“Decision makers need to get out cars and experience cycling”: Reaction to school ‘bike train’; Gridlock returns after LTN ripped out; Strava art; Remco races gravel; Commute truths; Bloody cyclists; Funding cuts protest ride + more on the live blog
SUMMARY
Why is nobody cycling? Gridlock at one of Ealing's ripped out LTNs...48 hours after the council asked more people to consider active travel for short journeys
Actual gridlock on a road in what was LTN21, foul air and foul tempers. pic.twitter.com/1jhYoAgAQW
— Better Ealing Streets (@BetterEaling) October 20, 2021
Right on cue, this video dropped just as the jokes and fury were raging in for Ealing Council encouraging people to utilise active travel and public transport for short journeys…two weeks after they’d ripped out seven of the borough’s LTNs.
“Foul air and foul tempers,” was how Better Streets Ealing described the gridlocked scenes at the former LTN21 site in West Ealing. Anyway, at least all the boundary roads will be empty…right?
Some pointed out how great it was to see better accessibility for all the people named as reasons for scrapping LTNs…
Great to see how One Ealing and Ealing Council have joined forces to ensure better accessibility for emergency services, the disabled and elderly, dog “walkers”, Mums who have to go somewhere else after school pick-up, plumbers carrying sofas and carers.
Is that everybody? https://t.co/SXK6ZA6PR5
— Paul Campbell (@PauloCampbell) October 20, 2021
Better Streets Ealing on the scene reported drivers finally “able to escape expressing their frustration with extra bursts of speed and hurried, angry driving.” One commenter came up with an ingenious solution to the problem…
Can’t we introduce a scheme to stop these drivers taking short cuts through side streets, and just letting in local residents? Keep the through drivers on the main roads?
— Derek Cox (@Derekabcd) October 21, 2021
How did Derek think of that? He’s going places that lad…(slowly if he’s in a car in Ealing).
Relevant
Enjoyed seeing this on my morning bike commute @TheWarOnCars pic.twitter.com/1moy3KDQ0i
— New York Lonely Boy (@StahlTactics) October 20, 2021
Here we go again...Deceuninck-Quick-Step living rent-free in our heads
Another wolf remains in the pack. Who could it be?
— Deceuninck-QuickStep (@deceuninck_qst) October 21, 2021
Is today the day? Quick-Step’s social media admin has had us on strings these last few days. First it was James Knox, then Zdeněk Štybar. Could this finally be the Cav contract confirmation we’ve all been waiting for? Guesses in the comments which rider they’re going to dupe us with this time…
Give me strength...it's not Cav...AGAIN (+ Remco planning to race gravel event during off-season)
First Italian in eight years to win the prestigious Omloop Het Nieuwsblad, @ballero_94 has agreed to a new contract with the Wolfpack: https://t.co/mMf7IffO0x
Photo: @GettySport pic.twitter.com/KFOxzzR3fF— Deceuninck-QuickStep (@deceuninck_qst) October 21, 2021
It’s going to be a long winter if Deceuninck-Quick-Step keep this up…
At least it gives me an excuse to mention the intriguing news that Remco Evenepoel is doing some gravel racing during the off-season. He’s off to Kansas at the end of the month to take on the Belgian Waffle Ride, a 111.11-mile gravel race on Halloween. I’m sure he’ll feel right at home surrounded by Belgian waffles and filthy bergs. His teammate, and 12th on GC at the Tour de France, Mattia Cattaneo is making the trip too.
Bloody cyclists
Strava art: Questionable elephants (+ Yorkshire kudos), Nirvana, "Refugees Welcome" and giant snowmen
My first @Strava art. The Greystones Elephant. (It’s NOT a gas mask) Oh and I made it into a segment and took the KOM! 🤣 pic.twitter.com/fAZnQCDWg0
— Simon Warren (@100Climbs) October 20, 2021
Elephant, gas mask, hazmat suit or Among Us avatar? Simon Warren gave creating an elephant-shaped segment his best shot…just a shame some on the internet didn’t see the resemblance.
Best reply?
What happened to good old fashion cock n balls eh?
— Embarrassed (@embarrassed45) October 20, 2021
‘Yorkshire Kudos’ is pretty impressive to be fair…
Not bad 🙂 but others have done better pic.twitter.com/hPLKR8VZlY
— Tony Thomas (@ttgas) October 20, 2021
Does it deserve a place in the Strava art hall of fame? Nirvana’s Nevermind album cover, “Refugees Welcome” and one huge snowman are just three of the benchmark GPS drawings to beat.
Protest ride organised in response to 50 per cent cut to London cycle training funding
There’s a protest ride in London next Friday that has been organised by the IWGB cycling instructors branch in response to cuts to funding. The protest will meet at Trafalgar Square at 2pm before moving on to City Hall. Funding for London cycle training between October and December has been cut by at least 50 per cent across every borough. The group says this will mean no new groups of children will get training for the rest of the year and at least one employee is out of work.
Black Cyclists Network celebrates third birthday
We are officially 3 years old today. 🔥🔥🔥
We want to thank all our supporters and members (both former and current) for believing in this project and helping us grow into a global movement that is making cycling a more inclusive space.
Grab your bidon and toast with us. 🙏🏿 pic.twitter.com/sNlrDf76xi
— Black Cyclists Network (@BCNtweet) October 20, 2021
"Well done parents. Shit job council": Reaction to Old Shoreham Road bike train
Bike trains!
Bike trains EVERYWHERE! https://t.co/L3zxJYkgPQ
— Holobionte 🐊 (@MrHolobionte) October 20, 2021
Plenty of love for the Old Shoreham Road bike train (and of course your daily dose of council criticism).
Andrew Anderson reckons some first-hand experience from those making decisions might make them more informed and empathetic towards cyclists, “The decision makers need to get out of their cars and experience cycling, perhaps they may actually get a different perspective of what it’s like for cyclists. For the sake of safety and the environment things have to change.”
Jodie Hayes wrote: “Well done. Good luck. We needs kids to be riding safely to school and learning such a valuable life skill.”
Richard Lawrence wins the comedy award: “Poor kid having the big golden sticker put on their face, how are they supposed to see?”
Irony is… when drivers pressure council to remove bike lane, forcing parents to cycle *two abreast* with their kids for safety 🤷 https://t.co/l34ckSZJaC
— closepassescardiff (@closepassescdf) October 21, 2021
Who fancies giving this a go in #Harlow I’m well up for this. Just need to borrow some pupils. https://t.co/9maxEZKgTu
— Yasmin Gregory (@yazzyg) October 21, 2021
Don't forget your snorkel...
Why don’t cyclists use the bike lanes? pic.twitter.com/JxYyc22Y4S
— Jo Rigby (@Jo_Earlsfield) October 20, 2021
Good for triathletes, not so much for the rest of us…
Retirement problem #54: What to do with all that kit?
I have so much cycling kit, lightly used or even new. Anybody out there know of a charity who would like a donation? Cycling school perhaps?
— Dan Martin (@DanMartin86) October 21, 2021
We’ve got a pretty strong idea of what conversations might be going on in the Martin household based on this tweet…”do you really need six pairs of Israel Start-Up Nation arm warmers?” The 35-year-old called time on his pro cycling career after Il Lombardia and clearly doesn’t need quite as much kit as he once did. Get replying with your charities, clubs, personal offers etc. if you want a little piece of double Monument-winning magic…
Endura says its Pro SL 3-Season Jacket is “one layer to rule them all”
Endura reckons that its new Pro SL 3-Season is “the ultimate autumn/ winter/ spring hardcore roadie jacket” that will “do a brilliant job in an incredibly wide range of temperatures and conditions”. “The Pro SL is designed to keep you warm on those chilly mornings and fast descents, while its excellent breathability and large ventilation zips prevent you from overheating when you’re working hard on steep climbs,” says Endura.
The Pro SL – designed with input from former pro Marcel Kittel, according to Endura – is also intended to be waterproof and not too heavy. The outer shell is a mix of high stretch, waterproof membrane fabrics while a separate vest uses PrimaLoft’s new Evolve fabric to provide lightweight insulation.
“The full-body venting system features two large two-way zipped chest vents, zipped wrist vents, and a special superpower feature: an exhaust vent at the rear – imagine the cooling system of a powerful engine with heat billowing out of the exhaust,” says Endura.
The jacket comes in an athletic fit with a high-cut collar. You get triple pockets at the rear with a zipped security pocket too. There’s also a zipped chest pocket, and subtle reflective details. Available in black and pumpkin, Endura’s Pro SL 3-Season Jacket is priced £179.99.
"I didn’t want to be there": Miguel Ángel López reflects on year with Movistar
Miguel Ángel López’s departure from Movistar was explosive enough, but now he’s doing interviews with the media…
Speaking to reporters, López said he “didn’t want to be there” and is looking forward to moving on when he returns to Astana in the new year. “It wasn’t due to my form,” López explained. “It was like a cup overflowing. There were a lot of things that were building up, and the best thing I could have done was to leave Movistar. It’s not something I’ll do again, but the lesson I take away is that you have to be where you want to be in order to shine.
“There’s a bit of regret for not finishing on the podium, but there are details I prefer not to talk about, it’s a closed chapter now. I didn’t want to be there, and I arrived at an agreement, and that was the best thing that could have happened. Now I am in a place where I am valued, where they want me.”
I’m pretty sure Netflix will want to reopen that closed chapter…
21 October 2021, 08:01
21 October 2021, 08:01
21 October 2021, 08:01
Help us to bring you the best cycling content
If you’ve enjoyed this article, then please consider subscribing to road.cc from as little as £1.99. Our mission is to bring you all the news that’s relevant to you as a cyclist, independent reviews, impartial buying advice and more. Your subscription will help us to do more.
65 Comments
Read more...
Read more...
Read more...
Latest Comments
@Rendel Harris Agree, I am baffled that the 84 year old who is now banned from driving for year can then start driving again without a retest. We should be re-tested regularly.
@mitsky Just checking the figures and apparently the 2026 average cost is £58,000 per year per prisoner; worth noting that is only the direct cost, you then have to factor in ten years of lost tax income from the prisoner, ten years that the prisoner is making no contribution to society as a worker or as a consumer, plus the fact that if they were the primary breadwinner very likely the costs will include benefits for their family as well. None of which should be a reason for keeping violent recidivists out of prison of course, nor drug/drink drivers who kill, but it is a factor worth considering for lower-level offences.
@Surreyrider I ride in Surrey a fair bit and absolutely many do look like that but the point is they all *think* they're driving perfectly reasonably (as one discovers when remonstrating with someone who's skimmed one by 30cm, "I gave you masses of room") so deterrent penalties have little effect. That's why we need to strike at the root cause and actually train drivers properly and test them stringently (and more than once over the course of a potential 70+ years of driving, it's absolutely absurd that competence and knowledge in what for most people is the activity in their life that will run the biggest risk of killing people you never have to have your qualifications renewed).
@mitsky Imprisonment currently costs over £50k p.a. per prisoner and obviously that will rise over the course of a ten-year stretch with inflation. Regarding culpability and mitigating sentences etc, of course I'm not against condign punishment for drivers who kill (and cyclists on the tiny, tiny handful of occasions when this happens), including prison as appropriate; I was objecting to the ridiculous and oft-repeated demand of MM that drivers who kill cyclists must get ten years, "no excuses, no exceptions".
Hey, but their wool blend cycling adjacent t-shirts are/were fantastic.
@Surreyrider Still the boss. Ride one, you'll see why
@Smoggysteve "Most would happily ride on the roads and be treated with respect by drivers". But people aren't - and as far as I can see they won't be. Not until there is a lot less driving and it's slower around cyclists, and far more people driving have "skin in the game" eg. they sometimes cycle and their friends and family do also. That's what leads to the model - which is perhaps most advanced in NL - where cycling, walking and driving are all seen as separate normal transport modes. Their needs, vulnerabilities and any dangers to others are considered. And *that* leads to "mix / share when possible, separate when necessary". But "possible" is "where your 10-year old would be safe to cycle unsupervised" - so very few motor vehicles, going slow! And AFAICS everybody - even "existing cyclists" - is happy with the result. (I dunno about a few pro cyclists - but don't they tend to have training camps in different counties anyway?)
@quiff as an Edinburgh resident I can confidently say he's speaking without moving his lips in one sense: - while as I noted in a separate comment there *is* now some real separated cycle infra, all the examples i can think of have *at least as much space* for pedestrians. The rest of the "cycle infra" is essentially similar to the situation in the rest of the UK: eg. bus lanes*, cycle lanes and shared use paths (eg. "build" infra by sticking up a sign). Edinburgh is one of the places with a moderately extensive network of former railways which have been converted to "shared use" paths (completely motor traffic few). However though shared they are not narrow by UK standards. And this is all effectively a "free extra" for all non- motorised users, not like the "sign a cycle path" where pedestrians do lose space. I think this all comes from the "popular understanding" of cycling in which ultimately cyclists are the "other". They don't fit "motor vehicle" or "pedestrian" (including wheelchairs on the very rare occasions people think about that). Thus "cyclists are cheating" in multiple ways! They shouldn't get their own space as "there aren't enough" of them. And "they can just use the road / path". But being able to *choose* "on the road" or "on the footway" (shared use path) is clearly unfair - nobody else gets to do that! BUT of course even if they did pick just one of road OR pedestrian space it's still not fair anyway because they're "too slow" for the road (don't pay "road tax" etc...) and "far too fast" for pedestrians... * Though some existing cyclists may appreciate them when there are few buses, buses and bikes are a very poor mix for several reasons.
Whilst a shame for any employees, their bib shorts had the worst chamois pad I’d ever encountered, utter waste of my money. Even though they were Strava challenge discount purchases, still a waste of money.
Thanks, just going to have to suck it up. Got next week off and will take the easy, if expensive option...
65 thoughts on ““Decision makers need to get out cars and experience cycling”: Reaction to school ‘bike train’; Gridlock returns after LTN ripped out; Strava art; Remco races gravel; Commute truths; Bloody cyclists; Funding cuts protest ride + more on the live blog”
Come on….. everyone here
Come on….. everyone here knows that the only reason there is gridlock on these streets is that all of the cyclists are on the other roads forcing the cars to use these rat runs……..
I can’t wait for Nigel Garage to come on about how One London and other such groups war on LTN’s to “return sanity to London’s Roads”….. what kind of excuse is he going to come up with?
I didn’t state that LTNs are
I didn’t state that LTNs are a bad idea, merely that in their current form they are (in the main) badly implemented, undemocratic, counterproductive, inequitable and – according to Southwark council’s buried consultation – quite possibly racist.
My sister used to live in Hanwell, which is down the road from Ealing, and seeing jammed up roads isn’t going to surprise anyone, LTN or no LTN… and that’s before even starting to talk about Hangar Lane…
Nigel re-wrting history once
Nigel re-wrting history once again. Doesn’t matter how often his statements are contradicted and disproved he continues to dig a hole.
But the plan is not to win over people to his ideas, just to distract and cause a reaction.
Nigeǀ Garage wrote:
Yeah, that’s why my black brothers and sisters from our neighbourhood were out in such force at the anti-LTN protest in Dulwich last week…hang on…
Where’s a mental health
Where’s a mental health specialist in a Land Rover when you need one?
Although with the racist
Although with the racist comments he is jumping on the same boat that Socrapi tried previously. “Oh, more traffic might be on boundary roads and sometime poorer people will be on those. And BAME make up poorer people so it must be white people forcing the traffic on poorer people”. So if the picture above does actually represent the people living in the LTN, the point might be made.
Of course car ownership is also racist in the same ways but there is only one thing he wants to get rid of.
Fair point but the crowd in
Fair point but the crowd in the picture are unlikely to be those living in the LTN – consultation showed those living within in around 65% in favour – but those who like to drive through Dulwich Village on their way to the golf and tennis clubs and the private and public schools. In the case of this particular LTN, it’s in a very rich area; any displaced traffic (not that there is much) is still going through predominantly white-owned rich streets. The area doesn’t become noticeably mixed race until it gets to my neighbourhood, about 1500m away, and we’re not affected by the LTN one way or t’other.
It’s worth nothing that nationally black people are twice as likely not to have access to a motor vehicle than whites, with that applying to 40% in total (DVLA, December 2020); in London, where 50% of the population as a whole doesn’t have a motor, that figure is likely to be higher, so one could in fact argue that any active travel/public transport enhancements work disproportionately in favour of black people. But then one suspects certain people who believe the motor car is “unquestionably humanity’s greatest invention” aren’t actually that concerned about any racial justice aspect…
Rendel Harris wrote:
That’s exactly the point. The traffic gets displaced from the wealthiests streets in Dulwich to a different (poorer, more diverse) borough altogether in many cases. On the subject of racism, one only needs to take a cursory glance at the responses in the buried Southwark council consultation to see how BAME people are far less likely to agree with the Dulwich LTN than their white counterparts – hardly surprising given how traffic is being diverted to their neighbourhoods to placate the wealthy in Dulwich.
On a different note, given the tone of the conversation yesterday it’s great to see Lord Robathan urging action on obesity today. “Is it not time, perhaps, to revert to the situation when I was young, when it was not socially acceptable to be grossly overweight and push individual responsibility?”.
Without wanting to get dragged into some ugly row, you’ll note that only around 40 years ago there were virtually no obese people in society, when it wasn’t socially acceptable. It’s amazing how fast waistlines have grown in the interceeding period as cultural Marxism and snowflakery have become entrenched, especially in universities.
Nigeǀ Garage wrote:
Nige? Garage wrote:
*checks time* only 2:20 and they’ve kicked off.
TBH, he might have a point. I
TBH, he might have a point. I’m sure he is wrting to his MP already to ban McDonalds and KFC and to only have 1 car and TV shared between 3 households. And maybe have rationing. I mean that was what was happening 60 years ago or so.
Of course from when Boo was a lad, there was probably higher teen suicides as school kids would bully the overweight (and effeminate and differently coloured ones). I’m sure that us what he means with the rise of snowflakery, ie acceptance of others.
AlsoSomniloquism wrote:
We had rationing in 1961? Need to check some facts, 1954 it ended.
Well my dad was still
Well my dad was still rationing well into his 80’s as that was how he grew up. So one tea bag in the pot when my mum was alive and when it was just him around he left it out to reuse it. As for coffee, if there was more then 5 grains on the spoon, he would state it was too strong.
So I expect there were still many families that rationed the household wage out 60 years ago, well what the dad didn’t spend in the pub on the Friday would then be grudgingly handed over for the mum to stretch out for the food for the rest of the week.
Nige? Garage wrote:
Traffic doesn’t ‘get displaced’. People choose to drive when alternatives exist. Every person in each car is the agent of their own obstruction and the cause of inconvenience and ill-health to others.
Obviously not. Why would you use the word “great” without immediately following it with the word “idiot” in relation to somebody who demonstrates no greater understanding of health than he does (as a former serviceman and under-SoS in MoD for welfare and veterans) of the need to respect 66,500 veterans of Arctic convoys?
Nige? Garage wrote:
Oh 0.5/10 trolling Nigel, even I’m not going to bite on such a pathetically transparent attempt.
I appreciate that its a bit
I appreciate that its a bit OT, but isn’t Dulwich where Thatcher kept her coffin full of soil from Grantham?
brooksby wrote:
She bought a rather nasty new Barratt (sp?) home down near the golf course (with a very substantial discount from the Tory Party donor builders) but she never really lived here. Rumour had it she only bought it as a publicity favour for Barratts to show they were “classy” – certainly after moving in when she left No.10 she moved out again to a house in Belgravia within months. It was on the market quite recently for £2.75M.
Nigel, you are not bold
Nigel, you are not bold enough to state that LTN’s are a bad idea….. you just infer they are at every opportunity.
You keep coming with the same old arguments that every person who is against any form of cycling infrastructure….. which basically boils down to any cycling infrastructure that reduces the freedom of movement of motor vehicles in any way is bad.
Badly implemented? please explain how they are badly implemented?
Undemocratic? Ah yes the same old the consultations say that people don’t want them…. all the while ignoring the fact that the residents in most areas are in favour of the LTN’s and that the consultations are being hijacked by the various “One” Groups who have no interest in anything other than “If you object to the LTN in my area I will obejct to the LTN in your area”
Counterproductive? By that I assume you mean preventing the use of the streets as a rat run.
Inequitable. Is this the it’s forcing traffic out of more affluent areas into less affluent areas? What evidence do you have of that. I would like to see the studies which show that traffic is being moved to less affluent areas as a result of LTN’s
Nigeǀ Garage wrote:
Do you think that all decisions have to be subject to referendum to be democratic?
Local authorities comprise elected members who choose their leadership, and officers working to a constitutional structure that includes democratically accountable processes. The actions they carry out include those directed by national government, elected and managed along similar lines.
There is a lot to be critical about how giverning groups are elected. The current Prime Minister was elected to parliament with support from 36% of locally registered voters. While his ascent to party leader was eventually based on 51% of the party membership, that is a self-selected group not an open vote (Tories have a smaller membership than Labour by a considerable margin). Only 0.04% of the population voted for him to be a Member of Parliament and a party-based 0.14% of the population asked him to be PM. Only 27% of the population voted in a “non-binding” vote to leave the EU.
At least LTNs are there to promote active travel, and the evidence before our eyes when they are in operation is that they do, and when they are not, cars ruin the place. The problem is not LTNs or lack of democracy, it is that people choose to complain that they have driven somewhere at the same time as lots of other people when pther options are available.
Well that proves the wisdom
Well that proves the wisdom of removing the LTNs. With them in place you wouldn’t even have been able to have gridlock there!
With the LTN those cars would have been causing pollution elsewhere, just displacing the problem. Women would feel unsafe walking there. The ambulances wouldn’t be able to get through on other streets.
My gratitude to the selfless residents of former LTN21 and the foresight of Ealing Council.
Not a cyclist as a victim,
Not a cyclist as a victim, however this does show that car drivers literally do get away with murder, especially if a jail term could upset business negotiations.
50mph in a 30 in the middle of London. Driving a car that can do 0-60 in 4 seconds. Killed someone crossing, Nah just careless mate.
Helps where you are member of
Helps where you are member of the Qatari royal family.
Money talks.
Clearly dangerous driving, so why go with careless ?
You answered your oewn
You answered your oewn question: “Qatari royal family”
I suspect they can be seen to
I suspect they can be seen to “act” but not actually jail him. If they did go with Dangerous and found guilty (or even admitting guilt) then he would have been jailed no matter what.
hirsute wrote:
£25,000 is pocket change, so will have no effect. As the old saying goes “When the penalty for a crime is a fine, that law only exists for the poor.”
It’s not just the rat-running
It’s not just the rat-running drivers that are to blame here, it’s also the residents of these streets storing their cars on the road. Yet I wonder how many residents will look out of their window and think, gosh, my parked car is causing a lot of trouble.
With traffic volumes like this, the council needs to make it one-way, install a modal filter or remove parking from one side of the street.
Indeed, the number of cars is
Indeed, the number of cars is growing faster than the road’s ability to keep up with them. This is a prime example https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/family-6-forced-pay-255-25240183
Five cars in one house, and any time I have visited friends or family that live in newer housing estates most of the houses have at least 3 cars, with at least one parked out on the road/pavement and 2 on the driveways
The tabloid sites had a story
The tabloid sites had a story yesterday where some woman was complaining because her council had put residents’ parking on the street she lives on. The household is her, her husband, two grown up daughters and one set of grandparents.
They have five cars, and can’t fit them all on their off-road parking, and they’re racking up “huge” parking fines “just for parking on our street”.
She claims that the council never consulted with her about the RPZ (seems unlikely?) and also that when she asked the council for a residents’ permit so they can park on the road she was told her household isn’t eligible because they have off-road parking.
Five cars <shakes head>
EDIT – should have followed your link; this is the same story <slaps wrist>
brooksby wrote:
brooksby wrote:
That’s TEN cars you’ve now parked on this thread!
chrisonatrike wrote:
I’m sorry – I thought there was room 😉
The council recently made one
The council recently made one side of a street near me resident parking only. I was chatting to a resident who lives on the opposite side of the street. They were a bit miffed that they wouldn’t also be getting resident bays, despite having a driveway that does have space for 5 cars (at least)…
The £255 a year (well under a
The £255 a year (well under a pound a day) it’s costing her is far less than the true cost of maintaining a paved parking spot, on or off road.
TriTaxMan wrote:
Prime!
“We didn’t really have any issues with street parking before the permits were introduced, the only time was maybe on a Saturday when the football was on.
“You might not have been able to park outside your front door, but you could park within a close vicinity but now we can’t park anywhere and we’re having to pay out parking tickets.”
In other words, they want to park without paying for it. Cos parking should be costless and doesn’t impose any costs on anyone.
But my favourite bit was this:
Angela says Rushmoor Borough Council is stopping families from expanding due to their parking restrictions, Hampshire Live reports.
So “We’d love to have a baby but we can’t because there’s nowhere to park”…?
Bmblbzzz wrote:
Well of course – how can you have a baby if there’s nowhere to leave it overnight?
Bmblbzzz wrote:
Obviously the child will immediately need his or her own spot.
Quote:
I’m slightly dubious that the Dad’s disability means he can’t access a car that’s parked on their driveway. But then I wondered if it was a long narrow drive, so had a quick look…
and you can clearly see all 5 of their cars parked on it, with room for more!! Busted!
By area that’s not a house,
By area that’s not a house, that’s a garage.
TriTaxMan wrote:
consequence of high housing costs, adults are not leaving their parents home because they can’t afford to, but since they are paying neither rent or mortgage they have plenty of cash for buying cars.
HoarseMann wrote:
Perhaps in the interests of local democracy that should be the question: Do you want your street to become an LTN or do you want to park somewhere else to optimise road use? Perhaps with the explanation that if you don’t then emergency services won’t be able to get through and people will die!
Sadly, it seems as if active
Sadly, it seems as if active travel is a battle that can’t be won. Car use is far too ingrained in your average person’s mind, that it will need something drastic for it to change.
During the first lockdown we kept hearing about how it was a chance for change; well guess what? Nothing has changed, in fact, it’s likely worse.
You mean this isn’t the
You mean this isn’t the Golden Age of Cycling? I thought it didn’t feel right…
Velophaart_95 wrote:
On yesterday’s story about the woman driving into the Insulate Britain campaigners in her Range Rover (I think it was) all the comments were backing her, hardly anyone pointed out that you aren’t allowed to bulldoze things out of your way in your 2 ton+ tractor. Especially when those things are human beings.
Daveyraveygravey wrote:
And of course nothing is said about those who get out of their cars and physically drag the IB protesters out of the way – Common Assault surely? But forget that, they’re only assaulting bleedin’ leftie tree-huggers innit.
It does seem that the police
It does seem that the police were not exactly engaging with all those people going Full Vigilante so they could take their kids to school…
Daveyraveygravey wrote:
I did think that if she’d lept out of her car brandishing a kitchen knife or a cricket bat to threaten the protestors the reaction might have been different. Wielding a car as a deadly weapon seems okay.
Velophaart_95 wrote:
I’ve seen various suggestions that we’ve reached Peak Car. Difficult to say if that’s the case. I don’t think there will be a meaningful reduction in car use without better public transport and cycling infrastructure..
Other countries have shown that bold initiatives are possible – e.g. in Austria you can now get a climate ticket for a year of public transport for the whole country for €1,095.
Interesting idea from Austria
Interesting idea from Austria. I think Austria may be one of the countries at COP26 arguing against financial support for developing countries. I have wondered about this as well. Would this money be better spent on changing behaviour in our own country by, for example, subsidising (and improving) public transport.
We all know that if the cost of rail between London and Glasgow was cheaper than flying very few would fly. What is the impact on Carbon reduction and what would it cost?
Tom_77 wrote:
I’ve commented elsewhere that for authorities to take positive action there has to be money to be gained. Unfortunately it seems that one of the “goods” of active travel is it’s less expensive in both energy/resource and money terms. So it succeeding would be in contravention of some laws of economic entropy: a) things become more expensive (in terms of resource usage) over time and b) you can only get “cheaper” in one place by expending more money (resources) overall.
Despite claims on this forum I suspect none of us are in charge – indeed no-one is. But before everyone on the planet has to face the consequences of the industrial world’s practices – which would come down to “there will be fewer people using fewer resources” – my betting’s on something that no-one thought about appearing to change the problem landscape. Bit like how the
carEDIT internal combustion enginechrisonatrike wrote:
Velophaart_95 wrote:
20 years ago no one would have believed you could ban smoking in pubs, as smoking was too ingrained in social situations.
The political will is lacking, even though the health benefits will likely be similar to the smoking ban. (particulates, NOX, CO reduction + excercise increase) Also will benefit the economy with less cash syphoned off to oil prducing states, less hours lost to congestion.
That HGV doesn’t even pay
That HGV hasn’t even paid Boat Tax.
Is the mistake a Yorkshireman
Is the mistake a Yorkshireman doing anything as demonstrative as a thumbs up?
mdavidford wrote:
No, it’s because he isn’t banging on about ‘ow bloody great Yorkshire is…
Indeed. What’s more, he seems
Indeed. What’s more, he seems to be almost…smiling..?
He’s got his hand out of his
He’s got his hand out of his pocket?
Bloody harbours, always
Bloody harbours, always coming up on the inside of HGV drivers’ blind spots.
IanMK wrote:
Perhaps it has a statue in the back
The sea came in while the
The sea came in while the driver was momentarily distracted.
jh2727 wrote:
Clearly the harbour’s fault; no hi viz, no lights, no helmet.
Meanwhile in Bristol Harbour.
Meanwhile in Bristol Harbour…”Hang on a minute lads, I’ve got a great idea…”
You were only supposed to
You were only supposed to knock the bloody cyclist over.
Meanwhile over in Amsterdam
Meanwhile over in Amsterdam
Looks like they had a dray
It’s the Netherlands so they’re used to dealing with dray-nag problems.
This isn’t how engines work –
This isn’t how engines work – Altura… “and a special superpower feature: an exhaust vent at the rear – imagine the cooling system of a powerful engine with heat billowing out of the exhaust,”