RAC Report on Motoring suggests 20% of drivers replacing vehicle journeys with cycling or walking

HoarseMann wrote:

I think lounge space was sacrificed for a garage. It's a semi-detached and next door still has a room in place of this garage.

I don't think it's either, it seems to be a conservatory rather than a lounge that backs onto the garage. The next door is not comparable as they're asymmetric designs anyway. My garage is similar in that it's built into the house with an upstairs room above, but backs onto a utility room, it's been like that since it was built.

Looks more like a garden room on the back of a garage.

... and it's getting worse. On BBC Breakfast this morning (50min 30sec in) there was a short article about retail parks. Apparently 83% of new business openings are now in retail parks.

That's only going to get worse.  There was a point a few years ago where it seemed like it was going to get better, with smaller shops opening on high streets / in city centres, but that all seems to have gone out of the window.

Once you realise that a huge number of drivers believe that their car is actually a physical extension of their bodies, rather than an inanimate object they own, you start to understand why the actions of cyclists concern them so much. Damaging their car (which is the worst thing a cyclist riding badly could do to them) is as bad to them as injuring a human being because their brains are broken and they think of a 2 ton hunk of metal and plastic as part of themselves. 

Sorry but that applies to bikes too, at least for me. I don't want to think my bike heavily damaged or stolen.

On the topic now, I can understand most people. There are very few parts in Europe that there is proper cycling infrastructure for riders to feel safe and distant from motor traffic.

cyclisto wrote:

Sorry but that applies to bikes too, at least for me. I don't want to think my bike heavily damaged or stolen.

On the topic now, I can understand most people. There are very few parts in Europe that there is proper cycling infrastructure for riders to feel safe and distant from motor traffic.

What little infrastructure there is near me, is a mess. A mishmash of shared paths, narrow cycle lanes on dual carriageways and cycle lanes that randomly dissappear, pushing you back into traffic.

I don't think people appreciare how bad they can be at times, as I once shared a video from my commute with someone who was moaning about cyclists not using the cycle lane. When they saw how narrow it actual is to cycle on and how covered in debris it is, they then understood.

Simply we need to get more people to experience riding bikes so that they can understand what it is like.

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

Simply we need to get more people to experience riding bikes so that they can understand what it is like.

I'm almost in agreement with you!  However, I think that this would actually lead to two outcomes:

1) People would think "this is actually much worse than I thought!  No way I (or anyone I know) is going to give up the car!  More people on bikes is totally unrealistic!"

2) People would have an uneventful ride and between that and their car-centric view of the world (e.g. they'd just accept cars barging in front / passing close - "didn't hit me") it would confirm their prejudice that cyclists are whingers.  "I didn't see any problems..."

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

Simply we need to get more people to experience riding bikes so that they can understand what it is like.

I propose a more subtle version of this: pre-job training / familiarisation for all MPs, councillors, those in the highways authorities, road planners and designers.

This would comprise the following: they should cycle from a nearby town or village to a port or transport hub and take the train / ferry / fly to Copenhagen*.  They would then have a tour riding a bike around the place with a guide who understood both the local systems AND how they differ from the UK. (This is crucial - locals without this knowledge may not appreciate just what makes things work).  They should then return to the UK and - another important detail - re-do their bike trip to their starting points.

Bonus marks if they can also experience e.g. using a wheelchair as part of this.

That should mean they get to see what the UK's like for cycling in both urban and country settings.  They then experience "how it could be" with pointers to the critical details (UK folks are good at looking at photos and copying without understanding, or making rubbish up because "not invented here"...) And finally have a reminder of just how bad the UK is comparatively on their return.

* Despite their high opinion of themselves and some "exceptional infra" Copehagen has distinctly second-rate cycling provision [1] [2] [3].  It's still full of motor vehicles driving on wide, straight roads.  However they have managed to boost cycling and active travel considerably.  The gold standard is The Netherlands but that might just be "too far" for most people's belief in what is possible in the UK.  We should definitely try to avoid some of the "cheap fixes" of Copenhagen if we can though.

David Hembrow of "A view from the cycle path" offered such "study tours". He no longer does because the environmental cost with people travelling from their country to the Netherlands is too high.

Left_is_for_Losers wrote:

Simply we need to get more people to experience riding bikes so that they can understand what it is like.

Agree. Where I am public transport is inadequete and like many when I passed my driving test in '97 I didn't cycle. Fast forward and working in London now with the train service worsening, four years ago I came to realise that cycling to a station further out was the best option. Arguably getting back on a bike has not only saved me money, but also gives an alternate perspective to hazards that you just don't appreciate in a car.

I do think it works both ways though, and there are a number of cyclists who would benefit from understanding the road from a drivers perspective.

Adam Sutton wrote:

I do think it works both ways though, and there are a number of cyclists who would benefit from understanding the road from a drivers perspective.

I'm not sure there are that many cyclists in the UK (except children) who don't drive - and even fewer who've never passed their test?

Possibly many would benefit from the HGV cab experience that some have mentioned though e.g. realising just how limited the view is from the last generation of these vehicles.

(I've been wrong before on the numbers of people who actually drive in the UK - it was a higher proportion of adults than I thought!)

While true that many adult cyclists like myself are drivers, the lack of situational awareness I see from many cyclists has me hoping they do not drive! 

I also think uptake of driving has lessened with the younger generation, in part due to how much more expensive it is now. My neice is in her twenties and doesn't drive, her partner only recently passed his test and there are many at work also only starting to drive in their twenties.

Fair enough, however I am not concerned at some cyclists behaviour as a driver, I am concerned as a road user.

Just this week, while driving out of our road, it comes to a roundabout. Two kids on bikes cycle into the estate on the wrong side of the road rather than round the roundabout heading straight for me.

Then cycling home on Wednesday from the station at another roundabout, another cyclist on an ebike rather than follow round a roundabout again goes the wrong side of the roundabout, and then proceeds through a red light at the next juncion through traffic. No lights either. No lights also seems a common thing on dark mornings.

There is absolutely no denying that a minority of cyclists do ride like utter twats, however I was simply pointing out that as cyclists have virtually no capacity to injure or kill a driver it seems odd that 20% of drivers should see them as their top concern of all the issues they encounter on the roads. One suspects that number has a lot more to do with "I don't like them because they don't pay tax/their cycle lane causes congestion/they are all self-righteous/they are all woke" etc etc rather than any genuine concern about the danger they pose.

I reckon we could use a bit of that dedicated cycle infra so that e.g. children can behave like idiots (or ... children) and people can break the law in greater safety.

That would also keep them safe from dangerous motor vehicles when their drivers break the law and/or drive carelessly or dangerous also.

In fact the most dangerous places are the ones we currently fail to tackle adequately (or at all) when making "cycle infra" - junctions and roundabouts!

Here's what it looks like when people ignore the rules on a roundabout and it's still really safe.

Yes, and I was simply pointing out that the behaviour of that (considerable it seems) minority, goes a long way to explaining the concern people have about  cyclists. As I said in my response to "chrisonatrike" the absolute lack of situational awareness I see form many cyclists is astounding.

Adam Sutton wrote:

Yes, and I was simply pointing out that the behaviour of that (considerable it seems) minority, goes a long way to explaining the concern people have about  cyclists. As I said in my response to "chrisonatrike" the absolute lack of situational awareness I see form many cyclists is astounding.

Could be.  Of course, the unusual is highly salient*...

On the other hand it could be simply an expression of our favourite "they're in our way".  The normal human "othering" e.g. "they're not playing by the rules because they're on the roads but not cars".

What really strikes me though is the lack of situational awareness of all the retroreflective illuminated bollards, or massive railway bridges etc.

* Around Edinburgh there are some bad cyclists (as you've described), definitely a few illegal "cyclists" (not pedalling and speeding past me).  However if I just stuck to the roads (I make a lot of use of the shared paths) I wouldn't see many cyclists at all.  So certainly I should notice all the bad ones on the roads, they'd really stand out. (The food delivery guys ignoring red lights certainly do...)

chrisonatrike wrote:

 

What really strikes me though is the lack of situational awareness of all the retroreflective illuminated bollards, or massive railway bridges etc.

That's a bit of a strawman since the issue here is drivers perception of cyclists behaviour and not a competition, we all know there are bad drivers. In any case, I don't know about those in your link, but any bollards here are generally missing or damaged due to damage by drunks on a night out ripping them up, more than vehicular damage. I certainly don't think the one stuck on a fence was casued by a car!

The lack of situaitional awareness I am talking of is basic lack of undersanding that doing XYZ is going to put themselves in unnecessary danger. Case in point being my encounter on Wednesday evening, cycling the wrong way round a roundabout, through a red light and across a major road in rush hour. Just as people remember bad customer service more than good, do you think the drivers there remembered me stopped at the lights with cycle lights on, or will they remember the idiot that came through live traffic with no lights? When you consider that I am suprised the figure is as low as 20%. I am in an area where cycling is not that popular, and commute 6 miles to the train station, yet of those few I do see cycling I can gauarntee seeing at least one with no lights or doing something mindbogglingly stupid.

Adam Sutton wrote:

chrisonatrike wrote:

What really strikes me though is the lack of situational awareness of all the retroreflective illuminated bollards, or massive railway bridges etc.

That's a bit of a strawman since the issue here is drivers perception of cyclists behaviour and not a competition, we all know there are bad drivers. In any case, I don't know about those in your link, but any bollards here are generally missing or damaged due to damage by drunks on a night out ripping them up, more than vehicular damage. I certainly don't think the one stuck on a fence was casued by a car!

Well I completely agree that the existence of "lads on a night out" explains some of these and drivers aren't generally stopping to graffiti road furniture!  On the other hand even the really burly drunks probably aren't bending those railings, lampposts and traffic lights, or taking broken car parts to leave lying about the road.

I hope I'm not just engaging in whataboutery!  My point is that "drivers" (actually "most people" because we all are affected by motornormativity) will see the odd cyclist (more or less) doing something wrong / dangerous and invoke "cyclists!" - but we just don't see (or discount) the prevelance of similar behaviour by other modes.  So "cyclists" just stand out, above whatever their "situational awareness" is.

Per your illustration is it not e.g. the one or two cyclists being idiots over a period that are salient - because you don't see many?  Presumably over that period you see some drivers doing something stupid but you may discount that become "normal" (and seeing drivers driving isn't unusual)?  Perhaps it's also harder to notice a driver isn't looking where they're going but is e.g. staring at the phone in their lap - and we've just got used to the WhatsApp gap?

Now there could be more or less "situational awareness" by cyclists.  I'm not aware anyone's measured that.  I'd suggest the "situational awareness" of the average UK cyclist is unlikely to be much different from that of drivers.  There are possible exceptions: kids - and that is important, I'd agree.  Also because UK road cycling is not a mainstream activity it could be that other specific populations are overrepresented in the cyclist numbers (TDF wannabes, those who've never passed a driving test, crims, disqualified drivers...)  However statistics say it's still pretty safe for overall for cyclists in the UK.  So clearly some are paying attention.  Or is it we're being saved by expert driving?

Humans gonna human.  Same as drivers, where they don't receive negative feedback for some activity, they'll probably keep doing it.

I do agree that "negative feedback" for a cyclist (or pedestrian) tends to be more striking than that incurred by a driver breaking a rule.  Also their negative impacts on others are also much less.  Hence my interest in addressing the driving / drivers and ideally just making this a non-issue - by giving cyclists their own space, or really limiting motor traffic speeds / volumes where they mix.

You seem to be contradicting yourself by saying it is wrong to invoke "all cyclists" while seemingly invoking "all drivers".

Do I see drivers doing stupid things yes, but I couldn't tell you how many I see as far more. You can make silly references to "motornormativity" but it's just how it is, particularly outside of areas with decent public transport or where I am, in close proximity to a major road like the M25 and Dartford crossing.

I also see a large proportion of HGV drivers and even car drivers move into the second lane of the dual carriageway I cycle, to give me more than enough room. Hard to believe for many here, but most drivers are actually not trying to kill you!

Adam Sutton wrote:

. . . . most drivers are actually not trying to kill you!

This is true which makes it all the more frustrating that so many drivers often do things that could, and sadly regularly do kill cyclists.

NOtotheEU wrote:

Adam Sutton wrote:

. . . . most drivers are actually not trying to kill you!

This is true which makes it all the more frustrating that so many drivers often do things that could, and sadly regularly do kill cyclists.

That is probably true, the problem is that most aren't trying hard enough not to kill you. That would require 100% concentration all of the time, slowing down if the sun is in your eyes, waiting till it's safe to overtake etc etc. Sometimes it's down to incompetence, sometimes it's down to impatience, sometimes it's just laziness, it doesn't matter, the results for us are the same.

And many cyclists don't do enough to judge the situation they are in, ergo the whole reason 20% of drivers are concerned at cyclists. Again, the muppet on an ebike navigating a roundabout the wrong way and flying through a red light across a main road. 

Adam Sutton wrote:

And many cyclists don't do enough to judge the situation they are in, . . . .

Totally agree with you. I have had to look at my own actions and change my riding style since starting to run cameras a few years ago and realising how my decisions sometimes increased danger rather than reducing it.

The big difference is an idiot on a bike poses no danger to a driver in a car which sadly cannot be said the other way around.

Adam Sutton wrote:

. You can make silly references to "motornormativity" but it's just how it is, particularly outside of areas with decent public transport or where I am, in close proximity to a major road like the M25 and Dartford crossing.

It's just a way of saying "can't see the cars for the traffic". It's only useful because - as you seem to agree - it is that way in most places in the UK; but wasn't always that way, doesn't have to be that way in the future and it's much less that way in some other places where people and politicians have made different choices.

Adam Sutton wrote:

Hard to believe for many here, but most drivers are actually not trying to kill you!

Oh, we know. As NOtotheEU says - that's exactly the issue*. No intent required. (One reason why society, the police and the courts look charitably at drivers who have killed.)

* part of why I mentioned the bollards. I should be presenting stats, I know, but I'm speculating that most people who kill someone on the road had not set out to do so, nor had they any idea that might happen. Of course, it's possible all those killed (not in cars) were just throwing themselves in the roads. I think there are some numbers on blame assigned for these somewhere but I don't have them at hand, sorry.