A couple of injuries kept me of my bike last year (not cycling injuries I hasten to add), so I ended up looking at more cycling related stories than I might otherwise have done, and what I saw is beginning to worry me.
While I understand and appreciate the efforts of most who try to encourage change and encourage improvements, I’ve detected a rise in those who seem to be more interested in attracting attention, or demanding more extreme action be taken to achieve what they think is ‘right’.
Over the past few years I’ve seen a steady increase in dedicated cycle lanes (fenced off from adjacent traffic), pedestrian crossing with additional signals for cyclists (to cross some wide and busy roads), plus the arrival of a number of areas with signs showing that they are shared paths for pedestrians and cyclists.
I’ve had to use them only as a pedestrian, and didn’t realise how advance this steadily growing network had become in the east end of Glasgow.
I think these are great, and make frequent use of them now.
Yet when I happened to come across a Glasgow cycling activist’s blog – he was completely against them, called them a mistake, and said they showed the planners didn’t have a clue, and should be fired.
As far as I could see, he wanted sole ownership of any bit of road he was using, everbody else is to ‘GEROFF’ and claimed such mixing of pedestrians and cyclists could never work.
I suggest he tries riding on the shared path between Central Station and the North Rotunda. That’s busy with both, especially on nice sunny days.
The only problem I’ve had on it has been from asshat ‘expert’ cyclists there, who speed round the blind side of corners as if they are the only ones on the path, or like the one I met last night, who sped past me so close he almost scraped the paint off my bike. Not even the courtesy of ding from a bell, or a ‘Sorry mate’ as he sped off.
Getting back on my bike, I looked at some recent online route planners – most are pretty poor to be honest, and have not been updated for years, and lack much recent detail. Going by their advice, if I followed it, I’d be on main road as they’re missing many of the lesser cycle paths, and seem surprisingly reticent to use side streets.
I ride along to the Science Centre fairly often now (from Shettleston), and after checking the online cycle route planners was disappointed they didn’t show a route to Riverside (transport museum), or Kelvingrove (art gallery and museum).
But when I was on the other side of the Clyde from the Science Centre I noticed the signs showed that Riverside was only 3 minutes further on, and that Kelvingrove was just another 3 minutes further on.
This was new territory for me, so… nothing ventured, nothing gained.
True enough, both venues were reached without any problems, and the one hazard on the road to Kelvingrove – crossing the very busy Argyle Street – is catered for by a controlled crossing with signals for cyclists.
Here’s the proof of those visits, via a route that’s almost completely segregated cycle path from the east end. Sorry the pics aren’t great – it was as dull and dark then as it appears to be.
I’d never have known I could ride to these place almost solely on various cycle paths. And if one ‘activist’ had his way, I wouldn’t even have the route!
I believe certain of the ‘activists’ and ‘extremists’ are not helping now. Their actions could even spoil things.
PS Waverley Science Centre Tower
PS Waverley. Pics above and below can be clicked for a bit bigger. There are bits of the TS Queen Mary visible in the background, where it is moored behind the tower.
PS Waverley
Riverside – Museum of Transport. The building extends to the left, but there was a fairly ugly tent there (you can see its reflection) for something else about to take place there, so I decided to get rid of it for the pic.
Riverside
Kelvingrove Art Gallery and Museum.
Kelvingrove Oblique
Secret Scotland 