Cycle lane positioning...

[[XAP]Bob]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-no ... e-42554715

[Boring_Username]

Some councils spend money wisely on cycle lanes that help cyclists and are safe
Some councils **** money away on cycle lanes that harm cyclists and are dangerous.

The latter error is easily preventable. I feel under no obligation to be one of its victims.

[reohn2]

Typical of the UK's approach to cycling,get the cyclists out of the way of the one's who really matter

[Username]

"It added that the money for the scheme and the "revision" had come from a £6.1m development fund and not council tax. "

Oh well thats alrite then

[mjr]

They look like narrow painted lanes in the picture and you don't even need a TRO for painted lanes any more, so surely this isn't a big spend? Is there more to the story or is it the Bike Bashing Corporation doing its usual?

National standards including 2+m width would avoid this nonsense.

And shouldn't Nottingham council be tackling the scourge of storing private property on public highways? They'd object if I built a shed on the road and some of those 4x4 tanks contain more junk than my shed.

[thirdcrank]

However, some Abbey Street residents complained it had caused problems by taking away on-street parking.

And there's the rub. Residents with any sort of grievance threaten the political future of ward councillors because with low turnouts in local elections, relatively few votes can change the result. IME, the most vocal anti-motor vehicle councillors will find any excuse to kow-tow to residents over on-street parking because it is the biggy. (White funk is a search term.)

[Outlaw13]

They look like narrow painted lanes in the picture

That's an old picture. This link gives you a better idea.
http://www.nottinghampost.com/news/loca ... ve-1001718

The West Corridor route which this is part of has been done really well IMHO. It just needs to get used more now.

[Bmblbzzz]

A few points here:
Parking. OMG call the UN!

A two-way cycle path was installed on Abbey Bridge, which then split into two one-way routes along Abbey Street.

It's inconsistencies like this (paths splitting and swapping sides) that make them impractical to use. Inevitably you loose priority and are delayed when crossing the road. Generally I think a path on the "correct" side of the road is preferable but the main thing is continuity.
The photo at the top of the bbc story shows the path on the rhs bumping up to the pavement and then down again, which is also rather annoying, slowing you down and forcing you to wiggle round pedestrians. Not good for the pedestrians either. It looks like a bus stop bypass, which might be a good idea when done well, but again, it's the break in continuity that is really annoying.

As for parking, the council - the world! - needs to "deal with it", which ultimately means facing up to the fact that in some areas the volume of cars exceeds the area of roadspace.

[thirdcrank]

Outlaw13's link to the Nottingham Post gives some interesting background info, as well as highlighting the pre-occupation with residential on-street parking. Even in Nottingham - once the world centre of cycle production - the pedal cycle is considered a nuisance rather than a valuable means of countering the growth of motor traffic.

[Outlaw13]

Even in Nottingham - once the world centre of cycle production - the pedal cycle is considered a nuisance rather than a valuable means of countering the growth of motor traffic.

I'm not sure that's the case. I think the council have made some great strides forward recently in encouraging cyclists in and around Nottingham. I cycle most days around the city and suburbs and I feel safer now because of the cycle paths I can use. I also get the feeling that most car drivers are getting used to having more bikes on the road. The two exceptions for me are the fact that the councils are still installing traffic calming islands and taxi drivers constantly stopping in traffic light bike zones and bike lanes.

[thirdcrank]

My comment was aimed at the residents quoted in the link to the local rag, whose self-serving logic implies that cyclists on the move are the problem, rather than motor traffic and parked vehicles. Unless I've got it wrong, we are discussing long-term on-street parking. A parked vehicle is an obstruction, in that you cannot pass over the bit of highway it's occupying, but it's become accepted that all but the most inconsiderate parking is "necessary." The point has already been made that it's not very much different from building a shed in the road and in some cases we are edging that way with caravans permanently standing in the road outside houses. (I'm not suggesting that occurs in this case.)

It's impossible to know how much of what the councillor said was not quoted in the rag, but there's not much there pressing the cycling case and more being defensive about cycle routes.

Whatever, the route is being moved quite soon after installation and there are only so many possible reasons: the designer got it wrong in terms of the best cycle route or residents complained about the effect on on-street parking, are the only two that immediately come to mind.

FWIW, I've not looked in detail at the comment about the yellow line but my impression is that they are reverting to a fudge whereby parking on the cycle route will be largely tolerated.

[mjr]

It's not inevitable that a cycleway loses priority when crossing a carriageway - we've a growing number around Norfolk where cycling and walking take priority - but I bet those residents wouldn't like that either!

[whoof]

Residents outrage as road is used for travelling on rather than a storage area.

[Stevek76]

This actually seems to be an improvement to me? Depends on final widths which are a bit unclear on the low res plan but a two way fully segregated track seems preferable to the current two one way tracks, one of which is just a dashed white line in the gutter.

Returning the bridge to single yellows seems to impact traffic lanes only so while it is a pity they've caved on that as I'm sure it will impact bus times as well it does mostly mean private vehicles will just be clogging themselves up.

[Vorpal]

I don't know the route, so it is hard for me to judge whether the cycle lane should be moved.

However, parking is a stupid reason to do it. The only reason they should consider moving it, is if it improves things for cyclists.

If parking is a problem on nearby streets, the council should sell parking permits, and enforce restrictions.

Residents would soon clear the crap out of their garages and off their drives so they can save money on parking permits.