Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 16517
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Vorpal » 17 Apr 2019, 8:46am

StephenW wrote:Hello Vorpal

Did you read the whole paper or just the abstract? Are you referring to the 2017 paper by Schepers et al or the 2013 one? The 2017 paper is a general overview of the various factors which contribute to cycling safety in the Netherlands, including cycle paths. I believe the reference to Schepers et al (2013) is actually a typo, it should be Scheppers et al (2011).

I went to your link, but it's a service that I don't have a subscription to, so I found a paper with the same date, title, authors and abstract on a service that I do have a subscription to, and read that. I have read other papers by the same authors, and while I haven't gone back to re-read them on the basis of this thread, (and frankly don't have the time at the moment), I think that if I had ever come across something substantiated that showed a significant benefit to segregation I would have remembered it clearly.

I think it was clear from my comments that I had read more than the abstract, but if I was commenting on the wrong paper, then the link must be incorrect?
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 1673
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Cugel » 17 Apr 2019, 9:46am

mjr wrote:
Cugel wrote:If car drivers are careful, considerate and don't break the motoring laws and rules, cycling would become far safer - as would being a pedestrian, a horse rider or even (especially!) a motorist.

Yes and if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle, but it's much easier said than done.

Mjr prefers a separate infrastructure for cycling.



I've written on this site before that I see cycleways as one of numerous tools to increase the numbers of voters cycling so we can then have the political power to reclaim more roads democratically.

This seems to avoid the fundamental issue (dangerous driving) and is likely to be far more expensive than more traffic police and prosecutions etc.. It won't save pedestrians or motorists from the ongoing carnage. In addition, all indications are that when so-called cycling infrastructure is provided, it's unfit for purpose bordering on outright dangerous. There seems little liklihood of that changing if more cycling infrastructure is provided, especially if the budget is tuppence 'appeny, which it would be.

Later stuff is generally better and many of the changes only require designers to think and follow the latest design manuals, rather than cost more, but I agree that some of it needs a decent budget. However, I think that could still be less than the cost of the number of extra police required for the improbable enforcement plan once you include all the recruitment, training, insurance and pension costs, and it can be ramped up on a per-area basis, as we've seen with Cycle City Ambition Grants (even if some like Leeds seem to have been blooper-filled) or Manchester's recent step up.


On the one hand you tell me that to suggest that we take political steps to improve road behaviours by motorists is impossible (your "auntie with balls") then suggest I'm "making up lies" about you when I summarise your many posts as "Mjr prefers a seprate infrastructure" for cycling. I feel a touch of over-excitement has entered your thoughts on these matters. :-)

I (like you, no doubt) have cycled hundreds of thousands of miles on the roads with little serious mishap involving a car (I was once pranged by a drugged person coming out of a side road in 1980). So the first point might be that although the roads have dangers to cyclists from motorised drivers, they aren't that bad if one is a competant cyclist paying attention; and other road users generally behave themselves.

Next we might consider the infrastructure so far provided for cyclists. It's all derived from theoretical considerations and based on some sort of idealised model in the head of a road planner who seems unfamiliar with riding a bicycle. There's no sign that this inadequate or even dangerous stuff with it's inadequate designers will change in future provisons .... which is a moot point since there's no sign either of the huge budget that would be required to design and construct any substantially useful cycling infrastructure at all.

We do have a solution, though. Once upon in time (certainly in my memory) there was a far better provision of traffic police, who did tend to curtail the casually dangerous antics of many everyday motorists. Once upon a time, it was regarded as OK to smoke in public rooms, persecute gay folk, beat children and discriminate openly against people with dark skins. In short, we already know how to revive good practices to improve road behaviours; we already know that seemingly intractable cultural behaviours of a toxic nature can be amended or even eliminated via political rather than financial action.

Cugel

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 12642
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby mjr » 17 Apr 2019, 10:15am

Cugel wrote:On the one hand you tell me that to suggest that we take political steps to improve road behaviours by motorists is impossible (your "auntie with balls")

Extremely improbable, not impossible. The "auntie with balls" proverb is about saying something would be good does little to make it so.

then suggest I'm "making up lies" about you when I summarise your many posts as "Mjr prefers a seprate infrastructure" for cycling. I feel a touch of over-excitement has entered your thoughts on these matters. :-)

Yes, I get overexcited when someone oversimplifies my views to the point of untruth, partly because I've endured this for years from certain CTC types who seem to oppose anything with a bike symbol on/by it.

I (like you, no doubt) have cycled hundreds of thousands of miles on the roads with little serious mishap involving a car (I was once pranged by a drugged person coming out of a side road in 1980). So the first point might be that although the roads have dangers to cyclists from motorised drivers, they aren't that bad if one is a competant cyclist paying attention; and other road users generally behave themselves.

I was last hit a year or two ago, right-hooked on the carriageway by a motorist. No amount of competence or attention by a cyclist protects against that. It can mitigate, but by that point we've already lost.

Have you also cycled thousands of miles (could be hundreds of thousands by now - I don't record the split) on cycleways with little serious mishap and none involving cars like I have?

Next we might consider the infrastructure so far provided for cyclists. It's all derived from theoretical considerations and based on some sort of idealised model in the head of a road planner who seems unfamiliar with riding a bicycle.

I wish it was, but the situation's both better (we have road designers who are keen cyclists) and worse (until recently, there seemed to be no theoretical considerations underneath many design manuals).

There's no sign that this inadequate or even dangerous stuff with it's inadequate designers will change in future provisons .... which is a moot point since there's no sign either of the huge budget that would be required to design and construct any substantially useful cycling infrastructure at all.

No sign it will change? So, to use an example from the biggest city, you would claim that the latest London Cycle Superhighways are no better than the initial round, which are themselves no better than the old LCN+? Or from a more famous city, that the CCAG half-step redmac cycleways in Cambridge are no better than the paint+signs pavements and gutter lanes they replaced?

We do have a solution, though. Once upon in time (certainly in my memory) there was a far better provision of traffic police, who did tend to curtail the casually dangerous antics of many everyday motorists. Once upon a time, it was regarded as OK to smoke in public rooms, persecute gay folk, beat children and discriminate openly against people with dark skins. In short, we already know how to revive good practices to improve road behaviours; we already know that seemingly intractable cultural behaviours of a toxic nature can be amended or even eliminated via political rather than financial action.

You keep saying "we already know how to revive good practices" without saying how, despite repeated requests. How will you do it if not by changing political views by getting more people cycling by providing protected space for cycling?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 1673
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Cugel » 17 Apr 2019, 12:34pm

mjr wrote:(snip)
You keep saying "we already know how to revive good practices" without saying how, despite repeated requests. How will you do it if not by changing political views by getting more people cycling by providing protected space for cycling?


Read my finger-pushes!

More traffic police and a series of political (some via legal) actions to discourage, penalise and eventually reduce (by a lot) dangerous driving habits. Political action is a complex set of procedures which we surely needn't expand here. Are you unfamiliar with politics as a social practice? I think not.

The "protected space for cycling" is (correct me if I'm wrong) in your view a demarcated and separate space for cycling that replaces road routes for cyclists only. The cost of replicating roads for cyclists would be astronomical and will never see the Chancellor's red case. Moreover, even if three trillionaires were to somehow be persuaded to fund it, this would likely result in a ban of all cyclists from the roads. Cyclists then become even more inept at coping with traffic. But all of this is just fantasy.

"Safe spaces" are available now - the current roads. They are ocassionally made unsafe by loons in cars, vans and lorries. The cost of loon-prevention seems likely to be far, far less than that of replicating all the roads as "safe cycling spaces". The loon-prevention would also save a lot of motorist, pedestrian and perhaps even horse-rider lives or maiming, which making safe cycling spaces will not. Better driving habits, enforced by cultural pressures of various kinds, would surely also improve all sorts of other things - perhaps even the rate of fuel burning?

In short, your proposals for "safe cycling spaces" seem unrealistic and impractical; and likely to have many unintended consequences. Making drivers behave in a much better (safer) fashion seems a far more realistic and practical solution, with far greater (wider) benefits to a far greater range of people, not just cyclists.

******
As to London and it's superhighways .....

Perhaps they did make cycling marginally safer - although there are still regular deaths and maimings. But surely the obvious answer is to ban private cars (perhaps much else) from London altogether? It would stop the pollution-related early deaths as well as making it far safer for not just cyclists but also pedestrians. And London would be a much nicer place. Government already wastes billions on strange vanity projects with little or no rational. Why add a few bits of so-called "safe cycling space" when there are far better solutions that also address many other traffic-related problems?

Cugel

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 12642
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby mjr » 17 Apr 2019, 9:59pm

Cugel wrote:
mjr wrote:(snip)
You keep saying "we already know how to revive good practices" without saying how, despite repeated requests. How will you do it if not by changing political views by getting more people cycling by providing protected space for cycling?


Read my finger-pushes!

No, you need to push the keys! All the important stuff is missing from the letters generated!

More traffic police and a series of political (some via legal) actions to discourage, penalise and eventually reduce (by a lot) dangerous driving habits. Political action is a complex set of procedures which we surely needn't expand here. Are you unfamiliar with politics as a social practice? I think not.

You seem to be, though! No politician is going to approve that without more cyclist voters, so you're stuck in catch 22.

The "protected space for cycling" is (correct me if I'm wrong) in your view a demarcated and separate space for cycling that replaces road routes for cyclists only. The cost of replicating roads for cyclists would be astronomical and will never see the Chancellor's red case.

You're wrong, twice. Firstly, sometimes it'll be space taken from carriageways, like in London, or it'll be upgrading park routes or towpaths and so on. Secondly, it's been estimated almost the whole A road network could be equipped for less than HS2.

[...] this would likely result in a ban of all cyclists from the roads. (Snip)

Always the same old bogeyman. In Cugelworld, cyclists are supposedly so politically powerful as to get more traffic police but simultaneously so politically inept that they get confined to one type of road in a way no other road user has ever been? That's absurd.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Pete Owens
Posts: 1456
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Pete Owens » 18 Apr 2019, 10:09am

Cugel wrote:Mjr prefers a separate infrastructure for cycling. This seems to avoid the fundamental issue (dangerous driving) and is likely to be far more expensive than more traffic police and prosecutions etc..


This is a false dichotomy in any case - segregation causes conflicts at junctions - thus requiring more skill and care on the part of drivers to avoid collisions - hence their inherent poor safety. This is why those advocating segregation tend to be particularly vociferous in calls for the need for more laws and greater enforcement. See the recent thread on loading - or the calls to change the law to give overtaking traffic priority.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 12642
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby mjr » 18 Apr 2019, 12:16pm

It may be a good idea to read the thread and note it's an anti-infrastructuralist who is being "particularly vociferous in calls for the need for more laws and greater enforcement" before pasting in the same old chestnuts.

And anyway, infrastructure doesn't cause conflicts at junctions, but it can make the latent conflicts that were there anyway more obvious, as well as remove them completely. In the recent past, UK highways departments have been particularly good at highlighting them and not generally great at removing.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

User avatar
Lance Dopestrong
Posts: 1101
Joined: 18 Sep 2014, 1:52pm

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Lance Dopestrong » 18 Apr 2019, 3:05pm

More laws and enforcement is great for us sensible sorts who know how to behave on the road, but if applied equally then many cyclists will get beaten with the same stick.
https://themediocrecyclist.home.blog
Self employed MIAS L5.B Instructor.
Warwickshire Lowland Rescue Bike lead.
IPMBA member.

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 1673
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Cugel » 18 Apr 2019, 4:05pm

Lance Dopestrong wrote:More laws and enforcement is great for us sensible sorts who know how to behave on the road, but if applied equally then many cyclists will get beaten with the same stick.


Indeed! They will be the same cyclists riding like loons on the cycling infrastructure paths shared with pedestrians - the ones who tend to run into pedestrians and their children, grannies, dogs, pushchairs or anything else getting in the way of their Important Progress at 20mph or more.

I too prefer to cycle at 20mph or more (when I can) so it's the roads for me, then. I would only feel guilty squashing a dog paw or worse.

Mind, I do stop for traffic lights and even pull over on the narrow lanes to let the tractor pass, because I am nice. :-)

Road riding does wonders for one's loon-detector. The slightest twitch and grimace of the car or loon driving it tells a whole story about the immediate possible future! Loon detection is then followed by loon-avoidance. If only the bairns and dogs on the shared cycling-pedestrian infrastuctures could learn these techniques, eh? Perhaps mjr can teach them?

Cugel

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 12642
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby mjr » 18 Apr 2019, 4:40pm

Cugel wrote:Road riding does wonders for one's loon-detector. The slightest twitch and grimace of the car or loon driving it tells a whole story about the immediate possible future! Loon detection is then followed by loon-avoidance. If only the bairns and dogs on the shared cycling-pedestrian infrastuctures could learn these techniques, eh? Perhaps mjr can teach them?

1. I've not yet seen a car grimace.
2. People keep their bairns and dogs under pretty good control on cycleways where people actually cycle in decent numbers.
3. Good luck avoiding 70mph motorised loons. I'll be on the cycleway the other side of the armoured control barrier if you need me!
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Pete Owens
Posts: 1456
Joined: 7 Jul 2008, 12:52am

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Pete Owens » 18 Apr 2019, 6:55pm

mjr wrote:It may be a good idea to read the thread ...

Perhaps you have not made such comments in this particular thread - which is why I specifically referenced other ones such as the recent one about trucks unloading. actions that would be entirely unproblematical were it not for the existence of cycle paths and lanes - and ones you call for the enforcement of non-existent laws to keep your precious farcilities marginally useable. And don't bother denying you vocal support for the misguided campaign to give overtaking vehicle priority over those turning - again supporting greater enforcement which is needed because of the problems caused by segregation.
... and note it's an anti-infrastructuralist ...

OK so i am assuming that what you mean by "infrastructure" here is "segregation".

- and don't bother trying to deny that you are an advocate of segregation just because you happen to use some euphemism in a particular thread.

infrastructure doesn't cause conflicts at junctions,


Of course it does (again assuming that you use "infrastructure" to mean "segregation" for the purpose of argument) by its very nature.

Any arrangement that that places a stream of traffic heading left at a junction to the right of a stream of traffic heading right is going to result in those streams crossing through the junction. That is what is meant by conflict. This conflict is inherent with segregation - and that is why segregated facilities are so unsafe at junctions - whatever minor details are put in to mitigate the danger. (Do you imagine the crossover section in a scalectrix track is to prevent collisions?)

Traffic engineers simply don't do this for what thy consider to be "proper" traffic because it is so stupidly dangerous. They arrange lane markings so that left turning traffic is directed into the left hand lane on the approach to a junction and so on. Now I know you have in the past made the absurd claim that they routinely do the the opposite, but perhaps before repeating this you could come up with an image of conflicting lane markings on streetview - say like this:
http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month/August2001.htm
but for cars.

User avatar
Lance Dopestrong
Posts: 1101
Joined: 18 Sep 2014, 1:52pm

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Lance Dopestrong » 18 Apr 2019, 7:31pm

Can we not have unnecessary use of bold type mid way through a paragraph please? I'm dyslexic and struggle to read it, ir before my eyes when folk do that. Apart from which, I'm sure everyone else can read.
https://themediocrecyclist.home.blog
Self employed MIAS L5.B Instructor.
Warwickshire Lowland Rescue Bike lead.
IPMBA member.

Mike Sales
Posts: 2036
Joined: 7 Mar 2009, 3:31pm
Location: Fenland

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Mike Sales » 18 Apr 2019, 7:32pm

Lance Dopestrong wrote:Can we not have unnecessary use of bold type mid way through a paragraph please? I'm dyslexic and struggle to read it, ir before my eyes when folk do that. Apart from which, I'm sure everyone else can read.


Are italics a problem for you?

User avatar
Wanlock Dod
Posts: 383
Joined: 28 Sep 2016, 5:48pm

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Wanlock Dod » 18 Apr 2019, 10:12pm

Are there any countries, or regions, which have achieved relatively high levels of cycling without significant levels of segregation?

User avatar
Cugel
Posts: 1673
Joined: 13 Nov 2017, 11:14am

Re: Painted cycle lanes may make roads more dangerous for bike riders

Postby Cugel » 19 Apr 2019, 9:09am

Wanlock Dod wrote:Are there any countries, or regions, which have achieved relatively high levels of cycling without significant levels of segregation?


Britain in the 50s. No one could afford a car unless they were very well-orf, in them days. Hordes cycled to and from work as well as elsewhere. I have not only seen the pickshers but the actual hordes, when I was a bairn in Tyneside.

Here is the obvious solution to car-danger on the roads, then. Ban the things! The roads then become largely "cycling infrastructiure", as they once were.

Perhaps many would also once more take up the horse, inclusive of some buggies and coaches. In fact, I saw a group of them just yesterday in one of the log-wagon turning bays up in Brechfa Forest! There were a about a dozen, harnessing-up and trotting off down the roads to the various forest tracks.

One "held me up" as we came out of the forest following the dog walk. I suppose I could have hooted, sworn, revved the engine (not much effect with an electric motor, mind) then done a close pass at 50mph. Instead I waited for the passing place then stopped alongside for a brief chat. How nice was that rig! How pleasant the drivers.

Cugel