Search found 206 matches

by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 3:48pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

Bmblbzzz wrote:Whether it says change lanes, 1m, 1.5m or any other distance can be hammered out when/if it ever gets to legislation – and that's a long way from a motion at CTC AGM! What's important IMO is that there is something concrete and that becomes an accepted part of "how you drive". As I've said, the 1m law in Poland results in practice in consistently greater passing distances.


How do you know the 1m law ensures greater passing distances in Poland?
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 1:33pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

Steady rider wrote:To measure passing distances, bicycle equipped with a LIDAR to collect overtaking data can be used. https://www.google.co.uk/?gws_rd=ssl#q=LIDAR


But what use is data collection when trying to prosecute? This isn't the sort of technology that even 10% will be able to have on their bikes.
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 1:30pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

Bmblbzzz wrote:Same thing surely? No one's going round with a tape measure; "That was only 99cm, you're nicked!" or even "There's only 99cm, I'll wait." It's about having a rough idea and even about realising there is such a thing. That "didn't hit" isn't enough.

Of course drivers want to get past. But most care a little bit about anonymous other humans, just because they're humans. They don't give a *&^%$ about the music industry – they might even actively want to hurt it, stick it to the man!

Yes, driver training would do the same, and would result from such a law, as learners would be taught to leave this much distance in order to pass.


Then why bother with the value in the first place? How does saying 1.5m change anything? People aren't good at judging distances, which is why a visualisation is as good as you can do. "Change lanes when overtaking" is an arguably more reproducible action.

In my honest opinion, 1.5m is ''not enough'' on most occasions. I think you should be overtaking far enough that a fall does not result in a collision.
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 1:00pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

Bmblbzzz wrote:The difference is that people don't want to obey laws about copying music, because they want the music. As has been mentioned already in this thread, passing distances (in this country, so no legal considerations and a fairly consistent culture) tend to vary with the availability of road width and visibility. People don't actually want to pass too close to cyclists (or other drivers). Give them a target and they'll aim to meet it.


I don't agree with this. If the issue is lack of road width then the correct action is to not overtake. If people didn't want to pass too closely to them, that is what they would do. Then discussing this proposal wouldn't be needed.

Giving a value is no more helpful than showing approximately how they should be overtaking. It is difficult to estimate distances by sight, especially if you are driving a right hand vehicle and overtaking someone who is on your left.
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 12:26pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

mjr wrote:Yes, we already know what the distance is in the event of a collision, but how rarely are motorists who collide with cyclists convicted of any offence? At least a minimum distance law would give a near-certain consolation punishment :(

I think from this the argument in the need to tackle the issues our created by the ''dangerous driving'' charge, for example. Passing too closely is just one example of an action that may lead to a collision, and drivers routinely are acquitted when their driving falls well below any highway code guidelines. If you drive and hit someone cycling, it is likely you were driving dangerously. Other causes are not slowing down due to sunlight, not looking properly at junctions, and so on. None of these are described as a ''must'' in the highway code. Trying to create new laws to deal with them is a fruitless exercise.
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 11:53am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

mjr wrote:I campaign for infrastructure as a priority, but they are not mutually exclusive and adopting the proposed policy does not commit existing resources to it.

So what is more effective: adopting a policy in favour of a minimum passing distance and letting it sit on the books, or rejecting it and sending out a signal that 1.5m is too much space to give cyclists?


How does rejecting the motion send the message that 1.5m is too much space? We already do have the guidelines in the highway code, which should arguable be reworded.

In my anecdotal experience the distance passed is much more dependent on the environment than the driver. If they can pass properly, they usually do. If they can't, many try it anyway, which is why we have this ''primary position'' suggestion.

Consider speed limits: although a good thing, it is true that a very large percentage of drivers exceed the limit, large than those who pass too closely. To effectively catch those who do, however, we need cameras or speed guns to ensure they are actually speeding. Measuring an overtaking distance is vastly more difficult. How would we be able to use it against close passes? Eyewitness or camera footage is certainly not enough. In other words, the motion appears redundant at best. It wouldn't be of any use after a close pass, and we already know what the distance is in the event of a collision.
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 11:35am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

[youtube]x3XhaxYzpH8[/youtube]

This is an effective measure against close passes in action. This required hard campaigning. A distance passing law requires hard campaigning. We have limited campaigning resources, and policy makers have a limited amount of resources to follow through on the campaigns.

So, what is more effective, to campaign for proven measures that deal with a hell lot more, or ones for which there is still no evidence of?
by aspiringcyclist
12 Apr 2016, 11:26am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Passing clearance - motion at AGM
Replies: 258
Views: 23063

Re: Passing clearance - motion at AGM

You know what is also common sense: that if you leave a jumper on top of a black car on a hot day in the sun, the black car will be ''hotter''. Oh wait, no, they are the same temperature.

In other words, common sense is useless.

Now, has anyone got evidence showing that a distance passing law is actually effective in what it is supposed to do?
by aspiringcyclist
14 Oct 2015, 7:54pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article
Replies: 71
Views: 6620

Re: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article

The A10 is *the* North South route so I don't think any rerouting could be possible. As the author said, through traffic has to go somewhere. The A10 is a good choice because it is plenty wide, although at least one bus lane would have to go if you were to add cycle trakcs. Here is a video of the A10 in Hackney: [youtube]2RtDu4UAVQ8[/youtube]
by aspiringcyclist
14 Oct 2015, 8:41am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article
Replies: 71
Views: 6620

Re: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article

Sorry for resurrecting this thread, but this was a pretty interesting response to Hill's arguments. https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.c ... a-fallacy/
by aspiringcyclist
8 Oct 2015, 8:35am
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article
Replies: 71
Views: 6620

Re: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article

Even at 20mph (which I think it already is at Kingsland High Street, plus with measures to slow traffic), the volume of traffic is too high for cycling to be made a possibility. I meant protected cycle tracks, proper side road treatment, and protection at junctions.
by aspiringcyclist
7 Oct 2015, 4:14pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article
Replies: 71
Views: 6620

Re: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article

Vorpal I understand most of what you have written, and it is true they take a more holistic approach. My point is that if we were to take the same approach, the A10 would need cycling infrastructure. It doesn't spoil anything in Kingsland High Street as the space would from the carriageway.
by aspiringcyclist
6 Oct 2015, 6:14pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article
Replies: 71
Views: 6620

Re: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article

Fine I give up. However, after cycling all over Hackney, no one will convince me that it is good for cycling. Until Stops is willing to concede of a backbone network of direct cycle routes, I consider him an impediment.

What the Dutch have achieved is 'greater' than Hackney, so it is hypocritical to call their methods nonsense while quoting Hackney cycling growth as an argument.

Edit: yes with the other comments I was exaggerating. Here is Stops' stance as I understand it. He wants small changes rather than large construction projects. He does not support segregation at all, although he does favour filtered permeability. The latter can only go so far as main roads are such because they are designed as through routes. The filtered permeability could be much more widely used as many minor roads are still rat runs, including the CS1 route which is only now going to have some filtered permeability added after the original scheme responses.

For a laugh, here is a parody of his twitter account. https://twitter.com/victorsteps

Here is a post about the road classification system in the Netherlands. The A10 would never be classed as residential because the through traffic cannot be removed. As such, roads like this would always have protected infrastructure. His argument that this spoils the sense of 'place' makes no sense. https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.c ... le-safety/
by aspiringcyclist
5 Oct 2015, 8:42pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article
Replies: 71
Views: 6620

Re: Whitechapel High St - Guardian article

Pete Owens wrote:
aspiringcyclist wrote:Well Vincent is someone who is completely against it.


Really:
http://www.eastlondonlines.co.uk/2015/05/hackney-council-to-build-the-uks-first-dual-zebra-crossing/

Hackney Councillor, Vincent Stops said: “This pedestrian and cycling crossing looks to be a great innovation and seems to suit the location. I know residents will welcome it. I look forward to its completion and using it for real. Hackney has been consistently investing in improvements to its streets to benefit both pedestrians and cyclists for many years.”

Now don't expect me to defend parallel cycle - zebra crossings. I think the idea is too confusing with respect to differing sets of rules applied to different users - and to where drivers are supposed to stop - A very wide zebra would be better IMO. However, that is not a quote from a man who is intransigently opposed to any cycle infrastructure on principle.


He supports these types of marginal improvements, but not the big stuff IMO. He was against CS1 on the A10 and I think that is a tragedy.
by aspiringcyclist
5 Oct 2015, 7:40pm
Forum: Campaigning & Public Policy
Topic: New Malden to Raynes Park Mini Holland Cycling route
Replies: 8
Views: 1919

Re: New Malden to Raynes Park Mini Holland Cycling route

MikeF wrote:
661-Pete wrote:More on that topic here:
http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/ ... reen-lanes
Has anyone had one of those nasty yellow leaflets or posters, as depicted in the article, inflicted on them yet? And how does one counter this nonsense?
Oh dear! I don't know how you counteract the rubbish put out. "Our solution: Use alternative cycle routes."That's not a very constructive comment, and it's so easy to be negative with no a commitment statement. :wink:. Positive input would describe these alternative routes - perhaps they mean cycle on pavements like some do around here? :lol: . There are not that many cyclists on the streets around here, but those that are seem to cover a wide spectrum.


The suggestions are predictably bad. Back street rat runs and the 'New River' which is unlight, away from the town centres, too narrow in certain locations, and involves 12 crossings with roads. Oh, and Thames Water doesn't want it built.