Tonight:
4°c
There are few more depressing descriptions in the English language than "cycling campaigner" - or, for that matter, "motoring organisations". There's something about our preferred means of getting around that makes us prey to tunnel vision: two wheels good, four bad. I'm as guilty of this as the next biped: although I like to walk, and cycle for the bulk of my London journeys, I also still depend on cars, buses and trains.
Now those dreaded cycling campaigners are calling for 100,000 new bike parking places in central London to cope with booming demand. But it's also a fact that they have their own agenda: two wheels best.
Granted, cycle parking - particularly in the City and the West End - can be a monumental drag. If there are racks, they're often festooned with bikes like a particularly charmless bracelet; and if they're individual ones they're no good unless you have safety bolts on your front wheel.
Then there are those businesses and private premises that threaten you with the loss of your bike if you have the nerve to chain it to their precious railings. Every cyclist ends up in a paranoid relationship with the urban space: if you're moving you're at risk from other vehicles, if you're at rest you're at risk from thieves and disgruntled proprietors.
I do think London would be a happier place with less motor traffic and more cyclists, and I do think better provision of cycle paths would be a help - but I also think there are ad hoc measures that could make it easier for two-wheelers. Why not simply make it illegal for private businesses and dwellings to forcibly remove locked bicycles, except where they are an actual obstruction? At one fell swoop this would massively increase available bike parking in central London.
The campaigners call for more cycle lanes, too, but research shows cyclists who jump red lights are safer than those who don't, while allowing cyclists to go the wrong way up oneway streets has already been adopted in at least one borough. So, why not a moratorium on all traffic controls - apart from biking in pedestrianonly areas - for cyclists?
As for the perennial threat of actual bike theft, my own preferred tactic is to daub any new bike I have with paint - my hunch is that thieves are even more brand conscious than legitimate consumers.
These three simple measures that would cost London's community charge payers nothing, enormously assist cyclists, and require absolutely no transport position papers. Of course, the first two will never happen - for precisely that reason. And the third won't ever be widely adopted because however much we style ourselves as eco-warriors, cyclists are capitalist consumers just like other Londoners.
Reader views (2)
How can a cyclist that jumps red lights be safer than one that waits ? Also many companies spend a small fortune on property maintenance and appearance,so why have it ruined by cyclists chaining their bikes to railings etc..and I was under the impression that cyclists in London were allowed to go the wrong way up a one-way street because non of them obey traffic signs anyway !
- Peter Killick, Hartlepool United Kingdom, 13/08/2008 18:16
Report abuse
Many companies have the ability to store bikes for staff in their underground spaces, but are unwilling to do so. Local Council tax rebates should be available for companies which provide showering and bike storage facilities for staff. Also we need a cross city of London cycle route should be an imperative.
- Alastair Grant, London, 12/08/2008 22:53
Report abuse
