child on a road shared with cars, so I can see why some would not bother."

Sorry disagree - I've nearly lost my 9 year old twice by attempting to manage her on UK shared roads. Once when a motorbike coming out of nowhere coincided with a brief wobble on her behalf and once when a bin lorry came out of a rural drive without stopping. Both these roads were tiny low volume traffic 'c' roads. She was 3ft away from me in the first instance and 10ft away on the second. Both times were so close that I sometimes still wake up in the night in a cold sweat.

In NL she will cycle 30km easily and I'm also happy for her to cycle to friends houses 5km away unaccompanied - this is how confident a cyclist she is and how confident I am in the infrastructure.

You cannot manage children on British roads safely and this is the point CB is making which I totally agree with.

interesting to see this Dutch discussion still going. I've not lived there but I have plenty of Dutch colleagues. comments above about the two types of cyclist fit with what they tell me. The workmate who had a drop bar bike is the exception (she still rode it in normal office clothes including heels etc). She proudly sent me photos when she bought one of those cargo bikes with a huge box on the front - how else would she transport a 3 year old child and a 15 year old dog? Bad weather doesn't seem to stop people commuting there, it's just what you do when you need to get somewhere. I'm sure commuting distances are a factor but an awful lot of UK journeys could easily be done by bike if people didn't think it impossible or dangerous.

I'm sure commuting distances are a factor but an awful lot of UK journeys could easily be done by bike if people didn't think it impossible or dangerous.

I wonder if 1960s city planning has had an effect here. They ploughed big ring-roads and arterial routes though our cities and towns, which sometimes make it harder to cycle places by cutting up the minor road network.

A quick look at the map of Amsterdam shows the modern (ie not mediaevel) grid-style street pattern which seems to work very well for cyclists because it gives you many through roads that are light in traffic. Look at a map of a UK city and often, in the suburbs, it's all designed with dead ends. This sometimes forces you onto the main arteries.

Just seen this comment on the BBC article -

All cyclists MUST (and there can be no argument on this, its not possible to argue with such patent fact): Be Insured. Pass A Test. Have Their Contraptions MOTed. PAY TAX.

Despite assertions on this site 99% of cyclists commit crimes for 99% of the time they are on a bike. Crime is the number 1 use of bicycles.

You really couldn't make it up ...

For me it all starts with sustained political will, backed by real money provided to the LA's to develop their infrastructure to a national standard. Piecemeal it won't work, and if any work can be stopped by the next government then it's a further waste.

@dunmall - it is for that reason that I simply avoid that sort of 'comments' section on the BBC website. It harbours the foulest trolls, and I find reading it just a journey of depression.

@GavinB: Too true, in the main it's just entrenched views on both sides shouting out "la la la, I'm not listening".

I learnt long ago that those who shout loudest have the least to say.

The question is though, what's easier to change? Drivers attitudes or the infrastructure?

That really gets to the nub of it for me, and really it has to be the Former IMO.

All the infrastructure investment imaginable isn't going to prevent cyclists and motorists having to share the same spaces at some points, not in this country and not given our existing road networks and town/city layouts.

Even if you did manage the impossible and 90%+ separated bikes and cars, it simply serves to reinforce bad driver attitudes...

[i]"See we told you you shouldn't be on the roads, and now they're all ours!"[/i]

Our national culture just didn't used to be like this...

Within my own living memory (only turned 35 last weekend), I remember being allowed to ride my bike all sorts of place as an 8 or 9 year old I rode across town to school, off to see my mates, I didn't live in some sleepy village, I lived in a town like lots of others...

So what exactly happened to the UK between the late 80's and today that means the majority are now so scared of undertaking a perfectly legal and healthy activity for fear of being squashed by a Mondeo?

Bicycles have always been allowed on the road, Historically cycling on the road wasn't considered a [i]dangerous[/i] activity.
To now start saying cyclists need some additional, special provision because [i]"Roads are now too dangerous"[/i] spectacularly misses the point...

Of course it will all come to a head eventually, economics is on our side, when private motor vehicle ownership becomes too expensive, oil becomes so scarce that fuelling a car for a week takes a months wages and self driving cars suck all the fun out of it for the [i]petrol heads[/i] then our roads will become vast barely used ribbons of tarmac for cyclists to roll lazily across the length and breadth of the country without fearing of death from some middle aged salesman in his company Audi... Should only take a generation or two I reckon...

So what exactly happened to the UK between the late 80's and today that means the majority are now so scared of undertaking a perfectly legal and healthy activity for fear of being squashed by a Mondeo?

Increaesd traffic volume.

[img] [/img]

cookeaa - Member

So what exactly happened to the UK between the late 80's and today that means the majority are now so scared of undertaking a perfectly legal and healthy activity for fear of being squashed by a Mondeo?

It all changed in 2012, when I bought a Mondeo. Now all wise men live in fear

double post sorry

Quite a stark graph that one.

When I learnt to drive in the 1970s, the roads were empty compared to today, most houses if they had a car just had one. There were fewer supermarkets and most people did their shopping locally, usually within walking distance, country areas had grocery & butchers vans doing weekly or twice weekly rounds. Our village used to have a shop but now the nearest one is four miles away but because of economies of scale (buying power of supermarkets) it's cheaper to drive the extra ten miles to the nearest town even for quite small amounts of groceries and food.

Lots of little things all add up.

molgrips - Member

I wonder if 1960s city planning has had an effect here. They ploughed big ring-roads and arterial routes though our cities and towns, which sometimes make it harder to cycle places by cutting up the minor road network.

A quick look at the map of Amsterdam shows the modern (ie not mediaevel) grid-style street pattern which seems to work very well for cyclists because it gives you many through roads that are light in traffic. Look at a map of a UK city and often, in the suburbs, it's all designed with dead ends. This sometimes forces you onto the main arteries.

Yes, it does have a role to play, but it can be changed. if there is the will and correct design guidance.

America has modern grid style streets....

According to Dirk on the BBC comments, Cycling is not in the British Blood! Right I'm off to buy some golf clubs and scrap my bikes.... 🙄

Increaesd traffic volume.

Well Duh. But why exactly is it that increased motorized transport automatically equate to worsening attitudes, less consideration for others, a greater sense of entitlement?

I can't help thinking some sort of general malaise is becoming a deeper and deeper part of British cultural identity, we've become quite a nasty, self centred bunch...

If our general use of the roads and the way we behave towards one another when driving, reflects the national psyche then the future is looking pretty grim IMO...
But I don't want to run away and hide from it all on a sustrans route, I'd rather live in the country I grew up in (rose tinted hindsight) and feel safe cycling on the road...

[quote=cookeaa ]To now start saying cyclists need some additional, special provision because "Roads are now too dangerous" spectacularly misses the point...

I'm suggesting cyclists need some additional special provision because it works in Holland (and there isn't anything that fundamentally different about Holland or the people who live there). That is a practical solution which has been proven to work. Everything else is unproven theory.

[quote=wors ]According to Dirk on the BBC comments, Cycling is not in the British Blood!

Which is one of the classic fallacious arguments about the Dutch model not working here.

(and there isn't anything that fundamentally different about Holland or the people who live there)

There might well be, according to the map.

This weekend I did around 200Km on the roads and had just one "incident", pretty well every other driver hung back if I indicated that it wasn't safe for them as I could see vehicles coming the other way then I'd wave them on and we'd acknowledge each other with a wave of thanks.

Some people (and I use that word rather than motorists) have little time or patience for [b]anyone[/b] else. When driving they see anything that gets in the way of their inalienable right to drive how they see fit as something to bully out of their way, any accident is always the other person's fault as they can't possibly be in the wrong. Fortunately they are a very small minority.

@molgrips, not a fundamental one for most of the places in the UK where this could happen.

Thinking of Cardiff, I'm struggling to think what I'd do to improve cycling infrastructure. There's a couple of main arteries that'd benefit from a big alternative cycle lane, but beyond that - the normal roads do just fine. The problem is that most drivers only drive on the arteries and think 'sod that, I'm not cycling along Newport Road' for example.

Cardiff's infrastructure fine for who? An experienced cyclist such as yourself or an 8 year old on the way to school?

As seems to be the main argument (not read the whole thread) Drivers attitudes have to change.

I'll give you a few recent examples from a drivers point of view - with me being a cyclist - and a cycling point of view

A few weeks ago now, i followed a group of guys down a descent near me (aptly titled on Strava "we're all going to die") the rear 2 guys were riding really close and going at 40+ mph in a 40 limit. i backed right off them sensing something was not right with their ability or knowledge of the area, sure enough, one guy loses it not 5 seconds later and runs off the road at the next corner into a ditch, cartwheels down the road, destroys his bike and ends up half lying in the road. i stopped sharpish, hazards on, backed up to stop the traffic as its a blind corner. made sure he was ok and his mates came back. once all was sorted, i carried on safe in the knowledge no one was going to run him over and he was ok, with a nice warm fuzzy feeling for doing a good deed.

Now, fast forward to last Friday, i'm riding to work, traffic is light, there are 2 vans maybe 200m behind me and a car heading towards the junction i'm turning into by a bus stop, he's a good 200m away too.
I turn in and its covered in diesel and i hit the deck quicker than i can blink. bike gets mangled and i'm lying prone (but un-injured) in the middle of the road.
NO ONE stops, not one. The guy approaching the junction who saw me crash slows to let the vans past, then drives round me as if i was road kill without a second glance. if anyone had been behind him and not seen me crash, they probably would have driven straight into me.
The only person to see if i was alright was a chap at the bus stop who looked up from his phone for 2 seconds to say "alright?" and that was it.

I think unless you are actually an avid cyclist driving a car, attitudes suck towards cyclists, which i can understand to a point (we all get riled by big groups of roadies at the weekend right?). But it seems to be of late going to a whole new level where common decency and looking out for other human beings seems to be left behind, seems like being behind a car steering wheel is slowly robbing people of any moral standards and cycling is seen as terrorism on the roads.
I could not and Would not drive around someone who had crashed directly in front of me without at least checking they are able to get up.

I fully agree with Boardman tho. Riding in a City is deadly, but it has nothing to do with bad infrastructure. we all have eyes and can see hazards, but, we are the vulnerable soft fleshy lumps not protected by a big metal box. and therefore need to be given the space and consideration required to go about our lives safely, just as any decent driver would do to other drivers.
I'm glad my commute is mostly Rural save for the last mile as my interaction with other traffic is minimal now.