In my previous posts I have been less than complimentary about Newham and its cycling policies. The video below shows one reason why I am so contemptuous of the borough's cycling record.
This cycle lane isn't just useless. It is dangerous. Whatever way I tackle this I have problems. If I try to use the lane I get to the end and have to negotiate my way into fast moving and unsympathetic traffic. When I take primary, which is probably the way I would be advised to tackle it, I usually get close passed by traffic and more than once frantic pointing by the driver towards the little cycle lane.
Clearly whoever implements this crap hasn't the first idea about the challenges of cycling. And it is utterly needless - the pavement has just been restructured to swallow up the cycle lane when the revamp could have actually improved matters for cyclists.
I note there are two types of cyclists around the one way system. The ones, like me, who decide to try to employ vehicular cycling on deeply unpleasant roads only designed for the car - and where speeding is endemic, or the cyclists who decide to ride on the pavement weaving in and out of pedestrians (and presumably annoying them somewhat). I am frankly unsure which makes most sense. Clearly Newham think the option that makes most sense is to ditch the bike and use the car, thus adding to the congestion and pollution in the area.
Thursday, 28 April 2011
Wednesday, 27 April 2011
Words Fail Me
It is official. The world has gone completely mad. Or at least the ASA has.
Citroen produced an advert for its "green" C4 featuring a large herd of cyclists following a C4 - supposedly able to breathe more easily because of its "stop-start" technology.
All fairly anodyne stuff really. The only complaint I would have is that any car being sold on "green" credentials is possibly stetching things a little bit.
But, after one complaint, the ASA has ruled against the advert saying
“we considered that younger children might not appreciate the fantastical nature of the ad and might consider that the ad represented a real-life scenario. We were therefore concerned that the ad might encourage younger children to emulate a behaviour prejudicial to their health and safety, and therefore concluded that the ad should have been given an 'ex kids' scheduling restriction to ensure that it was not broadcast at times when younger children were likely to be watching.”
The key issue that would corrupt our nations young minds was that the cyclists were not wearing helmets.
Frankly I think anyone watching the advert, no matter how young, would get the fantastical nature of the advert. A young person would actually have to be cycling on a UK road before being able to emulate, and in the years of cycling I have never seen anyone under the age of 10 on the roads around me (and then only a couple of school kids braving the A10). The fantastical nature of the adverts is that there are that many cyclists on the roads without having some idiot trying to barge their way through to make it ten seconds earlier to the lights. The last time I was in such a large group was the London Bikeathon where a black cab driver expressed his opinion of having a few dozen cyclists in front of him by leaning on the horn repeatedly until he turned off the road.
When I look at cycling, I sometimes feel that either someone is playing a massive April Fools joke on me, or the establishment has been replaced in the night by raving lunatics.
Citroen produced an advert for its "green" C4 featuring a large herd of cyclists following a C4 - supposedly able to breathe more easily because of its "stop-start" technology.
All fairly anodyne stuff really. The only complaint I would have is that any car being sold on "green" credentials is possibly stetching things a little bit.
But, after one complaint, the ASA has ruled against the advert saying
“we considered that younger children might not appreciate the fantastical nature of the ad and might consider that the ad represented a real-life scenario. We were therefore concerned that the ad might encourage younger children to emulate a behaviour prejudicial to their health and safety, and therefore concluded that the ad should have been given an 'ex kids' scheduling restriction to ensure that it was not broadcast at times when younger children were likely to be watching.”
The key issue that would corrupt our nations young minds was that the cyclists were not wearing helmets.
Frankly I think anyone watching the advert, no matter how young, would get the fantastical nature of the advert. A young person would actually have to be cycling on a UK road before being able to emulate, and in the years of cycling I have never seen anyone under the age of 10 on the roads around me (and then only a couple of school kids braving the A10). The fantastical nature of the adverts is that there are that many cyclists on the roads without having some idiot trying to barge their way through to make it ten seconds earlier to the lights. The last time I was in such a large group was the London Bikeathon where a black cab driver expressed his opinion of having a few dozen cyclists in front of him by leaning on the horn repeatedly until he turned off the road.
When I look at cycling, I sometimes feel that either someone is playing a massive April Fools joke on me, or the establishment has been replaced in the night by raving lunatics.
Newham's priorities
I am now the proud owner of a MUVI camera. Well, not particularly proud as the reason I bought it was to somewhat mitigate the lawless and car dominated roads that I sometimes have to cycle upon - especially those in Newham.
I have now managed to upload a section of the footage, which is my cycle-ride along the A11 from the Olympic park to Stratford Centre. It isn't particularly interesting, and the image stabilisation isn't what it could be - so those who are prone to sea-sickness may want to take their pills before watching...
This is the stretch of road that Newham Council (or the ODA, or TfL or the Mayor depending upon who you talk to) have decided doesn't need a cycle-superhighway. Or that the colour would detract from the pleasant ambiance of the road. Or that they are really quite busy re-organising the road at the moment. Or their dog ate the plans.
My video was taken yesterday in quite light traffic as many people aren't working this week. So things are a lot busier at rush hour on a normal week.
Even so, I think that it can be safely said that the road isn't exactly for beginners. Bear in mind that the road has recently been "improved" and this is the end result. It would appear that even extending the bus-lane to be continuous on this stretch wasn't deemed appropriate, yet would have afforded some measure of protection for the cyclists using the road.
It would appear no-one is really taking responsibility for shelving the Cycle Superhighway along this section, but fingers all point in one direction - Newham Council, and Mayor Sir Robin Wales.
Sir Robin Wales was knighted for services to local government (presumably this doesn't include cycling) but seems to court a certain amount of controversy.
To start, the first directly elected mayor has seen his salary increase by 34% since his election in 2002. Including a 4% payrise last year, when the borough is cutting £28M from the budget and staff have a two year pay freeze. This shows an admirable chutzpah if nothing else. Who on earth decides to award the payrise at this time? The local councillors - all of whom are in the same party as the mayor. Apparently half of these councillors have been awarded part-time jobs earning a very reasonable salary. Not that these two facts should be ever connected - it is clearly complete co-incidence.
Putting the question of personal renumeration aside, clearly Newham have better things to spend their money on than some cycle facilities. After all this is one of the poorest boroughs in the nation. So imagine my surprise when I stumble upon a BBC article concerning the council's new offices.
To summarise Newham managed to spend £111M on one office block for themselves. This included items such as five designer lights at £1,853 each. The refurbishment cost £18.7M with another £92M going on buying the office and stamp duty. The BBC article states that the £18.7M is around two thirds the money spent by every other London council combined on headquarter refurbishment over three years.
The article also mentions, almost in passing, that Newham have a council run newspaper costing around half a million pounds a year (the costliest in London) and that the Newham town festival costs more than the Westminster festival which attracts five times as many people. Although tight-lipped over costs, the BBC managed to get information that the show had cost around £160k in 2004, but was then rebranded as the Mayor's Newham Show and spending increased to £362k. The idea to name the show after the mayor was the mayor's. So one cannot accuse him of being completely bereft of good ideas..
In defence of the council, they are saying the move to new premises will save money - they expect to save £140M by 2014. Which is an impressive amount of money. Although the more cynical may say that words like expect when used in relation to future council cost savings are possibly code for might or hope. Indeed, I haven't seen a clear breakdown of how these savings will manifest themselves. I also struggle to understand why designer lights would aid these cost savings.
All of this adds up to my impression of a Mayor who runs Newham with compliant councillors and very little criticism. If the Mayor doesn't like cycling (and I assume he doesn't) then cycling measures are blocked. If earnest youth groups like the Woodcraft Folk want to challenge decisions such as the cycling superhighway then Sir Robin Wales simply refuses them entry to the meeting.
All of this would be laughable in a rich borough, but Newham is one of the most deprived. Whilst services to desperately vulnerable people are cut, the fact that the council thinks a pay-rise for the mayor and fancy chandeliers are acceptable shows a local government very deeply out of touch, and indeed a council that believes they are untouchable. The cost of the pay-rises and lights wouldn't save services, but the signal it gives out shows deeply complacent local government who aren't being held to account.
I have now managed to upload a section of the footage, which is my cycle-ride along the A11 from the Olympic park to Stratford Centre. It isn't particularly interesting, and the image stabilisation isn't what it could be - so those who are prone to sea-sickness may want to take their pills before watching...
This is the stretch of road that Newham Council (or the ODA, or TfL or the Mayor depending upon who you talk to) have decided doesn't need a cycle-superhighway. Or that the colour would detract from the pleasant ambiance of the road. Or that they are really quite busy re-organising the road at the moment. Or their dog ate the plans.
My video was taken yesterday in quite light traffic as many people aren't working this week. So things are a lot busier at rush hour on a normal week.
Even so, I think that it can be safely said that the road isn't exactly for beginners. Bear in mind that the road has recently been "improved" and this is the end result. It would appear that even extending the bus-lane to be continuous on this stretch wasn't deemed appropriate, yet would have afforded some measure of protection for the cyclists using the road.
It would appear no-one is really taking responsibility for shelving the Cycle Superhighway along this section, but fingers all point in one direction - Newham Council, and Mayor Sir Robin Wales.
Sir Robin Wales was knighted for services to local government (presumably this doesn't include cycling) but seems to court a certain amount of controversy.
To start, the first directly elected mayor has seen his salary increase by 34% since his election in 2002. Including a 4% payrise last year, when the borough is cutting £28M from the budget and staff have a two year pay freeze. This shows an admirable chutzpah if nothing else. Who on earth decides to award the payrise at this time? The local councillors - all of whom are in the same party as the mayor. Apparently half of these councillors have been awarded part-time jobs earning a very reasonable salary. Not that these two facts should be ever connected - it is clearly complete co-incidence.
Putting the question of personal renumeration aside, clearly Newham have better things to spend their money on than some cycle facilities. After all this is one of the poorest boroughs in the nation. So imagine my surprise when I stumble upon a BBC article concerning the council's new offices.
To summarise Newham managed to spend £111M on one office block for themselves. This included items such as five designer lights at £1,853 each. The refurbishment cost £18.7M with another £92M going on buying the office and stamp duty. The BBC article states that the £18.7M is around two thirds the money spent by every other London council combined on headquarter refurbishment over three years.
The article also mentions, almost in passing, that Newham have a council run newspaper costing around half a million pounds a year (the costliest in London) and that the Newham town festival costs more than the Westminster festival which attracts five times as many people. Although tight-lipped over costs, the BBC managed to get information that the show had cost around £160k in 2004, but was then rebranded as the Mayor's Newham Show and spending increased to £362k. The idea to name the show after the mayor was the mayor's. So one cannot accuse him of being completely bereft of good ideas..
In defence of the council, they are saying the move to new premises will save money - they expect to save £140M by 2014. Which is an impressive amount of money. Although the more cynical may say that words like expect when used in relation to future council cost savings are possibly code for might or hope. Indeed, I haven't seen a clear breakdown of how these savings will manifest themselves. I also struggle to understand why designer lights would aid these cost savings.
All of this adds up to my impression of a Mayor who runs Newham with compliant councillors and very little criticism. If the Mayor doesn't like cycling (and I assume he doesn't) then cycling measures are blocked. If earnest youth groups like the Woodcraft Folk want to challenge decisions such as the cycling superhighway then Sir Robin Wales simply refuses them entry to the meeting.
All of this would be laughable in a rich borough, but Newham is one of the most deprived. Whilst services to desperately vulnerable people are cut, the fact that the council thinks a pay-rise for the mayor and fancy chandeliers are acceptable shows a local government very deeply out of touch, and indeed a council that believes they are untouchable. The cost of the pay-rises and lights wouldn't save services, but the signal it gives out shows deeply complacent local government who aren't being held to account.
Saturday, 23 April 2011
Easter Festivities
Happy Easter!
What better way to celebrate Easter than sitting in traffic jams in 27 degree heat.
The above is the scene from Chingford Road. The traffic was jammed both ways from the Bell Junction up to the North Circular roundabout - a not inconsiderable distance.
In the picture one can see a couple of renegades on cycles. The type of people who contribute neither to "road-tax" or the increasing PM10 pollution levels. They really are a menace and should be stopped.
Friday, 22 April 2011
Big Brother Is Watching You....
.... or at least the tarmac surface anyway.
I got myself a Muvi camera the other day. The incident at Stratford finally made me think that recording incidents would be a good idea, if only to use as evidence if someone does knock you off the cycle.
Unfortunately, I managed to mount the camera in such a way that it gave an incredibly detailed view of the tarmac directly in front of the cycle, but little else. If anyone wants to do a study on the road surfaces in East and North London, look no further, I have over an hour of footage.
I think it incredibly sad that on cycle journeys this kind of recording needs to take place. But as can be seen with the link above, that need is very real.
I got myself a Muvi camera the other day. The incident at Stratford finally made me think that recording incidents would be a good idea, if only to use as evidence if someone does knock you off the cycle.
Unfortunately, I managed to mount the camera in such a way that it gave an incredibly detailed view of the tarmac directly in front of the cycle, but little else. If anyone wants to do a study on the road surfaces in East and North London, look no further, I have over an hour of footage.
I think it incredibly sad that on cycle journeys this kind of recording needs to take place. But as can be seen with the link above, that need is very real.
Smog
England and Wales are under threat from smog, according to the BBC
According to the dept of Environment :
...the alert was due to warm and still conditions brought on by a high pressure system.
I am very far from being a tree-hugging eco-warrior. But even I am slightly concerned that the dept of the Environment seems to be blaming the weather for pollution instead of the cause of the pollution. Maybe they actually believe that clement weather causes smog.
Later on, they advise people susceptible to pollution not to take exercise, and to try not to make short journeys by car.
London pollution regularly exceeds the guidelines from the EU. London traffic speeds during peak hours is 10mph. 50% of outer London car journeys are less than 2 miles.
Some people may think we would be mad not to encourage walking and cycling in London and discourage driving.
According to the dept of Environment :
...the alert was due to warm and still conditions brought on by a high pressure system.
I am very far from being a tree-hugging eco-warrior. But even I am slightly concerned that the dept of the Environment seems to be blaming the weather for pollution instead of the cause of the pollution. Maybe they actually believe that clement weather causes smog.
Later on, they advise people susceptible to pollution not to take exercise, and to try not to make short journeys by car.
London pollution regularly exceeds the guidelines from the EU. London traffic speeds during peak hours is 10mph. 50% of outer London car journeys are less than 2 miles.
Some people may think we would be mad not to encourage walking and cycling in London and discourage driving.
Sunday, 17 April 2011
Halfords
I have found that there is a certain amount of snobbishness concerning Halfords in some cycling circles. Certainly, I have experienced very different customer service in different branches. I haven't been in the Tottenham Hale branch for a while, so things may have changed, but the one time I went there last year I was met was majestic indifference to my questions, and so left and haven't returned.
The Halfords in Chingford, by the A406, by contrast, has always had polite staff who are helpful.
But this store has absolutely no cycle parking. None. Nada. Zip. Isn't this strange for a shop with a large cycling department?
Even stranger is that every BikeHut department I have visited is upstairs. It didn't occur to me until I saw three people heaving their bikes up the stairs (presumably to get them repaired) quite how inconvenient the stores are set-up.
Why would a company set up cycle stores in this manner? Surely not all the people who visit the cycle section drive?
The Halfords in Chingford, by the A406, by contrast, has always had polite staff who are helpful.
But this store has absolutely no cycle parking. None. Nada. Zip. Isn't this strange for a shop with a large cycling department?
Even stranger is that every BikeHut department I have visited is upstairs. It didn't occur to me until I saw three people heaving their bikes up the stairs (presumably to get them repaired) quite how inconvenient the stores are set-up.
Why would a company set up cycle stores in this manner? Surely not all the people who visit the cycle section drive?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)