tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post7257476432420369120..comments2024-03-28T11:13:48.581+00:00Comments on i b i k e l o n d o n: The National Travel Survey; cycling's canary in the coal mine?ibikelondonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06978714126105951294noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-64148038253471851462023-10-23T11:14:05.510+01:002023-10-23T11:14:05.510+01:00bapesta
jordan shoes
kyrie 6
air jordan
curry shoe...<a href="http://www.bape-shoes.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>bapesta</strong></a><br /><a href="http://www.jordan4.us.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>jordan shoes</strong></a><br /><a href="http://www.kyrie6.org" rel="nofollow"><strong>kyrie 6</strong></a><br /><a href="http://www.jordanstoreonline.com" rel="nofollow"><strong>air jordan</strong></a><br /><a href="http://www.curry9.us" rel="nofollow"><strong>curry shoes</strong></a><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-45996005362786412452023-09-11T10:52:58.543+01:002023-09-11T10:52:58.543+01:00Quality content is the main to interest the viewer...Quality content is the main to interest the viewers to pay a visit the website, that’s what this site is providing.카지노사이트가이드https://www.casinositeguide.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-64279680733512105132023-09-11T10:52:28.015+01:002023-09-11T10:52:28.015+01:00Greate pieces. Keep writing such kind of info on y...Greate pieces. Keep writing such kind of info on your site. Im really impressed by your blog.<br />먹튀검증토토사이트http://www.mttotosite.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-26449582087594904402023-09-11T10:52:02.015+01:002023-09-11T10:52:02.015+01:00What’s up to all, it’s genuinely a good for me to ...What’s up to all, it’s genuinely a good for me to visit this website, it includes helpful Information.카지노사이트킴https://www.casinositekim.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-103814773303276622023-09-11T10:50:43.601+01:002023-09-11T10:50:43.601+01:00Very good article. I certainly appreciate this web...Very good article. I certainly appreciate this website. Keep it up!카지노사이트넷https://www.casinositenet.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-39605725362928426852023-09-11T10:50:12.903+01:002023-09-11T10:50:12.903+01:00Some truly nice stuff on this internet site, I lik...Some truly nice stuff on this internet site, I like it.<br />먹튀검증https://www.safetotosite.pro/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-61137934372877058842023-08-26T21:46:19.534+01:002023-08-26T21:46:19.534+01:00Its very well written; I love what youve got to sa...Its very well written; I love what youve got to say.<br />안전놀이터https://www.totosafeguide.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-71704878199008151892023-08-26T21:45:57.300+01:002023-08-26T21:45:57.300+01:00Very shortly this site will be famous amid all blo...Very shortly this site will be famous amid all blogging and site-building people.토토https://www.totopick.pronoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-84272698838516963782023-08-26T21:45:27.861+01:002023-08-26T21:45:27.861+01:00I’m looking to create my own blog and would like t...I’m looking to create my own blog and would like to know where u got this from. thanks카지노사이트https://www.oncasinosite.netnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-66334242028518278722023-08-26T21:44:59.764+01:002023-08-26T21:44:59.764+01:00I really like your blog.. very nice colors & t...I really like your blog.. very nice colors & theme. <br />토토https://www.sportstoto.linknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-48661063852817665132023-08-26T21:44:25.851+01:002023-08-26T21:44:25.851+01:00This paragraph posted at this site is in fact plea...This paragraph posted at this site is in fact pleasant.<br />메이저사이트https://www.majortotosite.topnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-36568663699456334212011-02-10T18:26:22.098+00:002011-02-10T18:26:22.098+00:00I came back here, after months, from today's p...I came back here, after months, from <a href="http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/2011/02/what-wont-bring-about-mass-cycling-6.html" rel="nofollow">today's post by Freewheeler</a>.<br /><br />I'd not read Anonymous' post about "lunatics" before, but I'd like to say that he/she is exactly right. It really is exactly as simple as that.<br /><br />You have to make conditions such that they attract people to cycling.<br /><br />JohnBaldy's post about how he "can't justify the risk" also hits the nail on the head. These are the reasons why even people who would like to cycle don't do so in the UK as it looks right now.David Hembrowhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14543024940730663645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-28678114199973262662010-10-04T15:28:11.809+01:002010-10-04T15:28:11.809+01:00An exaggerated and simplified example to why good ...An exaggerated and simplified example to why good infrastructure is needed: <br /><br />You have cycling share of 1%. Those who cycle now are the lunatics, insane people who like dodging cars. There are no more lunatics, so you are stuck at 1%. <br /><br />There are sane people who want to cycle, but not on the roads as they are now. They do not feel safe. Helmet marketing or PR stunts is not going to make them feel safe.<br /><br />You want cycling share to rise to 10%, by getting 9% of sane people to start cycling. So you must build facilities that those 9% need to feel safe, not what the lunatics can get by.<br /><br />It's that simple, isn't it?<br /><br />Now, will that get them do something about it, or will they just launch another plan to double cycling in five years?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-28770277135238679442010-09-15T22:22:48.011+01:002010-09-15T22:22:48.011+01:00That's right, Philip - an idea in the making w...That's right, Philip - an idea in the making which Hackney council regards with contempt. Check out the obstacles to permeability in Hackney shown <a href="http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/2010/03/crap-cycling-walking-in-hackney.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />Hackney is a borough which is poisonously hostile to walking and cycling, and where the car is number one.<br /><br />The Hackney branch of the LCC is an obstacle to mass cycling because it is doggedly committed to making vehicular cycling a bit better. Permeability is vital but only on the Dutch model, not the rubbish alternative of the kind to be seen in Hackney and all over Greater London.<br /><br />Cycling is stagnating in Hackney and the reason for that is precisely because the LCC and its local branches are collaborationist in outlook, desperately trying to make their failed vehicular cycling strategy work. <br /><br />Hackney is a failed borough for cycling, despite the absurd and exaggerated claims which are often made about it.<br /><br />Take a look at the latest TfL figures. They show that for "Londoners’ trips by borough of origin: Trips per day and shares by main<br />mode, 2006/07 to 2008/09 average, Seven-day week" cycling's modal share in Hackney is 3 per cent.<br /><br />All the years of activity by Hackney cycling campaigners have signally failed to deliver, and the reason is precisely because these campaigners have no interest in what works - the Dutch model.freewheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16731932510033958017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-67976442136768367092010-09-07T19:35:38.340+01:002010-09-07T19:35:38.340+01:00Crossrider your suggestions are fine but risk re-i...Crossrider your suggestions are fine but risk re-inventing the whole goddam wheel all over again. A new organisation will simply encounter the same historical development that any campaign goes through: radical phase in the beginning, then consolidation and gradual professionalisation, then the "collaborationist" phase (to coin the beloved phrase of people above). Mind you, two organisations could be in different phases I suppose and represent a good cop/ bad cop approach. Your third way is quite right but again this exactly what several LCC groups are pursuing. It was first formulated (I think) by the Hackney LCC group in 1998, so here's an idea 12 years in the making:<br />http://www.hackney-cyclists.org.uk/permproj.htm<br />Is there anything really new, or do things come around in a slightly different way?Philip Loyhttp://twitter.com/philiploynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-5259381317235343522010-09-06T11:02:25.906+01:002010-09-06T11:02:25.906+01:00Yes!
I really want to cycle into central London...Yes! <br /><br />I really want to cycle into central London and back out to the suburbs each day once again - but since having children I can't justify the risk - so have not done so for 10 years.<br /><br />Modal apartheid now!JohnBaldyhttp://twitter.com/JohnBaldynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-64371435002011281882010-09-02T10:38:30.613+01:002010-09-02T10:38:30.613+01:00Good debate, although I think we need new ideas on...Good debate, although I think we need new ideas on how to solve the problem. A few thoughts.<br />1. Catalyzing change in any organization is extraordinarily difficult. I don't believe that LCC/CTC will change its priorities in the short/medium term.<br />2. LCC/CTC, as has been noted by others, are part of the establishment. They rely on government access and funding for a lot of their work so can't rock the boat too much. <br />For both of the above reasons, I think we need a new organization to campaign for segregated infrastructure. It could be an existing organization like Living Streets or Campaign for Better Transport, or a joint venture involving a number of existing organizations, or something entirely new.<br /><br />I think it is fine to have 'Dutch infrastructure' as a ideal long-term vision, but the problem to be solved is how we get there. Not enough of the population share that vision, so politically the time isn't right to push a wholesale reallocation of roadspace away from parking and motor traffic. In terms of making progress, hoping for Dutch infrastructure in the UK is as futile as hoping vehicular cycling will ever work.<br />However, I think there is a third way. You have to start with approaches that are politically realistic - that make sense to the majority of ordinary people. Approaches need to solve problems that ordinary people understand, such as congestion, rat-running and child safety, and solve them in a way that doesn't threaten car-dominated lifestyles too much. For example, I believe it would be possible to build support for safe, segregated routes to schools, and to engineer residential areas so that the traffic is strictly limited to residents and their legitimate visitors, with effective traffic calming. With enough such schemes, you have the start of a segregated or low-traffic cycle network. It won't be ideal, and most of the road system will still be motor-dominated, but you have a number of segregated routes for people who want to cycle away from traffic.aaahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11142330825237376723noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-7626218214792565732010-08-30T10:25:19.024+01:002010-08-30T10:25:19.024+01:00This is one of the best posts I have ever seen thi...This is one of the best posts I have ever seen this week. I read that article and I find it very informative. I had a great time reading it. Great post.hope chestshttp://www.beautifulcedarchest.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-50542032644826294302010-08-29T11:46:46.925+01:002010-08-29T11:46:46.925+01:00“Those people clearly have no experience of what c...“Those people clearly have no experience of what campaigning on cycling issues is like at the grassroots” says Jim.<br /><br />Well Jim I’ve stood in the streets with petitions, I’ve written hundreds of letters, I’ve had innumerable meetings with councillors and highway engineers, I’ve contributed to planning documents, I’ve spoken to transport committees, and I’ve used the usual channels in every possible way. So I can do without being patronised by you and others who have contributed to this post. Quite possibly Mark can say the same.<br /><br />When the Greater London Assembly did a consultation on parking controls I made the effort to respond, because I believe in taking a holistic approach to cycling and I am keen to see more parking restraint and the liberation of road space for cycling. The London Cycling Campaign with all its paid staff couldn’t even be bothered to respond, unlike petrolhead organisations like the Association of British Drivers, who take such consultations very seriously.<br /><br />I have no idea how much or how little campaigning Mark has done but it’s irrelevant to his arguments. The simple point is that neither the CTC nor the LCC are prepared to acknowledge that Dutch-style infrastructure is the only way you are ever going to get mass cycling in Britain. Both organisations need to make this their number one priority in campaigning. It doesn’t mean they have to stop doing all the other stuff, but it does mean they need to have a very clear vision of what works and to what end their campaigning is directed.<br /><br />Both the CTC and LCC remain committed to the doomed strategy of trying to ameliorate the conditions of vehicular cycling. Take a look at the LCC’s pitifully impoverished notion of what <a href="http://www.lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=77" rel="nofollow">“Redesigning our streets for cycling”</a> involves. The LCC is quite unequivocal that it <a href="http://lcc.org.uk/index.asp?PageID=230" rel="nofollow">believes the city’s roads should be made safer and shared by motorists and cyclists.</a>freewheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16731932510033958017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-86575135622961744302010-08-27T09:27:30.210+01:002010-08-27T09:27:30.210+01:00Hi Jim, I want to address some of your points in y...Hi Jim, I want to address some of your points in your comment on the National Travel Survey because I do not believe they stand up to scrutiny.<br /><br />If you stand back and read my post again you'll see that I state quite clearly that it won't be easy to campaign for Dutch style facilities (which emphatically *are* possible to build here; we've done it already in a few places in London), however it *is* important that the national campaigns at least admit in public that eventually, somehow, someday this is what they are aiming for. Sadly, at the moment, this is not the case, with the CTC in particular being especially opposed to segregated routes. If they don't want to do that, fine, but then come out loud and proud and say 'we don't think segregation will lead to mass cycling in the UK and we adopt vehicular cycling as a campaigning tool' instead. A little bit of honesty all round wouldn't go amiss.<br /><br />As to 'carping' on the internet; firstly, as you can see, this isn't exactly an idle forum - there are many visitors to this website who have contributed comments; both from everyday and ordinary 'cyclists' right up to people who spend their professional lives working on road design, cycle campaigns and all the rest in between. To say that these people "clearly have no experience of what campaigning on cycling issues is like at the grassroots" is not only a massively misinformed assumption it is, quite frankly, rather rude. Are you sure I haven't sat through hours of planning meetings, Jim?<br /><br />As for the Cycle Superhighways, if you look closely at the budget a lot of the money also went on free cycle training, signage, cycle parking, marketing. To say that all the cash went on re-surfacing roads would be untrue. As for the LCC; they were involved in the consultation for the first 2 pilot routes and expressed strong concern that they were being rushed through. The CTC happily pointed out some of the more obvious design flaws; again to say that they opposed them outright would be an untruth.<br /><br />To this point, Jim, this debate about the National Travel Survey (47 comments and counting) has been articulate, respectful of individuals and well-measured. Might I suggest you re-read your post, think about the tone you come here with and take a deep breath before writing again? As I say in the comments box introduction "Discourse is good - just keep it civil"<br /><br />Markibikelondonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06978714126105951294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-68782508868861494022010-08-26T20:38:42.323+01:002010-08-26T20:38:42.323+01:00Of course Dutch style segregation would work. I do...Of course Dutch style segregation would work. I don't think anyone disputes that. The trouble is that Dutch style segregation simply cannot be built in the UK - even in Cambridge, the cycle paths being constructed are feeble in comparison, despite dollops of cash and the political will that comes with 25% cycle to work share and a powerful local campaign group.<br /><br />How do you get Dutch-style facilities? Several people who have already commented think that it requires the main campaigning organisations to call for it.<br /><br />Those people clearly have no experience of what campaigning on cycling issues is like at the grassroots. They've never had to comment on plans sent by a careless, disinterested engineer who proposes yet another pavement conversion cycle track, yielding at every junction, fiddling past street furniture and railings. <br /><br />You sit here carping on the internet and clearly never lifting a finger to do anything which would expose you to the realities of what campaigning is like in Britain - the pure idiocy of council officials who couldn't give a shit about cycling and who cannot lift a finger to reduce car traffic. <br /><br />Over £10 million quid each was spent on the "Supershiteways" in London and much of that went on partially a repairing a road surface destroyed by ridiculous double-decker buses and lorries decades of under-investment. Why were they so bad? Because TfL refused to allow the removal of any roadspace. You can't pretend LCC didn't oppose them. CTC also voiced their discontent.Jimnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-47783141653985283932010-08-26T09:52:20.556+01:002010-08-26T09:52:20.556+01:00To wrap up this long and fascinating thread (46 co...To wrap up this long and fascinating thread (46 comments and counting, phew!), arguments aside as to how difficult or achievable building segregated facilities actually are, Freewheeler is right in pinpointing my analysis, that is to say "I would like to see a commitment from our three main cycling campaigns that this is what they are aiming for too" [in addittion to what they do already]<br /><br />At the moment, none of them are prepared to do this.<br /><br />This, I think, is what needs to be rectified.ibikelondonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06978714126105951294noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-13985677626591777092010-08-26T09:48:11.619+01:002010-08-26T09:48:11.619+01:00Look again at Mark's conclusion: "I would...Look again at Mark's conclusion: "I would like to see a commitment from our three main cycling campaigns that this is what they are aiming for too".<br /><br />The problem is they are not making this commitment. The CTC and LCC won't articulate it as a desirable goal. Nobody expects it to happen overnight but it will never happen if you aren't even prepared to say this is what you want.<br /><br />In the meantime, while the talking goes on, highway engineers are re-allocating road space for drivers and for car parking. This is happening in Redbridge and Waltham Forest, which are outer London boroughs where the next great phase of the 'cycling revolution' is supposed to happen. Here the conditions for vehicular cycling are growing worse, not better.freewheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16731932510033958017noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-89253321860289726032010-08-25T15:45:54.196+01:002010-08-25T15:45:54.196+01:00Well as Chris says this could go on forever.
I di...Well as Chris says this could go on forever.<br /><br />I didn't say campaigning for segregated facilities is pointless, just difficult.<br /><br />And I didn't say we shouldn't campaign for them just because they are difficult, just that you have to bear in mind that since it is going to be difficult you have to think more strategically about what should be prioritised.<br /><br />That article represents an innovation in modelling techniques which for the first time included cyclists in traffic modelling, something which had never previously been taken account of before.<br /><br />The lesson is sometimes you can't always get what you want, or at least get it straight away. It's a fundamental fact of life. Thank god there are people out there, practitioners in all sorts of places, be they local authorities, campaign groups, charities, and yes consultancies, who are actually working on cycling.Philip Loyhttp://twitter.com/philiploynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7129037502516609710.post-64599279461031069972010-08-25T13:07:53.366+01:002010-08-25T13:07:53.366+01:00Philip Loy represents the siren voice of business ...Philip Loy represents the siren voice of business as usual. Yes, the LCC's quiet diplomacy has worked so well over the past 20 years, hasn't it? <br /><br />'Trying to campaign for segregated facilities' hasn't begun, because the CTC doesn't believe in segregation and the LCC barely has a cycling philosophy at all. If the LCC really believed in 'Trying to campaign for segregated facilities' it could start by, well, suggesting that this was the solution to the current stagnation of cycling, or its development where modal share crawls above the usual 2 per cent. It might even dare to use the term 'segregated infrastructure'. Instead the LCC is dominated by people who think that segregated infrastructure is impossible because London's streets are too narrow, which is rubbish, or that cycling is being held back by billboards advertising cars. This is witchcraft cycle campaigning. <br /><br />When Philip Loy says that campaigning for segregated facilities is pointless "when there's no cyclists around to justify them" he is echoing one of the excuses of TfL. It's also blatantly contradictory since both the LCC and TfL are keen to claim that cycling is going up and up and up (up by 80 per cent since last Tuesday or whatever the latest frothy statistic might be).<br /><br />Hackney has the highest modal share in London (8-10 per cent) but absolutely nothing is being done to develop this to 15 per cent or 20 per cent. Hackney is as bad to cycle in as anywhere else in London.<br /><br />As Philip admits, he is involved with both the LCC and the transport consultancy Colin Buchanan. Top expert Buchanan is the man who says that "In Central London space for such segregated infrastructure is scarce."<br /><br />http://www.colinbuchanan.com/uploads/cms/files/93f58b86-e3a0-4add-8c6b-e7783933538f.pdf<br /><br />Which is garbage. Buchanan is another obstacle to the development of mass cycling in London, just like the rest of the cycling establishment. Cycle campaigning is packed with vested interests which have no interest in acknowledging their catastrophic failure to progress cycling over the past 20 years.freewheelerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16731932510033958017noreply@blogger.com