Forum menu
One of the beauties of a properly set up 20 mph urban limit is roundabouts and traffic lights can be removed and traffic flows increase as a result
PS @big_n_daft while I am loving your work, can I suggest you stop being part of the problem? There will never be an answer that works for everyone. If that’s what you want, give up now, it’s not happening.
What we need are multiple answers so everyone gets an answer that works for them – and probably a bit of this answer and a bit of that.
The reality of the low income households subsidising the wealthy households to get the cheapest way to charge their subsidised EVs isn't progressive
Taking pavement space for EV charging kiosks isn't supporting active travel
The other elephant in the room is that at some point the cost of running ICE vehicles is going to go up. Low income car users rely on the cheapness of bangernomics, the model doesn't work if the 10 year old or more EV essentially dies off. Are Tesla etc planning phased redundancy like apple do with their devices? Are 20 year old cars going to get software updates? How do you replace a battery that costs more than the car etc etc
As for car sharing I would suggest for many there will be social selection on where it's available. The cycle hire schemes demonstrate the issues.
I don’t see motorways crossing the centre of cardiff .
I can think of plenty of places where either motorways or dual carriageways cut through urban centres like a transport Berlin wall stopping active travel
Can someone please pass TJ a glass of water?
You list a whole load of problems. Fine - and I probably don’t really disagree with any of them.
Now start listing solutions, because the problems don’t help anyone, rich, poor or indifferent.
I very much doubt anyone else would consider bypasses and motorways skirting the city part of the urban environment.
These are the roads everyone uses to get around the city, they are the main urban arteries It's not really rural is it? The A48 crosses Cardiff. The eastern half is dual carriageway, the western bit is 30mph with some 40s.
I had a quick look at the map.
Knock yourself out:
@51.4849931,-3.1843289,13.3z/data=!4m9!4m8!1m0!1m5!1m1!1s0x486e036763973bdf:0xcbacefa08b4d1d5e!2m2!1d-3.1810788!2d51.4492274!3e0">Car - 7.9 miles, 16 minutes
@51.4673417,-3.1893871,15.48z/data=!4m44!4m43!1m35!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1544617!2d51.5306476!3s0x486e1c4b8ae86cc1:0x6cebec4936155af0!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1659787!2d51.5290282!3s0x486e1c45ce900283:0x7c5393c0c934a527!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1784434!2d51.5201897!3s0x486e1c66c14fe941:0xdbc1b97fbf38611f!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1771431!2d51.5145229!3s0x486e1c61d9c55225:0x2a45fc160d72a370!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1765079!2d51.5123668!3s0x486e1c8a5c5e190b:0x856fb4b794ca6606!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1781668!2d51.5003825!3s0x486e1c922d191c21:0xadc89ebe4b1e8c18!3m4!1m2!1d-3.1815668!2d51.493282!3s0x486e1c97dd91eff5:0xf1c406716a8e5c7f!1m5!1m1!1s0x486e036763973bdf:0xcbacefa08b4d1d5e!2m2!1d-3.1810788!2d51.4492274!3e1">Bike, adjusted from Google's original suggestion based on local experience - 8.5 miles, 49 mins
But anyway, I'm sorry that you feel frustrated. I'm not pointing out where we can't have good cycling support. We can, but I disagree with your apparent assertion that it's easy and we just have to do what other countries do.
It's desirable, it needs to happen and I dearly want it to. You might think making it sound easy is encouraging, but I disagree - in fact it's a damaging message in my opinion. It's NOT going to be easy to do. But it still must be done.
To recap - I'm not saying do nothing. We need to do a lot. Just not all of the things you are suggesting, because I don't think they necessarily apply.
Here's an idea. Can someone design a pre-fabricated aerial cycleway that can be factory made and assembled quickly and easily on-site? This would be a great way to make cycle bridges much more cheaply and it could cut out shedloads of bad junctions. You'd be able to get around not only much more safely but much quicker as you wouldn't need to wait for traffic lights or road spaces etc.
For cost comparison, Cardiff recently spent £57m on 0.8 miles of aerial dual carriageway link road, to cut out a 1.9 mile loop of 30mph.
Again - quoting things I did not say. I never said it would be easy. We have public opinion to shift and when even cyclists are against proven measures then public opinion is going to be difficult to shift
What I said is the solutions are known, proven and workable
I give up on this . this thread just shows the difficulties in getting folk to understand that this is possible
Just not all of the things you are suggesting, because I don’t think they necessarily apply.
It would be nice if you could explain why these well proven and widely used measures cannot work in the UK. Burdon of proof is on you as they work well in other places - even those will hilly topograhy and worse weather.
I missed the high speed parts of the a 48 but half a dozen points I looked at it both east and west and all were 30 mph
its very easy to cherry pick a route to prove your point. Riding from my house to barnton in rush hour I would be at least half an hour quicker and proably an hour than the car as I have a traffic free route the whole way and traffic jams on the car route are horrendous inrush hour
its very easy to cherry pick a route to prove your point.
Mate I've lived here for 20 odd years, I've driven, cycled and got busses all over the place. I'm NOT cherry picking to prove a point, this is the reality of living on this side of this city.
I'm not saying driving is always faster. But you said 'cycling around a city is faster' and it's NOT always the case. It's you who is selectively picking situations and using them to assert a general point. This is a bad thing to do in the general debate because people can easily rubbish your position by pointing out where you are wrong, just as I did. People will say 'you're talking rubbish' and discount ALL of your points, when most of them are valid.
You've even started an argument with me, when I'm on your side!
this thread just shows the difficulties in getting folk to understand that this is possible
It will be possible, but it won't be easy.
It would be nice if you could explain why these well proven and widely used measures cannot work in the UK.
Ok so:
1) Presumed liability - I can't see what difference it makes. Not being protected quite so much in law isn't what puts people off cycling. It's the fact can be busy, unpleasant, cold and wet and people don't want those things.
2) We simply won't get the public behind large scale spending on infrastructure, because we have had 40 years of cycle hating and you will need a long time to undo that. This is our first priority. Why does my neighbour drive to the shop? Because he's normalised that behaviour, along with everyone else. You need to un-normalise it, and you absolutely 100% guaranteed cannot do this by ranting at people.
3) As for narrow mediaeval streets - ok, they can be pedestrianised/cyclified etc. I'd like you to pick a bad route across your own city and show me specifically how it could be improved. I can do the same for Cardiff. Cardiff doesn't have mediaeval anything, but fitting in lots of cycle lanes is still going to be hard. So we need something different.
Now start listing solutions, because the problems don’t help anyone, rich, poor or indifferent.
Rewrite road design and urban planning standards so that active travel is the priority
Stop large infrastructure projects dividing communities by removing active travel access
Mandate that urban centres (towns and ideally larger villages) should have safe active travel corridors between them and the next adjacent one
Enable /ease compulsory purchase of land needed for links to enable active travel routes
Stop the highways agency filling in bridges
Legacy infrastructure review to see what can quickly be repurposed
Employer incentive to provide utility active travel bikes/scooters whatever
LA mandated that schools have suitable active travel routes within the catchment. Central pot to bid into.
Education and support campaigns
Regulation/ or whatever of urban public transport to enable oyster card type systems in all regions
EV charging standardisation ( lack we have for petrol and diesel pumps)
No planning permission at petrol stations without provision of substantial EV charging
No planning permission for out of town retail units without substantial EV charging facilities
Etc etc
And that's not working in the industry and quickly writing down whatever popped into my head
I think we shouldn't be discussing EV issues on this thread but those other ideas are good, bnd.
However I think that LAs are already under a fair few of those obligations, but it's handled so shittily that we get results that are absolutely unworkable and not useful. See my earlier example about houses on the business park.
Presumed liability – I can’t see what difference it makes
correct - you can't because you do not understand
What it does is legitimise cycling as a way of transport and removesd the "roads are for cars" mentality.
It’s the fact can be busy, unpleasant, cold and wet and people don’t want those things.
Busy and unpleasant - sorted by infrastucture
cold and wet - does not put people off in Amsterdam, in Oslo - both cities that have colder wearther and much higher cycling rates
A route across Edinburgh? the plans are there. They were doe about 10 years ago in conjunction with spokes the cycle campaign. What Edinburgh needs is an east /west and a north/ south safe cycling rote across the city centre
Edinburgh is one of the worst cities i have ever ridden in for cycle provision across its centre
My final post. Its useless trying to debate with somone with such fixed anti bike pro car attatudes
you do not want to learn, you do not want to listen
you do not want to learn, you do not want to listen
I literally am listening. I'm not anti cycling, I am literally discussing pro cycling strategies.
cold and wet – does not put people off in Amsterdam, in Oslo – both cities that have colder wearther and much higher cycling rates
Yes, but IT DOES HERE! Why?? How can we change that?!
What Edinburgh needs is an east /west and a north/ south safe cycling rote across the city centre
Ok - genuine question as the details of this interest me (and are quite important) - How would they be routed? Where would they go? What effect would it have on motor vehicle traffic? It's not enough to say 'we need a route', these need to be designed and planned.
Big n daft - Can i add one?
Allow bikes on trains without daft low quotas or onerous pre booking requirements.
correct – you can’t because you do not understand
What it does is legitimise cycling as a way of transport and removesd the “roads are for cars” mentality.
I don't agree, because I don't think most people know or care who's liable. When you're standing at your front door with your car keys in your hand, you aren't going to think 'you know what, if there's an accident I have a better legal position now, so I think I'll get my bike out and ride instead'
For the record I am in favour of presumed liability but I don't think it's going to have a big effect. People don't know the rules of the road now, changing them isn't going to make much difference. A better tactic would be start making people aware of the rules we already have, which requires changing people's attitudes towards motoring.
Allow bikes on trains without daft low quotas or onerous pre booking requirements.
Ooh yes. This comes under integrated solutions. We also need spaces to be able to get our bikes on and off. We already know most peopel are too lazy to cycle far. So when they create a cross-city tram or light rail route, for example, give each train a big free bike car. It would significantly extend the reach of every tram stop.
I'd also like to add a need to create competence in cycle infra design. They're putting some new lanes across Cardiff (great) and they are ruffling feathers at the same time, and the fact they are not letting this stop them is great. But some of the lanes are a bit ropey. They are on one side of the road usually so when you get to the end or need to cross the car carriageway there are some dicey moments resulting in not really understanding if you've jumped some light or failed to give way or what you're supposed to do.
Now we’re getting somewhere.
Hybrid travel solutions. Active travel within a wider context.
Thank you.
Molgrips, there already is a DfT design guide that should be adhered to. Guess what though, the UK is somehow different to many places that designs have been borrowed from, the guidance isn't followed, and through a process of incompetence, cost cutting, political point scoring and spurious objections the results are predictably compromised and confusing, if not dangerous. We don't need to invent a solution and build elevated cycleways either. There is an abundance of space on the ground, it's just monopolised by motor vehicles.
But it's ok, because in the meantime car drivers are not even slightly inconvenienced.
The Edinburgh West-East project has become a joke, mainly because a small group of entitled locals can't stomach the idea of the removal of some loading bays from outside a few small shops. I think it's been going for about 10 years. Uses a mixture of main roads, side streets, modal filters etc. It will remove some space from cars (!) and give priority to cyclists and pedestrians at certain points. It will also enhance a section of shopping street for pedestrians by widening pavements. Stymied endlessly by the ridiculous TRO process we have in Edinburgh that robs the roads authority of any authority to do roads work.
This is it. I've lost track of what's actually getting built http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/ccwel/
Anyway, it's not ok because some motorists will be slightly inconvenienced.
Dunno if it's the one that TJ is thinking of, but there's another piece of proposed new mostly off road active travel infra in Edinburgh that would join a couple of the most heavily used traffic free routes, but one objection has caused the whole project to be dragged back for yet more consultations to try and keep all the people happy all the time*.
*As mentioned up there, people have to accept that changes in how we get about need to be made. Some of these changes will make some people unhappy.
Ultimately, we don't have politicians that are brave enough to do things properly and take away space from motor vehicles, because they want to keep their jobs and they are too caught up in petty point scoring to reach any meaningful cross party consensus. I hugely admire Chris Boardman and the work he has already done. Hopefully he can make some headway in changing this.
We don’t need to invent a solution and build elevated cycleways either. There is an abundance of space on the ground, it’s just monopolised by motor vehicles.
Well, this is the thing. As you've shown people don't want to take space away from cars on the road. So elevated cycleways would solve that issue. And they would also make cycling more attractive because you wouldn't have to wait at junctions and lights and that. But I think that in some places elevated cycleways would solve some real issues with access, given that somewhere like Cardiff is cut into pieces with several railway lines and the river and there are few bridges.
Ultimately, we don’t have politicians that are brave enough to do things properly and take away space from motor vehicles
Democratically elected politicans can't just 'be brave' cos they won't get elected again. It's how democracy works.
I am deeply pessimistic about the major shift we as a society need to make to get away from the damaging car centric culture we've become over the last decades. We need to get away from being so dependent on cars, and that means taking space away. Like it or not.
Politicians are of course democratically elected, but they are also expected to have to make unpopular decisions from time to time. Cross party agreement would help hugely with this, with a shift away from polarising debate and point scoring within councils and governments, and the general population. It's mentioned above, but maybe Boardman will be helpful in this respect.
Another dutch example I'm afraid, but have a read about Groningen and Max van den Berg. A brave local politician in charge of traffic and urban development policy. He got a hugely controversial project in place, and was extremely unpopular at the time. Now, he's seen as a visionary planner. Spoiler - he stopped people being able to drive anywhere and everywhere.
He got a hugely controversial project in place, and was extremely unpopular at the time. Now, he’s seen as a visionary planner.
If only we could get people like that and get them elected.
In Edinburgh (and I'm sure other cities in the uk), there are people with ambitious and brave ideas. There is a plan (seen by many as controversial) to significantly change the way people move around the centre of the city. Remains to be seen how much of the plans will ever be realised.
I'm slightly involved in our new and shiny active travel forum. A very valid point made by the council chap involved is that there are a lot of groups out there who'd individually like active travel infrastructure but we're all working in silos.
Not sure what to suggest apart from pestering your councillors, contacting the council active travel team (there will be one) and trying to build links with other interested groups (which also means the likes of the horsey people). I don't know how much effort it will take but fear of backlash from the motoring lobby prevents a lot happening, and they are really a small minority.
Big n daft – Can i add one?
Only one?
Note none of mine include low income households subsidising high income households to get the cheapest way to charge their subsidised EV
I'd add mandatory speed camera on roads where the speed limit is exceeded by 30% by more than 1% of the traffic
Insurance (arguably spend to save) funded ANPR initiative to target uninsured vehicles and remove them from the highway
Democratically elected politicans can’t just ‘be brave’ cos they won’t get elected again. It’s how democracy works.
When city mayors were introduced the first election wasn't taken that seriously by the big parties. We had an independent win. He then started doing stuff he wanted. He made closing roads for events much easier. Many main roads were closed on Sundays for people to use. Lots of street parties, family cycling, we even had a giant water slide down the biggest shopping street in the city. It was great (unless you were a hard working, tax paying motorist or some such nonsense). He didn't get re-elected, although more down to the big parties engaging with the subsequent elections. Shame, but it was nice to have a glimpse of someone doing something different, unencumbered by political baggage.
Note none of mine include low income households subsidising high income households to get the cheapest way to charge their subsidised EV
Nor does home charging if you do it right. It just reduces costs by not pumping money into EV charging companies’ pockets. No subsidy, direct or indirect, required if you’re careful. There’s a lot of rubbish talked about grid costs, but fast charging, destination charging etc will add more grid cost than home charging ever will.
Now that doesn’t help folk in flats. Some of whom I agree are low income.
PS - here’s where the lower income brackets subsidise those who can afford EVs in your suggestions.
Indirect subsidy, but subsidy nonetheless. Possibly still a good idea, but not without winners and losers.
No planning permission at petrol stations without provision of substantial EV charging
No planning permission for out of town retail units without substantial EV charging facilities