Cycling in Edinburgh, London and Glasgow; Edinburgh wins for consistency in sheer visibility of cycle provision. London's scale makes it a questionable comparison as there is such a big difference between city cycling and suburban/local area cycling. Edinburgh cycle provision is often tokenisitic, even stupid to the practiced cyclist, but its presence is felt and seems to be effective at lower levels. Edinburgh has managed to create a serious commuter/transport cycling presence. Compare this to its neighbour which has far less visible cycle provision, far fewer visible cyclists and a ghastly car culture, to the extent that as a practiced cyclist considering riding in Glasgow, I prefer to dump the bicycle and use public transport instead. This does not mean that I do not agree that freeing up infrastructure to assist direct-route cycling is not good, If Edinburgh did this as well as the high visibility streetmarking it would be better still.
 
Nicholas Oddy.

________________________________

From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list on behalf of Dave du Feu
Sent: Sat 21/03/2009 01:18
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: cycling in Hackney[Scanned-Clean]



Re. push factors - in Edinburgh a significant one (based on a fairly
unrepresentative survey) is probably the difficulty of parking a car
at your place of employment.

Again, perhaps this is different to central London where I imagine
most people don't even consider parking a car at work as an option, so
may be an unconscious push-factor in London - whereas in Edinburgh
it's probably a more conscious one as more of the workforce can
probably get a workplace or onstreet parking place if they try hard
enough and long enough.

Re. Trevor's point ('God save us' if UK modal share is well below 4%)
- commuting cycling modal share in Scotland is 1.6%, and I think 2%
for UK.  Edinburgh has risen from under the Scottish average to around
4% at a time when the national figures were static or falling.

Re. Gary's point - I don't think the Edinburgh model has been
'fashionable throughout the UK' in the last couple of decades, as you
suggest.   What Edinburgh has done is provide WIDESPREAD coloured
cycle facilities - most notably, ASLs at almost EVERY light-controlled
junction, and the bulk of these have now been in place for quite a few
years.  The point which I seem unable to get across is that I am not
in any way thinking of the effect of any given cycle facility on any
given cyclist;  I am talking about the impact on the consciousness of
the entire road-using population of seeing every day every where that
cyclists are expected on the roads, so cycling seems
normal/accceptable (and the widespread coloured facilities also mean
it is perceived as safer).  People in their workplaces now talk about
cycling as something one might consider doing, not just for
enthusiasts.  It is of course likely that once there is a sufficient
critical mass of cyclists, that in itself becomes a major promotional
factor making cycling feel acceptable and normal.  But how do you
achieve that acceptance when bike use is around 1% or 2%? - we feel
Edinburgh has provided one answer.   Incidentally, of course it would
be much nicer if things were less fragmented and/or more Euro-style
but, as Gary says, that is hard to achieve in most existing urban
areas - and please note that it is not that relevant to my argument!

Dave

2009/3/20 gary cummins <[log in to unmask]>:
>
> Alex said:
>  My hunch is that poor PT
>> accessibility relative to other areas within the London is one key factor.
>
> Poor PT in terms of underground, but good PT in terms of buses and
> overground, and PT in London has been rammed for years but nevertheless is
> what is used. I quizzed Trevor Parsons, Borough Co-ordinator of the Hackney
> Group about the data. I interviewed him for my MSc paper on the London Cycle
> Network as well as his opposite number in the council responsoble for cycle
> infrastructure (or the lack of it in Hackney). The avoidance of piecemeal
> infrastructure, and the concentration on amendment of corner radii and modal
> filtering is what the local officers, and campaigner who led this agenda
> belive has worked.
>
> There has been some gentrification in Hackney, but it is localised where the
> city meets the borough, and other boroughs like Camden have been
> dramatically changed in the past 20 years much more so than Hackney, which
> escaped gentrification until the last 8-10 years.
>
> Alex below makes the point that we cyclists in London have known for years
> about packed public trasnport, but rammed public transport is not new in
> London. Fortunately the Hackney model of avoiding piecemeal infrastructure,
> (which Dave de Feu is convinced works, and is the fashionable model
> throughout the UK) seems to be permeating to other boroughs in London, it
> will be interesting to see what happens. Of course, Scandinavian type
> infrastructure, the the behavioural changes that go with will deliver
> greater levels of cycling, but we'd have to do some serious demotion of
> street frontages to deliver this within the urban environment.
>
> Cheers
>
> GC
>
> Trevor Parsons supplied the following data to me:
>
> Hi Gary
>
> The census is the strongest data we have for cycling levels in the past.
>
> 1981: 2.56%
> 1991: 4.03%
> 2001: 6.83%
>
> And certainly a large rise since then.
>
> In reference the Dave's Edinburgh figure: Is 4% well above what is normal in
> Britain. God save us, maybe it is!
>
> As quoted here:
> http://www.hackney-cyclists.org.uk/hackney_tops_cycling_growth.htm
>
> Cheers,
>
> Trevor
>
>
>> Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:10:27 +0000
>> From: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: cycling in Hackney
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Dear C&S Research Group
>>
>> Alex makes a very good point. It would be remiss to think that the
>> increase in cycling had come about as a result of pull factors alone. Does
>> anybody have any data on the accessibility characteristics of areas in
>> Hackney with high cycling growth compared to other similar areas
>> within/outside the borough with no/low growth? My hunch is that poor PT
>> accessibility relative to other areas within the London is one key factor.
>>
>> Furthermore, a social-cultural analysis behind the reasons for increase in
>> cycle growth is required. What have been the demographic changes in the
>> area (and nature of housing) over the years and has that had an impact on
>> levels of cycling? I am reluctant to use the 'G' word.
>>
>> Interesting study for a budding researcher to follow-up!
>>
>> Tim
>>
>>
>> > Hi folks
>> >
>> > Couldn't resist adding my tuppence to the "why is cycling in Hackney so
>> > popular" debate, purely because I'm a daily cyclist from Hackney to
>> > central London, and have been for years.
>> >
>> > Funnily enough the biggest issue for me was actually the fact that
>> > public transport is pushed to the limit: There is no direct tube
>> > service; the Overground is so busy you can't physically get on in the
>> > morning and the buses are heaving and take forever. So cycling is
>> > genuinely quicker, even if you actually stop at the red lights (which of
>> > course I always do).
>> >
>> > I just mention this because I didn't see recognition of these "push"
>> > factors, only a discussion of "pull" factors (e.g. are cycle lanes good
>> > or bad).
>> >
>> > For what its worth, I do think the "pull" factors, e.g. traffic calming
>> > measures, and allowing cyclists through roads closed to cars, and other
>> > measures the Council have brought in have been fantastic in Hackney - I
>> > can go most of the way seeing hardly any traffic at all.
>> >
>> > Just one other observation - the Council have painted giant cycle logos
>> > on roads designated as Cycle Routes - not quite as obvious as
>> > Edinburgh's coloured lanes, but it does tell drivers that they should
>> > expect to see cycles, and is a bit of sneaky promotion too.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> >
>> > Alex Veitch
>> > Integrated Transport Manager
>> > ATOC
>> > 020 7841 8052
>> > 07825 376 130