Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
- anothereye
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
- Location: Haringey, North London
Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
I've drawn a Venn diagram in the hope of promoting a discussion. There are 2 points I want to make but (at the risk of being obtuse) I'd like to see other peoples comments first.
Gerry
Click on image to enlarge.
Update: I've re-drawn it after some useful comments on this thread:
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/download/file.php?id=278&mode=view
(the one in this post is the firat draft).
Gerry
Click on image to enlarge.
Update: I've re-drawn it after some useful comments on this thread:
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/download/file.php?id=278&mode=view
(the one in this post is the firat draft).
Last edited by anothereye on 13 Mar 2009, 7:08pm, edited 1 time in total.
_______________________________________________________________
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
You missed the poice cars and white vans that like parking in cycle lanes
Trice Q 2007 in inky blue (Quackers)
Bacchetta Corsa 26 ATT (The Mad Weeble)
Cube SL Team Cross (Rubberduckzilla)
Homebaked tourer (The Duck's Dream)
MTB mongrel (Harold the Flying Sheep)
Bacchetta Corsa 26 ATT (The Mad Weeble)
Cube SL Team Cross (Rubberduckzilla)
Homebaked tourer (The Duck's Dream)
MTB mongrel (Harold the Flying Sheep)
- EdinburghFixed
- Posts: 2375
- Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 7:03pm
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
Yeah, my first response is that there's an incorrect area (the bit for bikes should either be overlapping with pedestrians or cars at all times). I can't think of anywhere that this condition is not true in practice as even a well-observed mandatory cycle lane is shared with cars, as they have to cross at junctions (and of course, parked cars again). This makes it vital, even more vital than when cycling on the road 'proper', to watch out for cars and means the area is not truly separate.
It might or might not be of value to block out some of the potential area with a parking sign, but in practice this effects all road users so I'm not so sure.
It might or might not be of value to block out some of the potential area with a parking sign, but in practice this effects all road users so I'm not so sure.
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
EdinburghFixed wrote:Yeah, my first response is that there's an incorrect area (the bit for bikes should either be overlapping with pedestrians or cars at all times). I can't think of anywhere that this condition is not true in practice as even a well-observed mandatory cycle lane is shared with cars, as they have to cross at junctions (and of course, parked cars again). This makes it vital, even more vital than when cycling on the road 'proper', to watch out for cars and means the area is not truly separate.
It might or might not be of value to block out some of the potential area with a parking sign, but in practice this effects all road users so I'm not so sure.
There are a few places that are cycle only, indicated by a white bike on a circular blue sign. For instance, where cyclists are given space to avoid some traffic calming, or on a cycle subway under a busy junction.
Should the pedestrian area overlap all the motor area, except the motorway bit? Pedestrians are allowed to walk in the road after all.
- anothereye
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
- Location: Haringey, North London
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
Hi EdinburghFixed, I take your points but the diagram is supposed to be more specific: It excludes parking and pedestrians crossing the road. Also; it's not a representation of actual practice (eg. motor vehicles crossing unbroken white lines designating cycle lanes) but rather a theoretical representation of what is legal.
My motivation for doing it is about signage; now what do you notice?
Gerry
My motivation for doing it is about signage; now what do you notice?
Gerry
_______________________________________________________________
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
- anothereye
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
- Location: Haringey, North London
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
skrx wrote:EdinburghFixed wrote:Yeah, my first response is that there's an incorrect area (the bit for bikes should either be overlapping with pedestrians or cars at all times). I can't think of anywhere that this condition is not true in practice as even a well-observed mandatory cycle lane is shared with cars, as they have to cross at junctions (and of course, parked cars again). This makes it vital, even more vital than when cycling on the road 'proper', to watch out for cars and means the area is not truly separate.
It might or might not be of value to block out some of the potential area with a parking sign, but in practice this effects all road users so I'm not so sure.
There are a few places that are cycle only, indicated by a white bike on a circular blue sign. For instance, where cyclists are given space to avoid some traffic calming, or on a cycle subway under a busy junction.
Should the pedestrian area overlap all the motor area, except the motorway bit? Pedestrians are allowed to walk in the road after all.
skrx,
Oh yes, there are country lanes without pavements so I do need to amend it. Thanks for that.There are usually pavements so pedestrians will only walk on the roads when crossing (or jaywalking).
I could have used the sign you mention for 'cycle only' but I found the other one first (I only wanted one sign per area).
Gerry
_______________________________________________________________
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
- anothereye
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
- Location: Haringey, North London
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
Here's the second draft (taking into account the above comments).
Gerry
Click on image to enlarge.
Gerry
Click on image to enlarge.
- EdinburghFixed
- Posts: 2375
- Joined: 24 Jul 2008, 7:03pm
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
anothereye wrote:My motivation for doing it is about signage; now what do you notice?
Hmm. OK, well there is no sign for 'pedestrian / bike / car' which is needed to cover the 95%.
So is the diagram supposed to refer to signage or practice? Because (for example) 99.9% of the pavement network doesn't have a 'no bikes' sign (or indeed a 'no cars' sign which is equally, or even more, relevant). Neither do many shared paths have the respective signs - I see none round here despite quite extensive shared use designations.
Also, motorbikes are not included. However there are areas they can go where cars cannot (and areas where buses can go that taxis cannot, etc. etc.) - I'm not sure if there are signs for all permutations though, or money to place them
Do you think it's worth differentiating between segregated and unsegregated shared use?
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
Wheras cyclists are forbiden from riding on pavements, cars are not forbiden from driving on them.
The idea that pedestrians have priority on the pavements is not respected or enforced. Police are more likely to detain the awkward pedestrian than the pushy motorist.
So your yellow pedestrian area has to swing around to partly overlap the car areas. This is also true of pedestrian crossings and pedestrianised zones. These crossings may only be a small part of the roads but are an essential part of walkways.
The idea that pedestrians have priority on the pavements is not respected or enforced. Police are more likely to detain the awkward pedestrian than the pushy motorist.
So your yellow pedestrian area has to swing around to partly overlap the car areas. This is also true of pedestrian crossings and pedestrianised zones. These crossings may only be a small part of the roads but are an essential part of walkways.
Yma o Hyd
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
meic wrote:Wheras cyclists are forbiden from riding on pavements, cars are not forbiden from driving on them.
Um, in law or in practice? While I believe the latter may be true in some areas, I don't know of any legislation that would give rise to that situation.
At the risk of resurrecting an RLJ thread, see viewtopic.php?p=134363#p134363
"The prejudice against bicycles has all but disappeared in London; [...] people in general look with pleasure upon the flying wheels as they scud noiselessly along." - London Standard, Aug 1879
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
Just look at the highway code.
It clearly states that cyclists MUST not cycle on the pavement.
For cars it states how you may drive on the pavements. The wording is loose enough to allow people to drive along the pavement. Wheras they should not drive along the pavement it is legal to drive on pavements and illegal to cycle on them. So if a cyclist hits a car on a pavement they had better start apologising!
It clearly states that cyclists MUST not cycle on the pavement.
For cars it states how you may drive on the pavements. The wording is loose enough to allow people to drive along the pavement. Wheras they should not drive along the pavement it is legal to drive on pavements and illegal to cycle on them. So if a cyclist hits a car on a pavement they had better start apologising!
Yma o Hyd
- anothereye
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
- Location: Haringey, North London
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
When are cars permitted to drive on pavements (I guess they are allowed to park with 2 wheels on the pavement in places so they would have to drive on the pavement to position themselves)? Meic; do you a reference to the Highway Code?
Gerry
Gerry
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
cars are not suposed to park 2 wheels on the pavement, its lazy motorists that do. THey are allowed to drive across pavementsto gain access to property. And they are certainly not suposed to drive along pavements
NUKe
_____________________________________
_____________________________________
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
NUKe wrote:cars are not suposed to park 2 wheels on the pavement, its lazy motorists that do. THey are allowed to drive across pavementsto gain access to property. And they are certainly not suposed to drive along pavements
Not lazy, they're just concerned about their cars being hit. Of course it does encourage people to squeeze past tearing off wing mirrors, so it's pointless.
Also parking two wheels on the pavement regularly ruins the suspension as well as blocking the pavement for wheelchair users.
- anothereye
- Posts: 750
- Joined: 8 Mar 2009, 4:56pm
- Location: Haringey, North London
Re: Pavements, Cycle Lanes and Roads.
The Highway Code
145
You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency.
So isn't that exactly the same for cyclists?
Gerry
145
You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency.
So isn't that exactly the same for cyclists?
Gerry
_______________________________________________________________
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users
http://www.roadusers.net/
reducing danger for all road users