Guest Post- Laura

Since my girlfriend started cycling I, as a reasonably confident and assertive cyclist, have been reminded of exactly how dangerous many of the roads feel to those who aren’t extremely confident cyclists. Roads that I consider to be somewhat ‘okay’ to cycle on, are quite a daunting prospect for the two of us and have made planning quiet routes for us quite a headache. I have also been using much more of the off-road infrastructure than usual, which has served as quite a shocking reminder of how badly designed and implemented some sections can be.

Seeing how ordinary cyclists like her are so easily sidelined in the planning of our roads, streets and paths has served to remind me exactly how important safe and high quality infrastructure is for those who just want to be ‘bike users’ and not compete with high speed traffic (something that many experienced cyclists, myself included, often forget). So here goes, a guest post from the lovely Laura:

I’ve recently started cycling (since the beginning of April) because of the amount bus fare costs now and it got to a point where I couldn’t afford to spend on bus fare every time I wanted to go out somewhere. I wanted an easy and quick way to get around to places like to the local town center, to food shops or even just going out for a ride to get some fresh air and there are many more places, the main reason for cycling is because we had an unused bike sitting in the garage gathering dust I made the choice to start cycling. I really enjoy going out on my bike – especially when the sun is shining – it’s healthy, relaxing and a bit of exercise. Overall I am really glad that I made the choice to stop wasting money and start cycling. I get to places faster and easier than walking or sitting on the bus, I can beat the traffic! Those are the best advantages of cycling; beating the traffic, not sitting in long queues, saving my energy, getting exercise and enjoying the weather.

I don’t cycle on the roads as I find them dangerous and not trustworthy. If there were cycle lanes on the roads that are safe to use and you have more than enough space between you, the pavement and the cars coming past you, I would be more than happy to use them. Today, the roads don’t feel safe enough for me because I find some cars pass you too closely or too fast. Even if the cycle lanes were separated from the roads (which I’d prefer) I would like to see and use them because I would feel safer away from cars / buses / or any large vehicles.

I cycle in my own everyday clothes, jeans / leggings mainly. I find wearing my own clothes comfortable and satisfying because I don’t have to worry about changing before an interview or going out with some friends, I can feel nice while I’m cycling too. I don’t wear heels while cycling, but I wear either boots or pumps which I find comfortable to wear while cycling. I’m not a trainer person and I avoid wearing them whenever I can, it’s fine to wear what you like and what makes you feel good while cycling.

For the past few months now, cycling has changed my lifestyle. I feel I am more active, outgoing and independent because I can travel everywhere on my bike. It has also become another bond that I share with my boyfriend; something we have in common. I’m really glad I took up cycling and I feel it has changed me for the better and I can say I will be cycling a lot more from now on.
Laura

 If you have any questions or comments for Laura, please leave a comment below and I shall forward them to her.
B

 

 

 

Birmingham Cycle Revolution?

This post is my personal interpretation and analysis of the Birmingham Cycle Revolution bid, and what exactly appears to be proposing, in regards to infrastructure (the full document can be found here. All emphasis in quoted text below is my own). As in the video above, the introduction to the bid appears to be heading down the right tracks:

 ’The bid focuses on investment in deliverable cycling infrastructure and facilities, building on our exiting cycling network, making the best use of our canal network and green corridors, develop a comprehensive on-road network supported by wider enabling measures. Such as cycle parking and bike hubs, offering significantly improved cycling conditions.’

While building on the existing canal and green corridors sounds like a pretty good idea, the focus on ‘deliverable’ infrastructure and emphasis on cycle parking and bike hubs is slightly worrying. Yes, cycle parking and bike hubs are a nice idea but paired with the idea of ‘deliverable’ infrastructure, it sounds like more of the same sub-par infrastructure present throughout much of the country (in other words an escape clause). The overall goal of the bid is a

‘Cycling modal split target of at least 5% over the next ten years, rising to the levels of of comparable European cities such as Munich and Copenhagen at over 10% by 2033.’

Certainly a high target for 20 years, with Munich at 20%+ modal share and Copenhagen at 36%+ with the target of increasing it to 50% by 2015 (
http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/07/worlds-most-bicycle-friendly-cities.html
). To even reach the same level as these cities would require a widespread and continuous network of infrastructure at a world class level, I for one hope that Birmingham can step up to the challenge. The proposals for the different types of route, however, do not exactly fill me with confidence:

‘Main Corridors: measures along eight of the main arterial roads into the city center. These will generally be suitable for more confident and experienced cyclists who value fast and direct routes with priority over side roads, and who are happy to mix with buses and other traffic in areas where separate cycle facilities cannot be provided within the space available.’

This whole idea that only ‘confident and experienced’ cyclists value fast and direct routes, and that we are ‘happy’ to mix with buses and other traffic is absurd. Fast and direct routes with appropriate priority should be standard across the whole spectrum of cyclists, and besides extremist vehicular cyclists (cycling’s secret sect) I have not come across a single cyclist who is actively happy to share the road with buses and trucks. The infrastructure proposed for these main routes also appears to cater this flawed idea:

‘Typical measures will include marked cycle facilities (formal or informal) on the carriageway, shared use foot-ways, improved cycle routes through subways (particularly at the ring road), bus lanes (with cycle lanes to link disjointed sections of bus lane) and short diversions to avoid particularly complex junctions or other pinch-points where facilities cannot be accommodated (for example in local centers) then general traffic measures will be introduced to narrow traffic lanes and reduce speeds, to give cyclists more confidence in taking up a dominant position within their traffic lane.’

So in other words, a choice between; an on road cycle lane (likely to be narrow, blocked and/or subjected to close passes by motorists), sharing the path with pedestrians, sharing a lane with buses or sitting in front of a queue of angry motorists who have no way to overtake you. Sounds absolutely lovely, especially the part where this will give the average cyclist ‘more confidence in taking up a dominant position within their traffic lane’. And then for those lacking confidence:

‘Parallel Routes: A network of generally quieter routes running parallel to the main corridors, but also leading to to local schools , health centers, parks and other community facilities, and suitable for less experienced commuter cyclists as well as family trips. Many routes will be identified primarily by signing, but additional measures will provided in many locations including marked cycle lanes or shared use footways, changed priorities at junctions, controlled crossings at intersections with main roads and measures to reduce vehicle speeds (including traffic calming features and 20 mph areas).’

While the idea of quieter routes does sound like a good one, as stated previously, is no replacement for safe, convenient and direct infrastructure, which will only happen if these routes are truly parallel and not significantly longer and harder to navigate through. However with the apparent focus on signage over any meaningful infrastructure I am not sure exactly sure how ‘safe’ these routes will feel. 20 mph limits are definitely a good thing (and not just for cyclists) but ‘traffic calming features’ sound like pinch points and other road narrowing schemes to me. Which at best create friction between drivers and cyclists and at worst are downright dangerous. The other types of infrastructure may be decent if built to a very high standard, but as stated before, often do little to help (‘controlled crossings’ – cattle pens anyone?). If implemented properly, with filtered permeability and appropriate priority parallel routes could be very beneficial but i have not seen any evidence that this will actually happened.

The document continues:

‘Within our bid area an emphasis on segregation and semi-segregation from traffic along main roads routes will develop a greater sense of continuity and improved safety similar to London’s superhighways.’

It is interesting that the people who wrote this document chose to compare the planned routes to London’s superhighways. While the designs for the new superhighways look promising, the routes already in place are hardly a roaring success in getting the average Londoner to cycle, don’t provide a great deal of safety and are definitely not trail-blazing pieces of infrastructure. And ‘semi-segregation along main roads’ doesn’t exactly sound like amazingly good infrastructure for the purposes of mass cycling.

Yes, I reckon I have approached this document rather cynically but I feel that I am somewhat justified in doing so, as the standard of currently in place on our roads at the moment is often of sub-par design, implementation and often more dangerous than the roads alongside. My conclusion is that this may be a slight step forward for Birmingham but it falls far short of being anywhere close to a real ‘cycling revolution’, in fact I don’t think there  is anything really ‘revolutionary’ to be seen in any of these proposals. My opinion is that to start a true ‘cycling revolution’ funds should be focused on small stretches of infrastructure built to an extremely high standard of safety and convenience and then extended gradually with a focus on high standards and continuity.

I have a dream…

I am well aware that the discrimination is absolutely nowhere near the scale and severity of the 1900 s America, but the fact is that many cyclists deal with threats to their lives on an almost daily basis (yes, I consider a tonne of metal being propelled just past me at 40mph, a threat) just because their method of transport is considered ‘abnormal’. The Government seems incapable of building infrastructure that isn’t so badly designed as to be downright -dangerous and as for the police and legal system, well the majority don’t seem to really care. Nevertheless, I have a dream…

While I would very much like to cycle on safer roads, I am one of those who would cycle even if the roads were paved with carpet tacks (don’t tell the gov I said that, it might give them ideas). What I really want is safer roads for all. I want to be able to tell my girlfriend/ mother/ siblings that it’s OK to cycle, that it’s perfectly safe to cycle to the shops. That they don’t have to worry about sharing the road with left turning lorries, impatient bus drivers or speeding motorists. I want to be able to put my hand on my heart and say “yes it’s safe go ahead and enjoy yourself”. There is always someone  who will point at the statistics and say “look cycling is safer than walking”. But these statistics invariably fail to take into account all the near misses and close calls that affect perceived safety. And are the statistics really any consolation to that one in a thousand cyclist who does get hit?

I have a dream… That my future children will grow up in a country where they can cycle, without hi-vis and in near-perfect safety, to a friend’s house, to play in the park, to visit the town center or even to school:

Source: 
http://www.youtube.com/user/markenlei
I am a strong believer in giving children freedom and independence to help them develop in true sensible, responsible and mature young adults, something that I feel is severely lacking in these times (but that’s a topic for a different blog). The fact is that children cannot, and never will be able to, drive a car. So unless a conscious effort is made to put alternative methods of transport such as walking or cycling on the same level of priority as that of motoring, and an effort is made to reduce the danger that cars pose, children will forever be reduced to being ferried around by their parents.

To be clear I am not advocating  the complete removal of cars from the roads. I, like many other cyclists, am a regular motorist, yes I do cycle more than I drive but there is no denying the convenience of car for some types of journey (a business trip to a town 20 miles away is a reasonable reason to drive). And I understand if people don’t fancy cycling at -3C* or in gale force winds, but the heyday of car only travel is passing. If you look at other famous cycling countries such as the Netherlands or Denmark you will realise that there are still people that drive, the situation is not in fact completely reversed. People cycle because it is simply more convenient, not because they will be labelled as second class citizens or threatened on a daily basis if they choose to drive.

The big question is; what sort of country do you want your children or children’s children to grow up in? A country based around the motor car, to which so many are unknowingly prisoners of? A country which is based around the people, and no person’s transport choice actively endangers another’s? How many lives is your right to drive everywhere worth?

The best cycle infrastructure in the West Midlands?

As you can see, this cycle track that runs in front of the shops in Shirley seems to hit all the right points. Made of good quality tarmac and clearly marked, it is clearly and fully segregated from both the busy A road to the right and the thriving pedestrianized area to the left. 

The crossing points for pedestrians are raised above the cycle track itself and clearly marked with symbols and bollards (the bollards themselves aren’t really that hard to navigate around, the space either side is decent enough for most bikes).

While cycle parking is pretty limited, the stands themselves are pretty well placed: Away from both pedestrian and cyclist desire lines.
And there is more than enough space to add more to cope with demand if it should arise. However as you may have noticed there is a distinct lack of cyclists making use of this facility, and it is actually pretty rare to see a bike locked up here. The reason for this, I would guess, is the location of this particular piece of infrastructure. Situated along the four lane Stratford Road this shopping street is hemmed in by busy roads and large junctions, the northern end is made largely impassable to cyclists by this intersection:

 With two lanes going in each direction, this crossroad is far from pleasant to cycle through (as i can personally attest to, I travel through this junction on a weekly basis and it is definitely not for the faint-hearted). And to the south of the street, a slightly less intimidating junction :

(still far from somewhere you’d cycle through with your kids).
So while this piece of infrastructure gets an A for safety, it fails on being both continuous and convenient. The roads surrounding this area are as a rule pretty busy and what little cycling infrastructure that does exist, mostly consists of half-hearted pavement infrastructure (as covered previously). However what this short cycle track does show, is exactly what planners can do if they put their mind to it. If this standard of infrastructure was made commonplace i’m pretty sure that a decent amount of the population would feel safe enough to cycle regularly.

What’s so special about the Netherlands?

Every cycling campaigner will at some point mention the Netherlands, but what is actually so special?

Credit: Dutch Cycling Embassy

The Netherlands have not always been a nation of cyclists, while the bicycle has always played a part in Dutch history, the period after the Second World War was characterized by an increasingly car-centric policy. However The Dutch reached a point in the 1970′s, where the lives lost to motor traffic increased to a unacceptable level for the public, and the Netherlands, as a nation, made a conscious decision to end the dominance of motor traffic. This was primarily driven by vigorous campaign from the public to bring an end to the traffic fatalities, particularly those involving children (Stop de kindermoord -Stop the child murder).

Now cycling has become central to all planning and transport policy in the Netherlands and a network of safe, convenient and continuous bicycle routes are in place across the country. Comprising of high quality segregated cycle tracks along busy roads and restricted motor vehicle access along minor or residential streets. This has had the effect of creating a cycling culture in the Netherlands; practically everyone cycles, young or old. Getting on your bicycle is simpler, more convenient and in some cases even faster than using a car. People in the Netherlands don’t see themselves as ‘cyclists’ any more than the majority of the people in the UK see themselves as ‘motorists’, the bicycle is simply just another method of getting around. No helmets, no specialist clothing, just a person on a bicycle getting from A to B safely and conveniently.

A Drawing Project

I’m not an architect or engineer, but this my attempt at plans for high quality cycling infrastructure. Comments, questions and critiques most welcome.
Major road

Roundabout

Traffic Light Controlled Junction

Route Review 1: Solihull Centre to Shirley.

Starting from  the cycle stands across the road from John Lewis,you have two options to get to the road running towards the park.

Either use the toucan crossing just beyond the lights, or join the road directly from the stands and mix directly with the buses and taxis leaving the town centre.From there it is possible to join a  presumably two way cycle path on the pavement.

While the path is visually separated from the pedestrian area by a gutter and bicycle markings, there is little space for cyclists to pass each other while going in opposite directions and pedestrians commonly stray across lanes. From here the road ends in a T-junction with a toucan crossing around the corner on the left.

However a combination of a blind corner and very little pavement area, make this corner all but impossible to navigate on a bike, never mind the hazard presented to pedestrians by doing so.

The problem area is made more acutely visible when viewed from the other side of the road. A possible solution may be to move the crossing closer to the road mouth to cut out the blind corner completely, allowing cyclists and pedestrians to proceed directly to the segregated path directly across the road.

While this segregated path is usually relatively busy, with a little care and attention on the part of both types of users it is easily usable. Travelling under a road and train track this path connects the centre of Solihull directly to Tudor Grange park and Solihull College.

The segregated path wends its way through much of Tudor Grange Park, making a very comfortable, convenient and scenic connection to the town centre.

And then through the sports centre car park.

The cycle path then ends before the bus stop and Blossomfield Road, a busy traffic route leading to Solihull centre.  To cross Blossomfield Road there are three choices

Firstly there is the pedestrian crossing further down the road to the right, however the pavement is narrow and the railings only serve to reduce the space available. It is also a busy pedestrian route from the train station, making it difficult to move a bike through.

The second option is the direct route across the road, using the narrow traffic island.

The last option is going through the car park, emerging to the left of the bus stop, and then cycling directly across the road. None of these options are particularly appealing and this road does present an inconvenient barrier to proceeding along the cycle route. A possible solutions would be to either move the pedestrian crossing to the position of the traffic island,  put in a dedicated cycle crossing or widen the pavement, remove the rails and enlarge the crossing.

The route then continues down Dorchester Road.While the road is wide and relatively quiet, however cars do sometimes travel pretty fast down this road. Painting in two metre cycle lanes would be beneficial in encouraging less confident cyclists to use this direct route into the town centre.

At the end of the road a feeder lane leads to a shared use footpath, allowing cyclists to bypass the busy Streetsbrook Road when turning into Sharmans Cross Road. However as shown in this picture the lane is often occupied by motor traffic. Widening the pavement and allowing cyclists to use it well before the junction, would allow cyclists to avoid this possible point of conflict.

Other than the  feeder lane issues, the bypass is well designed with a wide well surfaced pavement area and clear signage.

However after turning the corner no further provision is made for cycling, other than a lone sign. Designating the narrow and badly surfaced pavement as shared use, practically forcing cyclists back onto the road.

While the road is not hugely busy, it is also a well travelled bus route and during term time the area in front of the school on the left is usually filled with parked cars.

Halfway along the route Sharmans Cross Road is bisected by a large and busy roundabout, for the confident cyclist it would only be a minor barrier. However the traffic levels and speeds across represent more of a barrier to less confident cyclists. To improve it tightening the geometry and possibly installing segregated bike lanes would easily be the best solution to this somewhat off putting roundabout.

After the roundabout the route gets little better. As the road is a direct connection to the Stratford Road it is often used by HGVs and does see a substantial amount of traffic.

The route then takes a right turn into some quiet back streets.

These streets are pretty quiet, but the many parked cars on each side of the road do make encounters with any rather unpleasant.

The size of this roundabout right at the end of the route defies logic, to me this just looks like a waste of space. Increasing the width of the pavement and centre island would serve to make this roundabout more friendly to pedestrians as well as lowering motor traffic speeds.

The route terminates at this rather unfriendly junction, turning left onto the cycle track running in front the shops:

Conclusion

While this route does run continuously from the centre of Solihull to Shirley and links these two centres, the route still leaves much to be desired in cycle provision. The route from the centre through the park is well connected and convenient, however after this point the route uses busier and busier roads. These represent significant barriers to less confident cyclists and do not provide safe refuges for cyclists from motor traffic, this is most evident in the areas of the route shared by buses and HGVs. To create a route that encourages less confident cyclists to get on their bikes, would require fully segregated infrastructure along the majority of the latter part of the route.