 |
 |
It'd be a most excellent project for an 'outsider' to inform the 'inside' - maybe we should get a modern history student onto that. Great idea, Kevin.Kat
Sent from my iPad"A history of cycle campaigning......"Too, too depressing!
On 22 May 2015 at 20:46, Kevin Hickman <[log in to unmask]> wrote:A history of cycle campaigning, from a not-too-self-interested party, would be an interesting offshoot from this discussion.Kevin.
On Friday, May 22, 2015, John Parkin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:I am still taking notes…! J
Regards
John Parkin, Professor of Transport Engineering
University of the West of England, Centre for Transport and Society
Frenchay Campus, Coldharbour Lane Bristol, BS16 1QY, UK
t: +44 (0)117 32 86367 (NB I can pick up my landline via wifi in May and June while I am in Vienna)
m: +44 (0)7848 029 902 (NB moble inoperable in May and June while I am in Vienna)
Skype: john.parkin9, Twitter: @JohnParkin28
Publications: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/view/author/Parkin=3AJohn=3A=3A.html
www.uwe.ac.uk/research/cts and https://www.facebook.com/ctsuwe
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Deegan Brian
Sent: 22 May 2015 19:17
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cycle Proofing Case Studies - stakeholder consultation
Never being one to let something lie I find it astonishing that so called negative but completely accurate opinions are being dismissed on an academic list. There is lots of great infrastructure out there and I am happy to share my London collection of best practice. However, I am the first to admit that the current UK cycle network level of service is poor and that this is due to the enormous amount of contradictory and motor traffic orientated technical guidance still being followed and authorised for use on our streets. If you stop listening to criticism then you become unreasonable and misguided.
Brian
From: Nick Cavill [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 01:35 PM
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Cycle Proofing Case Studies - stakeholder consultation
Dear cycling and society group
Please keep it up! This group’s endless sniping and bitchy back-and-forth brightens up my inbox. It’is more entertaining than watching my two adolescent kids snap at each other.
after all, lists like this are meant purely for entertainment and a diversion from real work…aren’t they…?
Nick Cavill
On 22 May 2015, at 12:31, burton richard <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Richard,
I cannot agree with your analysis of the situation over the last thirty years "Negative thinking, aggressive attacks on local authorities and over-critical nit-picking has got us nowhere."
As someone who initially approached meetings with the local authority with a positive attitude, only to be met with a list of excuses as to why they couldn't do anything, despite all their policies and strategies saying that they should, it is very difficult to maintain any level of positivity. When you present them with five pages of quotes from their own policies, demonstrating that they aren't following those policies, and are dismissed out of hand, it's not easy to maintain equanimity and not to attack them for their complete incompetence. I don't call pointing out for 18 years that the local authority have completely failed to follow their own policies and strategies "over critical nit picking" I call it trying to hold them to account, which is surely our democratic right?
If the cycle lobby has failed, it is by being too accepting of the utter failures of local authorities to do what they are supposed to do, and have made cycling more dangerous, less attractive and less convenient as a result.
The next generation will end up taking the reins, but unless we make the local authorities live up to their responsibilities now, they too will be met with a wall of indifference and a complete unwillingness to see beyond the bonnets of the 4x4s the councillors drive.
On 22 May 2015 at 12:07, Richard Armitage <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
Colleagues
I look forward to the Case Studies - we need positive examples, as Phil Jones indicated. So, please do not be put off by the sniping and whingeing - if you have an example you think is worth discussing, submit it today!
I seek to encourage people to think positively about cycling at the various events that the CILT UK Cycling Forum promotes. Negative thinking, aggressive attacks on local authorities and over-critical nit-picking has got us nowhere. It is time for the old guard, whose approach has achieved very little in the last thirty years in terms of on-road cycling infrastructure, to stand aside and let the next generation take the reins.
Richard Armitage
Chair, Cycling Forum, CILT UK
Richard Armitage BSc FCILT
W: richardarmitage.me
M: +44 (0)7973 538 556
T: +44 (0)161 368 6603S: richardratc
Richard Armitage Transport Consultancy Ltd. is registered as a company in England and Wales, No. 4658733. Registered office: Oxford House, Smithy Fold Road, Hyde, Cheshire, SK14 5QY, UK • VAT No. GB 509 5221 59 • Data Registration No. PZ8134433
From: John Meudell <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thursday, 21 May 2015 16:48
To: "[log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Cycle Proofing Case Studies - stakeholder consultation
Sorry, Phil, but you’ll find an equally large number of books, guides, standards and leaflets on cycling planning and infrastructure, most of them publically funded, and they have done even less good if not been universally ignored. There have been an absolute blitz of “Best Practice” guides in transport, general and cycling specific, all of which have also been universally ignored in the UK.
Plus you are blissfully ignoring the problems being caused by the woolliness of the basic question….it’s so general as to be meaningless!
Furthermore, given this study will have gone through a whole planning and development process that must have taken quite some months, please explain why it is there’s barely three weeks to think about and respond with a complete case study?
Ooooh, and I note you haven’t bothered to indicate what format and content would be acceptable or useful in such a case study. So I and others could easily spend some time developing something for you (I note, free of charge) only to be rejected ‘cos it’s not in the right format (or some such reason) or not considered relevant.
Cynical it may seem but, unfortunately, reality it is…….
John
Ps: I’ve been dealing with the public since my father bought a shop when I was in my early teens. I’ve continued dealing with the public and organizations large and small across the world since then. If I treated people like this my employers (and my father) would have kicked my ass….and did on an occasion or two.
People don’t respond well to being bounced. If you don’t like it, change your approach. If you can’t change it then get used to it……
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Phil Jones
Sent: 21 May 2015 16:11
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cycle Proofing Case Studies - stakeholder consultation
I’m afraid I disagree. We have many many blogs, tweets, conferences and books pouring scorn on UK cycling infrastructure, it’s been going on for years and it hasn’t worked. Decision makers just don’t engage with it.
The exercise is not as cynical as you think, and as one of the people who posed it I do take some umbrage. It is a genuine attempt to find those ice cubes in hell, work out how they were made and say to other authorities – look, you can do this, people in the UK will cycle if you give them what they need.
Come on folks, let’s try to get out of the negative mindset. There must be some good stuff out there, even if it’s only one link, one junction. Let’s say what we do want, and point to an authority that’s managed to achieve it, rather than keep banging the same old drum.
Phil
Phil Jones Associates
Seven House, 18 High Street Longbridge, Birmingham, B31 2UQ
T. 0121 475 0234 M. 07958 473498
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Meudell
Sent: 21 May 2015 15:58
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Cycle Proofing Case Studies - stakeholder consultation
John
Interesting but I find both the poor question definition and the short time available for response indicative of a more traditional “we have to ask the question but we’re not interested in the response” approach to public/stakeholder consultation. The question is so woolly as to be meaningless, but I have no doubt that local authorities along with Sustrans will be queueing to tell you what a good job they are doing……
It’s an example of the “first law of physics practical” at play…..”First draw your line and then plot your points”. Translated that means: first decide the answer you need and then find the data to support that, ignoring any information to the contrary.
I am fully supportive of the views expressed regarding the lack of examples of “good (let alone competent)” cycle infrastructure design, be it on- or off-carriageway…..they are so few and far between in the UK as to be irrelevant.
A study of poor examples would be far more informative and productive, in terms of both narrow and broad learning. Furthermore the study, if it’s to be of any use, would also need to identify the generic mistakes in planning and design, something I am absolutely sure government and local authorities don’t want to know.
To quote “the second law of physics practical”…..the only experiments you learn anything from are the ones that get cocked up. Translated that means it is the case that knowledge and understanding are more often extended and improved through examination of mistakes than things that go exactly as planned. But requires recognising and analysing mistakes…. and changing.
At a recent UCL lunchtime I, along with Graham Smith and others, suggested that you would have to look a long time back in time to find good examples of cycle infrastructure, of any type, in the UK. My own (favourite) examples date back to 1985 and 1967 (in the latter case the layout appears in the current CROW guide!)
The fact is that “Best Practice Books” are so 1990’s, the concept having been undermined by the ease at which many organizations (both public and private sector) were able to neuter and eliminate critical comment.
To be honest you’d have been better off researching best practice in public consultation first….its clear WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff, along with the Department of Transport, have little idea how to do it!
Cheers
John Meudell
C.Eng, MIMechE
From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Parkin
Sent: 20 May 2015 14:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Cycle Proofing Case Studies - stakeholder consultation
Importance: High
Dear Cycling and Society research Group List members (UK members),
I am part of the study team for the study described below. Please respond if you are able to.
-------------------------
WSP | Parsons Brinckerhoff, on behalf of the Department for Transport, is compiling a set of Case Studies that exemplify high quality, high performing cycle infrastructure in the UK.
Please could you recommend good on-highway cycle solutions that the DfT could publish as Case Studies?
We are particularly interested in on-highway cycle solutions, rather than cycle facilities located away from the highway (except where a highway project derives part of its success from them). If you are not sure, send anyway!
Please send us your suggestions as soon as possible – and by Wednesday, 10th June at the latest – using this link:
http://goo.gl/forms/Wg8aG6VJxo
Thank you for your help in this.
Kind regards
Carole Lehman
Regards
John Parkin, Professor of Transport Engineering
University of the West of England, Centre for Transport and Society
Frenchay Campus, Coldharbour Lane Bristol, BS16 1QY, UK
t: +44 (0)117 32 86367 (NB I can pick up my landline via wifi in May and June while I am in Vienna)
m: +44 (0)7848 029 902 (NB moble inoperable in May and June while I am in Vienna)
Skype: john.parkin9, Twitter: @JohnParkin28
Publications: http://eprints.uwe.ac.uk/view/author/Parkin=3AJohn=3A=3A.html
www.uwe.ac.uk/research/cts and https://www.facebook.com/ctsuwe
Click here to report this email as SPAM.
***********************************************************************************
The contents of this e-mail and any attached files are confidential. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately at [log in to unmask] and remove it from your system. If received in error, please do not use, disseminate, forward, print or copy this email or its content. Transport for London excludes any warranty and any liability as to the quality or accuracy of the contents of this email and any attached files.
Transport for London is a statutory corporation whose principal office is at Windsor House, 42-50 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0TL. Further information about Transport for London’s subsidiary companies can be found on the following link: http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/about-tfl/
Although TfL have scanned this email (including attachments) for viruses, recipients are advised to carry out their own virus check before opening any attachments, as TfL accepts no liability for any loss, or damage which may be caused by viruses.
***********************************************************************************