Sorry everyone – didn’t mean for this to go to the whole group.
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Handy, Susan
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2013 12:58 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Digest - 27 Oct 2013 to 28 Oct 2013 - Special issue (#2013-83)
Lake – Having seen your posting to the cycling and society list, I’ve been meaning to introduce myself, as I am very interested in cycling developments in Chile (being interested
in cycling planning in general and having spent enjoyed some time in Chile) and as UC Davis is trying to set up exchanges with Pontificia Universidad Catolica de Chile. Pablo
Andrés Guarda, a student of Juan de Dios Ortúzar, will be coming here in January. I’d be interested
in hearing more about your work, and let me know if you have any interest in coming to Davis (the bicycling capitol of the US!).
Best,
Susan
**************************************
Susan Handy, Professor and Chair
Department of Environmental Science and Policy
University of California, Davis
1 Shields Avenue
Davis, CA 95616
(530) 752-5878
**************************************
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of Lake Sagaris
Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 2:22 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Digest - 27 Oct 2013 to 28 Oct 2013 - Special issue (#2013-83)
Based on our work here in Chile, with the Dutch NGO Interface for Cycling Expertise, and the CROW manual (now complemented by similar
efforts from Mexico, India, the US and elsewhere), we consider measures in three spheres essential for leveraging significant change in cycle rates, as we have achieved here in Santiago. They are education/behaviour change, urban measures and design, fostering
a cycling economy (with the right services, accessories, etc.).
In each of these three spheres there is quite a long and very interesting set of measures, but what is important is how each city chooses among them, adapting
them to its own culture, and leveraging change, both individually and above all through their interaction.
We are convinced that a robust civil society environment is essential for this purpose, as is clear from experiences elsewhere around the world, and in our
own case too. I documented this in some detail in my recent doctoral thesis, if anyone is curious to know more. Building civil society is a complex issue for developing, democratizing countries in Latin America and elsewhere, since most of our "civic infrastructure"
(the social, political and financial structures that make a robust civil society possible), has traditionally been provided by development agencies and solidarity from abroad. We have to learn to build our own in what is normally a very hostile environment,
based on clientalism rather than active independent citizens and their organizations.
All best
Lake
Dr. Lake Sagaris
BFA, MSc., PhD urbanismo y participación
Post-doctoral fellow
Department of Transport Engineering and Logistics
Centro de Desarrollo Urbano Sustentable (Centre for Sustainable Urban Development, CEDEUS)
BRT Centre of Excellence, Pontificial Catholic University of Chile
Urban advisor: Ciudad Viva
E-mail:
[log in to unmask],
[log in to unmask],
Tel: 569 6321-0157
On Monday, October 28, 2013 6:10:51 PM, CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY automatic digest system <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
There are 22 messages totaling 10632 lines in this issue.
Topics in this special issue:
1. Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate? (21)
2. In progress cycling research list
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2013 21:42:27 -0300
From: Carlosfelipe Pardo <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>>
>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>>
>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>>>
>>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>>>
>>>
>>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>>>
>>>
>>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have
never found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also
has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>>
>>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve Melia
>>> Senior Lecturer
>>> Transport and Planning
>>> University of the West of England
>>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 00:57:34 +0000
From: Ian Perry <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
A decade ago I was living in Japan, and using StreetView today, I saw many
more bikes in the streets than I remember. There were bicycles, but no
bicycle infrastructure. Many bicycles were parked at the railways station.
The owner would get off their bicycle, put the kickstand down and then go
to catch their train. In any other country, I would have had to describe
the owner applying all manor of security devices to their bicycles. There
was no fear of crime and no bicycle theft.
Many of the streets in Japan had no segregation for pedestrians, because
there was not enough space for footways. Until you got to the main roads,
vehicles moved slowly. I assume it would be shameful to travel at an
inappropriate speed.
As for infrastructure, I've seen a study that found that children in the
Netherlands are a much larger segment of Dutch cyclists than Danish
children are in Copenhagen. The properly segregated cycle paths are much
better for children.
I also notice during my months in Freiburg, Germany, that fewer children
seemed to cycle there than in the Netherlands. Freiburg has a number of
naked streets. Even as a cyclist, you have to be alert to spot some of the
junctions that are not marked in anyway (no paint on the road or signs),
and appear from behind parked vehicles. No one is quite sure who has right
of way. On busier streets and roads, there are cycle paths, usually
painted onto pavements. Many of these are poor, little better than what is
often found in the UK. But, Freiburg, a student city, is still a "cycling
city".
I'm trying to picture Basel in Switzerland. There is a high level of
cycling there, but I don't recall seeing excellent bicycle infrastructure.
Some was definitely the advisory cycle paths we have in the UK - although
I think the Swiss have measured the width of a human being.
I think that Basel is a city without an extensive network of '*segregated*'
bicycle routes, but cycling has a modal share of 20-25%.
http://www.ecf.com/wp-content/uploads/Hammer-A_-Basel-How-to-Become-the-Most-Bike-and-Pedestrian-Friendly-City-in-Switzerland.pdf
Ian
On Sun, Oct 27, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't
> Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will
> deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you
> realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is
> almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics,
> infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all related to each other. It
> may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle.
> One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling
> on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of
> cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network
> of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course.
> 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered
> permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several
> years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never found an example
> of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city
> which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few
> cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal).
> Osaka also has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I
> can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which
> might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 15:40:27 +1000
From: Matthew Burke <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Hi Steve,
Firstly, footpath cycling is legal in much of Japan but this was a stop-gap
'solution' to previous high rates of car-bike crashes on-road. This policy
remains contentious and the road safety people wish they'd made better
choices in years gone by as they still have many incidents at intersections
and driveways. They are finding it difficult to create design options for
safe footpath cycling infrastructure (ask Prof Hideo Yamanaka if you want
to know more on this). Many Japanese researchers I've spoken with wish
they'd built segregated networks when they had options previously.
Second, China's best cycling cities (including Shanghai) have high levels
of segregated infrastructure and strong enforcement to keep cars from
parking in the bike lanes. Their experience also supports the role of a
good network of safe, segregated routes as part of efforts to promote
utilitarian cross-demographic cycling. Notably, these cities have also made
segregated infrastructure available to the large number of e-bikes in their
fleets.
It's extremely hard to make any case for not having large, connected,
segregated networks these days.
Hope that helps,
Matt
--
*Dr Matthew I Burke*
Australian Research Council Future Fellow and Senior Research Fellow
Urban Research Program
Griffith University
Bldg N78, Room 3.14
170 Kessels Road
Nathan Qld 4111
Australia
[log in to unmask]
Ph. +61 7 3735 7106
Twitter. #drmattburke
On 28 October 2013 01:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't
> Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will
> deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you
> realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is
> almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics,
> infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all related to each other. It
> may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle.
> One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling
> on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of
> cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network
> of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course.
> 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered
> permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several
> years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never found an example
> of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city
> which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few
> cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal).
> Osaka also has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I
> can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which
> might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 08:39:20 +0000
From: Thomas Alexander Sick Nielsen <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Hi Steve,
You could have a look at: Shkodra (Albania). An associate city to the so-called 'Champ' project.
http://www.champ-cycling.eu/en/The-Champs/Shkodra-associate-city/Shkodra-overwiev/
They seem to be cycling - but are not very keen on segregation.
Thomas S. N.
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Matthew Burke
Sent: 28. oktober 2013 06:40
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Hi Steve,
Firstly, footpath cycling is legal in much of Japan but this was a stop-gap 'solution' to previous high rates of car-bike crashes on-road. This policy remains contentious and the road safety people wish they'd made better choices in years gone by as they still
have many incidents at intersections and driveways. They are finding it difficult to create design options for safe footpath cycling infrastructure (ask Prof Hideo Yamanaka if you want to know more on this). Many Japanese researchers I've spoken with wish
they'd built segregated networks when they had options previously.
Second, China's best cycling cities (including Shanghai) have high levels of segregated infrastructure and strong enforcement to keep cars from parking in the bike lanes. Their experience also supports the role of a good network of safe, segregated routes as
part of efforts to promote utilitarian cross-demographic cycling. Notably, these cities have also made segregated infrastructure available to the large number of e-bikes in their fleets.
It's extremely hard to make any case for not having large, connected, segregated networks these days.
Hope that helps,
Matt
--
Dr Matthew I Burke
Australian Research Council Future Fellow and Senior Research Fellow
Urban Research Program
Griffith University
Bldg N78, Room 3.14
170 Kessels Road
Nathan Qld 4111
Australia
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Ph. +61 7 3735 7106
Twitter. #drmattburke
On 28 October 2013 01:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk<http://www.uit.co.uk>). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all
related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
Best Regards
Steve Melia
Senior Lecturer
Transport and Planning
University of the West of England
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 15:56:15 +0000
From: John Meudell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and convenient).
But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
Cheers
John Meudell
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Steve,
the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That debate
came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect, it would
be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated
network, but low levels of cycling.
Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all
related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
Best Regards
Steve Melia
Senior Lecturer
Transport and Planning
University of the West of England
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:24:34 +0200
From: Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>
> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>
> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>
> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>
> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>
> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>
> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>
> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>
> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>
>
>
>
> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 17:50:19 +0000
From: John Meudell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations across
the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
Cheers
John
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and convenient).
But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
Cheers
John Meudell
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Steve,
the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That debate
came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect, it would
be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated
network, but low levels of cycling.
Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all
related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
Best Regards
Steve Melia
Senior Lecturer
Transport and Planning
University of the West of England
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:05:07 +0000
From: Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations across
the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>
> Cheers
>
> John
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>
> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>
> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>
> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>
> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>
> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>
> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>
> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>
> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>
>
>
>
> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:11:50 +0200
From: Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
You are so right re cultural context - there's more to bicycle-friendliness than infrastructure, but too often 'policy tourists' as we call them return with tales of bike lanes, and fail to see the rest (eg the impact sprawl , density, social stratification
/ equity, and the quality and availability of public transport networks have on 'cycle-friendliness'... Or quite simply the cost of bicycles...
On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>
> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>
> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>
> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>
> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>
> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>
> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>
> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>
> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>
>
>
>
> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:18:09 +0200
From: Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being gobookee.org.
On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations across
the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
>> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>
>> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>>
>> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>>
>> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>>
>> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>>
>> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>>
>> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> John Meudell
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
>> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>
>> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>>
>> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>>
>> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>>
>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>>
>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>>
>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>>
>>
>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>>
>>
>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have
never found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also
has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>
>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>>
>> Steve Melia
>> Senior Lecturer
>> Transport and Planning
>> University of the West of England
>>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:30:08 +0000
From: Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
I don't think the original website has a download option
http://www.crow.nl/publicaties/design-manual-for-bicycle-traffic
Yes, I would be vary too.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 28 Oct 2013, at 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being gobookee.org.
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations
across the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>
>>> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>>>
>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>>>
>>> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>>>
>>> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>>>
>>> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>>>
>>> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>>>
>>> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> John Meudell
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>
>>> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>>>
>>> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>>>
>>> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>>>
>>> Kat
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>>>
>>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>>>
>>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>>>
>>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>>>
>>>
>>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>>>
>>>
>>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have
never found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also
has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>>
>>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve Melia
>>> Senior Lecturer
>>> Transport and Planning
>>> University of the West of England
>>>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:25:02 +0100
From: Stefan Groth <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
GoBookee is clearly a scam – you should under no circumstances give them your CC info. I suppose other sites offering the CROW manual are similar. See
http://safeweb.norton.com/reviews?url=gobookee.net
and http://www.mywot.com/en/scorecard/ebookee.org
Stefan
On 28.10.2013, at 19:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one beinggobookee.org.
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations
across the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>
>>> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>>>
>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>>>
>>> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>>>
>>> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>>>
>>> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>>>
>>> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>>>
>>> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> John Meudell
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>
>>> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>>>
>>> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>>>
>>> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>>>
>>> Kat
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>>>
>>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>>>
>>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridgewww.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>>>
>>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>>>
>>>
>>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>>>
>>>
>>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have
never found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also
has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>>
>>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve Melia
>>> Senior Lecturer
>>> Transport and Planning
>>> University of the West of England
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:34:49 +0000
From: Jim Davis <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it available
on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling Embassy of
Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which took great
patience and dedication :)
John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have
interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people
as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap
that has also banged his head against the wall of British Cycle
Campaigning. One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the
Cycling Embassy of Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on
his Study Tour as it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling
infrastructure but quite something else to see it in context and how it's
used and why a particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of
us continue to go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I
am heading to Amsterdam at the end of the week (partly for the day job for
World Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we
rode off the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here
and it was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting to
arbitrarily write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of
'policy tourists'. Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally
ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to
post to members on a regular basis :)
Wishing you all the best
--
Jim Davis
Mob: 07545 598998
Twitter: @lofidelityjim <http://twitter.com/lofidelityjim>
Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
@GBCycleEmbassy <http://twitter.com/gbcycleembassy>
Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
*Personal Jottings: **The Lo Fidelity Bicycle
Club<http://lofidelitybicycleclub.co.uk/>
*
*
*
On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing
> over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being
> gobookee.org.
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about
> an electronic version.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a
> leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did
> ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways
> engineers and their organizations across the UK, the only other copy I’ve
> ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.****
>
> ** **
>
> Cheers****
>
> ** **
>
> John****
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [
> mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>]
> *On Behalf Of *Jennings Gail
> *Sent:* 28 October 2013 16:25
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?****
>
> ** **
>
> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on
> sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
> ****
>
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:****
>
> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are
> quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have
> “read” that document. ****
>
> ****
>
> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch”
> campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a
> jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of
> whom take the time to gain an understanding of the wider transportation and
> spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture
> within which those take place.****
>
> ****
>
> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts
> have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That
> said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and
> trains and aeroplanes!) in a number of countries I have (of necessity)
> learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and
> norms of the particular country I’m in.****
>
> ****
>
> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the
> context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view,
> will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.****
>
> ****
>
> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and
> boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved
> there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city
> where cycling is comparatively safe and convenient). But, without
> recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling
> take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst,
> downright dangerous.****
>
> ****
>
> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.****
>
> ****
>
> Cheers****
>
> ****
>
> John Meudell****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> *From:* Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [
> mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>]
> *On Behalf Of *Carlosfelipe Pardo
> *Sent:* 28 October 2013 00:42
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?****
>
> ****
>
> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence
> of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>
> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos****
>
>
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:****
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary
> item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city -
> as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and
> other vehicle restraint measures.****
>
> ****
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad****
>
>
> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:****
>
> Steve,****
>
> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the
> answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were
> proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might
> be some researcher bias here! That debate came to no conclusion, since as
> you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work
> together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically
> impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and
> effect, it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or
> is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely
> that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of
> this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated network, but low
> levels of cycling.****
>
> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to
> identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination
> of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which
> show that segregation has some effect, and some which show the opposite,
> but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect
> also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with
> segregation.****
>
> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong
> question.****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> ****
>
> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:****
>
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't
> Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will
> deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you
> realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is
> almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics,
> infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all related to each other. It
> may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle.
> One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling
> on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of
> cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network
> of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course.
> 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered
> permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several
> years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never found an example
> of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city
> which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few
> cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal).
> Osaka also has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I
> can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which
> might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England****
>
> ****
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 18:53:12 +0000
From: Rachel Aldred <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: In progress cycling research list
Apologies for cross-posting.
Thank you to everyone who sent me details of their in-progress cycling research.
I have now put the list of in progress cycling research on my website as a pdf. I hope it is of interest. Please feel free to share it.
http://rachelaldred.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Cycling-research-list.pdf
best wishes
Rachel
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:10:12 -0700
From: Adonia Lugo <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
In trying to understand this policy and transportation culture change
chicken-egg question, I have found it useful to look at the shift to
driving in the United States in the 1920s, particularly in Los Angeles.
Scott Bottles' 1987 book *Los Angeles and the Automobile* provides a lot of
insight into how street redesign followed demand, not the other way around.
The current paradigm in American bike advocacy is to build it before they
come, but it's certainly worth considering whether working in other ways to
grow bicycling demand might make a transition into complete streets less
controversial.
--
Adonia E. Lugo, Ph.D.
Bicycle Anthropologist
www.urbanadonia.com
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Jim Davis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it
> available on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling
> Embassy of Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which
> took great patience and dedication :)
>
> John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have
> interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people
> as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap
> that has also banged his head against the wall of British Cycle
> Campaigning. One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the
> Cycling Embassy of Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on
> his Study Tour as it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling
> infrastructure but quite something else to see it in context and how it's
> used and why a particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of
> us continue to go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I
> am heading to Amsterdam at the end of the week (partly for the day job for
> World Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we
> rode off the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here
> and it was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting to
> arbitrarily write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of
> 'policy tourists'. Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
>
> I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally
> ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to
> post to members on a regular basis :)
>
> Wishing you all the best
>
> --
> Jim Davis
> Mob: 07545 598998
> Twitter: @lofidelityjim <http://twitter.com/lofidelityjim>
>
> Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
> www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
> @GBCycleEmbassy <http://twitter.com/gbcycleembassy>
>
> Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
>
> *Personal Jottings: **The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club<http://lofidelitybicycleclub.co.uk/>
> *
> *
> *
>
>
> On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]>wrote:
>
>> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of
>> handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one
>> being gobookee.org.
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard
>> about an electronic version.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a
>> leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did
>> ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways
>> engineers and their organizations across the UK, the only other copy I’ve
>> ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Cheers****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> John****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> *From:* Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>]
>> *On Behalf Of *Jennings Gail
>> *Sent:* 28 October 2013 16:25
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?****
>>
>> ** **
>>
>> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on
>> sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>> ****
>>
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:***
>> *
>>
>> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are
>> quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have
>> “read” that document. ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch”
>> campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a
>> jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of
>> whom take the time to gain an understanding of the wider transportation and
>> spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture
>> within which those take place.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts
>> have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That
>> said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and
>> trains and aeroplanes!) in a number of countries I have (of necessity)
>> learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and
>> norms of the particular country I’m in.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the
>> context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view,
>> will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and
>> boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved
>> there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city
>> where cycling is comparatively safe and convenient). But, without
>> recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling
>> take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst,
>> downright dangerous.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Cheers****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> John Meudell****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> *From:* Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [
>> mailto:[log in to unmask]<[log in to unmask]>]
>> *On Behalf Of *Carlosfelipe Pardo
>> *Sent:* 28 October 2013 00:42
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence
>> of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>>
>> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos****
>>
>>
>> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary
>> item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city -
>> as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and
>> other vehicle restraint measures.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> Sent from my iPad****
>>
>>
>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]>
>> wrote:****
>>
>> Steve,****
>>
>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the
>> answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were
>> proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might
>> be some researcher bias here! That debate came to no conclusion, since as
>> you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work
>> together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically
>> impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and
>> effect, it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or
>> is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely
>> that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of
>> this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated network, but low
>> levels of cycling.****
>>
>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to
>> identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination
>> of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which
>> show that segregation has some effect, and some which show the opposite,
>> but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect
>> also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with
>> segregation.****
>>
>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong
>> question.****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> ****
>>
>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:****
>>
>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't
>> Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will
>> deal with issues related to cycling.
>>
>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you
>> realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is
>> almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics,
>> infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all related to each other. It
>> may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle.
>> One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling
>> on normal roads' is to ask:
>>
>>
>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates
>> of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive
>> network of segregated cycle routes?
>>
>>
>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course.
>> 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered
>> permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several
>> years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never found an example
>> of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city
>> which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few
>> cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal).
>> Osaka also has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I
>> can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>
>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which
>> might help to answer this question?
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>>
>> Steve Melia
>> Senior Lecturer
>> Transport and Planning
>> University of the West of England****
>>
>> ****
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 19:56:54 +0000
From: Michael Cavenett <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
When we at LCC took our study trip to the Netherlands we deliberately visited higher-density urban areas such as Amsterdam, Utrecht and Rotterdam. We were guided by knowledgeable people from CROW, the Dutch Cycling Embassy and the Fietsersbond in order to provide
context to what we saw. We also met the architect of Sustainable Safety (now retired) and others from Stop de Kindermoord.
I don't claim to be the world's leading expert on Dutch infrastructure, but I am an advocate. I'm comfortable with this position because I've been to the Netherlands (several times), ridden it, talked about it, compared it with my own experience living in the
UK and other countries, read the CROW manual (we have a copy, of course), and done my best to absorb information from countless other blogs (both for and against). I would say the same is true for my colleagues, and resent the cheap jibe that we might be "policy
tourists".
As for our trip being a "jolly", I can honestly say our study tour was one of the most tiring weeks I've ever worked.
So rather than insulting those who've taken the effort to experience what it's like across the North Sea, I would reserve scorn for the countless people (the history of British cycle campaigning is littered with them) who dismissed Dutch cycling facilities
without ever having seen them.
Kind Regards
Mike Cavenett
Communications Manager
London Cycling Campaign
On 28 Oct 2013, at 18:34, Jim Davis wrote:
> I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it available on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which took great patience and dedication :)
>
> John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap that has also banged his head
against the wall of British Cycle Campaigning. One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on his Study Tour as it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling
infrastructure but quite something else to see it in context and how it's used and why a particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of us continue to go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I am heading to Amsterdam at the
end of the week (partly for the day job for World Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we rode off the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here and it was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting
to arbitrarily write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of 'policy tourists'. Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
>
> I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to post to members on a regular basis :)
>
> Wishing you all the best
>
> --
> Jim Davis
> Mob: 07545 598998
> Twitter: @lofidelityjim
>
> Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
> www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
> @GBCycleEmbassy
>
> Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
>
> Personal Jottings: The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club
>
>
>
> On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being gobookee.org.
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>>
>> Kat
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations
across the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> John Meudell
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>>>
>>> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kat
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Steve,
>>>
>>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>>>
>>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>>>
>>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>>>
>>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>>>
>>>
>>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>>>
>>>
>>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have
never found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also
has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>>
>>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>>
>>> Steve Melia
>>> Senior Lecturer
>>> Transport and Planning
>>> University of the West of England
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Mike
101 Ohio Building
Deals Gateway
London
SE13 7RX
07939 606359
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 22:13:26 +0200
From: Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Oh dear re 'policy tourists' ... Be assured I'm referring to no one in any of the organizations you mention or members of this group; I refer specifically to the situation as (often) experienced in my work, my country and my continent, which reflects a significantly
different urban fabric and socio-economic context to that of Europe and the UK, and the lessons are seldom as transferable as planners would wish them to be...
On 28 Oct 2013, at 9:56 PM, Michael Cavenett <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> When we at LCC took our study trip to the Netherlands we deliberately visited higher-density urban areas such as Amsterdam, Utrecht and Rotterdam. We were guided by knowledgeable people from CROW, the Dutch Cycling Embassy and the Fietsersbond in order to
provide context to what we saw. We also met the architect of Sustainable Safety (now retired) and others from Stop de Kindermoord.
>
> I don't claim to be the world's leading expert on Dutch infrastructure, but I am an advocate. I'm comfortable with this position because I've been to the Netherlands (several times), ridden it, talked about it, compared it with my own experience living in
the UK and other countries, read the CROW manual (we have a copy, of course), and done my best to absorb information from countless other blogs (both for and against). I would say the same is true for my colleagues, and resent the cheap jibe that we might
be "policy tourists".
>
> As for our trip being a "jolly", I can honestly say our study tour was one of the most tiring weeks I've ever worked.
>
> So rather than insulting those who've taken the effort to experience what it's like across the North Sea, I would reserve scorn for the countless people (the history of British cycle campaigning is littered with them) who dismissed Dutch cycling facilities
without ever having seen them.
>
> Kind Regards
>
> Mike Cavenett
> Communications Manager
> London Cycling Campaign
>
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 18:34, Jim Davis wrote:
>
>> I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it available on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which took great patience and dedication :)
>>
>> John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap that has also banged his head
against the wall of British Cycle Campaigning. One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on his Study Tour as it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling
infrastructure but quite something else to see it in context and how it's used and why a particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of us continue to go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I am heading to Amsterdam at the
end of the week (partly for the day job for World Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we rode off the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here and it was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting
to arbitrarily write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of 'policy tourists'. Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
>>
>> I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to post to members on a regular basis :)
>>
>> Wishing you all the best
>>
>> --
>> Jim Davis
>> Mob: 07545 598998
>> Twitter: @lofidelityjim
>>
>> Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
>> www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
>> @GBCycleEmbassy
>>
>> Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
>>
>> Personal Jottings: The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club
>>
>>
>>
>> On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being gobookee.org.
>>>
>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>>>>
>>>> Kat
>>>>
>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>
>>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations
across the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> John
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
>>>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an
understanding of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a
number of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe
and convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> John Meudell
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
>>>>> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>>>>>
>>>>> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Kat
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve,
>>>>>
>>>>> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here!
That debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>>>>>
>>>>> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>>>>>
>>>>> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>>>>>
>>>>> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour
are all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have
never found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also
has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best Regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Steve Melia
>>>>> Senior Lecturer
>>>>> Transport and Planning
>>>>> University of the West of England
>>>>>
>
>
> Mike
>
> 101 Ohio Building
> Deals Gateway
> London
> SE13 7RX
>
> 07939 606359
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:34:45 +0000
From: John Meudell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Sorry, but youve visited high density, urban cities in the mostly densely
populated part of the Netherlands. They are not necessarily typical, and to
choose to do so suggests a desire to constrain the insight and conclusions.
Whilst CROW is universally accepted as the definitive cycle design guide for
the Netherlands, it isnt necessarily what happens outside of the cities
youve visited. By way of example, and because its topical, Id note that
the Dutch have four generic roundabout designs, only one of which appears in
the CROW cycle design guide. Furthermore the currently topical shared
space concept, which you tend to find in the northern provinces, doesnt
even warrant a mention.
If you have absorbed the CROW guide than Im sure that you will have noted
that, in the cities you referred to, most of segregated facilities
correspond to bus routes, in line with the CROW guide, which prioritizes
segregation from large vehicles, something that has been practiced for many
years. Segregation of cyclists is not as generally applied as most
proponents would have you believe, and the CROW guide provides a structure
in which segregation of cyclists is prioritized based on route
characteristics and setting, a fact that does not often emerge in
conversations with non-technical staff.
The fact is that, as with anywhere (and any subject), practices vary, more
often than not (at least in the Netherlands) because of context, even though
a common set of basic principles apply. To take a balanced and
representative view of provision I would have at least ensured I visited a
wide range of locations and settings.
And three of the four organizations you met with are campaigning
organizations. For a complete view I would have also talked to planners and
engineers at provincial bodies, along with officials at the Transport
Ministry (which, over the years, I have managed to do).
Having lived and worked in the Netherlands since the mid 70s, what concerns
me is if narrow interpretation becomes converted into equally narrow and
inflexible dogma….something that is the very antithesis of what the Dutch
do. Indeed, I find narrow and inflexible dogma somewhat insulting myself.
Beste Wensen
John Meudell
C/Eng, MIMechE
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Michael Cavenett
Sent: 28 October 2013 19:57
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
When we at LCC took our study trip to the Netherlands we deliberately
visited higher-density urban areas such as Amsterdam, Utrecht and Rotterdam.
We were guided by knowledgeable people from CROW, the Dutch Cycling Embassy
and the Fietsersbond in order to provide context to what we saw. We also met
the architect of Sustainable Safety (now retired) and others from Stop de
Kindermoord.
I don't claim to be the world's leading expert on Dutch infrastructure, but
I am an advocate. I'm comfortable with this position because I've been to
the Netherlands (several times), ridden it, talked about it, compared it
with my own experience living in the UK and other countries, read the CROW
manual (we have a copy, of course), and done my best to absorb information
from countless other blogs (both for and against). I would say the same is
true for my colleagues, and resent the cheap jibe that we might be "policy
tourists".
As for our trip being a "jolly", I can honestly say our study tour was one
of the most tiring weeks I've ever worked.
So rather than insulting those who've taken the effort to experience what
it's like across the North Sea, I would reserve scorn for the countless
people (the history of British cycle campaigning is littered with them) who
dismissed Dutch cycling facilities without ever having seen them.
Kind Regards
Mike Cavenett
Communications Manager
London Cycling Campaign
On 28 Oct 2013, at 18:34, Jim Davis wrote:
I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it available
on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling Embassy of
Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which took great
patience and dedication :)
John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have
interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people
as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap
that has also banged his head against the wall of British Cycle Campaigning.
One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the Cycling Embassy of
Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on his Study Tour as
it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling infrastructure but
quite something else to see it in context and how it's used and why a
particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of us continue to
go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I am heading to
Amsterdam at the end of the week (partly for the day job for World
Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we rode off
the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here and it
was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting to arbitrarily
write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of 'policy tourists'.
Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally
ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to
post to members on a regular basis :)
Wishing you all the best
--
Jim Davis
Mob: 07545 598998
Twitter: <http://twitter.com/lofidelityjim> @lofidelityjim
Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
<http://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/>
www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
<http://twitter.com/gbcycleembassy> @GBCycleEmbassy
Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
Personal Jottings: The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club
<http://lofidelitybicycleclub.co.uk/>
On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing
over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being
gobookee.org <http://gobookee.org/> .
On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about
an electronic version.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a
leg (for a self-financing researcher….they dont do discounts (I did ask))!
Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways
engineers and their organizations across the UK, the only other copy Ive
ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
Cheers
John
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on
sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite
clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have read
that document.
To be honest Im really quite disappointed with the Lets Go Dutch
campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a
jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of
whom take the time to gain an understanding of the wider transportation and
spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture
within which those take place.
This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts
have fallen down (though Ill agree Im not as widely read as some). That
said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and
trains and aeroplanes!) in a number of countries I have (of necessity)
learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and
norms of the particular country Im in.
To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the
context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view,
will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
Dont get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats
and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in
the 70s, Im all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where
cycling is comparatively safe and convenient). But, without recognising and
addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results
are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
Cheers
John Meudell
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of
lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary
item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city -
as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and
other vehicle restraint measures.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Steve,
the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer,
and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were
proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might
be some researcher bias here! That debate came to no conclusion, since as
you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together
and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible.
Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect, it would
be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not
responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any
single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g.
Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated network, but low levels of
cycling.
Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to
identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination
of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which
show that segregation has some effect, and some which show the opposite, but
in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect
also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with
segregation.
To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong
question.
On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't
Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk <http://www.uit.co.uk/> ). A few
of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you
realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is
almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics,
infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all related to each other. It
may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle.
One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on
normal roads' is to ask:
Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of
cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network
of segregated cycle routes?
A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation'
may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads
closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying
European 'cycling cities', I have never found an example of such an
exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which
appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle
paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka
also has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't
find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which
might help to answer this question?
Best Regards
Steve Melia
Senior Lecturer
Transport and Planning
University of the West of England
Mike
101 Ohio Building
Deals Gateway
London
SE13 7RX
07939 606359
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:35:24 +0000
From: John Meudell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
That’s what I paid for my copy.
Cheers
John
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Katja Leyendecker
Sent: 28 October 2013 18:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations across
the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
Cheers
John
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and convenient).
But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
Cheers
John Meudell
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Steve,
the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That debate
came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect, it would
be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated
network, but low levels of cycling.
Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all
related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
Best Regards
Steve Melia
Senior Lecturer
Transport and Planning
University of the West of England
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 17:42:51 -0300
From: Carlosfelipe Pardo <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
You can get a Spanish translation for free - legally - from ciudadviva.cl
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
> On 28/10/2013, at 17:35, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> That’s what I paid for my copy.
>
> Cheers
>
> John
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Katja Leyendecker
> Sent: 28 October 2013 18:05
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations across
the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>
> Cheers
>
> John
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>
> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>
> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>
> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>
> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>
> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>
> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>
> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>
> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>
>
>
>
> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 20:54:14 +0000
From: John Meudell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Thanks
David now lives in the same town that I spent most of (the Dutch part) of my
career in. So Ive seen how Assen has grown and changed over the years
(when I first stayed there, in 1977, it had a population of something like
25 30.000…now its 62,000), something David hasnt. David and myself
often have conversation about why and how things are what they are…..and why
people from outside see what they see.
If you are heading off to Amsterdam….dont. It, and the West Netherlands,
isnt necessarily typical. Go visit some obscure towns in Noord Holland
(Alkmaar a good example, or Schagen, both of which I know well) or go to
Zwolle, or Hoogeveen. And dont just take a few photos, take some time to
understand the spatial and transport contexts, and then why planners and
engineers came to the solutions they use.
The reality is that the Netherlands have the same problems and constraints
of legacy infrastructure as elsewhere, and will adopt whatever solution is
the most effective and practical. The UK has more legacy than non-legacy
infrastructure….therefore its the legacy driven solutions that are more
relevant than the new-build.
And I am particularly irritated when the cycling community dismisses the
views of those of us in the community of buitenlanders whove lived there,
worked there and studied there over a period of many, many, years.
Oooh, and Id add Denmark to your last comment, a country which has adopted
solutions that are often very different to those of the Netherlands….even
though they still achieve cyclist casualty rates comparable to the
Netherlands. Why is there so little discussion of that countrys approach?
Cheers
John Meudell
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jim Davis
Sent: 28 October 2013 18:35
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it available
on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling Embassy of
Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which took great
patience and dedication :)
John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have
interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people
as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap
that has also banged his head against the wall of British Cycle Campaigning.
One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the Cycling Embassy of
Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on his Study Tour as
it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling infrastructure but
quite something else to see it in context and how it's used and why a
particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of us continue to
go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I am heading to
Amsterdam at the end of the week (partly for the day job for World
Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we rode off
the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here and it
was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting to arbitrarily
write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of 'policy tourists'.
Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally
ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to
post to members on a regular basis :)
Wishing you all the best
--
Jim Davis
Mob: 07545 598998
Twitter: <http://twitter.com/lofidelityjim> @lofidelityjim
Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
<http://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/>
www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
<http://twitter.com/gbcycleembassy> @GBCycleEmbassy
Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
Personal Jottings: The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club
<http://lofidelitybicycleclub.co.uk/>
On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing
over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being
gobookee.org.
On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about
an electronic version.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a
leg (for a self-financing researcher….they dont do discounts (I did ask))!
Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways
engineers and their organizations across the UK, the only other copy Ive
ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
Cheers
John
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on
sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite
clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have read
that document.
To be honest Im really quite disappointed with the Lets Go Dutch
campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a
jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of
whom take the time to gain an understanding of the wider transportation and
spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture
within which those take place.
This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts
have fallen down (though Ill agree Im not as widely read as some). That
said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and
trains and aeroplanes!) in a number of countries I have (of necessity)
learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and
norms of the particular country Im in.
To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the
context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view,
will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
Dont get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats
and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in
the 70s, Im all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where
cycling is comparatively safe and convenient). But, without recognising and
addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results
are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
Cheers
John Meudell
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of
lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary
item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city -
as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and
other vehicle restraint measures.
Kat
Sent from my iPad
On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Steve,
the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer,
and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were
proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might
be some researcher bias here! That debate came to no conclusion, since as
you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together
and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible.
Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect, it would
be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not
responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any
single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g.
Milton Keynes with an extensive segregated network, but low levels of
cycling.
Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to
identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination
of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which
show that segregation has some effect, and some which show the opposite, but
in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect
also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with
segregation.
To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong
question.
On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't
Moving' (for UIT Cambridge www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal
with issues related to cycling.
The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you
realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is
almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics,
infrastructure, culture and behaviour are all related to each other. It
may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle.
One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on
normal roads' is to ask:
Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of
cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network
of segregated cycle routes?
A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation'
may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads
closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying
European 'cycling cities', I have never found an example of such an
exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which
appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle
paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka
also has narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't
find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which
might help to answer this question?
Best Regards
Steve Melia
Senior Lecturer
Transport and Planning
University of the West of England
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:10:44 +0000
From: Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
Having extensively lived in Germany...
(anyways, this discussion thread has somewhat derailed itself I think)
Kat
CEng EurIng MCIWEM MSc
Sent from my iPad
On 28 Oct 2013, at 20:54, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Thanks
>
> David now lives in the same town that I spent most of (the Dutch part) of my career in. So I’ve seen how Assen has grown and changed over the years (when I first stayed there, in 1977, it had a population of something like 25 – 30.000…now it’s 62,000), something
David hasn’t. David and myself often have conversation about why and how things are what they are…..and why people from outside see what they see.
>
> If you are heading off to Amsterdam….don’t. It, and the West Netherlands, isn’t necessarily typical. Go visit some obscure towns in Noord Holland (Alkmaar a good example, or Schagen, both of which I know well) or go to Zwolle, or Hoogeveen. And don’t
just take a few photos, take some time to understand the spatial and transport contexts, and then why planners and engineers came to the solutions they use.
>
> The reality is that the Netherlands have the same problems and constraints of legacy infrastructure as elsewhere, and will adopt whatever solution is the most effective and practical. The UK has more legacy than non-legacy infrastructure….therefore it’s
the legacy driven solutions that are more relevant than the new-build.
>
> And I am particularly irritated when the cycling community dismisses the views of those of us in the community of buitenlanders who’ve lived there, worked there and studied there over a period of many, many, years.
>
> Oooh, and I’d add Denmark to your last comment, a country which has adopted solutions that are often very different to those of the Netherlands….even though they still achieve cyclist casualty rates comparable to the Netherlands. Why is there so little discussion
of that country’s approach?
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jim Davis
> Sent: 28 October 2013 18:35
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> I have to admit, I bought one, scanned each page and then made it available on a private Google Drive for other Board Members of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain (it still can't be bought electronically) which took great patience and dedication :)
>
> John - You raise some interesting points, but surely it also helps to have interpreters of the Dutch cultural and historical background in such people as Mark Wagenbuur, Marc van Woudenburg and of course David Hembrow - a chap that has also banged his head
against the wall of British Cycle Campaigning. One of the first things I did as Founder and Chair of the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain was to organise for a group of us to go on his Study Tour as it's all very well extolling the virtues of Dutch cycling
infrastructure but quite something else to see it in context and how it's used and why a particular solution was selected in the first place. Most of us continue to go back to gain further background understanding - indeed, I am heading to Amsterdam at the
end of the week (partly for the day job for World Architecture News). The difference being that unlike many, when we rode off the ferry at Harwich we were still convinced it could be done here and it was far from being a jolly. I think it would be insulting
to arbitrarily write these opinions off, or dismiss them as the views of 'policy tourists'. Assuming you meant CEoGB of course!
>
> I also think it's a bit better than the previous UK arrangement of totally ignoring the Netherlands (et al) except on a CTC Tour sheet which I used to post to members on a regular basis :)
>
> Wishing you all the best
>
> --
> Jim Davis
> Mob: 07545 598998
> Twitter: @lofidelityjim
>
> Founder & Board Member, Cycling Embassy of Great Britain
> www.cycling-embassy.org.uk
> @GBCycleEmbassy
>
> Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike
>
> Personal Jottings: The Lo Fidelity Bicycle Club
>
>
>
> On 28 October 2013 18:18, Jennings Gail <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> There are quite a few sites that offer a download, but I'm wary of handing over credit card details to a relatively unknown (to me) site - one being gobookee.org.
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 8:05 PM, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> CROW ordering is paper copy only I believe. About £85. Haven't heard about an electronic version.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:50, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> No, bought mine at VeloCity in Munich a few years back….cost an arm and a leg (for a self-financing researcher….they don’t do discounts (I did ask))! Somewhat distressingly, despite having exposure to lots of highways engineers and their organizations across
the UK, the only other copy I’ve ever come across was in the possession of CTC headquarters.
>
> Cheers
>
> John
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jennings Gail
> Sent: 28 October 2013 16:25
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> Do you know how to download CROW by the way? I've seen it for download on sites that may or may not be trustworthy? Anyone had any experiences there?
>
> On 28 Oct 2013, at 5:56 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Actually, yes, the parameters for segregation and non-segregation are quite clear in the CROW……but I suspect few outside the Netherlands have “read” that document.
>
> To be honest I’m really quite disappointed with the “Let’s Go Dutch” campaign in the UK. Most of the proponents have only spent a few days on a jolly designed to fulfil the intent of a small cadre of campaigners, few of whom take the time to gain an understanding
of the wider transportation and spatial planning contexts, highways safety approach or the national culture within which those take place.
>
> This is one of the areas I feel the cycling research communities efforts have fallen down (though I’ll agree I’m not as widely read as some). That said, having lived and worked (and cycled……and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes!) in a number
of countries I have (of necessity) learnt to understand, and work with and within, the cultural frameworks and norms of the particular country I’m in.
>
> To somehow extract cycling elements without critical examination of the context and frameworks within which this activity takes place, in my view, will tend to undermine the quality and robustness of the analysis.
>
> Don’t get me wrong, having lived, worked, cycles (and caught buses and boats and trains and aeroplanes) in the Netherlands since I first moved there in the 70’s, I’m all for going Dutch (or any other country of city where cycling is comparatively safe and
convenient). But, without recognising and addressing the context and culture within which cycling take place, results are likely to be, at best, inconclusive and, at worst, downright dangerous.
>
> The same would apply for any trans-national comparisons.
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carlosfelipe Pardo
> Sent: 28 October 2013 00:42
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Examples of Any Cycling Cities Which Don't Segregate?
>
> As far as I know, Segregation is a function of volume, speed and presence of lorries. Isn't it defined pretty clearly in the CROW manual?
>
> Probably sent while riding a bicycle. Please excuse typos
>
> On 27/10/2013, at 16:33, Katja Leyendecker <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Has anyone read City Cycling? Segregation, as you call it, is a necessary item in the engineering and planning toolbox of creating a liveable city - as are filtered permeability, car parking charges, pedestrianisation and other vehicle restraint measures.
>
> Kat
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On 27 Oct 2013, at 18:40, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Steve,
>
> the question you ask seems to beg the answer that segregation is the answer, and having attended the debate at UWE on the subject where you were proposing segregation, one might be forgiven for thinking that there might be some researcher bias here! That
debate came to no conclusion, since as you point out, there are a large number of variable factors at work together and isolating the effects of any single factor is practically impossible. Since it is so difficult to identify any single cause and effect,
it would be misleading to try to prove that one single factor is or is not responsible for changing levels of cycling. It is indeed unlikely that any single factor has a significant effect, and there are examples of this e.g. Milton Keynes with an extensive
segregated network, but low levels of cycling.
>
> Surely a better approach than the almost impossible task of trying to identify a single cause and effect, would be to identify which combination of factors has acheived significant changes? There may be examples which show that segregation has some effect,
and some which show the opposite, but in both cases, it is likely that other factors had a significant effect also. Or perhaps looking at what factors were influential in common with segregation.
>
> To say that segregation is or is not the answer is asking the wrong question.
>
>
>
>
> On 27 October 2013 15:55, Steven Melia <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I am currently writing a book with the working title 'Why Transport Isn't Moving' (for UIT Cambridge
www.uit.co.uk). A few of the chapters will deal with issues related to cycling.
>
> The more you look into the broader questions of 'what causes what?' you realise that the typical question: what difference did policy X make? is almost always impossible to answer. Over the longer term, politics, infrastructure, culture and behaviour are
all related to each other. It may, however, be possible, to approach a question from a different angle. One way of looking at the old chestnut about segregation versus 'cycling on normal roads' is to ask:
>
>
> Are there any examples of cities in developed countries with high rates of cycling (e.g. over 20% modal share) which do NOT have an extensive network of segregated cycle routes?
>
>
> A 'cycle route' is not the same as a 'cycle path' of course. 'Segregation' may take many different forms, including filtered permeability i.e. roads closed to through traffic except bikes. In several years of studying European 'cycling cities', I have never
found an example of such an exception. I have never been to Japan. Osaka is the only city which appears in the international top lists. I understand there are few cycle paths, but pavement cycling is normal (tolerated though not legal). Osaka also has
narrow historic streets where segregation is not needed. I can't find any English language literature about cycling in Japan.
>
> Is anyone aware of any examples, or anything which has been written which might help to answer this question?
>
> Best Regards
>
>
> Steve Melia
> Senior Lecturer
> Transport and Planning
> University of the West of England
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------
End of CYCLING-AND-SOCIETY Digest - 27 Oct 2013 to 28 Oct 2013 - Special issue (#2013-83)
*****************************************************************************************