A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old November 14th 11, 12:30 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,174
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted over 300
riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV news crews from
across the capital. The ride, organised by London bloggers Danny Williams of
Cyclists in the City & Mark Ames of ibikelondon was designed to highlight
what Transport for London itself has identified as the 10 most dangerous
junctions in London and to force politicians and transport planners to do
something to make them safer it certainly managed that with a headline piece
on the BBC's London regional news and the presence of numerous politicians.

The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road bikes
right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a particular statement by
riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that can only be described as grim it was
one of the junctions not on the ride, the Bow Road roundabout, that was
highest in everybody's minds following the death of a woman cyclist there on
Friday evening - the second cycling fatality there in less than three
weeks - a minute's silence was held in her memory."


http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots


--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net/

Ads
  #2  
Old November 14th 11, 01:08 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Weaseltemper[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 951
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted over
300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV news crews
from across the capital. The ride, organised by London bloggers Danny
Williams of Cyclists in the City & Mark Ames of ibikelondon was designed
to highlight what Transport for London itself has identified as the 10
most dangerous junctions in London and to force politicians and
transport planners to do something to make them safer it certainly
managed that with a headline piece on the BBC's London regional news and
the presence of numerous politicians.

The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road bikes
right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a particular statement
by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that can only be described as grim
it was one of the junctions not on the ride, the Bow Road roundabout,
that was highest in everybody's minds following the death of a woman
cyclist there on Friday evening - the second cycling fatality there in
less than three weeks - a minute's silence was held in her memory."


http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots



Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all come
- is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to work.
None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school, whether
that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which exclude
people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those of us who
aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the Elephant and Castle
roundabout - is designing in danger, and designing in inequality.
Personally, I find that unacceptable. This week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of
London, said he thought the Elephant and Castle roundabout was perfectly
negotiable by bike so long as you kept your wits about you. I do not
believe that the 89 cyclists who have been killed or seriously injured
in the past 2 years on this junction did not keep their wits about them.
I believe that these places are inherently dangerous, and it is
negligent in the extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces
are remedied as urgently as possible."
You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give cyclists
special provision and all they do is whine about it."

--
Simon
For personal replies, please use my reply-to address.
  #3  
Old November 14th 11, 01:13 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,275
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted
over 300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV
news crews from across the capital. The ride, organised by London
bloggers Danny Williams of Cyclists in the City & Mark Ames of
ibikelondon was designed to highlight what Transport for London
itself has identified as the 10 most dangerous junctions in London
and to force politicians and transport planners to do something to
make them safer it certainly managed that with a headline piece on
the BBC's London regional news and the presence of numerous
politicians. The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real cross
section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road
bikes right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a particular
statement by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that can only be
described as grim it was one of the junctions not on the ride, the
Bow Road roundabout, that was highest in everybody's minds following
the death of a woman cyclist there on Friday evening - the second
cycling fatality there in less than three weeks - a minute's silence
was held in her memory."
http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots



Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all
come - is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to
work. None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school,
whether that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which
exclude people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those
of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the
Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger, and
designing in inequality. Personally, I find that unacceptable. This
week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant
and Castle roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as you
kept your wits about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists who
have been killed or seriously injured in the past 2 years on this
junction did not keep their wits about them. I believe that these
places are inherently dangerous, and it is negligent in the extreme
not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are remedied as
urgently as possible."

You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give
cyclists special provision and all they do is whine about it."


if it is so obviously dangerous then why on earth do cyclists keep riding
round it? Is it impossible for them to get off and push? they are at
liberty to use the pavements while pushing and can remount after the "
terribly dangerous" bit. Problem solved.


  #4  
Old November 14th 11, 01:24 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Weaseltemper[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 951
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On 14/11/2011 12:13, Mrcheerful wrote:
Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted
over 300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV
news crews from across the capital. The ride, organised by London
bloggers Danny Williams of Cyclists in the City& Mark Ames of
ibikelondon was designed to highlight what Transport for London
itself has identified as the 10 most dangerous junctions in London
and to force politicians and transport planners to do something to
make them safer it certainly managed that with a headline piece on
the BBC's London regional news and the presence of numerous
politicians. The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real cross
section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road
bikes right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a particular
statement by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that can only be
described as grim it was one of the junctions not on the ride, the
Bow Road roundabout, that was highest in everybody's minds following
the death of a woman cyclist there on Friday evening - the second
cycling fatality there in less than three weeks - a minute's silence
was held in her memory."
http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots



Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all
come - is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to
work. None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school,
whether that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which
exclude people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those
of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the
Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger, and
designing in inequality. Personally, I find that unacceptable. This
week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant
and Castle roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as you
kept your wits about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists who
have been killed or seriously injured in the past 2 years on this
junction did not keep their wits about them. I believe that these
places are inherently dangerous, and it is negligent in the extreme
not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are remedied as
urgently as possible."

You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give
cyclists special provision and all they do is whine about it."


if it is so obviously dangerous then why on earth do cyclists keep riding
round it? Is it impossible for them to get off and push? they are at
liberty to use the pavements while pushing and can remount after the "
terribly dangerous" bit. Problem solved.



Not sure if I agree with that. That course of action might be credible
if the journey is a one-off. You come across a road that appears to have
exceptional hazards so you do your best to avoid it any way you can. But
if that hazard forms part of your commute, getting off and walking
several hundred yards is not really going to be something very
practical. The better solution would be to find another route which
avoids the hazard.

But here we have a situation where TPTB have painted lanes to encourage
cyclists to use the road. If anything, it highlights my own belief that
where you see cycle lanes you should stay out of them, find another
route, or indeed, get off and walk. Cycle lanes it seems, are a very
dangerous place to cycle and they really only exist to help traffic flow.



--
Simon
For personal replies, please use my reply-to address.
  #5  
Old November 14th 11, 02:05 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mrcheerful[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,275
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 12:13, Mrcheerful wrote:
Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted
over 300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV
news crews from across the capital. The ride, organised by London
bloggers Danny Williams of Cyclists in the City& Mark Ames of
ibikelondon was designed to highlight what Transport for London
itself has identified as the 10 most dangerous junctions in London
and to force politicians and transport planners to do something to
make them safer it certainly managed that with a headline piece on
the BBC's London regional news and the presence of numerous
politicians. The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real
cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road
bikes right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a
particular statement by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that
can only be described as grim it was one of the junctions not on
the ride, the Bow Road roundabout, that was highest in everybody's
minds
following the death of a woman cyclist there on Friday evening -
the second cycling fatality there in less than three weeks - a
minute's silence was held in her memory."
http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots



Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all
come - is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to
work. None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school,
whether that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which
exclude people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those
of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the
Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger, and
designing in inequality. Personally, I find that unacceptable. This
week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant
and Castle roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as
you kept your wits about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists
who have been killed or seriously injured in the past 2 years on
this junction did not keep their wits about them. I believe that
these places are inherently dangerous, and it is negligent in the
extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are remedied
as urgently as possible."

You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give
cyclists special provision and all they do is whine about it."


if it is so obviously dangerous then why on earth do cyclists keep
riding round it? Is it impossible for them to get off and push? they are
at liberty to use the pavements while pushing and can
remount after the " terribly dangerous" bit. Problem solved.



Not sure if I agree with that. That course of action might be credible
if the journey is a one-off. You come across a road that appears to
have exceptional hazards so you do your best to avoid it any way you
can. But if that hazard forms part of your commute, getting off and
walking several hundred yards is not really going to be something very
practical. The better solution would be to find another route which
avoids the hazard.

But here we have a situation where TPTB have painted lanes to
encourage cyclists to use the road. If anything, it highlights my own
belief that where you see cycle lanes you should stay out of them,
find another route, or indeed, get off and walk. Cycle lanes it
seems, are a very dangerous place to cycle and they really only exist
to help traffic flow.


a quarter mile walk (would it be that far?) would only take 7 mins at a
wander. People need to decide how urgent their commute really is in
relation to death.


  #6  
Old November 14th 11, 04:55 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Simon Mason[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9,242
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On Nov 14, 12:08*pm, Simon Weaseltemper
wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:



"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted over
300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV news crews
from across the capital. The ride, organised by London bloggers Danny
Williams of Cyclists in the City & Mark Ames of ibikelondon was designed
to highlight what Transport for London itself has identified as the 10
most dangerous junctions in London and to force politicians and
transport planners to do something to make them safer it certainly
managed that with a headline piece on the BBC's London regional news and
the presence of numerous politicians.


The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road bikes
right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a particular statement
by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that can only be described as grim
it was one of the junctions not on the ride, the Bow Road roundabout,
that was highest in everybody's minds following the death of a woman
cyclist there on Friday evening - the second cycling fatality there in
less than three weeks - a minute's silence was held in her memory."


http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...-attracts-hund...


Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all come
- is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to work.
None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school, whether
that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which exclude
people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those of us who
aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the Elephant and Castle
roundabout - is designing in danger, and designing in inequality.
Personally, I find that unacceptable. This week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of
London, said he thought the Elephant and Castle roundabout was perfectly
negotiable by bike so long as you kept your wits about you. I do not
believe that the 89 cyclists who have been killed or seriously injured
in the past 2 years on this junction did not keep their wits about them.
I believe that these places are inherently dangerous, and it is
negligent in the extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces
are remedied as urgently as possible."

You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give cyclists
special provision and all they do is whine about it."


I am sure he will be ruining yet another of his evenings writing about
it, yes.

--
Simon Mason
  #7  
Old November 14th 11, 08:26 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,576
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On 14/11/2011 12:08, Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted over
300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV news crews
from across the capital. The ride, organised by London bloggers Danny
Williams of Cyclists in the City & Mark Ames of ibikelondon was designed
to highlight what Transport for London itself has identified as the 10
most dangerous junctions in London and to force politicians and
transport planners to do something to make them safer it certainly
managed that with a headline piece on the BBC's London regional news and
the presence of numerous politicians.

The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road bikes
right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a particular statement
by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that can only be described as grim
it was one of the junctions not on the ride, the Bow Road roundabout,
that was highest in everybody's minds following the death of a woman
cyclist there on Friday evening - the second cycling fatality there in
less than three weeks - a minute's silence was held in her memory."


http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots




Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all come - is
because none of us should have to fight to make our way to work.
Quote:

Do any of us disagree?

Perhaps we can look forward to non-malicious phasing of traffic lights, the
return of purloined road space and general abandonment of the Monbigot /
Beggs Code.

None of us
should feel afraid taking our children to school, whether that's by foot or
by bicycle.


....or by car.

Designing public spaces which exclude people on the basis of
their ability - that is to say those of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark
Cavendish around the Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger,
and designing in inequality.


Does he want to be allowed to cycle on the motorways as well, then?

Personally, I find that unacceptable. This week,
Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant and Castle
roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as you kept your wits
about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists who have been killed or
seriously injured in the past 2 years on this junction did not keep their
wits about them. I believe that these places are inherently dangerous, and it
is negligent in the extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are
remedied as urgently as possible."


You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give cyclists
special provision and all they do is whine about it."


What IS the problem with the E&C roundabout(s)?

Is it really that some cyclists try to get past left-turning lorries (etc) on
the nearside?
  #8  
Old November 14th 11, 08:28 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,576
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On 14/11/2011 13:05, Mrcheerful wrote:
Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 12:13, Mrcheerful wrote:
Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted
over 300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV
news crews from across the capital. The ride, organised by London
bloggers Danny Williams of Cyclists in the City& Mark Ames of
ibikelondon was designed to highlight what Transport for London
itself has identified as the 10 most dangerous junctions in London
and to force politicians and transport planners to do something to
make them safer it certainly managed that with a headline piece on
the BBC's London regional news and the presence of numerous
politicians. The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real
cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road
bikes right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a
particular statement by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that
can only be described as grim it was one of the junctions not on
the ride, the Bow Road roundabout, that was highest in everybody's
minds
following the death of a woman cyclist there on Friday evening -
the second cycling fatality there in less than three weeks - a
minute's silence was held in her memory."
http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots



Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all
come - is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to
work. None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school,
whether that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which
exclude people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those
of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the
Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger, and
designing in inequality. Personally, I find that unacceptable. This
week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant
and Castle roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as
you kept your wits about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists
who have been killed or seriously injured in the past 2 years on
this junction did not keep their wits about them. I believe that
these places are inherently dangerous, and it is negligent in the
extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are remedied
as urgently as possible."

You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give
cyclists special provision and all they do is whine about it."

if it is so obviously dangerous then why on earth do cyclists keep
riding round it? Is it impossible for them to get off and push? they are
at liberty to use the pavements while pushing and can
remount after the " terribly dangerous" bit. Problem solved.



Not sure if I agree with that. That course of action might be credible
if the journey is a one-off. You come across a road that appears to
have exceptional hazards so you do your best to avoid it any way you
can. But if that hazard forms part of your commute, getting off and
walking several hundred yards is not really going to be something very
practical. The better solution would be to find another route which
avoids the hazard.

But here we have a situation where TPTB have painted lanes to
encourage cyclists to use the road. If anything, it highlights my own
belief that where you see cycle lanes you should stay out of them,
find another route, or indeed, get off and walk. Cycle lanes it
seems, are a very dangerous place to cycle and they really only exist
to help traffic flow.


a quarter mile walk (would it be that far?) would only take 7 mins at a
wander. People need to decide how urgent their commute really is in
relation to death.


Almost every commuter on other modes has *at least* that distance to walk
every day anyway. Lots of people walk several times that distance inside Tube
station tunnels.



  #9  
Old November 14th 11, 08:39 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Bertie Wooster
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 590
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 19:28:17 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 14/11/2011 13:05, Mrcheerful wrote:
Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 12:13, Mrcheerful wrote:
Simon Weaseltemper wrote:
On 14/11/2011 11:30, Simon Mason wrote:
"Saturday's tour of London's most 10 dangerous junctions attracted
over 300 riders and the attention of politicians and press and TV
news crews from across the capital. The ride, organised by London
bloggers Danny Williams of Cyclists in the City& Mark Ames of
ibikelondon was designed to highlight what Transport for London
itself has identified as the 10 most dangerous junctions in London
and to force politicians and transport planners to do something to
make them safer it certainly managed that with a headline piece on
the BBC's London regional news and the presence of numerous
politicians. The ride, dubbed The Tour de Danger attracted a real
cross section of
London's cycling community from Lycra-clad riders on drop bar road
bikes right across the spectrum to those perhaps making a
particular statement by riding on Boris bikes. In an irony that
can only be described as grim it was one of the junctions not on
the ride, the Bow Road roundabout, that was highest in everybody's
minds
following the death of a woman cyclist there on Friday evening -
the second cycling fatality there in less than three weeks - a
minute's silence was held in her memory."
http://road.cc/content/news/47678-lo...ent-blackspots



Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all
come - is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to
work. None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school,
whether that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which
exclude people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those
of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the
Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger, and
designing in inequality. Personally, I find that unacceptable. This
week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant
and Castle roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as
you kept your wits about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists
who have been killed or seriously injured in the past 2 years on
this junction did not keep their wits about them. I believe that
these places are inherently dangerous, and it is negligent in the
extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are remedied
as urgently as possible."

You can already hear the cries from people like Dave, "You give
cyclists special provision and all they do is whine about it."

if it is so obviously dangerous then why on earth do cyclists keep
riding round it? Is it impossible for them to get off and push? they are
at liberty to use the pavements while pushing and can
remount after the " terribly dangerous" bit. Problem solved.



Not sure if I agree with that. That course of action might be credible
if the journey is a one-off. You come across a road that appears to
have exceptional hazards so you do your best to avoid it any way you
can. But if that hazard forms part of your commute, getting off and
walking several hundred yards is not really going to be something very
practical. The better solution would be to find another route which
avoids the hazard.

But here we have a situation where TPTB have painted lanes to
encourage cyclists to use the road. If anything, it highlights my own
belief that where you see cycle lanes you should stay out of them,
find another route, or indeed, get off and walk. Cycle lanes it
seems, are a very dangerous place to cycle and they really only exist
to help traffic flow.


a quarter mile walk (would it be that far?) would only take 7 mins at a
wander. People need to decide how urgent their commute really is in
relation to death.


Almost every commuter on other modes has *at least* that distance to walk
every day anyway. Lots of people walk several times that distance inside Tube
station tunnels.


Do you think that pedestrians would welcome 1000+ cyclists per day
pushing their bikes through the crowded Elephant and Castle
underpasses during the peak periods?
  #10  
Old November 14th 11, 08:51 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,576
Default London Tour de Danger attracts hundreds of riders

On 14/11/2011 19:39, Bertie Wooster wrote:

wrote:


On 14/11/2011 13:05, Mrcheerful wrote:


[ ... ]

Quote:
"The reason we're here today - and the reason why I hope you've all
come - is because none of us should have to fight to make our way to
work. None of us should feel afraid taking our children to school,
whether that's by foot or by bicycle. Designing public spaces which
exclude people on the basis of their ability - that is to say those
of us who aren't able to cycle like Mark Cavendish around the
Elephant and Castle roundabout - is designing in danger, and
designing in inequality. Personally, I find that unacceptable. This
week, Boris Johnson, Mayor of London, said he thought the Elephant
and Castle roundabout was perfectly negotiable by bike so long as
you kept your wits about you. I do not believe that the 89 cyclists
who have been killed or seriously injured in the past 2 years on
this junction did not keep their wits about them. I believe that
these places are inherently dangerous, and it is negligent in the
extreme not to act and ensure that these urban spaces are remedied
as urgently as possible."


if it is so obviously dangerous then why on earth do cyclists keep
riding round it? Is it impossible for them to get off and push? they are
at liberty to use the pavements while pushing and can
remount after the " terribly dangerous" bit. Problem solved.


Not sure if I agree with that. That course of action might be credible
if the journey is a one-off. You come across a road that appears to
have exceptional hazards so you do your best to avoid it any way you
can. But if that hazard forms part of your commute, getting off and
walking several hundred yards is not really going to be something very
practical. The better solution would be to find another route which
avoids the hazard.
But here we have a situation where TPTB have painted lanes to
encourage cyclists to use the road. If anything, it highlights my own
belief that where you see cycle lanes you should stay out of them,
find another route, or indeed, get off and walk. Cycle lanes it
seems, are a very dangerous place to cycle and they really only exist
to help traffic flow.


a quarter mile walk (would it be that far?) would only take 7 mins at a
wander. People need to decide how urgent their commute really is in
relation to death.


Almost every commuter on other modes has *at least* that distance to walk
every day anyway. Lots of people walk several times that distance inside Tube
station tunnels.


Do you think that pedestrians would welcome 1000+ cyclists per day
pushing their bikes through the crowded Elephant and Castle
underpasses during the peak periods?


To be frank, that doesn't really sound like the extra "up to a quarter of a
mile walk" posited by a PP, so he must be thinking of some alternative route
which lengthens the journey by that amount rather than the few tens of yards
(at most) which would result from becoming a subterranean pedestrian.

But don't mistake me - I'm not arguing that cyclists should walk the quarter
mile. I suspect that the risk would be reduced if there was simply less
undertaking of left-turning large vehicles.

And what "improvements" would be possible to completely eliminate such
danger? After all, those undertaking accidents also happen at cross-road
traffic lights as well as at roundabouts. At a junction like the northerly
E&C roundabout, redesigning that as a traffic light junction with no one-way
working at all would cost many millions of pounds and cause chaos both during
the necessary roadworks and after that.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
5 day London Hebrides London Tour? Phil Cook UK 33 July 6th 09 06:18 PM
Hundreds of cyclists take part in 2008 London Naked Bike Ride Maple Tree Techniques 6 June 18th 08 02:30 AM
Danger! Danger! (Worst liability waiver?) [email protected] General 16 February 12th 08 09:18 AM
DO NOT WEAR YOUR HELMLET!! DANGER, DANGER, danger TJ Mountain Biking 4 December 23rd 06 07:03 PM
Riders-in-london jimio Unicycling 16 February 25th 06 11:10 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.