Police bring undercover cyclist operation to Arbroath

[ian]

Look at any new-build estate in the UK, outdoor space is the occasional straggly tree between car parking spaces. By the time half the houses have sold, there will be even more cars parked on the pavement. There might be a bit of pavement with a painted bike on it. No one will cycle in these places. Every activity will be mediated by car.

[DuncanM]

Everything begins with small steps. If we want to take away the traffic from our urban environments (and that's where a huge chunk of easily replaceable traffic is), we need people who currently drive to want to cycle the 2 miles to the shops, the 1 mile to school, the 5 miles to work. And to be happy with kids doing that too. Riding for fun doesn't replace many car journeys (and as you said may increase them due to people driving to "places to cycle").
What is stopping people doing this? I'm guessing the biggest contributors are perception of weather, effort, and safety. The latter can be changed with good infrastructure. If every driver in the land suddenly became an angel, I don't reckon it would make many of them say "you know what - cycling is so much safer these days, I'll give it a try".

[nuttycyclist]

I live in a busy built up town, the most urban area locally (when we moved here we were looking at a more rural setting but then got sensible).  I live on a bus route, less than ten minutes walk to a main line railway station or high street, multiple supermarkets within walking distance; it was that choice that made us move to an area we'd been avoiding in our searches (a very large area over many months) as we realised that we didn't want to live where we needed to get the car out every time we needed a pint of milk.

My wife's main objection to me taking the non-pub bike shopping, or allowing us to cycle to a place where we need to lock up our bikes to undertake another activity, is that according to bookfarce there are many stolen bicycles every day.  If my daughter cycles to school I carry the bike home for the day instead of "risking" leaving it padlocked in the bike rack.

If I need that pint of milk now, I blast down the main road into town (overtaking the traffic in rush hour instead of undertaking it using the cycle lane due to the risk of a left hook).  I can be back home in under 15 minutes even if the queue is long.   If I want to take my daughter to an activity a bit further down the high street, I have no issues with riding behind her in primary to protect her - or taking the longer route through quiet residential roads.

Look at any new-build estate in the UK, outdoor space is the occasional straggly tree between car parking spaces. By the time half the houses have sold, there will be even more cars parked on the pavement. There might be a bit of pavement with a painted bike on it. No one will cycle in these places. Every activity will be mediated by car.

Not just new build, but older areas too (my house was built in the 1930's).  There is no space available to build dedicated infrastructure.   And before you suggest closing the road to traffic, I've had bus drivers knocking at the door before when people were double parked outside and they couldn't get through (luckily the offenders were nothing to do with me).  We also have articulated lorries passing daily, mainly supplying the local corner shop.   Close the road to provide decent on-carriageway cycle route and the impact to the local area will be more negative than it will be on cycling.    It's a shame I no longer work from the front room as otherwise I might dedicate a day to a traffic count - I see cyclists going past the driveway on a significant number of times per day.

I know the pros/cons argument for infrastructure will never end.   I'm not "anti" myself, and have pushed many times in the past for some routes that will enable cyclists to take one side of a square instead of the other three.

This topic was started with the report of encouraging drivers and cyclists to be safe and give each other space.

[grams]

If I need that pint of milk now, I blast down the main road into town (overtaking the traffic in rush hour instead of undertaking it using the cycle lane due to the risk of a left hook).  I can be back home in under 15 minutes even if the queue is long.   If I want to take my daughter to an activity a bit further down the high street, I have no issues with riding behind her in primary to protect her

As long as you have a man to protect you, cycling on the roads is great!!!!!

[ian]

For me to cycle to town involves a narrow, overparked rat-run, with a significant likelihood of encountering an aggressive driver. I might do it, I'm a cyclist. The average person, no, they're not going to be enticed into doing it bike (or walking along grubby blocked pavements). They're going to drive that singular mile, which is exactly what they do.

You keep superimposing your experience as a cyclist. That's almost no one else's experience.

You keep inventing made-up infrastructure to knock it down. No is going to put a cycle lane down every street. No one is going to close every street. That's not being proposed by anyone.

But yes, take my example, they could close that road to through traffic and implement some residents' parking restrictions. It's doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how reducing the prioritization for cars could be broadly beneficial (for everyone, even the drivers). Of course, that involves a fight with a small minority of drivers that our council doesn't have the appetite for.

So, no one will cycle. End of. Asking drivers to be nice doesn't work, the evidence it pretty obvious.

[nuttycyclist]

If I need that pint of milk now, I blast down the main road into town (overtaking the traffic in rush hour instead of undertaking it using the cycle lane due to the risk of a left hook).  I can be back home in under 15 minutes even if the queue is long.   If I want to take my daughter to an activity a bit further down the high street, I have no issues with riding behind her in primary to protect her

As long as you have a man to protect you, cycling on the roads is great!!!!!

She's eight (well seven and one week).  I wouldn't let her out on her own.

I just ride where I normally ride, and let her ride in front so that I can keep an eye on her and shout any instructions/guidance as required (mind that pot hole, pull out away from the kerb, we'll be turning right soon so don't forget to look behind you).

Once she's older, and I am happy she can look after herself, then I know I can let her go out alone and I won't be branded an irresponsible adult.   She'll get her ability to look after herself much sooner than those cyclists who have only ever ridden in a sterile false sense of security.

[TimC]

I live in the middle of nowhere, and cycling is generally a pleasure around here. However, my house is fairly close to an A road which is busy at commuting times (FCVO busy - this is Suffolk, not London!), and isn't an inviting prospect to cycle on at those times. I don't imagine that cycling routing will ever be off-carriageway on any roads within several miles of where I live, so persuading people to adopt cycling instead of driving needs to demonstrate that there are alternative, perceptionally 'safer', but perfectly convenient routes that don't involve the A road. That isn't easy, as almost any journey to shopping or work using the local lanes will be significantly further than using the A road.

For my sins, I'm involved in the formal efforts to improve and increase utility cycling in my local town (a few miles away from where I live). New developments around the town display all the uselessness that Ian describes; even walking is made difficult by the fact that households get parking for one car but often own several. What parking there is is often a walk away from their homes - a walk made difficult by people attempting to park outside their houses. The now-frequent deliveries by courier vans further congests the limited space available. At the moment, I have no idea how we're going to sort that mess out but we are beginning to make progress with the planners over new developments. The majority of the older part of town is very pleasant to cycle round (though hills are an issue), so our efforts have been concentrated on providing secure bike parking near shops, and publicising their existence. This may be helped by the fact that free car parks are about to become charged for...

[nuttycyclist]

...
You keep superimposing your experience as a cyclist. That's almost no one else's experience.
...

Where did I get that experience?  By cycling.

I grew up in the utpoia of a short cul-de-sac {edit - in a major town} where we used the hammerhead as a roller skating rink/tennis court/etc.  I was allowed to cycle to a friend's house (halfway down the road) and then grounded as when I left I rode straight out of the driveway into the path of a neighbour's car - luckily he was looking, unlucky he complained to my parents.

If I got to the end of the road, it was a 40mph main A road taking a lot of traffic.  I learned to ride it.  a mile or so along there was a large roundabout.  It scared me.  I learned to ride it - I realised that walking around it on the pavement took too much out of my day.

Had I been brought up to be a "pavement cyclist" I'd have never got that experience.  One dedicated path did exist way back then, the A127 was built with a dedicated path between London and Southend.  I never used it as it didn't take me to my friend's houses.  {edit: My experience took me from just playing on a single speed tiny bike with rod brakes, to short rides to friends, to bigger bikes with gears, to longer distances.  As I grew up and was allowed out more from home my distances grew - I still recall the first time I exceeded 30 miles in one ride, and that was when I was at 6th form college.  The longer rides came later in life, but all based on the experience I learned growing up and cycling in town on busy roads.}


If we want to increase cycling, we need to remove "the fear".  Building infrastructure and telling people to get off of the road doesn't do that.  Reminding drivers to give space and courtesy can do that.    (As per earlier in the thread, e-bikes have greatly increased the number of people cycling - I believe as it has removed "the fear" of hard work.)

[Cudzoziemiec]

Everything begins with small steps. If we want to take away the traffic from our urban environments (and that's where a huge chunk of easily replaceable traffic is), we need people who currently drive to want to cycle the 2 miles to the shops, the 1 mile to school, the 5 miles to work. And to be happy with kids doing that too. Riding for fun doesn't replace many car journeys (and as you said may increase them due to people driving to "places to cycle").
What is stopping people doing this? I'm guessing the biggest contributors are perception of weather, effort, and safety. The latter can be changed with good infrastructure. If every driver in the land suddenly became an angel, I don't reckon it would make many of them say "you know what - cycling is so much safer these days, I'll give it a try".

We don't need those people to want to cycle for that. They could, and are probably more likely to, walk or take the bus (or tram, metro or local train, where these exist). Or, as we see thanks to Covid, to stay at home.

[Jaded]

I think the lockdowns have been worse because the timid and more law abiding drivers are at home.

Really? The first lockdowns created an atmosphere almost like Family Cyclist's German new town; people sitting on doorsteps chatting while kids played in the streets. Or even as ian's rosy remembered childhood of unstructured play. Again, there's quite likely an urban-rural thing (or just location).

OK, not the first lockdown, so much. However there were so few cars about and there was general bad behaviour. It's been much more noticeable in the 2nd and 3dr lock downs.

[grams]

My parents used to live a couple of miles from the nearest town with shops but both roads in that direction where narrow and busy. I can't imagine anyone in their village cycling there without dedicated paths.

I've seen such stuff in rural bits of Germany (brand new EU funded alongside minor roads) and a few odd bits in the UK. Huge potential if done right, especially with e-bikes and scooters.

I'm not saying it will work, but expecting people to decide to just not to be scared of thundering produce trucks, or to expect motorists to be happy slowing to a fraction of the speed limit on a straight road because mum's popped out for a loaf of bread.

Once she's older, and I am happy she can look after herself, then I know I can let her go out alone and I won't be branded an irresponsible adult.   She'll get her ability to look after herself much sooner than those cyclists who have only ever ridden in a sterile false sense of security.

I expect she'll be much more confident on the roads come her 17th birthday.

[Jaded]

My parents used to live a couple of miles from the nearest town with shops but both roads in that direction where narrow and busy. I can't imagine anyone in their village cycling there without dedicated paths.

I've seen such stuff in rural bits of Germany (brand new EU funded alongside minor roads) and a few odd bits in the UK. Huge potential if done right, especially with e-bikes and scooters.

Dedicated paths, hmmm.

How are they kept clear and safe?
Deiced?
What happens at side roads?
Or when the rider needs to get to the other side, (e.g. is there a Pelican Crossing?)

We can barely keep roads clear of debris and ice and potholes.

[DuncanM]

Everything begins with small steps. If we want to take away the traffic from our urban environments (and that's where a huge chunk of easily replaceable traffic is), we need people who currently drive to want to cycle the 2 miles to the shops, the 1 mile to school, the 5 miles to work. And to be happy with kids doing that too. Riding for fun doesn't replace many car journeys (and as you said may increase them due to people driving to "places to cycle").
What is stopping people doing this? I'm guessing the biggest contributors are perception of weather, effort, and safety. The latter can be changed with good infrastructure. If every driver in the land suddenly became an angel, I don't reckon it would make many of them say "you know what - cycling is so much safer these days, I'll give it a try".

We don't need those people to want to cycle for that. They could, and are probably more likely to, walk or take the bus (or tram, metro or local train, where these exist). Or, as we see thanks to Covid, to stay at home.

But they don't right now, they drive. You've seen the congestion around each school.  You've seen how much less traffic there is when it's the school holidays.  Sure, they could take the bus, but it doesn't go where they want to go. Sure, they could walk, but heavy shopping or kids or lack of time means they don't. I have to admit - Wednesday afternoon, I'm one of them (she'd be on the bus if it weren't for covid).

Once she's older, and I am happy she can look after herself, then I know I can let her go out alone and I won't be branded an irresponsible adult.   She'll get her ability to look after herself much sooner than those cyclists who have only ever ridden in a sterile false sense of security.

Congratulations.
My daughter is 11 - if she was happy riding these roads, she'd be allowed. She isn't. She went to her friends house after school a few weeks ago and they had to walk because while her friend rides (from a direction with decent infra), she doesn't because of traffic. It makes me sad, there's an islabike gathering dust in our garage because you can't get anywhere she wants to go without braving busy roads.

[ian]

...
You keep superimposing your experience as a cyclist. That's almost no one else's experience.
...

Where did I get that experience?  By cycling.

I grew up in the utpoia of a short cul-de-sac {edit - in a major town} where we used the hammerhead as a roller skating rink/tennis court/etc.  I was allowed to cycle to a friend's house (halfway down the road) and then grounded as when I left I rode straight out of the driveway into the path of a neighbour's car - luckily he was looking, unlucky he complained to my parents.

If I got to the end of the road, it was a 40mph main A road taking a lot of traffic.  I learned to ride it.  a mile or so along there was a large roundabout.  It scared me.  I learned to ride it - I realised that walking around it on the pavement took too much out of my day.

Had I been brought up to be a "pavement cyclist" I'd have never got that experience.  One dedicated path did exist way back then, the A127 was built with a dedicated path between London and Southend.  I never used it as it didn't take me to my friend's houses.  {edit: My experience took me from just playing on a single speed tiny bike with rod brakes, to short rides to friends, to bigger bikes with gears, to longer distances.  As I grew up and was allowed out more from home my distances grew - I still recall the first time I exceeded 30 miles in one ride, and that was when I was at 6th form college.  The longer rides came later in life, but all based on the experience I learned growing up and cycling in town on busy roads.}


If we want to increase cycling, we need to remove "the fear".  Building infrastructure and telling people to get off of the road doesn't do that.  Reminding drivers to give space and courtesy can do that.    (As per earlier in the thread, e-bikes have greatly increased the number of people cycling - I believe as it has removed "the fear" of hard work.)

An how do you remove this fear? Your advice seems to be MTFU, which isn't helpful or inclusive. In practice, you reduce the fear by providing safe alternatives to busy roads that make cycling an actual possibility. Not by pushing people into an A road and say 'see, you're not dead yet.' And you ignore the fact that even if you're not actually scared and you abstract driving behaviour, it's just not pleasant being passed by lorries and fast-moving people and breathing their fumes.

You don't seem to get that in practical terms no one is cycling. There aren't kids out on bikes, there aren't many people popping to the shops by bike, these are things that aren't happening. If something scares someone, the majority of them won't do it. And quite frankly, they're entitled not to feel scared.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Everything begins with small steps. If we want to take away the traffic from our urban environments (and that's where a huge chunk of easily replaceable traffic is), we need people who currently drive to want to cycle the 2 miles to the shops, the 1 mile to school, the 5 miles to work. And to be happy with kids doing that too. Riding for fun doesn't replace many car journeys (and as you said may increase them due to people driving to "places to cycle").
What is stopping people doing this? I'm guessing the biggest contributors are perception of weather, effort, and safety. The latter can be changed with good infrastructure. If every driver in the land suddenly became an angel, I don't reckon it would make many of them say "you know what - cycling is so much safer these days, I'll give it a try".

We don't need those people to want to cycle for that. They could, and are probably more likely to, walk or take the bus (or tram, metro or local train, where these exist). Or, as we see thanks to Covid, to stay at home.

But they don't right now, they drive. You've seen the congestion around each school.  You've seen how much less traffic there is when it's the school holidays.  Sure, they could take the bus, but it doesn't go where they want to go. Sure, they could walk, but heavy shopping or kids or lack of time means they don't. I have to admit - Wednesday afternoon, I'm one of them (she'd be on the bus if it weren't for covid).

Well exactly. Cycling is dangerous and inconvenient and for weirdoes. Walking is not weird but it is dangerous and inconvenient. Buses are safe, apart from late at night, but they're inconvenient and expensive. Walking (in which I'd like to include wheelchairs and the slower sorts of mobility scooters, but maybe that's being a bit hopeful initially) is probably the easiest to de-inconvenience and the one which which encounters the least resistance generally. And making somewhere easily walkable tends to make it easily livable in all sorts of ways, which has bonuses like people spending money locally. If it turns out that people prefer cycling or that it's easier to make certain places or situations cycleable than walkable, that's great.

[nuttycyclist]

An how do you remove this fear? Your advice seems to be MTFU, which isn't helpful or inclusive. In practice, you reduce the fear by providing safe alternatives to busy roads that make cycling an actual possibility. Not by pushing people into an A road and say 'see, you're not dead yet.' And you ignore the fact that even if you're not actually scared and you abstract driving behaviour, it's just not pleasant being passed by lorries and fast-moving people and breathing their fumes.

You don't seem to get that in practical terms no one is cycling. There aren't kids out on bikes, there aren't many people popping to the shops by bike, these are things that aren't happening. If something scares someone, the majority of them won't do it. And quite frankly, they're entitled not to feel scared.

When I go out I can guarantee I'll see other cyclists.  If I'm taking the kids to the park, other children have their bikes there.  If I'm nipping to the shops I'll see other utility cyclists and can guarantee that there will always be more than one bike in the rack when I get there.  If I'm working in the front garden I will frequently see a cyclist passing - it might be somebody on a utility trip, it might be schoolchildren coming home from school, it might be a group of friends out together.   If I go further afield out of town then I know I'll start to see the lycra roadies who've forgotten to turn their lights off in the mid day sun,   Maybe if I get time one day this week I'll go do a random survey.

How would I suggest removing this fear? 
1) advertising.  Cycling is fun and safe.
2) cyclist education. -  How to cycle safely
                                 -  How to plan a quiet cycle ride
3) driver education   -  How to interact with fellow humans who are riding bikes
                                 - schemes such as the one at the start of this topic
4) integration.     Remind cyclists that drivers are human, but faster so allow them past to be polite when it is safe to do so
                           Remind drivers that cyclists are human and allowed on the road.

re point 2 - Some years ago I went on a two day ride with friends.    Day one the leader mainly took us on cycle routes and paths alongside main busy roads.     Day two I'd been asked to plan, we hardly saw a car the whole day and everybody congratulated me on what a quiet and scenic ride they'd had.     

On a forum some time ago a cyclist was asking for advice after having had an issue riding the A13 dual carriageway.  I was confused that he'd been on there since every time I rode towards London I used the quiet roads that the A13 had bypassed.  I am not criticising his choice or route planning, but the route I always chose back then is one that (from memory and I haven't been there in some time) I'd quite happily take the family cycling along.

This planning a quiet route is easy - even in gridlocked Southend, when I was cycling, if I fancied a slower and meandering route instead of overtaking the traffic, I could ride the 8 mile commute on almost empty residential roads which were perfectly safe for novices.   They were too meandering for rat running, hence being suitable for cycling.    I did propose this route to the Council several times, but they objected and said that they expected cyclists to use the main A13 as that was going to be their strategic route.

It's not a case of MTFU, it's a case of looking at it sensibly and realising that you can just go out on a bike and have fun without a need for dedicated facilities.

[TimC]

Ian and Nutty are both right! Ian is no doubt relaying accurately what he observes, and so is Nutty. And both have their own strategies for getting by on a bike.

It's a fact that, by any metric and outside of London, Cambridge and one or two other places, the numbers of utility cyclists are very small and not increasing significantly. The last DfT report shows that, on average, those who do get on a bike complete 16 trips and 54 miles a year (2019). Only 11% of adults ever get on a bike for any reason at all, and most of those do it for leisure or fitness, not for transport. Only 2% of journeys are achieved by bike, or 1% of distance travelled. These are tiny numbers, and if you take the cycling hotspots out of the equation, it's easy to see why Ian (and many others) feel that no-one is cycling - except for the lycra brigade.

The biggest encouragement to get people on their bikes is seeing other people do it. People won't go shopping on a bike having seen the local chain-gang go past at 25mph. They need to see other people going shopping.In my local town, that is beginning to happen. Through little steps (no grand infrastructure projects) we are hoping to encourage more to do it. Each cyclist is one more driver out of their car, and one more ally in the battle to achieve more respect on the road (something which too many cycling club riders are as guilty of ignoring as any driver). It's about ordinary people doing ordinary things on bikes, and being seen as part of the normal overall picture.

It has been achieved in Cambridge, Oxford and a very small number of other places. My experience of London is that no respect is expected or given by anyone to anyone else, so it's total anarchy and not an example I'd want to follow.

[nuttycyclist]

Thanks TimC for such a diplomatic answer.  It has reminded me that I must say that this is not an argument of Nutty versus ian or others, and that this forum is a most excellent place.   This is a discussion.

One thing that I will add to your post is that I worry about "metrics" and reports.  Back in the Southend days they proved that the scheme was a success as cyclist numbers on the new path increased; but the audit report post project highlighted that no numbers had been taken prior to the scheme and thus they had gone from zero to something.   No monitoring had taken place on the road or promenade before, but counters had been installed on the new path.  The location of the automated counting machines gives a different result from reality in my personal opinion.

From a personal experience and noting the cyclists, there was a change in behaviour and all the regular commuters disappeared from the seafront and cyclists went to other roads.  I do not have figures to prove it as I only had personal observation, but my impression was that cycling numbers overall in the town decreased with the exception of weekends when cars with bicycles on the roof sat in gridlock.

My informal observations here are that daily I see many cyclists, the majority of whom have panniers and are not touring.  The implication from this is that people are using bicycles as daily transport.  I cycle to the supermarket for small top-ups, but drive to do a larger shop or when I know what I need won't fit on the bike, and I believe that many others have the same choices of transport.

[ian]

Really, people don't cycle. You may live in a blip of cycling utopia, but they don't. Cycling is a significant minority leisure pursuit, and it's nice to see lots of people out at the weekend, but I suspect that few of them consider cycling to the shops as practical. That certainly reflected in the dire number of journeys made by bike, and its year-on-year decline. I'm not yet super-old as a 70s/80s child, but I grew up being able to cycle anywhere, and having a bike was a normal bit of growing up. Nowadays, most kids, if they want to ride a bike, have to be ferried to the park. I don't really blame the parents for doing this. My experiences on the roads inform me that it's no place or situation in which I'd want to place a child.

Assuming we feel that empowering people to cycle is a good thing – and it ought to be, it's a cheap way to travel, and has indubitable health benefits in a society that faces an epic health crisis (the costs of obesity will dwarf COVID) – then we have to think how.

No advocate of cycling infrastructure is claiming that country lanes need a segregated cycle path, or that every street needs a 'facility' down to the tiniest village. It should really be about cycling per se, it should be about how we create urban environments that we want to live in, that encourage active travel. It is key to have good infrastructure, both for cyclists and pedestrians. If you expect people to cycle down busy fast roads, it just won't happen, they won't do it. The evidence is there in the fact that they are not doing it. They won't tackle aggressive rat runs. No one wants conflict or the risk of serious injury.

Yes, drivers should behave better. I'm all for strict enforcement but asking them to be nice doesn't work. Cars embolden people to be bullies. Every cyclist and pedestrian has seen this, and most drivers too. It gets worse as cars become bigger and more powerful, which year-on-year, they do.

Training for cyclists is a bit of a no-go too. Part of the joy of cycling is that you can just get on and go. Once you've learned to balance that's it, you are liberated. It doesn't matter if you're five or fifty-five. Saddling it with training and courses, it's another reason for people not to bother. They might as well get in the car.

Normalizing cycling is the key, but that means you have to get people cycling. They won't do it until it's convenient and safe.

[Kim]

...
You keep superimposing your experience as a cyclist. That's almost no one else's experience.
...

Where did I get that experience?  By cycling.

[...]

If we want to increase cycling, we need to remove "the fear".  Building infrastructure and telling people to get off of the road doesn't do that.  Reminding drivers to give space and courtesy can do that.    (As per earlier in the thread, e-bikes have greatly increased the number of people cycling - I believe as it has removed "the fear" of hard work.)

There's a lot of truth in this, though I disagree with the conclusion.

To pick a less controversial example: Flags on recumbents.  Every experienced recumbent rider knows they're the most noticeable thing on the road by dint of the WTF-factor.  Everyone who's not an experienced recumbent rider knows that recumbents are invisible and going to get splatted utterly to DETH by the first driver to come up behind them.

It's readily apparent that a little bit of flappy cloth, viewed end-on due to the prevailing airflow, is going to make a negligible difference to visibility in most circumstances where it would be any use.  But for many new riders it removes the fear.

See also: Helmets, hi-vis jackets, FRIKKIN LAZERS, any infrastructure that isn't a painted cycle lane, canal path cycling, ebikes, those lollipop things, maintenance courses, showers at work, riding in a group, restricting motor traffic, free bikes etc, etc.  Most are neutral, some actually increase risk, but they all remove a perceived barrier.

But it's not a zero-sum game:  It's entirely possible for the highways people to build infrastructure that's actually decent (or at least not actually a trap) while the police get on with re-educating drivers, and for various organisations to help people get on bikes at a grass-roots level.  There is no one solution, because there's no one barrier.  We need more of all of them.

[Diver300]

I hope this isn't too far off-topic.

I came across this:- https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00592-0

TLRD; It's an article in Nature about how people will add stuff to solve a problem rather than remove stuff.

Examples in my experience are barriers on bike lanes (https://goo.gl/maps/k2N1vUvTkSR8Lcr2A) and beg buttons with pedestrian detection radar, with a suitable delay as punishment for being a pedestrian, when the green man could perfectly well be lit every time the lights go red for the cars, saving the cost of the beg button box, the radars, and the posts they are fitted to, each time a car doesn't stick to the rules.

(The bike barrier that I linked to is the replacement because, well I'm sure you can guess. The original will have damaged the car further, "had" to be be replaced, all at significant cost, when the solution would have been to rip it, and probably the bollards)

[Cudzoziemiec]

See also: Helmets, hi-vis jackets, FRIKKIN LAZERS, any infrastructure that isn't a painted cycle lane, canal path cycling, ebikes, those lollipop things, maintenance courses, showers at work, riding in a group, restricting motor traffic, free bikes etc, etc.  Most are neutral, some actually increase risk, but they all remove a perceived barrier.

That would be the showers; risk of slipping and scalding, not to mention picking up athlete's foot. 

[Cudzoziemiec]

In terms of infrastructure, and relating particularly to TimC's shopping post, IMO some of the most effective infrastructure is decent cycle parking. Sheffield stands or similar, which a variety of bikes (and trikes) in various sizes can be locked to securely, put in places where people want to go and where the parking is obvious, such as supermarkets, schools, centres of emplyment, train stations, bus stations, areas of restaurants, bars, cinemas and nightlife, and so on. Train stations seem to be getting reasonably good at this, bus stations less so, schools vary a lot, in terms of supermarkets the Teutonic discounters are good, the other areas less so.

[Kim]

In terms of infrastructure, and relating particularly to TimC's shopping post, IMO some of the most effective infrastructure is decent cycle parking. Sheffield stands or similar, which a variety of bikes (and trikes) in various sizes can be locked to securely, put in places where people want to go and where the parking is obvious, such as supermarkets, schools, centres of emplyment, train stations, bus stations, areas of restaurants, bars, cinemas and nightlife, and so on.

I agree, but that's my perspective as a Cyclist.  I suspect they're the sort of thing that helps people keep cycling once they start, rather than encouraging them to cycle in the first place.

On a related note, can we just have some more quality cycle parking somewhere else, rather than those roadside tool station things?

Train stations seem to be getting reasonably good at this

The cynic in me says because it's much easier than providing decent cycle space on trains, but it's all good.

[TimC]

Yes, good bike parking was our conclusion as being the most cost-effective way to increase cycling locally. All we're trying to achieve is to increase the number of people who choose a bike instead of a car for the very short journeys people do in a small market town. We're actually over-served with car parking, but the council want to wean people off parking in the high street so it can eventually be pedestrianised, at least part-time. They built a relief road to allow this about 50 years ago, but never completed the job! Persuading just 20 people a day to use bikes would mean that there is sufficient car parking off the High Street to absorb the rest of the traffic.

As well as providing the parking, you have to tell people it's there and give them clues about how to get from where they live to where they shop via existing quiet lanes or the very small amount of infra that doe exist. To that end, I've produced a town and local area cycling map which will be distributed via the local free community news magazine. That's been paid for from the Active Travel fund of the county council. It will be interesting to see if we get the hoped-for response!