Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

London Deploys Cycle Superhighways Despite "Old Men In Limos"

Posted by timothy on from the varied-means-to-varies-ends dept.

dkatana writes: London's mayor Boris Johnson had to fight its way through stiff resistance to the new Cycle Superhighways to see his vision of a cycling capital become reality.

Detractors included the Taxi Drivers Association (LTDA), which threatened legal action, but ultimately backed away when it became apparent that a judicial review of TfL's plans would simply delay rather than stop the new routes. Property firm Canary Wharf Group had also been vocal, producing an anonymous briefing (which it later acknowledged) that called the planned route "extremely damaging for London." An unnamed borough was threatened with powers to seize control of their roads if cycle superhighways were blocked.

Now the two new segregated bike paths will crisscross the city and open up speedy, safe cycling that will ease pollution and traffic for everyone, non-cyclists, too, Boris Johnson says.

35 of 258 comments (clear)

  1. wish this existed in silicon valley by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I drive on heavily congested roads for about 12 miles. My car says I average 22 mph....
    If there was a bicycle highway that was uninterrupted for this distance, I could save stress by riding a bike rather than a car, with little cost in time.

    1. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by beelsebob · · Score: 3, Informative

      Unfortunately, US road design means that cycling in Silicon Valley is basically a guaranteed death sentence.

      It would require major reworking (like replacing the light junctions with roundabouts so that the roads could be made narrower, and dedicated, separate lanes could be added in the space the roads used to use.

    2. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by quenda · · Score: 3, Interesting

      If there was a bicycle highway that was uninterrupted for this distance, I could save stress by riding a bike rather than a car, with little cost in time.

      Looking at google maps, I see there is a rail line running the length of the valley. That would be a the obvious place to build a cycleway - would that help?
      There are already decent bike lines alongside sections of the line. Could the rail reserve be used?

      Or could you combine bike & train, either folding bike on train, or keep a bike locked up at each end of your commute (unless you can park a car at your local station). Is that a good option in California?

    3. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by Locando · · Score: 2

      I don't know man, I tried biking in San Jose once and the main thing holding me back from taking a trip down there again was the monotony of miles upon miles of office parks. There are bike lanes, and drivers generally respect them. That's more than you can say for most American suburbs.

    4. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by gwolf · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oh, FFS... I am an urban cyclist in Mexico City. Yes, non-bike-riders often tell me I'm crazy for risking my life daily in one of the world's largest cities, with all kinds of expeltives directed at my fellow countrymen... ...And they are all wrong.

      Of course, I don't cycle in highways/motorways. Of course, I go out of my way to be sure I am seen. Of course, I know all of the driving rules (and many of the usual wrongs). Of course, I am very very careful. I am not the least interested in making my kids orphan.

      But riding a bike in a city not thought for bikes is perfectly doable. And we will only achieve greater visibility and better city design by breaking the balance and becoming more visible. By becoming more cyclists. By being seen so often on the roads that motorists will *expect* us to be there.

      I don't need (and often don't want, as they are usually not very well planned nor enough drivable) cyclist-only paths. We are a moving vehicle, and should coexist with traffic. After all, as GGP said, motorists average 22MPH (35.2Km/h). I average 20-25Km/h. It's not that much of a difference.

    5. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by Grishnakh · · Score: 3, Informative

      Sorry, I'm not going to risk my life driving alongside assholes driving giant pickup trucks that take up the whole lane, and who can't even be bothered to stay within their lanes.

      All it takes is one small mistake by a car/truck driver and you're dead. Having more cyclists out there does not change the laws of physics. You're risking your life every time you ride with traffic.

    6. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by skirmish666 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Oh, FFS... I am an urban cyclist in Mexico City.

      Hello, I'm an urban cyclist in what's considered my country's most cycle-friendly city.

      Of course, I don't cycle in highways/motorways. Of course, I go out of my way to be sure I am seen. Of course, I know all of the driving rules (and many of the usual wrongs). Of course, I am very very careful.

      Where I live you would be 1. Arrested almost immediately, 2. Hit by another vehicle, 3. Fined 4. Hit by another vehicle for not doing so

      But riding a bike in a city not thought for bikes is perfectly doable.

      Doable, yes. Doable safely, no. People (passengers and drivers alike) regularly kill cyclists because they can't be bothered to look behind them before opening a car door, or stop SMSing their fully sick M8s long enough to check the mirrors of their daddy's BMW while they pull into your lane without indicating.

      And we will only achieve greater visibility and better city design by breaking the balance and becoming more visible. By becoming more cyclists. By being seen so often on the roads that motorists will *expect* us to be there.

      “Because it’s so narrow, the cars have to move out a lane or half lane, it creates confusion and traffic,” - The lord mayor of the country's most cycle accessible city reflecting the attitude of the city's non-cyclists. Drivers will not put up for going an average of 10-15kph slower, changing lane, or gently swerving to avoid cyclists. Period.

      I don't need (and often don't want, as they are usually not very well planned nor enough drivable) cyclist-only paths. We are a moving vehicle, and should coexist with traffic.

      If the other traffic behaved in a way that wasn't dangerous to the average cyclists life, perhaps. I'm a cautious cyclist and I count on average one event per hour of road time that would lead to a serious or fatal incident if I hadn't taken emergency actions.

      I can't imagine how people less prepared for the reality of the dangers involved, or those a bit less cautious than me manage but I can see the statistics of road fatalities and serious injuries that result.

      Would you take your 1988 hatchback along a highway populated by high-speed monster trucks driven by people with nothing better to do than drive as fast as they can to the next red light? How do you think they feel about your $500 fuel efficient car keeping up with their $200k gas guzzlers? Apparently, where I'm from, that sort of thing is tantamount to telling someone to go forth and multiply.

      Drivers feel well within their rights to not have to be bothered to "move out a lane or half lane", after all the lord mayor doesn't seem to think they should.

      --
      Sigger than your average
    7. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by unimacs · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Lots of metro areas are becoming like this and so increasingly are suburbs. I live in Minneapolis and bike year round. We have a bike freeway that cuts through the middle of the city on an old railroad line. It's the quickest way across the city, especially during rush hour.

      Lots and lots of people die in car accidents and it doesn't stop folks from driving.

    8. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by MacTO · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You can reduce those risks by becoming familiar with your route and how motorists behave at different times of day, then adjusting your riding habits accordingly.

      To give you an example of what I mean: there is a particular 3-way stop in my city where I always pull over to the left hand side of the lane. This is because the driver's view on one of the streets is obstructed by a large tree, so a cyclist on the right would go unseen. While my first couple of trips through that intersection were scary, because I was sticking to the right, becoming familiar with the intersection and modifying my riding habits accordingly made the trip much safer.

    9. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by hankwang · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Roundabouts are bad for cyclists. It is very difficult to devise a sensible solution."

      I often pass over this elevated bike roundabout. Kind of expensive though...

      https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik...

      --
      Avantslash: low-bandwidth mobile slashdot.
    10. Re:wish this existed in silicon valley by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      Personally, I think there needs to be a moratorium on anything to do with converting rail right of ways to trails, in part or in whole. The proposals sound well meaning, but they're frequently done in bad faith as an attempt to prevent trains from being used in certain areas, and they're based upon the proposition that trains are "obsolete" and "never coming back" whereas 99% of the issues the US rail industry has can be traced to systematically hostile governance and subsidies of the alternatives.

      Rail will, ultimately, go back to growing as a means of transportation due to a combination of population growth, and under (real) capacity. As that happens, the politically nearly-impossible-to-reverse destruction of rail right-of-ways will become a major problem.

      Build the cycle paths in the areas next to the freeways. They're normally pretty wide as it is. For bridges etc, alternate routes can be found.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  2. I don't understand the opposing argument. by timrod · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The article states that the London Taxi Drivers Association and a couple of other groups are against the bike lanes because they believe the bike lanes will increase congestion - yet the article also states that the bike lanes are entirely or almost entirely segregated from normal car traffic. I just don't see how those two things meet up. The real reason is obvious: that more people riding bikes means fewer people taking taxis and other forms of paid transportation, but they could have at least come up with a better argument.

    1. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by OhPlz · · Score: 3, Informative

      They're probably thinking that segregated lanes will mean fewer traffic lanes that cabs can use, therefore congestion. Space is limited and those new lanes will have to go somewhere. I live on the other side of the Atlantic, but when bike lanes are added in my area, it usually comes at the expense of at least one "regular" traffic lane, sometimes one in each direction. I'm all for cycle lanes though, this is just my guess on what they're thinking.

    2. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When you close massive amounts of lane-miles, then of course your decision to massively increase congestion will increase congestion. Of course the bike riders want that to happen. They want to make the lives of those of us that have to drive for a living here even more of a living hell. They hate us.

    3. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by beelsebob · · Score: 4, Insightful

      As someone from the UK who's recently moved to the US, I can safely say, cyclists in the UK are a lot better (not perfect, but much better) at keeping to the rules. Cyclists in the US really genuinely seem to think that absolutely no rules apply to them at all.

    4. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      München is planning exactly this, a citywide network of elevated cycle freeways:
      http://www.wired.com/2015/07/m...

    5. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by digitig · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Just because you ride a bike, doesn't mean you can ride in the road and ignore traffic lights, ignore stop signs, cut the lane in between cars and have the gull to grab onto a car and use it as a speed booster.

      Indeed it doesn't. And I don't know about where you are, but in the UK most of those things are likely to get the cyclist a hefty fine if caught. Sure, some cyclists try it on anyway, but how many motorists can say they've never exceeded a speed limit?

      --
      Quidnam Latine loqui modo coepi?
    6. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by Pinky's+Brain · · Score: 2

      He said "all but essential".

      Old European city cores are god awful for car traffic, limiting traffic to the core to ambulances and supply trucks (usually during very early morning) is common for a lot of busier shopping streets or in some cases entire city cores. It's simply a huge economic gain for the area, better shopping, better tourism and yes ... more pleasant living for the rich folk who can afford it. Regardless of car access working class people can't live in London city center.

    7. Re:I don't understand the opposing argument. by Kobun · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.thelocal.de/2015072...

      He's pretty much got it right.

  3. The street will become half as wide by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    They appear to have be creating these segregated lanes by halving the size of existing streets.

    London is crowded. There is not a whole lot of room to build infrastructure. You can't move the buildings back 3 meters to make room for a bike lane, you have to make the existing street narrower.

    If you halve the size of a busy street, you will absolutely increase congestion.

    1. Re:The street will become half as wide by MacTO · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That depends upon how many people choose to cycle. Bikes take considerably less space both on the road and for parking. In the long term, it may also makes the length of trips for both cyclists and motorists since businesses will find it desirable to be closer to their workers and consumers. Of course, all of that depends upon uptake. Only time will tell.

      It is also worth considering that "halve the size of a busy street" is also incredibly misleading. Considering that you can support bidirectional bike traffic in less space than a single lane for motor vehicles and that bike lanes tend to be along corridors (rather than on every street), you are dedicating significantly less than 50% of the infrastructure to bikes. Indeed, it would be surprising if the percentage of the infrastructure dedicated to cycling would be anywhere close to the percentage of the population that cycle.

    2. Re:The street will become half as wide by Locando · · Score: 2

      I don't disagree with your opinion, but why do you say "the damn things" about a vehicle used as a serious mode of transport by thousands of people in any given city? If this is the kind of casual disrespect you show people who do things a way you disapprove of, why do you feel you have the right to have your choices respected in turn?

    3. Re: The street will become half as wide by Malc · · Score: 2

      Considering that you can support bidirectional bike traffic in less space than a single lane for motor vehicles

      This is precisely why I dislike the bike lanes in a London. I'll wait and see how these new cross London routes pan out, but I suppose I'll stick with the roads.

      The lanes as you describe it are not wide enough. You can't overtake and believe me there are a lot of very slow cyclists in London, and I'm not even referring to the amateurs and tourists wobbling around on Boris bikes.

  4. Foolproof by lucm · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Of course the plan includes building locker rooms for all those people who will now get to the office covered in sweat, rain, snow and whatnot.

    Otherwise it's the entire office that will smell like a locker room.

    --
    lucm, indeed.
    1. Re:Foolproof by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah, most offices these days have showers. I think all new ones are required to.

      The UK isn't particularly hot though, so you'll likely sweat only on the three days a year of what passes for summer. Rain can be dealt with by simply wearing waterproof clothing, like people do in the Netherlands and Denmark, both drizzly countries that have long since figured out how to set up bike infrastructure.

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    2. Re:Foolproof by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      I commute to work about 4 miles each way by bicycle, in Dallas, in August. It was 104 here last Friday, and ~85F by the time I arrived to the office, but I don't sweat too much getting to the office.

      I had a coworker like you. I smelled him every time he came to the office.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Foolproof by serviscope_minor · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Otherwise it's the entire office that will smell like a locker room.

      No, it actually doesn't work like that. The keen cyclists like to tear around fast and get hot and smelly. I like doing so. Once you have enough people cycling, you get the more normal people. They put about as much effort as walking, only being on a bike it's about 2.5x the speed. Much like normal pedestrians, they arrive at their destinations basically pretty fresh.

      They also tend to ride nice upright bikes which emphasise comfort over speed.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Foolproof by mrbester · · Score: 2

      It's not the heat, it's the humidity, and UK is a lot hillier than Denmark or (especially) the Netherlands. Cycling in the latter is almost effortless compared to UK, apart from the Norfolk Broads where it is equally flat and the biggest slope you'll encounter is in a supermarket car park thus requiring a 4 wheel drive SUV for the 1 in 75 incline...

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
  5. Where are the old men in limos? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 2, Informative

    This concept is referred to in the headline with a direct quote, and yet it's not in the article or the summary. Where are these old men in limos? Did the submitter or editor just invent this quote out of thin air to provide support to a fictitious argument that nobody is making?

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    1. Re:Where are the old men in limos? by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Informative

      I was also confused, but from some Googling it looks like it's a phrase that's frequently been used in this particular fight, by supporters of the cycle-route plan, to ridicule opponents of the plan. Possibly okay to assume your reader would recognize the phrase if this were a London newspaper, but on Slashdot less likely.

      The phrase "old men in limos" with acronym "OMILs" appears to have been coined by Chris Boardman, an Olympic cyclist, as a riposte to the term MAMIL, or "middle-aged man in lycra".

      It was later picked up by Boris Johnson's administration, e.g. here's an article from June in which London's cycling commissioner says,

      "It was at times nightmarishly difficult to manage this, and we saw some absolutely ferocious resistance, kicking and screaming, and we saw a lot more passive resistance, heel digging and foot dragging from whom Olympic cyclist Chris Boardman called Old Men in Limos; you've heard of the MAMILs, those were the OMILs. A lot of objections, which would nearly always start with the words 'Of course I support cycling...'"

      --
      10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
    2. Re:Where are the old men in limos? by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

      I don't think they are lies, rather typical over-the-top rhetoric that you frequently see in British politics. Check out this movie for an example. Note how many people are laughing, and how much fun everyone seems to be having.

      Compare that to CSPAN. We really got ripped off in our congressional system, at least as far as entertainment value goes.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Where are the old men in limos? by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      There's no bee in your bonnet either man, but you sure have a bee in your bonnet. Lighten up.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  6. Amazing by Evtim · · Score: 5, Informative

    I did read through the whole tread and I am astounded that so many readers spell doom and gloom for a city that introduces proper bike infrastructure. Distorted reality, eh...

    I have news for you. Let's take the obvious case - the Netherlands. Do you believe the countries exists? Yes? OK, so how come it has not collapsed to the bottom of the economic ladder if businesses cannot deliver their goods, customers cannot go to shops and employees cannot reach their work [all those are claims I found in the tread]? Reality check : FAIL!

    I live in A'dam and work in Delft [bike-train-bike]. I have regular visits for business, medical and personal reasons to Maastricht, Leiden, Njimegen, Eindhoven, Hilversum and Leeuwarden. Check google maps to see what this means. Never owned a car. Never needed a car except when I shop furniture or tons of materials and tools for home renovation [but that can be delivered by the retailer, I can rent a car for a day or ask a friend with a car to help]. Trains and bikes can get you everywhere in this country and I do mean everywhere. You can go between cities [separated bike lanes that go usually through nice scenery double the road network].

    What do I win and what society wins:

    No costs for a car

    1.5 hrs per working day reading books/magazines and meeting people in the train. Nice, clean trains that are used by all segments of society [so you don't have reasons for the old idiotic Clarkson retort that public transport is used only by junkies who will puke on you]. In fact traveling in the morning to the work you meet all the students that go to Leiden and Delft [university centers]. Did I mention the females are more in the NL than the males and the gays are more than the lesbians [there is a shortage of men here]? Hell, for the last nuclear summit in NL where Obama landed with the plane, shook hands with the king and then immediately disappeared in a helicopter [escorted by 2 others and hordes of bikes and cars] - btw, most dutch thought that was ridiculously paranoid, unnecessary and plain rude - the prime minister of Belgium took the train [high-speed line Amsterdam - Brussels - Paris].

    No need for cardio in the gym so I can focus on power training. When I stopped going to the gym for 6 months after I started again the only exercise I could more of compare to before the break was legs [so it helps the power training too]. Because the infrastructure allows me to ride the bike as an exercise as well - very fast with rapid acceleration and braking.

    General health benefits for all cyclists [to mention again those mythical [for /. ers] creatures, called women - any idea how riding a bicycle shapes women's legs. No? Thought so...]. Contemplate what this means on a country scale - MASSIVE saving due to healthier population [lower health cots, higher productivity ect.]

    Environmental benefits [no need to elaborate I hope]

    Convenience. Going out in Amsterdam with a car is idiotic [OK, if you go to the opera with 10 000 euros worth of clothing and a hair-do for 500 you might need a car but I am talking about the 99% here]. It takes me 10-15 min on the bike to go to the hearth of downtown, no need to pay huge costs for parking [if you find available place that is], you can drink [or smoke] and can go back home at any moment in the night independent from any transport.

    Issues:

    Cyclist can be nasty and sometimes dangerous on the road - just like everyone else. No surprises here. To claim that somehow there are more asses among them than the rest of the population is moronic at best [I saw that "argument" here as well]

    What else? Oh, yes - when you arrive at work you stink of sweat [I see this retort often here]. Actually no. Really, really NO. With good hygiene [and diet!!] your smell is barely noticeable and with enough exercise you can bike with decent speed without breaking a sweat. Besides, at work we have this amazing thing, it's called "running hot water" and "a shower". Check it out!

    Less space for ca

  7. addendum by Evtim · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Small addendum - the bike lanes can [and are] used by senior citizens in those nice little cars that can only go 40km/hr or so. Old folks needs motorized transport sometimes. Would you prefer them to ride regular car and endanger themselves and the others [you know they are more dangerous than the young drivers]?

    Oh, and the lanes are used by small motor bikes [again if you have some health issue that prevents you from cycling]. The pizza delivery guys use them too [those people are in fact the most dangerous participators of the traffic and their behavior should be sanctioned] Electrical motor assisted bikes are on the raise too...those are better since they don't make noise.

  8. Re:Bicycles should be banned from city streets by pjt33 · · Score: 2

    Streets were made for cars.

    We're talking about London here. The streets were made before combustion engines existed.