would you paint a cyle lane here?

[cycling man]

It starts innocuously enough, with a car size lane painted next to it

(the road in question is just off a roundabout and is a single lane road, with two lanes going in the other direction)

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BxHIcB ... 2&hl=en_US

But behold! to the unsuspecting cyclist and driver, within a few feet (the cycle lane is only a few feet) has rather suddenly narrowed, with cars forced to choose between driving over a cyclist or into oncoming traffic.

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BxHIcB ... 1&hl=en_US

to the point where, at the very short cycle lane's end, the car lane has narrowed to about shoulder width! and in fact lesser in width than the bike lane cutting into it.


https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BxHIcB ... x&hl=en_US


As we car see here, vehicles who go as close to the lane boundary as they possibly can, cannot avoid suddenly obliterating anything in the cycle lane.

https://docs.google.com/leaf?id=0BxHIcB ... w&hl=en_US

I saw this while driving, and while taking photos, some rather terrified cyclists. I certainly wouldn't know what to do to make myself safe here!

any opinions?

[alicej]

I'm not clear why traffic in the other direction has two lanes, when there isn't enough room on this side for one lane plus cycle lane. Why not move the centre line over and have enough room on both sides for one car lane plus cycle lane?

To cycle it I think I'd ride just to the right of the cycle lane to prevent overtaking, since there's not enough room to overtake a cyclist there and drivers are more likely to realise that if you're not over on the left on a road that's marked to imply that there is space.

Maybe contact your local traffic planning department?

[[XAP]Bob]

yes, but I'd make it mandatory and enforce it. See how the cars like being forced to magically evaporate...

Stupid cycle lane - do the people with the paintbrushes simply never engage brain?

[Ian Raleigh]

Yet another idiot council road designer sat in his chair twiddling his pen and wondering
were to put another dangerous cycle lane have these people ever rode a bicycle i doubt it

If this cycle lane is close to you, you need to visit your council 'highways' department and ask them astonishing
is this cycle lane all about and point how dangerous it is and is it to be altered - made safer or just burn't off.

Ian.

[sirmy]

Having an aversion to all things google (pathetic cowtowing money grabbing toadies that they are) any chance of posting the pictures somewhere else

[anothereye]

It starts innocuously enough, with a car size lane painted next to it ....

I cannot access the links, they need a password, can you send as google map links please?

[Vorpal]

That's not as bad as some I've seen. It is an advisory lane (dashed lines) so motor vehicles are permitted to drive in it. It does seem pointless, though it might serve to warn motorists of the presence of cyclists if they are common, there. Not that they should need warning, but....

Chances are, though, that it won't do anything but encourage timid cyclists to stay out of the way & motorists to give the rest a bit of hassle for not using it.

Write or email the local authority and ask them to remove it. You'll probably get a lame, placating answer, like 'we'll put in a better facility when we redesign that section of road in 2020...', but it's worth a try.

[boris]

I am no lover of cycle facilities, but to be fair I would also say that the designer was presumably trying to reinforce the legal right of cyclists to struggle slowly up the hill on the road without drivers squeezing past them or shouting 'get on the footpath' at them.
Also the presence of cyclists is highlighted at the t-junction. I would ride near to the lane marking probably.

some local problems are here:
http://s189.photobucket.com/albums/z122 ... =slideshow

[cycling man]

thanks for the replies- I have no idea why some people are getting passworded, as i have made the access fully public. I am also unable to host them anywhere but google, because although they are a corporate giant, I don't want to have to sign up to yet another image hosting provider and I already use their image hosting services for other things.

I am currently in contact with the council, who have received a complaint about it from me, and I am waiting to speak to a Mr Colin Green about it, but he is currently far too busy to give me a phonecall or respond at this time.

I have seen my fair share of silly cycle lanes, but i feel that this is actually incredibly dangerous, rather than just being nonsensical. This is because cycle lanes, to many poor drivers, indicate a kind of territory that if they stay clear of in their car, they can overtake safely.

We know this to be wrong, but many people see cycle lanes as just that- a separate lane, and apply the conventional car rule that says different lane= safe overtake.

The problem is that two lanes- the cycle lane and the car lane- rapidly converge into the width of one lane with no warning- in fact the continued presence of two lanes being marked works against any warning signs and serves to mask the narrowing until it is too late.

This then is the equivalent of having two car lanes without warning merge suddenly, without indication and without markings to indicate that two lanes have become one. i.e a massive disaster.

[snibgo]

I think google docs requires users to sign in. I can see the pictures with no problem, but it "knows" who I am -- it shows my email top-right. I suppose my computer is already signed-in.

Yes, that farcility is well-intentioned but, like so many others, encourages dangerous behaviour. Perhaps cyclists have been injured there so they felt they had to do something.

The photos give the impression that the road goes uphill. Is that the case? If so, the cycle lane warns drivers about slow cyclists.

The road seems to have two lanes in the other direction. A better solution would be to remove one motorist lane and shift the centre line. This would probably give enough space for one motoring lane and one cycle lane in each direction.

[anothereye]

The road seems to have two lanes in the other direction. A better solution would be to remove one motorist lane and shift the centre line. This would probably give enough space for one motoring lane and one cycle lane in each direction.

Yes, move the centre line but, with a 20 mph limit, there is no need for a cycle lane on the other, downhill side (in any case, it bends left so cyclists should be well away from the curb); just a single lane with cycle logos.
With 2 lanes going uphill cyclists would be safer without a lane marked; just cycle logos in the inside lane.

[graymee]

Have you posted pictures on the "Crap cycle facilities" website run by Warrington Cycle Campaign?

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/site-map.htm

[Nettled Shin]

I encountered something similar on the A591 through Ambleside on Sunday. In some patches, it wasn't physically possible for a car to fit in the "car" lane, so it would have to straddle the cycle lane. I don't know what to make of such things...they signal to the motorist that there may well be bicycles about, but the lane markings boost driver confidence thereby discouraging concentration or his going more slowly. Perhaps the most important thing is consistency, and if the planners can't be consistent, they shouldn't put the cycle lane in. Erratic, piece-meal designs don't help anyone.

[Pete Owens]

The only problem with those cycle lanes is the same problem that virtually every other cycle lane has - they are too thin. I can't believe that on a cycle form (as opposed than the letters page of the Daily Wail) folk are worried that not enough space is allocated to motor vehicles.

In the vast majority of cases cycle lanes are painted in the space left over after the motorists are catered for - which almost inevitably means that cyclists don't get sufficient space (2m is the amount we need) and drivers do indeed get extra confidence to overtake more closely and at greater speed. See: http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.u ... -lanes.pdf. This is particularly bad in the sort of cases where the road narrows to a pinch point and space is taken from the cycle lane.

This used to be the case in Ambleside (the Google street view photo is actually out of date) where extremely thin cycle lanes forced cyclists into the hedge and encouraged drivers to try to squeeze past in their lane. The situation has now improved (at least for south bound cyclists) as the cycle lane is now wider than the general traffic lane. This means that drivers normally have to encroach the cycle lane to make progress, which of course is no problem for the 90% of the time that it is unoccupied by a cyclist. In the other 10% of occasions there is the clear message to drivers that they do not have enough room to overtake cyclists in the face of oncoming traffic so have to wait for a gap.

[Pete Owens]

But behold! to the unsuspecting cyclist and driver, within a few feet (the cycle lane is only a few feet) has rather suddenly narrowed, with cars forced to choose between driving over a cyclist or into oncoming traffic.

Which of course is the entire point.

Note - the choice is actually whether or not to attempt a dangerous overtake, rather than how to execute a dangerous overtake.

That unsuspecting driver would be faced with exactly the same choice without the cycle lane.
The existence of the cycle lane (or rather the narrowness of the general traffic lane) makes it clear that they do not have enough room to overtake.
Sadly it is common for drivers to underestimate the space needed by cyclists, and looking at that photo I would imagine many would attempt to squeeze past if the cycle lane was absent - and almost all would if there was the more common and entirely uncontroversial very narrow cycle lane next to a general traffic lane just wide enough for a car.