Cycling UK Forum

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 12:44pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 10:50am Infra is in large part about widening access to anyone on a bike, more than it is about making it possible for anyone at all.

I think you make an important point that enabling cycling, walking, playing and so on, doesn't necessarily require a separate space for those activities, just that the existing space be made safe eg by removing most of the current motor traffic. But I'm not clear what the above line means. What's the difference between "widening access to anyone" and "making it possible for anyone"?

Reading back, yes, poor choice of words.

Rather than "possible for anyone at all" it would better read "possible at all"
i.e., Infra shouldn't be needed to make any cycling possible.
Infra is really useful in making cycling alongside fast/heavy traffic more accessible to a much wider demographic than the stereotypical Cyclist (including non-cycling options like mobility scooters, wheelchairs etc.)

Pete.

pjclinch wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 9:11am

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 12:44pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 10:50am Infra is in large part about widening access to anyone on a bike, more than it is about making it possible for anyone at all.

I think you make an important point that enabling cycling, walking, playing and so on, doesn't necessarily require a separate space for those activities, just that the existing space be made safe eg by removing most of the current motor traffic. But I'm not clear what the above line means. What's the difference between "widening access to anyone" and "making it possible for anyone"?

Reading back, yes, poor choice of words.

Rather than "possible for anyone at all" it would better read "possible at all"
i.e., Infra shouldn't be needed to make any cycling possible.
Infra is really useful in making cycling alongside fast/heavy traffic more accessible to a much wider demographic than the stereotypical Cyclist (including non-cycling options like mobility scooters, wheelchairs etc.)

Pete.

Okay, so just to check, what you're saying is that infra – in its conventional sense of separate facilities – is useful in allowing everyone access to the A1 (on bike, wheelchair, foot, etc) but really has no place on a residential street or minor country lane?

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 9:29am
Okay, so just to check, what you're saying is that infra – in its conventional sense of separate facilities – is useful in allowing everyone access to the A1 (on bike, wheelchair, foot, etc) but really has no place on a residential street or minor country lane?

I'm not saying it has no place on a residential street or minor country lane, but folk don't need to rule out cycling on residential streets or minor country lanes that don't have them.

If you surf around NL on StreetView you'll find that residential neighbourhoods quite typically don't have fietspads, especially in denser/older urban settings, and the same goes for minor country lanes. In the same images you'll probably see plenty of people cycling. Minor country lanes will sometimes have a paint/advisory cycle lane each side and a single central lane as default for motors in both directions. I'd say a fietspad/shared path alongside would be better, but at the end of the day you have to pay for stuff and without unlimited money you have to choose your spending targets, and these are minor roads without much traffic (plus, being NL, drivers tend to be more attuned to bikes because they see so many of them all the time).

Go to bigger country roads and there will pretty much always be a fietspad alongside. Even as an experienced rider I would love that in rural places in the UK where the main road is more or less the only one. It's not so much the safety as it's pretty horrible cycling on a single carriageway A road with lots of traffic.

Pete.

Yes, it gets a bit tiresome. Mind you, riding on a separate cycle path alongside a busy carriageway is also pretty horrid. Last summer I rode alongside the A66 (IIRC) into York from the west, along a totally separated, well surfaced path; but it was just so noisy. I made sure I took a different route out.

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 12:44pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 10:50am Infra is in large part about widening access to anyone on a bike, more than it is about making it possible for anyone at all.

I think you make an important point that enabling cycling, walking, playing and so on, doesn't necessarily require a separate space for those activities, just that the existing space be made safe eg by removing most of the current motor traffic. But I'm not clear what the above line means. What's the difference between "widening access to anyone" and "making it possible for anyone"?

Yes, I live on a "Spielstraße" (play street) which is a dead end with a turning circle. It is surfaced with blocks, is single-lane and has no footway or cycleway. Driving and cycling must be done at walking pace. Cars with one exception may not be parked on the street or in front of the houses - we have parking places at the end. Children play on it: drawing with chalk, kicking balls or throwing them at the basketball goal that stands by the tree at the end, riding their bikes and leaving them on the street. Our street party took over the turning end one day. We even had tennis for a while - just move the net when someone in a car wants to bring the shopping home. Table tennis too! It's a nice place to live. Why doesn't the UK build like this? I looked at some new UK housing developments in the spring - they were horrible and infested with cars.

I don't think that's a question of building; there are plenty of UK streets which are dead end with a turning circle, some are even paved with blocks (either concrete or bricks). It's a question of attitude and use.

Flashing "intelligent" road studs have been installed at junctions along a busy road in Hull in a bid to improve safety for cyclists and drivers.

aunty beeb

plancashire wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 2:00pm

Bmblbzzz wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 12:44pm

pjclinch wrote: ↑28 Aug 2023, 10:50am Infra is in large part about widening access to anyone on a bike, more than it is about making it possible for anyone at all.

I think you make an important point that enabling cycling, walking, playing and so on, doesn't necessarily require a separate space for those activities, just that the existing space be made safe eg by removing most of the current motor traffic. But I'm not clear what the above line means. What's the difference between "widening access to anyone" and "making it possible for anyone"?

Yes, I live on a "Spielstraße" (play street) which is a dead end with a turning circle. It is surfaced with blocks, is single-lane and has no footway or cycleway. Driving and cycling must be done at walking pace. Cars with one exception may not be parked on the street or in front of the houses - we have parking places at the end. Children play on it: drawing with chalk, kicking balls or throwing them at the basketball goal that stands by the tree at the end, riding their bikes and leaving them on the street. Our street party took over the turning end one day. We even had tennis for a while - just move the net when someone in a car wants to bring the shopping home. Table tennis too! It's a nice place to live. Why doesn't the UK build like this? I looked at some new UK housing developments in the spring - they were horrible and infested with cars.

As bmblbuzz said, we have roads built this way - we just don't have rules (or conventions?) as in the bold text above
Driving and cycling must be done at walking pace.

Drivers on my estate happily do 35mph through twisty bits, round parked cars, mindless of children - who of course stay indoors due to parents' safety concerns,

harriedgary wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 2:16pm

Flashing "intelligent" road studs have been installed at junctions along a busy road in Hull in a bid to improve safety for cyclists and drivers.

aunty beeb

Screenshot 2023-08-30 14.10.56.png

This seems to be the shiny, both literally and metaphorically, for its own sake. Though we'll see, if we're told, how it's fared in a year or two.


But from the same article:

An infrared detection system had also been installed to prevent high vehicles hitting the rail bridge on Stoneferry Road, after the council estimated it was being struck by over-height vehicles six times per year, on average.

is a good idea for what seems to be an increasingly common problem.