Re: bike bridge, and seasonal variations in cycling

Simon Brooke <[email hidden]> wrote:
| in message <[email hidden]>, Erik Sandblom
| ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:
| > So, what do you think? Can there be such a thing as good bike
| > infrastructure separated from motor traffic? Under what circumstances?
|
| No, not really; and more to the point, I don't see any purpose in
| segregating cyclists from motor traffic. It only make motorists think that
| cyclists 'shouldn't be' on the roads, and are therefore fair game.

Surely provision of segregated motor-traffic routes is much more
likely to "make motorists think that cyclists 'shouldn't be' on
[any] roads" than is provision of segregated cycle routes? There
is no reasonable argument in places like London or Oxford against
the provision of things like extra bridges for pedestrians and
cyclists. Certainly the psychology of motorists is no grounds
for making the rest of us go the long way round. Good grief,
take Simon's argument seriously and you wouldn't want pedestrianised
shopping streets for fear that motorists would think that pedestrians
should be kept off non-pedestrianised streets. (Mind you, perhaps
some of them already think that.)

Anything that makes getting from Chalmers to Lindholmen by bike
easier (than using the ferry) gets my vote. At least it would if
I had a vote. (But so would anything that made Swedish drivers
clean the muck off their windscreens in the winter.)

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Erik Sandblom

(') said:

You can see from the map that the new (low) red bridge is a major
shortcut compared to the existing (steep, high) gray bridge. Especially
for those going to the expansive Lindholmen urban redevelopment at left.
http://www.alvstaden.se/images/articles/gangbro1a.jpg

Oh, Gosh, that map just reminds me how much I love Stockholm. What did the
Swedes do to deserve such a ridiculously nice capital city?

Build it? :-)

in message <[email hidden]>, Ziggy

(') said:

On Wed, 21 Mar 2007 18:04:25 +0000, Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Erik

Sandblom (') said:

You can see from the map that the new (low) red bridge is a major
shortcut compared to the existing (steep, high) gray bridge. Especially
for those going to the expansive Lindholmen urban redevelopment at
left. http://www.alvstaden.se/images/articles/gangbro1a.jpg

Oh, Gosh, that map just reminds me how much I love Stockholm. What did
the Swedes do to deserve such a ridiculously nice capital city?

Build it? :-)

Location, location, location. You couldn't build Stockholm anywhere in
Britain; we don't have the geology or the geography or - critically - the
freedom from tides.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; no eternal reward will forgive us now for wasting the dawn.
;; Jim Morrison

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> a écrit:

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant, because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful. The behaviour of motorists is
bloody awful because we teach them to believe they own the road. If you
take vulnerable traffic off the road onto other routes, you confirm this
belief. What we need is more school-children playing football on main
roads, as they used to before the coming of the motor car. And more old
people stopping to chat in the middle of the street. And lots of wobbly
cyclists. We need to make our streets safe places to be, and to enjoy
life; and the only way to do that is to reclaim them. The more we hide
away from the motor car, the more aggressive and badly behaved the
motorists become.

I came across the following recently, and didn't know whether to laugh or
cry:

http://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q519.htm

Question Q519

Can ball games be legally played on a public road?

Answer

Aside from the legal issues it is not safe for children to play on
roads, however quiet they may be. This can also cause a nuisance
for lots of people in the area who are wary of driving down the
street for fear of knocking over a child or who are getting their
cars' damaged.

It is an offence to play ball games on a public road if it is to the
annoyance of road users. It is likely that ball games played on
a public road will be to the immediate annoyance of road users.
It is also a breach of bye-laws to play ball games to the annoyance
of those living near by.

If this is going on on your street, then contact your local
neighbourhood policing team who will be able to offer
advice and assistance.

Where to begin?

James Thomson

Simon Brooke wrote on 21/03/2007 22:20 +0100:

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant, because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful. The behaviour of motorists is
bloody awful because we teach them to believe they own the road. If you
take vulnerable traffic off the road onto other routes, you confirm this
belief. What we need is more school-children playing football on main
roads, as they used to before the coming of the motor car. And more old
people stopping to chat in the middle of the street. And lots of wobbly
cyclists. We need to make our streets safe places to be, and to enjoy
life; and the only way to do that is to reclaim them. The more we hide
away from the motor car, the more aggressive and badly behaved the
motorists become.

We don't often see eye to eye but on this one I agree 100%.

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

James Thomson wrote on 21/03/2007 23:19 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I came across the following recently, and didn't know whether to laugh or
cry:

Next time you are knocked off your bike, call the police and tell them
someone is playing football in the road. It appears they will be far
more likely to come running to your assistance if you do.

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Simon Brooke said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant, because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful. The behaviour of motorists is
bloody awful because we teach them to believe they own the road. If you
take vulnerable traffic off the road onto other routes, you confirm this
belief. What we need is more school-children playing football on main
roads, as they used to before the coming of the motor car. And more old
people stopping to chat in the middle of the street. And lots of wobbly
cyclists. We need to make our streets safe places to be, and to enjoy
life; and the only way to do that is to reclaim them. The more we hide
away from the motor car, the more aggressive and badly behaved the
motorists become.

I couldn't have put it better myself, despite having tried many times.
Let's hope you don't get the abuse here that I got, including rebuttals
of the idea that "we teach them [motorists] to believe they own the
road", for saying /exactly/ the same things. :-)

--
Matt B

James Thomson said:

I came across the following recently, and didn't know whether to laugh or
cry:

http://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q519.htm

Question Q519

Can ball games be legally played on a public road?

Answer

Aside from the legal issues it is not safe for children to play on
roads, however quiet they may be. This can also cause a nuisance
for lots of people in the area who are wary of driving down the
street for fear of knocking over a child or who are getting their
cars' damaged.

It is an offence to play ball games on a public road if it is to the
annoyance of road users. It is likely that ball games played on
a public road will be to the immediate annoyance of road users.
It is also a breach of bye-laws to play ball games to the annoyance
of those living near by.

If this is going on on your street, then contact your local
neighbourhood policing team who will be able to offer
advice and assistance.

Well, gosh darn it, I happen to have an active neighbourhood policing
team, and I'll make sure that I do raise it with them.

My problem is that the children in my street play cricket at a level far
beyond what I could hope to join in with. The fact that they play with
soft tennis balls, and move aside (too quickly for my liking) every time
a car drives past, thus discouraging rat-running would seem to give the
lie to the stupidity of the police's advice.

A

James Thomson said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> a écrit:

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant, because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful. The behaviour of motorists is
bloody awful because we teach them to believe they own the road. If you
take vulnerable traffic off the road onto other routes, you confirm this
belief. What we need is more school-children playing football on main
roads, as they used to before the coming of the motor car. And more old
people stopping to chat in the middle of the street. And lots of wobbly
cyclists. We need to make our streets safe places to be, and to enjoy
life; and the only way to do that is to reclaim them. The more we hide
away from the motor car, the more aggressive and badly behaved the
motorists become.

I came across the following recently, and didn't know whether to laugh or
cry:

http://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q519.htm

Question Q519

Can ball games be legally played on a public road?

Answer

Aside from the legal issues it is not safe for children to play on
roads, however quiet they may be. This can also cause a nuisance
for lots of people in the area who are wary of driving down the
street for fear of knocking over a child or who are getting their
cars' damaged.

It is an offence to play ball games on a public road if it is to the
annoyance of road users. It is likely that ball games played on
a public road will be to the immediate annoyance of road users.
It is also a breach of bye-laws to play ball games to the annoyance
of those living near by.

If this is going on on your street, then contact your local
neighbourhood policing team who will be able to offer
advice and assistance.

Where to begin?

At the beginning: form a street football league.

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

[snip]

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant,
because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful.

Oh, rubbish. Any good bike book tells you how to deal with that.
(Which may be a good criterion for distinguishing a good bike book
from a bad one)

A bike training course to level 3 of the new national Standards would
teach you how to deal with it. (Which may be why Transport for
London is suddenly losing its enthusiasm for funding any teaching
beyond level 2, or any teaching at all for adults)

Jeremy Parker

"Buck" <[email hidden]> wrote

[snip]

Quoted message said:

I will watch the press to see how you get on cycling round the M25.

[snip]

Many US states allow cycling on the shoulders of freeways.
California allows cycling on more than a thousand miles of freeway,
for example. New Jersey has rather an odd law. To ride on their
freeway shoulders you need to have a licence. You get it just by
asking, and then it's good for life. I have one

Jeremy Parker

Erik Sandblom said:

Den 2007-03-21 19:04:25 skrev Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Erik
Sandblom

(') said:

You can see from the map that the new (low) red bridge is a major
shortcut compared to the existing (steep, high) gray bridge.
Especially for those going to the expansive Lindholmen urban
redevelopment at left.
http://www.alvstaden.se/images/articles/gangbro1a.jpg

Oh, Gosh, that map just reminds me how much I love Stockholm. What
did the
Swedes do to deserve such a ridiculously nice capital city?

Uh, that's a picture of Göteborg. Stockholm doesn't have a river like
that, it has islands and stuff.

But the best thing about Stockholm (apart from the congestion charge)
is the train to Göteborg.

City was designed and built by Dutch engineers IIRC.

--

Geoff

Den 2007-03-22 22:27:03 skrev GeoffC <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Erik Sandblom said:

Den 2007-03-21 19:04:25 skrev Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Erik
Sandblom
([email hidden]'😉 wrote:

> You can see from the map that the new (low) red bridge is a major
> shortcut compared to the existing (steep, high) gray bridge.
> Especially for those going to the expansive Lindholmen urban
> redevelopment at left.
> http://www.alvstaden.se/images/articles/gangbro1a.jpg

Oh, Gosh, that map just reminds me how much I love Stockholm. What
did the
Swedes do to deserve such a ridiculously nice capital city?

Uh, that's a picture of Göteborg. Stockholm doesn't have a river like
that, it has islands and stuff.

But the best thing about Stockholm (apart from the congestion charge)
is the train to Göteborg.

City was designed and built by Dutch engineers IIRC.

Yes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothenburg#History

Erik Sandblom

--
Oil is for sissies

Den 2007-03-22 21:01:09 skrev Jeremy Parker <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

[snip]

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant,
because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful.

Oh, rubbish. Any good bike book tells you how to deal with that.

There are books that can teach you to deal with anything, but I wouldn't
say that makes it *pleasant* to ride in heavy, fast motor traffic.

Erik Sandblom

--
Oil is for sissies

in message <[email hidden]>, Jeremy Parker

(') said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

[snip]

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant,
because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful.

Oh, rubbish. Any good bike book tells you how to deal with that.
(Which may be a good criterion for distinguishing a good bike book
from a bad one)

I can deal with it, but I'm an experienced cyclist. It's very intimidating
for inexperienced cyclists. But it's also just bloody awful, and not
particularly pleasant to deal with.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

;; Women are from Venus. Men are from Mars. Lusers are from Uranus.

Erik Sandblom said:

Den 2007-03-22 22:27:03 skrev GeoffC <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Erik Sandblom said:

Den 2007-03-21 19:04:25 skrev Simon Brooke <[email hidden]>:

> in message <[email hidden]>, Erik
> Sandblom
> ([email hidden]'😉 wrote:
>
>> You can see from the map that the new (low) red bridge is a major
>> shortcut compared to the existing (steep, high) gray bridge.
>> Especially for those going to the expansive Lindholmen urban
>> redevelopment at left.
>> http://www.alvstaden.se/images/articles/gangbro1a.jpg
>
> Oh, Gosh, that map just reminds me how much I love Stockholm. What
> did the
> Swedes do to deserve such a ridiculously nice capital city?

Uh, that's a picture of Göteborg. Stockholm doesn't have a river
like that, it has islands and stuff.

But the best thing about Stockholm (apart from the congestion
charge) is the train to Göteborg.

City was designed and built by Dutch engineers IIRC.

Yes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gothenburg#History

There you go then. Rumour has it that copper wire was invented by two
Dutchmen fighting over a 5c coin. Looks like some of their frugality has
rubbed off on the present local government :-)

--

Geoff

Erik Sandblom said:

Den 2007-03-22 21:01:09 skrev Jeremy Parker <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

"Simon Brooke" <[email hidden]> wrote

[snip]

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant,
because
the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful.

Oh, rubbish. Any good bike book tells you how to deal with that.

There are books that can teach you to deal with anything, but I wouldn't
say that makes it *pleasant* to ride in heavy, fast motor traffic.

Erik Sandblom

quite, its not pleasent what ever your skill. bike, car or what not.

roger

Erik Sandblom said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

This is chicken and egg. Cycling on the streets is not pleasant,
because the behaviour of motorists is bloody awful.

There are books that can teach you to deal with anything, but I wouldn't
say that makes it *pleasant* to ride in heavy, fast motor traffic.

That's taking rather more than was originally said.

Most streets are *not* filled with heavy, fast motor traffic. They may
have a steady flow of cars doing 30mph, but that is a very different
kettle of fish. And while riding through an urban environment is
unlikely to be most people's idea of a scenic day out, it need not be
unpleasant.

Once you've got over the initial nervousness that most people have
about cycling on a main road, it's not an issue. You just get on with
it. If you're riding your bike as a means of transport, you have to
take whatever route is the most sensible. (If you are riding just for
fun/exercise, you'd probably want to choose a different route, but
that's just down to aesthetics).

By riding defensively, you will see far less bad behaviour from
motorists, which will make your cycling a more enjoyable experience.
Yes, if you are riding along a main road filled nose-to-tail with
lorries, it probably won't be all that great - but it will still be
better than if you were sidling along in the gutter!

--
Stevie D
\\\\\ ///// Bringing dating agencies to the
\\\\\\\__X__/////// common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

Tony Raven said:

James Thomson wrote on 21/03/2007 23:19 +0100:

Quoted message said:

I came across the following recently, and didn't know whether to laugh or
cry:

Next time you are knocked off your bike, call the police and tell them
someone is playing football in the road. It appears they will be far
more likely to come running to your assistance if you do.

In Canada it is customary to play "road hockey" so at least the
players are armed when the car arrives.

John Kane, Kingston ON Canada