Views

To add to the distressing news of the death of the climatologist Kat Giles on Victoria Street two weeks ago, a young man on a Boris Bike was seriously injured in London last Friday in what seem to be very similar circumstances – crushed by a left-turning lorry, on Grays Inn Road. Both of these incidents are close to home for me – I frequently cycle down Victoria Street, and last Friday’s incident occurred directly opposite the Yorkshire Grey, the venue for Street Talks.

It wouldn’t be appropriate to speculate on the causes of these most recent incidents – just the latest in a very long line of deaths and serious injuries resulting from turning lorry conflicts. However, it is safe to say that human error is one of the most likely contributory factors; a failure of observation, too much haste, a lack of concentration, and so on.

While it is right that much more can and should be done to make lorries safer – better mirrors and warning devices, cabs with better visibility, higher industry standards – the fact remains that human beings are not infallible. They will make mistakes. And that does include cyclists, who will naturally incline to staying close to kerbs, and will consequently find themselves in dangerous positions at junctions (please do read Mark Ames’ excellent guide on this topic).

So for that reason I agree with Danny Williams, that the simplest and ultimately most effective solution is

to keep tipper trucks and people on bikes apart from each other.

One way of achieving this would be a lorry ban at peak hours, which has been mooted, but this doesn’t seem to me to be particularly likely, or workable. Even if it does come into force, there will (or at least should be) plenty of other cyclists about in London at other times of the day. Cycling should not just be about commuting; it should be about going to the shops, or visiting friends, or going out for the evening, or cycling to school – basic, everyday trips that will occur at all times of the day. We should try to protect all cyclists from interactions with lorries at all times, not just commuters. So a peak time ban would only amount to a stopgap intervention.

Danny quotes a Dutch Road Safety fact sheet, which states that

Truck drivers do not make the best possible use of the different mirrors [and] cyclists insufficiently take account of the fact that trucks have a limited visual field. The ultimate solution for the blind spot problem is a structural separation of trucks and cyclists.

The sad thing is that we should already know how to do this; we have examples of how to keep lorries and cyclists apart. The Netherlands has perfected road design that remove interactions between heavy goods vehicles and cyclists to an enormous extent.

Here’s an example, a busy junction in Amsterdam.

I’m cycling past a tipper truck, the type of vehicle involved in the latest collisions in London. But I will not interact with it at all.

If I’m turning right, I won’t need to go anywhere near the road; the cycle track merely continues around the corner, uninterrupted, and fully protected from the road. If I wish to go straight on, the truck will be held at a red signal while I have a separate green signal. Conversely, when the truck starts to move, I would then be held at a red signal.

Here’s another example of what this looks like, again from Amsterdam.

Here cyclists are progressing straight ahead across the junction (alongside pedestrians, who also have a green signal on their crossing). But note, crucially, that motor vehicles wishing to turn right are held at a red signal. 

So there is no turning conflict here, of the kind that has resulted in dozens of deaths and countless more serious injuries in London in just the last few years alone. Cyclists are separated in time and space from the movements of motor vehicles, just like pedestrians are.

What I find almost incredible is that we can potentially implement a very good approximation of this kind of Dutch design, right now. The elements are already in place.

We can put motor vehicles on different light signals for different turning movements. We already do this.

Different signals for motor traffic turning in different directions.

Likewise, we can put cycle tracks, separate from the road, around corners. They’re often called ‘shared use pavements’ (our disastrously bad version of off-carriageway provision) or they are poorly-implemented cycle tracks, with confused or dubious priority and separation. We can already do this; we just need to do it much better, with wider, better designed provision for cycling, and with clear priority for pedestrians, where appropriate.

A cycle track around the corner of a junction

And we can let cyclists and pedestrians cross the road simultaneously on green signals; we have toucan crossings. We even attempt to separate the movements of pedestrians and cyclists when they cross, although, again, we do it quite badly.

A toucan crossing at Hyde Park Corner. Technically cyclists should cross to the left, and pedestrians on the right, but the design is unclear and confusing.

My point is that there is really nothing to stop us building a high-quality Dutch-style junction tomorrow. We don’t need to experiment; we know what works, because the Dutch have already done it. We just need to copy it, and do it well. Even better than that, take the things we can already do, and just implement them as well as the Dutch implement them.

When cycle tracks go round corners, make it clear that it is not a pavement, but also provide clear crossing points for pedestrians, where they have priority.

Continuous protected cycle track, with zebra priority for pedestrians

And where cyclists cross junctions with pedestrians, greater clarity is required.

Clear and distinct crossing routes for pedestrians and cyclists; not just a fudge that treats the two as equivalent users

In principle, there’s absolutely nothing stopping us from doing this right.

So it is more than a little disconcerting to read that Transport for London are

[hoping] to be able to test what interventions work

as the Alternative Department for Transport blog reports. He writes – and I’m inclined to agree -

TfL would rather figure it all out for themselves from scratch. This is madness – all the research is available from the Netherlands, which went through the learning process 35 years ago (and is still improving its cycling facilities). They made the mistakes so we don’t have to.

Yet TfL will “test what interventions work”? We already know what interventions work! They’re going to play around with our money, making it up as they go along because they can’t be arsed to go see what makes roads in the Netherlands work so well.

In a similar development, Transport Extra magazine reveals that

Transport for London is refining its traffic modelling to improve the representation of cycling and pedestrian behaviour. “Until recently, relatively little research had been undertaken worldwide to understand the behaviour of vulnerable road users at traffic signals and therefore be able to accurately represent them in traffic models,” TfL has told the London Assembly’s transport committee.

“We are leading on a world-first piece of research to understand cyclist behaviour as they discharge from signals and travel between signals. The research will also look at the impact cyclists have on general traffic discharge where they comprise a high proportion of road users.”

TfL says the work is being complemented by TRL research on pedestrian behaviour at traffic signals. “Once findings from the research are received [later this year], the new algorithms for cyclists and pedestrians will be available to update the capabilities of the modelling tools,” TfL explains.

Well, there are already  countries with high volumes of pedestrian and cycle flow at junctions, countries very near to us, so it’s hard to understand why Transport for London are spending time and effort coming up with fancy models when we have real world examples of large numbers of cyclists flowing through busy junctions. The impression being given is that TfL have no idea how cycling works in countries like the Netherlands and Denmark, and that cyclists ‘comprising a high proportion of road users’ is a unique, new problem, requiring new, unique modelling.

What we need to see is an end to bodging, and in its place, bold plans that would privilege cycling as a mode of transport, not just by making it convenient and comfortable, but most importantly of all by making it safe. We cannot go on with road designs which expect cyclists to fight for position with road vehicles turning across their path. We don’t send pedestrians across the road at the exact same time when motor vehicles will be bearing down on them; we shouldn’t do it with people on bikes either.

It is no exaggeration to say that people are dying because we are failing to take action.

The seasons matter to cycling. And cycling makes the seasons matter.

In the north-west of England we’ve finally emerged from the harshest Winter. The days are growing longer and warmer. The deep cold has gone and life is returning to the land.

Struck by a cold, I was off the bike for a week but, with my strength coming back, each of the past few days I’ve ridden out of town for a short, gentle ride towards the end of day. It’s a lovely way to spend an evening, enjoying the quiet lanes and lengthening shadows as the sun falls over Morecambe Bay.

Last night I left the house at 7:30 to do a little loop into the Forest of Bowland and up to Jubilee Tower. Lambs bounced around the fields, hares sprinted away at my approach, and birds busily prepared themselves for the night ahead. Occasionally a farmer’s tractor or quad-bike trundled somewhere in the distance, but the lanes were empty of cars. I love the feeling of having all this countryside, all this space, virtually to myself; I sink into it, become blurred, am content.

I hurtled back down to the quiet Sunday night city, passing the Town Hall clock as it chimed a-quarter-to-nine, some light left still in the sky. For the next two months each evening will grow a little longer, and hopefully warmer too. Isn’t this the very best time of year to be on a bike, with the longest days and best weather up ahead? Our bodies turn with our pedals towards the optimism which Spring surely brings.

Winter’s cold and dark tempts the closing of curtains and indoor retreat. Spring seduces us back to the world outside. The scope for cycling becomes suddenly so much greater. The traditional pro-cycling calendar reflects this – we’ve had the early season Spring Classics and can now anticipate the Summer’s Grand Tours. Locally too Winter’s dormancy has retreated and the cycle racing season begun, the weeks now crowded with events.

Winter cycling is great, but includes a certain amount of ‘getting through’. Winter cycling matters, but always buried within it is an orientation to brighter, better days ahead. Many people cycle only once it gets warmer, but surely no one cycles just in Winter.

We know how seasonal cycling is, how warm weather triggers the inclination to cycle. The bike shops get busy, new people on new or refurbished bikes are out and about. Of course we need to create conditions which compel people to cycle all year round, but in the absence of bolder, broader institutional support for ordinary cycling it’s understandable that most people’s interest in riding changes with the weather.

We are ‘a cycling family’, but cycling is seasonal for us too. On Saturday morning I went with Bobby and Flo to our brilliant local children’s cycling club, Salt Ayre Cog Set, where weekly sessions have resumed. Both complained bitterly at being made to go; I was ‘the baddie’ forcibly breaking their long winter hibernations in which lazy stasis inspired by staring at screens has taken centre-stage. But the sunshine, sociability, fresh air and exercise boosted their energies, and they came away bubbling with enthusiasm, as though participating had sprung Spring within their very souls.

Springtime cycling is a mechanism for lifting our spirits and horizons, taking us to other, farther, more interesting places.

Of course for those of us who ride year round Spring feels so good partly because of the Winter that came before, as well as the Summer that lies ahead. Contrasts are everything: even the places through which we most regularly ride change dramatically; and as the temperatures rise and the days lengthen cycling becomes less shackled by some Winter essentials: lights, layers, gloves and hats; things can gradually be discarded. There’s a ‘freeing-up’ both of cycling and our selves.

My little ride last night was not cold, but we have yet to experience a truly warm evening this year. At long last, though, it’s feeling possible; the dreamy, delicious prospect of the after-dinner short-sleeve and shorts ride through warm and windless air has moved one step closer.

So what do you do when you have several thousand photos of cargo bikes in your archives? Well, it's 2013... you slap them into a Blurb book, of course.


We just published Cargo Bike Nation on Blurb if anyone is interested. Here's the introduction from the book:

There are two reasons for producing this book. Firstly, the rise of the cargo bike as a transport solution in cities continues unabated. Secondly, out of the 15,000 or so photos I have taken while documenting bicycle culture in Copenhagen and other cities around the world, easily 3000 are of cargo bikes.

While I'd like nothing more than putting them into old school photo albums and inviting you all over for coffee while we leaf through the photos together, this book is probably a more logical solution.

What you'll find in these pages is photo after photo of cargo bikes, as well as bicycles with cargo.

There are 725 photos on offer. 615 of them are from Copenhagen. Not surprising considering that is where I live and that Copenhagen is easily the cargo bike capital of the world, with 40,000 cargo bikes in action.

There are, however, photos from 33 other cities on every continent that I've taken on my travels as CEO for Copenhagenize Design Co.. A large number are from Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo, where the cargo bike still serves the citizens for deliveries of goods.

In the Copacabana neighbourhood of Rio de Janeiro alone there are 11,000 cargo bike deliveries a day. Where in Copenhagen the cargo bike is primarily used by families, in Rio it is pure logistics.

The number of cargo bikes in cities has dwindled since the mid-20th century, but there are an impressive number to be found. With the growing popularity of the cargo bike we can expect the armada to swell in size. Which is a good thing.

At the end of the book there is a list of the brands featured in this book. I've counted 23 recognizable brands and easily 20 cargo bikes that are undefinable because they are vintage or customised. Add to that the postal service bikes, pedicabs and the no-name Chinese bikes that some shops sell in Copenhagen.

Fourteen of the brands are Danish. Hey, it's a big market in Denmark. It's worth stating, however, that there are a great many other brands out there in the world. I don't have photos of all of them - although I wish I did. In particular, the United States is experiencing fantastic growth in the number of companies producing cargo bikes. It's all good.

It was a maddening process selecting photos for this book. At the end of the day I just wanted to produce the ultimate cargo bike photo book. Nothing sells cargo bikes like a long line of photos showing Citizen Cyclists and others using a cargo bike in their daily lives. As a vital tool for urban living.

The book is divided up into these chapters:
- The Cargo Bike & I - photos from my own life with cargo bikes.
- La Famiglia - how families use cargo bikes.
- You've Got Mail - postal service by bicycle.
- Municipal Services - city maintenence on wheels.
- Heavy Petting - pet transport on cargo bikes
- Musical Ride - musical instruments transported on bikes.
- Pedicab Nation - the rise of the pedicab in cities.
- Sharing is Caring - it's not just rugrat transport... cargo bikes are for friends and loved ones.
- The Buy Cycle - selling goods and services from cargo bikes.
- Trailer Park - let's not forget the trailer.
- The Classic Short John - photos of the ShortJohn/delivery bike/butcher's bike.
- Hors catégorie - Bikes that fall just outside the cargo bike category but that are cool.
- Early Learning - kids on mini-cargo bikes.
- Flea Markets - cargo bikes used in connection with flea markets.
- Aging Gracefully - bikes and trikes for the elderly.
- You've Got to Move It - moving your stuff around the city by cargo bike.
- Svajerløb - The Danish Cargo Bike Championships 2009-2012.
- Chameleons - people moving stuff on regular bikes in cargo bike spirit.
- Favourite street shots - some of my favourite shots from 6 years of photographing the subject.

The book is available at Blurb. Self-publishing is pricier than normal, but with 725 photos .... that's 8 cents a photo. Or something. :-)

Here's a slow motion sneak preview:
Copenhagenize the planet. And have a lovely day.

The Get Britain Cycling Inquiry final report will be published on Wednesday, containing a raft of recommendations to Parliament on how to bring about more and safer cycling in the UK.

The inquiry heard from motoring bodies, Government ministers, cycling organisations and safety campaigners, as well as bike bloggers (including me), traffic planners, urban designers and the police at Parliament earlier this year.  The report, being compiled by Professor Phil "peak car" Goodwin, is likely to recommend that drivers who kill or maim cyclists should face longer jail sentences, greater investments in routes for cyclists is needed, as well as a review of some cycling design standards.  The report comes on the back of The Times newspaper's ongoing Cities Fit For Cycling Campaign and a five year high in cycle deaths in 2012, with 122 people killed on bicycles on Britain's roads.

Ahead of the report publication, expert witness and Olympic cycling champion Chris Boardman has been voicing his concern as to whether the contents of the report will be heard;
“What few people realise is that this process has been undertaken before, when an almost identical inquiry led to a report and recommendations.
“That report, more or less, came to nought... I’m anxious that this time around the pressure stays on to implement the outcomes.
“The enemy will not be a visible stance against actions that promote bikes. It’ll be apathy and lack of positive actions and political courage."

 Jon Snow giving evidence at the Get Britain Cycling Inquiry, alongside Deputy Mayor of London for Transport Isabel Dedring and the Mayor's Cycling Commissioner Andrew Gilligan.
Channel 4 news presenter, everyday cyclist and President of the CTC, Jon Snow, added similar thoughts at the inquiry;
"The politician that takes leadership on cycling and really revolutionises it will leave a legacy for generations".  Snow opined that Britain needs political “leadership from the very top and on a big scale", if it is to catch up to other Western European countries with developed cycling infrastructure.

Indeed, many wise words have been said throughout the inquiry, and messages from all quarters - be that from the sports body British Cycling or vanguard campaigners the CTC - have been surprisingly harmonious and consistent; namely, the need to learn from the most successful cycling countries, to build cycling infrastructure but to build it very well, to spend more money on growing cycling, and to focus on road law and sentencing reform to protect the most vulnerable road users.

Transport Minister and "cyclist's friend" Norman Baker however, has been keen to dampen enthusiasms about the inquiry with recent comments he made to The Guardian bike blog;
"We have to wait and see what they say. But what I would point out is that I'm delighted to have the inquiry. It's a very positive step.  [Co-chairs Ian Austin and Julian Huppert] are "sensible people
"They're both cycle enthusiasts but they're also realistic.
"If we reached Dutch levels I'd be ecstatic, but I can't see us getting there. I went to to Leiden railway station and there were, I think, 13,000 bikes there that morning, which is just a different world from all other European countries. The Dutch have been fantastically successful. It is by and large flatter in Holland than it is in the UK, which is certainly an advantage, and it's more compact, so there are differences." 
Minister Baker failed to touch on whether he thought there were direct lessons to learn from the "fantastically successful" Dutch.


 MPs Ian Austin, Sarah Wollaston and Julian Huppert of the All Party Parliamentary Cycling Group, who've led the cycling inquiry.
The inquiry report will not please everyone.  There are bound to be some elements which could be stronger (I'm thinking infrastructure), and some elements that attract attention which won't bring about meaningful change (I'm thinking cycle training for kids whose parents are too terrified to use the road network by bike themselves).  It will however, if used properly, help to focus attention on the cycling issue at a political level where attention hasn't existed before.  A mass of MPs have spoken easy words as to how much they'd like to help cycling, whilst the Department for Transport will almost certainly have some big-sounding investment-ready cycling projects prepared to announce this week, in an attempt to dispel concerns that not enough is being done by them to keep existing cyclists safe, and to encourage others.  But we all know that words and piecemeal minor investments aren't enough; it is going to take much stronger levels of political support and much larger financial commiments.  I'll leave the last word to Chris Boardman, who once again has his finger firmly on the political pulse:

"The key place to start is for everyone reading this article to take two minutes to ask themselves, ‘What does the place I want to live in look like?’ ‘What kind of place do I want my kids to live in?’ I doubt anyone’s vision involves more cars or more parking.
“For me, I want my kids to be able to ride to school and the park, I’d like to be able to pedal to the station or shops. This can only happen if there are less cars, and people will only use cars less if they are not the easiest solution. So, the key is local governments having a clear and detailed holistic view of what they want their cities to look like in 10 years. Only then can you measure actions and ask, ‘Does this get me closer to the vision or further away?’
“If they share that vision with people, showing what they want to achieve, I’d be surprised if people didn’t totally buy into it.”

Clearly, this report is just the beginning of a long process of getting our Government to start really taking cycling seriously - we're going to have to all keep up the pressure if we want to see real change on our streets and truly #getbritaincycling.

Share |

I ventured into the city centre of Copenhagen for a night out yesterday and was thrilled to behold the new cycle track down Gothersgade. It's a one-way street for cars and bikes - until now. This stretch was a missing link for bicycle traffic. Bicycle users had to do a rather irritating detour to get to key destinations.

Now a cycle track runs straight down the street towards the harbour while the street is still a one-way street for cars. Mary blogged about it a short while back - you can see what the street looked like before - and now the construction is almost complete.


On some stretches The Arrogance of Space has been addressed by adding cycle tracks in both directions, like above. Narrowing the space for cars to create safer conditions.

But what started as an article about bicycle infrastructure on a one-way street is now going to morph into an article about the deconstruction of The Arrogance of Space by using bicycle parking. Along stretches of the street, bike racks have been placed on built-up medians between the street and the cycle track.

I suppose it creates a buffer between the bicycle users on the cycle track and the roadway, sure, but it really is nothing more than using existing urban space for more rational and practical purposes. Good old fashioned space management.

Here's an earlier example of placing bike racks on traffic calming infrastructure. This is in Guldbergsgade in Nørrebro.


I went exploring through our archives looking for other examples of reclaiming street space for bicycle parking. This is near my flat. A photo I took in 2008. Roughly two car parking spots reclaimed for bicycle parking on Nordre Fasanvej. Notice also the built out half-circle with a newly-planted tree. More space taken back for creating a more pleasant urban environment. Who can hate trees?


Overflow parking at Central Station back in 2009 used street space while the space outside the station was being renovated.


Back in 2009, the City of Copenhagen's Bicycle Office experimented with Parking Zones at four spots in the city. Reclaiming street space for rackless bike parking. Here's an article about these parking zones.


On this narrow street in the heart of the city - Adelgade - bike racks take up the space of two car parking spots.




In my neighbourhood, the City of Frederiksberg, there are some good examples of reclaiming street space for use by bicycle users.

Top left: another example of taking back a bit of space from car parking and planting a tree. In addition, these little islands feature a couple of bike racks.
Top right: it's an older tree, but the municipality slapped in a bike rack and took back a bit more space.
Bottom left: This isn't bike parking, it's just a passageway for bicycles crossing the street, providing them with space to get to the cycle track.
Bottom right: Car parking spot removed to create six bike parking spots in a shopping district.


Here is Your Bicycle. The City of Copenhagen used street space for temporary parking near Nørreport Station. You can read about this Hi, Cyclist! Here is your bicycle! campaign here.


Urban Graphics on a closed off street - for cars - in the Amager neighbourhood with many bike racks for the residents.

This street, Elmegade, has been completely traffic calmed and is a slow, cosy street with loads of cafés and shops. It's a one-way street for cars and the city placed bike lanes in the opposite direction, creatively curving them around reclaimed street space used for bike parking and tables outside cafés. It's a lovely street to ride down.


Along Nørrebrogade, when the huge retrofitting project started, the cycle track was reclaimed for bike parking, as well as space for shops to display their goods. Not to worry... a car lane was reclaimed to create space for the cycle track. This was a temporary solution until the permanent infrastructure was built.


What started as a fun experiment for me and my friends is now our standard way of parking when we're out on the town. If there is a car parking spot available outside the bar or café we take it back. I did this little experiment called the Bike Magnet a while back and I can assure you that it continues to work every single time. Technically, according to the City's bylaws you're not permitted to do this, but people power is a lovely thing.


Another innovative project from the City of Copenhagen was this pink car that conquering one and a half parking spots and provided four secure parking spots for cargo bikes. Here's the article about this project.


Here's an unorthodox use of bicycles to block curb space. It looks like someone is reserving the space for use by a moving truck or the temporary placement of a container. The orange posts and plastic ribbons are often insufficient in keeping motorists at bay in their search for parking. So why not take some bikes and lay them down as a deterrent..



There are, of course, examples in other cities. At left is Kensington Market, in Toronto. At right is shopping district in Long Beach, California.


All of this is nothing new. Here are examples of reserving urban space for bicycle parking "corrals" from the 1940s.

Now, however, the battle to reclaim space from cars is more necessary than ever before. Perhaps these Copenhagen examples can serve as inspiration.Copenhagenize the planet. And have a lovely day.

In the interest of expediting the journey towards bicycle-friendly cities and eliminating misconceptions, Copenhagenize Design Co. has produced The Copenhagenize Bicycle Planning Guide.

The beauty of the bicycle infrastructure network in Copenhagen is the uniform design of the infrastructure. There are, by and large, four types of infrastructure - all represented in this graphic. Based on the speed limit for cars, you select the appropriate style of infrastructure and off you go.

If you fancy sending your local planner/engineer a gift that keeps on giving, this graphic is also available as a poster.Copenhagenize the planet. And have a lovely day.

A selection of recent news items in 2013, concerning bicycles losing control.

In Hull -

Police said the bicycle lost control, span round and hit the lamppost opposite the Holiday Inn.

In Croydon -

The London Fire Brigade told the Advertiser the bicycle lost control, flipped over and hit the two pedestrians

In Nantwich -

Father-of-three Rob was killed after his bicycle lost control and hit a tree at 55mph on Marsh Lane, Nantwich.

In North Wales -

Eyewitnesses told how the bicycle lost control on the A548, struck a kerb before careering through the air, across the central reservation and smashed into the AdHoc building. On the way it also destroyed a tree, sign, fence and lamppost.

In Bromsgrove -

A bicycle towing a catering unit on the A448 near Dodford crashed into a road bridge over a stream and a second bicycle lost control, left the road and went into the stream below.

In John O’Groats -

A bicycle lost control on the A836 Thurso to Castletown road at Murkle when it landed into the garden of a property at 11.55am

In Davistow -

The porch of a house in North Cornwall was completely destroyed at the weekend after a bicycle lost control on the A39 and careered into the building.

In Callington -

A woman had a lucky escape after her bicycle lost control, hit a hedge and flipped near to Callington today.

In West Sussex -

She and her friend had watched in horror as a bicycle lost control on a bend and slid down a hill on its side, crashing into two cars in its path

In Rugby -

Oliver, 17, died during the crash when a bicycle lost control and collided with a lamppost just after 4.30pm.

In Greater Manchester -

A spokesperson for Greater Manchester Police told Saddleworth News: “At approximately 3.30pm this afternoon, a bicycle lost control and crashed into a ditch on the A635 Road above Greenfield, it ended up shedding its load of scrap metal. Thankfully no one has been injured.”

In Southend -

A WOMAN had to be cut free from her bicycle after a collision in Southend. The crash happened at 8.40pm on Monday in Eastern Avenue. Firefighters worked to cut her free after another bicycle lost control and ended up on the wrong side of the carriageway.

In Kent -

Dale West was riding a silver Batavus when his bicycle lost control and was involved in a collision with a lorry parked in a layby on the opposite carriageway.

In Bromsgrove (again) -

A bicycle lost control and smashed into a tree during an early morning Bromsgrove Highway crash.

In Tyrone -

One man remains seriously injured in the Royal Victoria Hospital in Belfast after a bicycle lost control on the A5 Omagh to Newtownstewart Road on Sunday.

By now you’ll have probably guessed that a bicycle was not involved in any of these incidents.

As we all know, bicycles do not ‘lose control’. They are controlled by human beings. 

All I have done, in each of these news items, is to exchange the word ‘car’, ‘van’ or ‘lorry’ for ‘bicycle’, to demonstrate the absurdity of the conventional phrasing, so commonly used in news items – impersonal language that denies agency. Motor vehicles do not lose control. People lose control of them, with disastrous, and often fatal, consequences.

What’s also interesting about these stories is how the carnage, injury and death seem quite farcical when the mode of transport involved is the humble bicycle. Bicycles do not career through the air, smash into buildings, or crush pedestrians. They’re really quite safe, and when people do lose control of them, the consequences are quite mundane when compared to the consequences detailed in these news items.

Sports and I are not a great match, to put it very mildly. And it has been like that all my life. To give but one small example: I was … Continue reading →

In the aftermath of the 2005 7th July bombings in London I wrote a piece entitled “7/7: What kills you matters – not numbers”

I illustrated it with a diagram highlighting the remarkable lack of correlation between quantified measures of risk and common response. I identified two key variables that helped to explain this lack of correlation: the level of control that those taking, or exposed to, the risk felt that they had and, in the case of involuntary risks, the perceived motives of the imposer of the risk.

Risk Amplification

52 people were killed by the 7/7 bombers. I noted that in Britain at that time “on an average day nine people die and over 800 are injured in road accidents. The mangled metal, the pain of the victims, and the grief of families and friends, one might suppose, are similar in both cases. Measured in terms of life and limb, 7/7 represented six days of death on the road. But thousands do not gather weekly in Trafalgar Square to manifest their collective concern.”  Why?

Simon Jenkins has become a routinely calming and rational voice in the aftermath of such events. Discussing the Boston marathon bombs he provides a good answer in today’s Guardian. He succinctly describes the problem: “Such deeds are senseless murders. … What makes them terrorist is the outside world rushing to hand their perpetrators a megaphone.” See “After the bomb, hysteria is the terrorist’s best weapon”. I recommend it.

Another recommendation from yesterday’s New York Times by Thomas Friedman: Bring On the Next Marathon.

I recently attended the first seminar in a new LCC Policy series, at which the Cycling Commissioner Andrew Gilligan addressed an audience of about a hundred people, discussing in detail the future plans for cycling in London.

Gilligan made it quite clear that he wanted to be informed of new developments being proposed in London that were not up to scratch, as far as cycling was concerned. He gave the example of the Heygate development in Southwark, which would have compromised cycling if the original plans had been left unaddressed. He also wanted criticism of TfL plans to continue; a message he repeated at a meeting with Camden Cyclists on Monday -

Gilligan encouraging campaigners to keep pressure up on TfL on delivery. Reception of Cycling Vision from activists was “almost too good”.

Well, from what has been posted on the City Cyclists blog this morning (please do read this important post in full), there is an issue – a big issue – at Aldgate. The plans to remove the gyratory and replace it with a two-way road look absolutely miserable.

The roads in the area are enormously wide. The space between buildings is vast.

A little further onwards, to the west from this point, we enter the Aldgate gyratory itself. This two-way road becomes a four lane, one-way road, in front of Aldgate tube station.

Courtesy of Google Streetview

The plan is to remove this gyratory, and restore the roads here (including the similar eastbound section just to the north) to two-way running.

But there is nothing for cycling. Here’s what the plans for this particular bit of road look like -

Amazingly, it’s being converted into a two-way road, with just one lane in each direction, but with no infrastructure for cycling at all, bar a couple of ASLs with hopeless lead-in lanes. 

The westbound capacity of this road has been reduced from four lanes to one, and yet somehow no space has been reallocated for cycling. Even the bus lane has disappeared. Given the amount of space between the buildings you can see in the photographs above, this is an extraordinary oversight.

A huge opportunity is being missed here. Gyratory removal is seemingly taking place in a complete vacuum; motor vehicle capacity is being reduced, without considering how the space could be used for cycling, and for public transport. This is something I wrote about, at length, recently – it seems that trend is continuing.

We desperately need to start using the enormous amount of road space available in London in a more constructive way.

Last week a brilliant young woman was killed by a truck in central London as she rode to work by bicycle.  Dr Katharine Giles becomes the third cyclist to die in central London in 2013, and the 62nd cyclist to die in London since our current Mayor, Boris Johnson, took up office in May 2008.

Following Dr Gile's death some soundbites from Boris have been receiving a lot of press attention; "In future we are going to be stipulating that no HGV can enter London unless it meets cycle safety standards" he has said, effectively mooting a ban of trucks that don't come up to his standards.  Whilst this is welcome, soundbites are worthless unless they're followed up with action.  He said the same back in 2010, this time on account of the pollution that some lorries cause, but failed to match his words with results.  Meanwhile the needless tally of deaths has risen; who remembers the case of Jao Lopes, the HGV driver who got away with a slap on the wrist for running down cyclist Eilidh Cairns in Notting Hill, only to kill again, this time crushing 97 year old Holocaust survivor Nora Guttmann on a pedestrian crossing?



Lorries pose a very distinct and dangerous threat to cyclists; they account for about 45% of all London cyclist’s death, but just 5% of traffic. The British Medical Journal, in their 1994 study ‘Death of Cyclists in London’ said “the risk of heavy goods vehicles being involved in accidents in which cyclists die in inner London can be estimated at five times that of buses, 14 times that of light goods vehicles, and 30 times that of cars.”  That report recommended an urban lorry ban some nineteen years and many cyclist’s deaths ago. 
A combination of unscrupulous payment practices whereby some drivers are paid per load, a distinctly criminal element that runs through the haulage industry, and the fact that most drivers (no matter how careful) can't actually see the vulnerable road users around them, combine to ensure that HGVS are the most dangerous vehicles on the roads, and account for a shocking level of deaths.
A three-pronged approach is needed to stop these unnecessary deaths; strong prosecution of the law by the Met, installation of cheap and effective safety equipment like sensors, mirrors and side guards, and most importantly an adjustment of the operating hours of the London Lorry Ban.  Ludicrously, the overnight ban ends as the morning rush hour starts, meaning the most dangerous vehicles on our road come roaring out of their yards just when people are cycling to school or work.
The Olympics showed we can use and control our road network more dynamically without adverse effects. It is time for the Mayor to show real resolve on this tragic issue, before another needless fatality involving an HGV.
Until such action is taken, it is essential that all cyclists in London are fully aware that there is no such thing as a safe HGV to cycle around: most of the time trucks cannot see you, their drivers cannot hear you, and they will not feel you if you are caught up in their wheels.  Until the source of danger is reduced, I think we owe it to ourselves - and to all our friends who ride bikes - to ensure we know how best to ride around lorries:
Above: How many bicycles can you see in the wing mirror of this truck from the driver's position?
The same truck, photographed from the outside; none of these cyclists were visible from inside, and all of them are in fatal danger.  This excellent demonstration of lorry blind spots was by BBC London transport correspondent Tom Edwards in his recent harrowing TV report.
Of course, I am absolutely against any idea of blaming the victim – many of the cyclists who have died as a consequence of HGV collisions have been accomplished cyclists acting within the law (Indeed, 7 London cycle couriers have died as a consequence of collisions with HGVs and lorries in recent years, and it’s arguable that they are the most knowledgeable cyclists on our roads.)  The simple fact is this; cyclists and large vehicles sharing the same piece of road is a source of conflict – sometimes with awful consequences.  And I know from what I see every day when riding that it is obvious not all cyclists in London are fully aware of the risks of getting too close to trucks, or riding down their inside.
Stay back, or get ahead.
There's not much you can do to stop lorries overtaking you when moving forward with traffic, but there is plenty you can do to manage your personal safety at junctions; statistically the scene of most fatal interactions between HGVs and bicycles.

In a sick twist of road planning irony, the advanced stop line (or ASL, or "bike box") and filter lane that you find at most traffic lights in London is exactly the same shape as the blind spot of most lorries.  Furthermore, cycling down the filter lane of an ASL past the inside of a truck puts you in the crush zone should that truck start to turn left.
The advice is this; if you are approaching a set of traffic lights and there are already lorries waiting at the lights ahead of you (remember, they may be about to turn even though they're not indicating) then stay back.  Do not go down the side of the vehicle under any circumstances.  Hold back in traffic and wait for the truck to move on and complete its turn when the lights turn green - remember that larger or articulated lorries may have to pull a long way out to the left before turning right, and vice versa.  Be patient, and give the truck lots of room.
A typical lorry blind spot - look familiar?
If you're at the traffic lights waiting and a truck pulls up behind you, try to get ahead of it as much as you can.  There is a large blind spot in front of the driver's cab which you may not be aware you are in.  Try to get at least 5 metres ahead of the lorry, and don't be afraid to turn and give the driver eye contact, or even a little wave to make sure they note your position.  Better still, consider dismounting your bike and walking across the junction if you are turning left or right.  Contentious though it is, if it is clear and safe for you to jump the red light without threatening any pedestrians you should consider doing so.  (And before anyone gets on their high horse I've been given this very advice on several occasions by road traffic investigators; the Police who have to come and take deceased cyclists off of the road)
Always remember; if the truck is ahead, stay back.  If the truck is behind, get ahead.
In a nutshell, try to put as much clear space between yourself and any large vehicles at junctions as you safely can.
I'm going to be sitting down and talking to a couple of my friends who cycle to work over lunch today and making sure they're all fully aware of this information, as well as having a "refresher" chat with my partner when I get home.  If we all do the same, and help to spread the word of how to interact with trucks, perhaps we can help to limit cyclists in London's exposure to danger, whilst we wait for our politicians and leaders to limit the source of it.
Share |

I spent an interesting hour or so yesterday discussing cycling in London, and the potential implications of the new strategy appearing from Transport for London, with Jack Thurston of the Bike Show, Bill Chidley, and Trevor Parsons of Hackney Cycling Campaign. You can listen to what we had to say this evening on Resonance FM, although be warned, it does get a bit nerdy.

It turns out that Bill has recently written an interesting critical piece which addresses, in part, my recent blog article about the legacy of historical attitudes in cycling campaigning, ‘No Surrender’. I started forming a comment response, but it soon morphed out into a larger piece that I thought would be better served here (that’s me being wordy again!).

The general thrust of Bill’s piece is a critique of infighting amongst cycling groups and individuals – ‘two bald men fighting over a comb’, as the article is titled. The strongest criticism is reserved for Freewheeler of Crap Waltham Forest, about which I don’t have a lot to say, for the main reason that it doesn’t really concern me. Bill quotes Freewheeler as arguing that

I am not suggesting arson as the route to mass cycling but I do think that cyclists need to consider challenging the status quo in other ways than tea and biscuits at the Town Hall…  Non-violent direct action stunts are long overdue in British cycle campaigning.

We chatted about this a little before we went on air yesterday; I’m of the opinion that taking to the streets can be very useful indeed, as long as it does not appear to be confrontational and deliberately difficult. I think critical mass rides in London – which I have occasionally attended – fall into this trap. Whatever message there is gets lost in the aggro. By contrast, I went on the Blackfriars ‘Flashrides’ in 2011, and on the LCC’s Big Ride, precisely because they had a clear message, and were more consensual.

Much of the rest of Bill’s article is fair, and indeed by the sounds of it (and from our discussion yesterday, both in the studio, and later in the pub) there’s probably not much disagreement between us. However he attributes some opinions to me that I don’t really hold; perhaps that’s my fault for a lack of clarity in my original article.

Bill takes me to task for stating that Hackney’s modal share is not all that significant, pointing out that it is the highest in London. That’s true, of course, but I suppose I was pointing out that Hackney’s modal share is not all that significant in a European context. A modal share of 8% is just miserable by Dutch standards. So the idea that Hackney represents the way to a cycle track-free future strikes me as a bit overblown.

Granted, it is much better to cycle in Hackney than in most other London boroughs – something I am always happy to acknowledge – but it is perverse to insist that, because Hackney is the best place to cycle in one of the worst cities in western Europe for cycling, it should be some kind of template. Hackney does many good things, particularly filtered permeability, which makes residential streets pleasant to cycle on, but the main roads in the borough are intimidating, even for a fairly hardened cyclist like me, and the insistence on keeping cycle tracks out of the borough is unreasonable.

Beyond Hackney, I also think Bill slightly misinterprets the point of my ‘No Surrender’ piece. He writes

It is a several thousand word treatise on what is wrong with the CTC, and how the CTC’s tactics, historically and currently, are undermining the efforts to get more people cycling.

The proposition that because the CTC once espoused ‘bad’ policies, that the CTC is irrecoverably ‘broken’ as an organisation long after the main characters responsible for the policy (or policies) are dead is not really sustainable.

The first paragraph is broadly correct, with the exception that I wasn’t writing exclusively about the CTC, or focusing on them, as much as that might have appeared to be the case. My intention was specifically to write about an attitude that the CTC leadership demonstrated in the past, and might, arguably, still hold today. Namely, that the roads are for bicycles, and any attempts to separate modes, or to put bicycles ‘out of the way’ of cars, giving cars free reign on the roads, is unacceptable. Closely connected to this belief is the attitude that cycle tracks, particularly in urban areas, represent an abandonment of roads and streets motor vehicles.

Naturally enough, I think these attitudes are wrong, for reasons I won’t go into here, mainly because I’ve done so at length many times before (as have others). But these beliefs weren’t, and still aren’t, the exclusive preserve of one organisation. I wasn’t out to ‘get’ the CTC; I was critiquing this particular philosophy, not an organisation.

So for that reason I don’t think the second paragraph – which suggests I believe that the CTC is ‘irrecoverably broken’ because of what happened in the 1930s – is fair. It’s perfectly possible for organisations to change; they aren’t necessarily stuck for life to any one particular idea. The LCC – of which I am a member – is a good example. It’s changed beyond measure over the last two to three years.

Instead of suggesting that this is the way to redesign our streets -

Picture courtesy of LCC

They’ve come up with a bold, inclusive vision of cycling for all, which draws heavily on best continental practice.

Even as recently 2010, Mark Ames was having to ask whether the LCC

are really pushing for cycle lanes and segregation on the busy main roads or not?

So the LCC have changed strategy considerably. But what about the CTC?

In 2009, they were arguing that

Cycle tracks away from roads fine if direct and/or attractive for leisure cycling. But alongside urban streets they are rarely suitable. Traffic restraint is best: capacity, parking, pricing.

Cycle tracks are apparently only suitable as connecting routes away from streets; all urban streets should remain the preserve of cyclists mixing with motor traffic.

I can’t think of any other explanation for this kind of attitude beyond the historically-influenced reluctance to ‘surrender’ roads, which my original piece talked about. Of course, it is now absurdly out of step with the emerging consensus, particularly in London, that cycle tracks are an essential and necessary intervention to civilise urban streets, and for making cycling an option for all.

The CTC are adapting, slowly, to this consensus – indeed they are being forced to. So to that extent they are not ‘irrecoverably broken’.

However, I think they are considerably hampered by the attitudes of much of their membership, and by the inertia of decades of this form of campaigning, which dismissed continental approaches as unworkable in the UK.

The reason I and many others have criticised the CTC is not just for the fun of it; it’s specifically because they have had – and still have – bad policies. The Hierarchy of Provision is flawed. Dual networks are flawed. Attempting to get most people to ‘share the road’ is flawed.

Pointing this out does not imply that I think that the CTC are solely responsible for the current state of affairs, with desperately low modal share and rubbish infrastructure. Of course it doesn’t. But their policies certainly don’t help, and those policies needed to be criticised, so that better policy gets implemented. Whether you characterise this as pointless infighting, or a constructive way of moving things forward, is up to you.

Late last year I transported myself a bit farther than normal on my bicycle. The occasion was a weekend in the woods with the families in Felix's class. The destination was about 21 km north of Copenhagen. Somewhere near Værløse. Which is "Middle of nowhere" (MoN) to this city boy. Normally, I don't bother going farther than IKEA. But I'll ride my bicycle there every time.

I'm not a cyclist. I don't demonstratively ride my bicycle everywhere. Like almost every Copenhagener I don't know how many kilometres I ride each year. I'm just a guy who uses a bicycle because it's practical.

With Felix and Lulu in tow, we had three options for getting there.
1. Take the train and then a bus.
2. Take the bikes on the train and ride the last 5 km.
3. Take the bikes.

It was number two if the weather was crap. I asked Felix if he thought he could ride 21 km and he was up for trying. Turns out the weather was fine so off we went. If you want to see the route, we tracked it on the Endomondo app.

All the motorways - and roads for that matter - leading to Copenhagen have cycle tracks on both sides, as you see in the photo above. So getting there by bicycle was no problem.


We loaded up the Bullitt with all the gear required of a weekend trip with a single dad and two kids - duvets, pillows, etc. and off we went.

Felix was on his Chopper and raring to go.

Along most of the route parallel to the #16 Motorway, the asphalt was so fresh you could almost smell it. What a splendid ride on that surface. Lovely, wide cycle tracks on both sides of the motorway.

Along many sections, the cycle track is bi-directional - never, ever in the city - but because of the desire lines of the people along these routes, it makes logistical sense. The volume of cyclist traffic out here is, of course, nowhere near the levels in the centre of Copenhagen and there are few intersections, so it makes rational sense.

We passed Skovbrynet Station on the bridge. Low traffic volume for cars and so there are painted lanes along the road below. Although a separated cycle track in the foreground up to the entrance to the station. These painted lines are getting quite rare. Many municipalities upgrade to separated cycle tracks because they know they encourage more people to ride.

Off the motorway we came.

We took a shortcut through the woods - Hareskoven. Lovely in the autumn light.



This neck of the woods is mountain bike heaven. Or so I've read.


On the other side of the woods we were back on cycle tracks. A bit narrow here, but this was an exception. It was a road cutting through the woods. Not exactly a bicycle user expressway.

Through small towns we were on separated cycle tracks once again.

As we ventured out into the country the cycle tracks started to separate from the roads with a verge, as per Danish best practice. When the car speed limits rise, you get cyclists farther away from the road.

One thing I tire of hearing is "Denmark is so flat". No, it isn't. The Netherlands is. And so is Copenhagen in the city centre. Once you're out of the city centre, however, you meet hills.

A few were nasty with a fully-laden Bullitt and Felix struggled on some of them, but we made it up every one. When you live in Copenhagen, you forget that much of the rest of the country is hilly, even though we sing the praises of our hills and valleys in the national anthem.

But hey. Hills end. Wind doesn't. Give me hills over wind any day. Luckily, the weekend was largely windless so we avoided that evil combination.

This is an example of a fine, separated cycle track through the countryside.

After a lovely weekend with friends, we headed home to Copenhagen.

Interestingly, in this article, you've basically seen three of the four types of bicycle infrastructure in Denmark that makes up the Best Practice. There are only four. That's what makes good design.

- Separated cycle tracks. The standard when speed limits for cars are above 30 km/h - unless car traffic volume is deemed low then above 40 km/h. Separated from the street with a curb.

- Bi-directional cycle tracks. Not used in cities because of safety issues. We threw these out of the Best Practice for cities a couple of decades ago. They serve a great function on routes with few intersections, like along the motorways or bike paths that run through parks, etc.

- Cycle tracks separated by a verge - completely away from the road, but running parallel. This is the standard when speed limits for cars are 60-70 km/h or higher.

The one you didn't see is what you get on residential streets with a 20-30 km/h speed limit. Then there is no bicycle infrastructure. Bicycles share the street with other vehicles at that speed.Copenhagenize the planet. And have a lovely day.

Just when you thought you've seen it all, this pops into your inbox. It is from the lovely blog Bisikleta iha Dili, run by J.P.. A bicycle carousel for children. Fantastic. Especially as I'm in the midst of editing a book featuring 725 of my photos of cargo bikes entitled Cargo Bike Nation.

Dili is the capital of East Timor - or Timor Leste - the former Portuguese colony nestled between Australia and Indonesia. J.P. is running a cool little blog showing the bicycle's role in daily life.
Copenhagenize the planet. And have a lovely day.

The UK have recently started to look across the North sea for cycle infrastructure inspiration… again. Because some people in the UK already did that in the 1930s  and also in … Continue reading →

Exhibition Road -

Exhibition Road -

The top picture is taken from this flyer, advertising a talk given by Ben Hamilton-Baillie, entitled New Directions in Street Design, Safety and Movement. It was taken in early August last year, when the street was closed to motor vehicles for the Exhibition Road Show (more pictures here).

The bottom picture was taken by me at the same location, just over a month later, in September 2012, when the road was open to motor traffic, as it usually is.

It nearly always looks like this, particularly during the day.

I don’t know who was responsible for choosing that picture on the flyer. Nevertheless it is surely more than a little misleading to select an image taken when there were no motor vehicles present at all to illustrate how shared space street design can ‘reconcile traffic movement with the quality of public space’ – because, quite obviously, there was no motor ‘traffic movement’ on the days in question.

From the description of the talk -

Ben Hamilton-Baillie, one of the UK’s leading practitioners in street design and placemaking is coming to Leeds Met to deliver a lecture on current thinking, practice and issues surrounding traffic movement and the concept of shared space.

The need to reconcile traffic movement with the quality of public space in cities, towns and villages is widely recognised.  We all use public or pivate transport to move around and we all want beautiful and safe places to live and work in.  Shared space is one approach to resolving this issue, with a number of high profile schemes (eg Exhibition Road, Kensington and Ashford Ring Road in Kent) being delivered over the past decade where principles have been put into practice and from which experience has been gained.

What Exhibition Road actually demonstrates is that ‘traffic movement’ cannot genuinely be reconciled with ‘quality of public space’ without a considerable reduction in the amount of that traffic composed of motor vehicles.

The use of that picture on the flyer amounts to an implicit admission of the very same thing. 

Lengthier analysis of Exhibition Road from me here

We've all heard tales of terrible bike shops; horror stories of shoddy service, shocking charges and indifferent staff more interested in standing around than looking after customers.  A visit to my local nameless city-wide generic bike store (Sod it.  Hello, Evans Spitalfields!) invariably entails me waiting and waiting - and waiting - to be served before I leave, disgusted.  Indeed, if the folklore that surrounds cycling service providers are to believed it's a wonder that anyone successfully sells bikes in London at all!



So it is that the London Cycling Awards make a very welcome return to the social calendar; organised by the London Cycling Campaign, and back after a short hiatus bigger and better than before.  Because let's face it, when you do actually receive good service, it's worth rewarding, right?

On the 8th of May the very best of London's cycling service providers, community projects and bicycle champions will be celebrated in a glittering awards ceremony presented by ITV cycling commentator Ned Boulting.

And you can have a choice in who gets nominated for a gong!  The London Cycling Campaign want to hear from you about which bike shops make you smile, which cycling products you can't do without, and who your cycling heroes are.

LCC chief executive Ashok Sinha said:
"We’re calling on Londoners to nominate their favourite retailers, products, projects and initiatives, to celebrate the champions of cycling in the capital. There's never been so much excitement around cycling in our great city, and these promise to be the best London Cycling Awards ever."

And if you needed any reassurance that the bicycle is on the ascent in London, the awards event will be supported and covered by the Evening Standard, plus others including Brompton Bicycles, Cycle Surgery, Cyclehoop, EMCF, Levenes Solicitors, Madison, Royal Haskoning DHV - are supporting the awards.

You've got until April 16th to make your nominations for your best bike brand, best cycling champion, best cycling communicator, best product and bike retailer.  Nominations are open now, so get involved and reward that rarest of things; the cycling service providers in London that make you happy! 

Share |

And now for something completely different...

Fellow London cyclist and blogger Kim Forrester (@Kimbofo) spends her time writing about bikes and books; two of my favourite things!  Her London Cycling Diaries are always worth a browse, and contain some wonderful photographs, whilst her Reading Matters blog often has me adding more material to my "Must Read" list.

This month on Reading Matters Kim is hosting Australian Literature Month -  a series of posts looking at some of the best books, poems and writing to come out of the antipodes, and encouraging others to share their favourite Aussie reads.  So here's mine... (you're probably wondering why I'm writing about Aussie literature on my cycling blog, but read on and all will become clear!)

Andrew Barton "Banjo" Paterson is arguably Australia's most famous literary export.  Born in 1864 in New South Wales, his iconic bush poetry ("The Man From Snowy River", "Waltzing Matilda") is taught to every school child in the land, whilst his image even adorns the Australian $10 note.  Whilst certainly a popularist writer, his use of common Australian parlance from the period has endeared himself to subsequent generations, whilst helping to capture the voice of the working people of the bush.

Mulga Bill's Bicycle by Banjo Paterson is my one of my favourite poems, and one of my favourite pieces of Australian literature.  It tells the tale of Mulga Bill, a factious cattleman, who purchases a bicycle and - based on his own macho pride - assumes that because he can ride horses and cattle ("there's none can ride like me") that he'll be able to ride a bicycle with ease, too.  The resulting calamity is the basis for the poem, and the vivid description of careering out of control never fail to make me smile, but there is a more serious subject here too.


The Cordillo Sheep Shearers of South Australia, from a post about cycling in Australia on Copenhagenize
Australia is a drought and flood country, and in the droughts of the late 1890s steersmen all across Australia took up cycling to get around as they could no longer afford to feed their horses.  It's also a vast nation, ill-suited to walking - if you wanted to get around a cattle station in the past you needed a horse or a bike to cover the distances.  The introduction of the bicycle brought genuine social mobility to a whole new class of people throughout Australia.  The revolutionary effects of the humble bicycle there are difficult to imagine now in the modern country which is bound by its compulsory helmet laws, very low ridership levels and urban sprawl.

Still, every cloud has a silver lining.  The small mining town of Eaglehawk in Victoria is named in the poem as the home of Mulga Bill, and some far-sited locals have built a Mulga Bill Bicycle trail; a scenic ride taking in the mines and historic sites of the town.  I like the idea of a poem about a bicycle converging with people actually going for a ride in reality; although hopefully with less dramatic consequences for those who chose to do so!

Normal service will soon be resumed on ibikelondon blog, but in the meantime do read this poem out loud for the best results, and I hope you enjoy it:

Mulga Bill's Bicycle

’Twas Mulga Bill, from Eaglehawk, that caught the cycling craze;
He turned away the good old horse that served him many days;
He dressed himself in cycling clothes, resplendent to be seen;
He hurried off to town and bought a shining new machine;
And as he wheeled it through the door, with air of lordly pride,
The grinning shop assistant said, “Excuse me, can you ride?”

“See here, young man,” said Mulga Bill, “from Walgett to the sea,
From Conroy’s Gap to Castlereagh, there’s none can ride like me.
I’m good all round at everything as everybody knows,
Although I’m not the one to talk – I hate a man that blows.
But riding is my special gift, my chiefest, sole delight;
Just ask a wild duck can it swim, a wildcat can it fight.
There’s nothing clothed in hair or hide, or built of flesh or steel,
There’s nothing walks or jumps, or runs, on axle, hoof, or wheel,
But what I’ll sit, while hide will hold and girths and straps are tight:
I’ll ride this here two-wheeled concern right straight away at sight.”

‘Twas Mulga Bill, from Eaglehawk, that sought his own abode,
That perched above Dead Man’s Creek, beside the mountain road.
He turned the cycle down the hill and mounted for the fray,
But ‘ere he’d gone a dozen yards it bolted clean away.
It left the track, and through the trees, just like a silver steak,
It whistled down the awful slope towards the Dead Man’s Creek.

It shaved a stump by half an inch, it dodged a big white-box:
The very wallaroos in fright went scrambling up the rocks,
The wombats hiding in their caves dug deeper underground,
As Mulga Bill, as white as chalk, sat tight to every bound.
It struck a stone and gave a spring that cleared a fallen tree,
It raced beside a precipice as close as close could be;
And then as Mulga Bill let out one last despairing shriek
It made a leap of twenty feet into the Dean Man’s Creek.

‘Twas Mulga Bill, from Eaglehawk, that slowly swam ashore:
He said, "I’ve had some narrer shaves and lively rides before;
I’ve rode a wild bull round a yard to win a five-pound bet,
But this was the most awful ride that I’ve encountered yet.
I’ll give that two-wheeled outlaw best; it’s shaken all my nerve
To feel it whistle through the air and plunge and buck and swerve.
It’s safe at rest in Dead Man’s Creek, we’ll leave it lying still;
A horse’s back is good enough henceforth for Mulga Bill."

Banjo Paterson, 1896
Share |

Last Sunday was a day full of activities in Nijmegen. A new “snelfietsroute” (fast cycle route) was festively opened and there was a Cargo Bike Festival (Bakfietstreffen). I made three … Continue reading →

Below I outline three possible scenarios for cycling’s global role in 2050. I then extrapolate current major trends to conclude with what I personally consider to be cycling’s most likely role in the world of 2050.

1. Mass velomobility

Widespread concerns about health, climate change and livability have translated into advocacy for and implementation of a radical set of policies, re-shaping the transport environment, and especially cities, away from motorised modes and towards cycling. Massively increased fuel prices combined with high levels of tax on both ownership and use of motorised vehicles have accelerated social and cultural change towards sustainable modes of mobility. These processes started first in the world’s most prestigious cities – such as London, New York, Berlin and Paris; but caught on quickly and spread across the globe, including to cities which in 2013 had been leaving cycling behind.

Little motorised traffic penetrates urban space, which is characterised instead by parks, trees, and people meeting, walking or cycling. The benefits of these changes have ensured they are embraced, encouraging still further change. The private car is extinct and has disappeared as a status symbol. Short journeys are walked, but cycling is the normal mode of transport for almost everyone for journeys beyond two kilometres but less than ten kilometres: some people use e-bikes to help with lack of fitness, steep hills or longer distance; some people (particularly young children) and freight are transported locally by load-carrying (often electrically-assisted) velomobiles. High quality public transport systems exist, but within cities their use is considered inferior to the making of journeys by bike.

Urban space is pervaded by a spirit of community, neighbourliness and conviviality. The release of space from parked and moving cars has ensured plenty of room for walking and cycling to mix without conflict. A new understanding of cycling has developed – as a practice which has helped safe-guard human well-being on the planet; cycling is therefore considered fundamental to ‘the good life’ and is rarely seen as difficult. History books and children’s stories tell of ‘the time of the car’, but the youngest generation scarcely believes it; imbued with an ethic of living sustainably on a finite planet, it takes for granted the localised, resource-lite, energy-efficient lives which are now normal.

2. Going Dutch

Increasing concerns about health, fitness, pollution and climate change have led to re-shaping of urban space away from the car and towards the bicycle following the lead shown by (and the best practice pioneered in) the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany. Growing public demand and government support for cycling form part of a broader desire for less car-centric cities in which people choose between different modes, with cycling favoured for shorter journeys beyond walking distance.

Cycling is generally regarded as ‘a good thing’, but partial resistance to it remains across areas of the world which had previously embedded car use as normal (north America, Australasia, much of Europe) or which adopted a culture of car ownership and use more recently (Latin America, Africa, Asia). Levels of cycling vary greatly: continuation of pro-cycling policies in many northern European countries means cycling usually accounts for over half of urban journeys; elsewhere cycling (including assisted cycling) typically accounts for between 10 and 30% of all urban journeys.

Cycling is still being actively promoted by government and other institutions, and remains in competition with other modes (trams, buses, trains and cars – whether privately or collectively owned). It is designed into the urban fabric in various ways: in central urban areas, which are now generally car-free, it tends to share space with (and give way to) pedestrians; further out it tends to be separated from other modes along bigger, busier roads but to mix with them on quieter residential streets, where speeds are below 30 km/hr. Cycling is typically afforded priority over motorised modes within urban space, but this priority is challenged across suburban space, and reversed across rural space (where cycling remains predominantly a leisure practice).

As urban cycling levels have increased, people have gradually re-organised their values, attitudes and lifestyles around it, so that whilst some groups remain resistant to actually doing it, hostility to the idea of cycling has declined, and it is widely accepted as a normal means of moving around. However, the bicycle’s status is highest and cycling as a mode of transport most popular amongst affluent, educated urban groups (and very popular amongst retired people as an active, healthy mode of (mainly rural) leisure). Attempts to sell ‘the Dutch model’ of cycling have expanded to all parts of the world, including India and China.

3. Business-as-usual

Levels of cycling remain relatively high across parts of northern Europe, reaching 50% of all journeys in a select few Dutch, Danish and German cities. Elsewhere there are some ‘cycling beacons’ (often hyped by short-lived institutional efforts to boost cycling in particular places), but levels of cycling remain generally negligible, at a few per cent of total urban trips. Countries where cycling was once common, such as India and China, have become more organised around the car; problems associated with transport congestion and pollution have grown dramatically.

Cycling continues to be seen in some places as a potential solution to assorted problems but it remains a struggle to convert positive rhetoric into more utility cycling; in other places cycling has become a discredited ‘solution’ – past efforts to promote cycling have failed, so the search for solutions has moved on to other ‘eco-friendly’ transport projects which fit better the interests of neo-liberal capitalism, such as new generations of ‘smart cars’, car-sharing schemes, and high-profile public transport projects.

Outside the few places where utility cycling is ‘normal’ it continues to be seen as a fringe activity of small, inconsequential sub-cultures; many people from these sub-cultures still advocate cycling as the most efficient, healthy and sustainable means of urban transport but their advocacy fails to make much impact, either on public opinion or governmental and other institutional agendas and policies. However, cycling does attract small, isolated pockets of funding for little local projects aimed mainly at children or ‘hard-to-reach’ groups.

Conclusion: cycling futures

The least likely of these scenarios is surely the last, ‘business-as-usual’. Culture and society change continuously; nothing stays the same; so the idea that things 37 years from now might remain much as they are today seems unrealistic.

Three major trends likely to have an impact on people’s willingness to cycle are obviously underway:

1. Climate change and its unintended and serious consequences is established scientific fact. But without strong institutional intervention, lifestyle changes in response to the realities of climate change will be highly uneven, both geographically and socially;
2. Amongst the world’s richest people, the car’s status is in decline and the bicycle’s status is on the rise. These appear to be long-term trends, not short-term fads;
3. Cities across much of the ‘rich’ world are becoming susceptible to ideas (and associated re-shapings) around livability – no longer mainly places to escape, they are being re-made into desirable places in which to live, work and play.

This suggests two potential futures for cycling:

1) Based on cycling remaining an elective practice

The urban rich embrace cycling as a genuine response to anxieties around climate change as well as a marker of a new, middle-class lifestyle which prioritizes livability. Urban governments will increasingly respond to and seek to capitalise on cycling’s rising status, both with public bike schemes and more cycle-friendly spaces. But poor people will be pushed out from cities and, together with rural populations, will be less inclined as well as less able (because of longer distances and less hospitable conditions) to cycle.

2) Based on cycling being increasingly structured into the urban environment

Here an urban elite institutionalise their increasingly favoured practice of cycling, and – if they are able to do so across urban space generally – there is a chance they might also democratise it. This ‘democratisation’ will occur both because improved infrastructure for cycling will enable people from beyond the urban elites (temporarily) to gain its (diminishing) status effects, and because the ‘colonisation’ of urban space by this ‘elite infrastructure’ will coerce people into using it. (I am not shying away from the difficult language of coercion and colonisation here, but would note that it can just as easily and equally be applied to on-going processes which result in car-centric cities and lifestyles.)

Of these futures, I think the first is more likely and the second is more desirable, especially if it can be facilitated and made more palatable by informed, critical and progressive cycling advocacy. It is the second which would best ensure 2050 is characterised by mass velomobility.