The problem with segregated cycle routes

[TonyR]

[youtube]qwj-v8G7AR0[/youtube]

[mjr]

Does "segregated cycle routes" mean cycle tracks? As you can clearly see in the preview picture, it isn't a cycle track at that junction. The protection stops before the junction (you can see the end of the kerb on the far right of shot - plenty of space for a motorist to make a fast sweeping turn and left-hook cyclists) and becomes a paint-only cycle lane in a dodgy position on the road... although even then, http://highwaycode.info/rule/183 tells motorists to give way to a cycle lane when turning left... so really this discussion should be retitled "the problem with kerbless on-carriageway cycle lanes".

[MikeF]

The Dutch don't seem to have this problem so it's not a problem with segregated cycle routes per se.
Also if there weren't a cycle route there, the same problem would occur ie on "ordinary" roads. I don't see how the cycle lane is the problem - road design and the driver are the problem.

[TonyR]

Does "segregated cycle routes" mean cycle tracks? As you can clearly see in the preview picture, it isn't a cycle track at that junction. The protection stops before the junction (you can see the end of the kerb on the far right of shot - plenty of space for a motorist to make a fast sweeping turn and left-hook cyclists) and becomes a paint-only cycle lane in a dodgy position on the road... although even then, http://highwaycode.info/rule/183 tells motorists to give way to a cycle lane when turning left... so really this discussion should be retitled "the problem with kerbless on-carriageway cycle lanes".

In the real world segregated cycle lanes do have to have interruptions for junctions which is what we have there. Trying to pretend its not really a segregated cycle lane because its got a junction is rather stretching it IMO. The Tavistock Place and Royal College St segregated lanes had exactly the same problem of excessive accidents at junctions. The best option is, like the camera cyclist, to stay out in the traffic which was also the conclusion of http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7502000957 which said

The only engineering suggestion is to mix different road users rather than separate them in order to make cyclists more “visible” in the relevant locations

[kwackers]

There's a (decent - i.e. wide) cycle lane runs all around the estate I live on.
The sort of problems the video shows are endemic here. I'm not sure why, but there's something about it that seems to convince motorists that they can simply turn across a bike travelling down a road.
It must have something to do with the cyclist being in their own lane which somehow makes them think that when they turn there's either no conflict or perhaps that the onus is on the cyclist to stay out of the way.

Whatever it is, remove the road markings and the problem pretty much goes away...

[Heltor Chasca]

The Dutch don't seem to have this problem so it's not a problem with segregated cycle routes per se.
Also if there weren't a cycle route there, the same problem would occur ie on "ordinary" roads. I don't see how the cycle lane is the problem - road design and the driver are the problem.

+1 That's correct. The line before the cycle lane is used as the stop/give way point. And of course there is the whole cycle culture thing going on [emoji6]

[blackbike]

There are a few segregated cycle lanes in the Manchester area but I never use them because they are too short and are inconvenient to access and leave.

I've also given up on the new segregated cycle lane on Oxford Road as it is often blocked by pedestrians milling about especially where it runs behind bus stops and between those bus stops and the pavement.

[mjr]

so really this discussion should be retitled "the problem with kerbless on-carriageway cycle lanes".

In the real world segregated cycle lanes do have to have interruptions for junctions which is what we have there.

No, they don't. The cycle track could have continued across that junction on a raised table with tight corners to slow motorists, which is one of the (few?) things that CTC, Sustrans, Cyclenation and British Cycling all endorse! Here's the example from the Sustrans Design Handbook:

or if space is available (rare in London):

but there are plenty of real world examples which we've discussed before, like we've discussed Tavistock Place and Royal College Street before too and come to different conclusions.

But maybe everyone can agree that dumping people from a cycle track into a paint-only lane at the last minute before junctions is a bad idea?

[TonyR]

The Dutch don't seem to have this problem so it's not a problem with segregated cycle routes per se.
Also if there weren't a cycle route there, the same problem would occur ie on "ordinary" roads. I don't see how the cycle lane is the problem - road design and the driver are the problem.

The Danes and Dutch do have the problem. Its known as the "looked but failed to see" problem. See for example http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7502000957 for the Danish experience.

[TonyR]

But maybe everyone can agree that dumping people from a cycle track into a paint-only lane at the last minute before junctions is a bad idea?

Ironic then that the bottom right illustration in your picture above does exactly that then.

[MikeF]

But maybe everyone can agree that dumping people from a cycle track into a paint-only lane at the last minute before junctions is a bad idea?

Ironic then that the bottom right illustration in your picture above does exactly that then.

Screen Shot 2015-12-01 at 20.07.22.png

The photo is not indicating a junction on the plan.

[MikeF]

The Dutch don't seem to have this problem so it's not a problem with segregated cycle routes per se.
Also if there weren't a cycle route there, the same problem would occur ie on "ordinary" roads. I don't see how the cycle lane is the problem - road design and the driver are the problem.

The Danes and Dutch do have the problem. Its known as the "looked but failed to see" problem. See for example http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7502000957 for the Danish experience.

Well I haven't 40$+ to read that. But from the summary it seems to be about SMIDSY which happens regardless of cycle lanes.
There are accidents in Holland, and I don't know the figures but I would presume it's lower per number of cyclists than here.

[TonyR]

The Dutch don't seem to have this problem so it's not a problem with segregated cycle routes per se.
Also if there weren't a cycle route there, the same problem would occur ie on "ordinary" roads. I don't see how the cycle lane is the problem - road design and the driver are the problem.

The Danes and Dutch do have the problem. Its known as the "looked but failed to see" problem. See for example http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7502000957 for the Danish experience.

Well I haven't 40$+ to read that. But from the summary it seems to be about SMIDSY which happens regardless of cycle lanes.
There are accidents in Holland, and I don't know the figures but I would presume it's lower per number of cyclists than here.

Well if you did read it you'd find it was a particular type of SMIDSY related to cycle lanes that makes 54% of cycling accidents in Denmark. And as noted above, they concluded that the only solution was to mix the cyclists with the motor traffic rather than segregating them.

[pjclinch]

Well if you did read it you'd find it was a particular type of SMIDSY related to cycle lanes that makes 54% of cycling accidents in Denmark. And as noted above, they concluded that the only solution was to mix the cyclists with the motor traffic rather than segregating them.

The point missing there is that half the accidents in Denmark is still a lot less of an issue than the general safety record here, and if you let bikes and traffic freely mix as your one-stop solution you'll get a lot more folk finding the idea of cycling unpleasant and won't do it at all.

You can cherry pick pedestrian deaths on pavements as an anecdote about how pavements don't work, but it's not really going to move anything much. Pavements and cycle tracks aren't about safety so much as being a moderately pleasant place to be to get from A to B. Might I get hooked on a cycle track? I might... but I probably won't. Will I get unpleasantly overtaken close by an HGV on a cycle track? Not even possible if it's decently engineered, but I know for a fact that happens on the road. If I don't like that as an experienced and committed vehicular cyclist why should someone new to the game think it's no problem?

No matter how many anecdotes of awfulness you pick up about dedicated infrastructure the fact remains that a vehicular cycling paradigm in the UK has failed to get many people cycling (I'm sure you can cherry pick exceptions, but they're exceptions) and where infrastructure is one of the main planks of cycle provision we've got the safest and biggest modal share for cycling in the world across whole countries.

Pete.

[squeaker]

...is incompetent drivers making very late decisions (and signals)