Hi, I've got a bit of a question regarding a cycle lane in Warrington. This cycle lane goes right down Sankey Way. At one end of the cycle lane there is the letters printed on the pavement END (to mark the end) and a sign which has END OF ROUTE (and a lowered kerb to allow access onto the road (although doing so would find you heading the wrong direction on a very fast dual carriageway!)), on the other end of the cycle way it goes past a shop then has the Give Way triangle painted on the pavement but doesn't provide any indication as to whether or not the cycle lane ends there (apart from there is no more dots on the pavement to indicate it continuing any further, but theres no sign either to indicate an end of route or a lowered kerb to allow access to the road). Does that mean that this cycle lane continues on the pavement after this give way sign with the meaning that you should give way to pedestrians and the council ran out of paint (or haven't got round to completing it yet) or does that mean that the cycle lane finishes and goes onto the road?
Also a number of people have told me to just cycle on the pavement anyway as nobody bothers as long as your not causing problems to pedestrians as your out of the way of cars and police prefer this. Is this true?
Cycle lanes
-
Jon
Re:Cycle lanes
Are there any shared use/segrgated use signs anywhere, the small round blue ones with the white cycle and pedestrians on them? I tend to take these as a better indication of a path than the road markings, as I get the feeling that the contractors who are putting down the markings for cycle lanes don't know what they are doing half the time. They have a pretty feeble grasp of markings for the actual roads, and cycle lanes completely throw them!
-
John S
Re:Cycle lanes
I'd advise anyone to avoid all cycle lanes (and especially the ones on pavements) unless they offer a clear advantage in terms of both speed and safety.
Most slow you down, don't go where you want to and riding on them is far more dangerous than riding on the roads.
Most slow you down, don't go where you want to and riding on them is far more dangerous than riding on the roads.
-
gerry
Re:Cycle lanes
For lots of information on the dangers of "cycle facilities" have a look at
www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/infra/infra
which lists and has extracts from a number of research papers.
And if you live in Warrington, take a look at
www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/Warring ... aign/index
They have a "Facility of the Month" gallery, including one in Sankey Road, but I don't think it is the one you are referring to.
www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/infra/infra
which lists and has extracts from a number of research papers.
And if you live in Warrington, take a look at
www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/Warring ... aign/index
They have a "Facility of the Month" gallery, including one in Sankey Road, but I don't think it is the one you are referring to.
-
mbadmin
-
661-Pete
Re:Cycle lanes
Cycle Lanes! You love ‘em! You hate ‘em! Anyone spotted the ‘heads you win, tails I lose” syndrome here?
Experienced cyclist: “I love cycle lanes because (a) our rights are being recognised at last, (b) they show that the authorities are trying to encourage people to take up cycling, every guru tells us: more cyclists on the road = a better time for all cyclists....”
Experienced cyclist: “I hate cycle lanes because (a) you can’t keep up a decent pace what with all the bends and obstructions, (b) they give out the message that cyclists are unwelcome/unsafe on the roads, this encourages yet more aggressive drivers and puts off inexperienced cyclists from ever venturing onto the roads, hence the epidemic of pavement cycling....”
Novice cyclist: “I love cycle lanes because they give me a safe place away from traffic to do my cycling in, I’m scared of traffic.....”
Novice cyclist: “I hate cycle lanes because (a) they’re full of pedestrians who just won’t get out of the way, and (b) they peter out just when I reach a busy roundabout, help! I’m lost! what do I do now???”
etc. etc.
Winners – 0. Losers – everyone.
In a cyclist-unfriendly urban sprawl not a million miles from me (Brighton, actually), the provision of cycle lanes here seems rather more a condescension than a commitment, (a) paint a white stripe so as to equally divide the already narrow pavement lengthwise in two, and hope there’s room for the poor cyclist to squeeze past all the pedestrians at 15mph, or (b) grant cyclists the right to chance it on the bus/taxi lane (giving the cabbies, especially, free rein to pelt along at normal cabbie velocity mowing down all cyclists in their path...). Seems to me, if it costs more than a can of white paint and a brush, it won’t get done. And the can-of-paint infrastructure is the best we can expect from most local authorities at present. Sometimes I think it’s just cash. Sometimes I think it’s motivation (lack of).
Experienced cyclist: “I love cycle lanes because (a) our rights are being recognised at last, (b) they show that the authorities are trying to encourage people to take up cycling, every guru tells us: more cyclists on the road = a better time for all cyclists....”
Experienced cyclist: “I hate cycle lanes because (a) you can’t keep up a decent pace what with all the bends and obstructions, (b) they give out the message that cyclists are unwelcome/unsafe on the roads, this encourages yet more aggressive drivers and puts off inexperienced cyclists from ever venturing onto the roads, hence the epidemic of pavement cycling....”
Novice cyclist: “I love cycle lanes because they give me a safe place away from traffic to do my cycling in, I’m scared of traffic.....”
Novice cyclist: “I hate cycle lanes because (a) they’re full of pedestrians who just won’t get out of the way, and (b) they peter out just when I reach a busy roundabout, help! I’m lost! what do I do now???”
etc. etc.
Winners – 0. Losers – everyone.
In a cyclist-unfriendly urban sprawl not a million miles from me (Brighton, actually), the provision of cycle lanes here seems rather more a condescension than a commitment, (a) paint a white stripe so as to equally divide the already narrow pavement lengthwise in two, and hope there’s room for the poor cyclist to squeeze past all the pedestrians at 15mph, or (b) grant cyclists the right to chance it on the bus/taxi lane (giving the cabbies, especially, free rein to pelt along at normal cabbie velocity mowing down all cyclists in their path...). Seems to me, if it costs more than a can of white paint and a brush, it won’t get done. And the can-of-paint infrastructure is the best we can expect from most local authorities at present. Sometimes I think it’s just cash. Sometimes I think it’s motivation (lack of).
-
Tim
Re:Cycle lanes
Yes, get rid of cycle lanes and then everyone will learn to use the road safely and with confidence. Pedestrians and bikes don't mix well.
-
Pedalling Pete
Re:Cycle lanes
So why the deafening silence from the CTC on this issue? We will continue to have this nonsense delivered as long as we allow it to happen. The local government politicians authorise the expenditure because a) they can claim their political party is trying to help the traffic problems, and being "green", and b) they get rewarded by meeting targets from central government for same reason. They all avoid any Quality Control, as we would tell them it is (choose from the profanosaurus).
What is necessary is to challenge the politicians to demonstrate how effective the schemes are that they authorise. Don't let them side step the issue by asking the "Planners" to answer. They are simply jobsworths, who are not going to criticise their political masters, who after all pay their wages and influence their job prospects. They are told to do the job, and cheaply, so what can they do?
So long as there is no organised opposition to the cheap and nasty delivery of inappropriate cycling facilities, they will continue to be delivered, and using our money! And claiming to be for our benefit. If the CTC chose to highlight this nonsense it would get more credibility for its claim to be "The UK's national Cyclists' Organisation".
What is necessary is to challenge the politicians to demonstrate how effective the schemes are that they authorise. Don't let them side step the issue by asking the "Planners" to answer. They are simply jobsworths, who are not going to criticise their political masters, who after all pay their wages and influence their job prospects. They are told to do the job, and cheaply, so what can they do?
So long as there is no organised opposition to the cheap and nasty delivery of inappropriate cycling facilities, they will continue to be delivered, and using our money! And claiming to be for our benefit. If the CTC chose to highlight this nonsense it would get more credibility for its claim to be "The UK's national Cyclists' Organisation".
-
Jon
Re:Cycle lanes
As far as I'm aware the CTC policy is to promote on-road facilities for cycling. I'm just about to sign up to be the CTC's Right to Ride rep. for my district and, if I'm reading their policy handbook right, the preference is for on-road facilities.
-
Kevin
Re:Cycle lanes
Our campaignining message board might be the place for this debate, but too late.
What you may have missed is the now slightly dated but absoluteoly vital Hierarchy of Solutions for highway design which came out of the mid 90s.
It runs its way through all the options of traffic restraint and highway modification ending up with off carriageway cycle routes as the very last solution. CTC has been actively supporting and encouraging that approach for over 10 years and you will find it in a lot of government policy we contributed to.
We have also put this kind of thing at the heart of our benchmarking process, using peer review to highlight the best in UK cycle design, planning and education and permeate it throughout the country. Its behind the scenes stuff but it has seen scales dropping from the eyes in many places. Of course those that need it most often don't sign up to the programme but you need to see the best of the new facilities across the country to see what is possible, and take some pride in CTC's contribution to the way the game has been raised in those places we supported.
Its a bit carrot and stick, Right to Ride and lobbying on one side, best practice promotion on the other.
The next big step is the DFT's proposed manual for streets which promises to put cycling & waking at its heart, we have a key seat on the working party.
What you may have missed is the now slightly dated but absoluteoly vital Hierarchy of Solutions for highway design which came out of the mid 90s.
It runs its way through all the options of traffic restraint and highway modification ending up with off carriageway cycle routes as the very last solution. CTC has been actively supporting and encouraging that approach for over 10 years and you will find it in a lot of government policy we contributed to.
We have also put this kind of thing at the heart of our benchmarking process, using peer review to highlight the best in UK cycle design, planning and education and permeate it throughout the country. Its behind the scenes stuff but it has seen scales dropping from the eyes in many places. Of course those that need it most often don't sign up to the programme but you need to see the best of the new facilities across the country to see what is possible, and take some pride in CTC's contribution to the way the game has been raised in those places we supported.
Its a bit carrot and stick, Right to Ride and lobbying on one side, best practice promotion on the other.
The next big step is the DFT's proposed manual for streets which promises to put cycling & waking at its heart, we have a key seat on the working party.
-
Tim
Re:Cycle lanes
we should be on the road first and foremost. cycle "facilities" will mean that we lose the right to ride on the road and be governed by traffic legislation. The danger is that we become confined to cycle paths and shared paths and are unable to travel directly from place to place. How many cycle routes do you know that are tortuous and poorly routed?
-
Jeremy Parker
Re:Cycle lanes
My own comments about bike lanes, which were printed in Cycletouring a few years ago, are on my web site www.jfparker.demon.co.uk.
I notice a tendency nowadays for people to get confused between bike lanes and cycle tracks. I suppose that's because cycle tracks have become the facility that dare not speak its name, being, when alongside roads, even worse than bike lanes.
Fifty years ago Britain's greatest town planner and traffic engineer, Professor Sir Colin Buchanan, said in his book "Mixed Blessing, The Motor in Britain"
"The meagre efforts to separate cyclists from motor traffic have failed, tracks are inadequate, the problem of treating them at junctiions and intersections is completely unsolved, and the attitutude of cyclists themselves to these admittedly unsatisfactory tracks has not been as helpful as it might have been."
Nothing changes
Jeremy Parker
I notice a tendency nowadays for people to get confused between bike lanes and cycle tracks. I suppose that's because cycle tracks have become the facility that dare not speak its name, being, when alongside roads, even worse than bike lanes.
Fifty years ago Britain's greatest town planner and traffic engineer, Professor Sir Colin Buchanan, said in his book "Mixed Blessing, The Motor in Britain"
"The meagre efforts to separate cyclists from motor traffic have failed, tracks are inadequate, the problem of treating them at junctiions and intersections is completely unsolved, and the attitutude of cyclists themselves to these admittedly unsatisfactory tracks has not been as helpful as it might have been."
Nothing changes
Jeremy Parker
-
Pedalling Pete
Re:Cycle lanes
Bike Lanes & Cycle Tracks cause confusion? We've got "Discretionary Strips" in our nearest town. No one knows what the **** they are! They are basically a killing field, whereby cyclists think they are for their use, as do motorists who need a bit of extra room to squeeze inside the car turning right. These "Discretionary Strips" were left by the planners using a government grant for an experimental scheme. We can tell them it didn't work. Surveys of cyclists showed they felt less safe after this experiment. Were the planners punished for their mistakes? What do you think? One is a senior planner with our county council, the other works for Sustrans. Nuff said!