Another cycle farcility

"Tim Hall" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

What is the point? (rhetoroical)

Local Authority gets to report on an extra n metres of cycle 'provision'.

--
Rob

Please keep conversations in the newsgroup so that all may contribute and benefit.

Following on from Tim Hall's message. . .

Quoted message said:

Wending my way through Richmond (on Thames) this afternoon I spied another useless cycle farcility.
A one way street with two lanes plus a Magic Red Asphalt Cycle Lane. So far nothing special.

However the road is quite narrow, in places almost too narrow for two lanes of traffic. The Magic
Red Asphalt Cycle Lane makes everything even narrower. To make it all OK though, it's an advisory
cycle lane only (broken white line border) and there's a sign on a lamp post saying it's an
advisory lane only, please use as normal traffic lane.

What is the point? (rhetoroical)

Ask the chief executive of the Borough. Also ask if they have got special approval from the DfT for
the non-standard signs. Chase and chase.

--
PETER FOX Not the same since the e-commerce business came to a .

Tim Hall said:

Wending my way through Richmond (on Thames) this afternoon I spied another useless cycle
farcility. A one way street with two lanes plus a Magic Red Asphalt Cycle Lane. So far nothing
special.

However the road is quite narrow, in places almost too narrow for two lanes of traffic. The Magic
Red Asphalt Cycle Lane makes everything even narrower. To make it all OK though, it's an advisory
cycle lane only (broken white line border) and there's a sign on a lamp post saying it's an
advisory lane only, please use as normal traffic lane.

What is the point? (rhetoroical)

Well, it's useful if the magic cycle lane is contraflow, possibly preventing a long detour. Is it?

Colin McKenzie

Colin McKenzie said:

Tim Hall said:

Wending my way through Richmond (on Thames) this afternoon I spied another useless cycle
farcility. A one way street with two lanes plus a Magic Red Asphalt Cycle Lane. So far nothing
special.

However the road is quite narrow, in places almost too narrow for two lanes of traffic. The Magic
Red Asphalt Cycle Lane makes everything even narrower. To make it all OK though, it's an advisory
cycle lane only (broken white line border) and there's a sign on a lamp post saying it's an
advisory lane only, please use as normal traffic lane.

What is the point? (rhetoroical)

Well, it's useful if the magic cycle lane is contraflow, possibly preventing a long detour. Is it?

No. It's up there with fireguards from Messrs Cadbury and the Harley Davidson Previously Combusted
Cigarette Container.

Tim
--
In space no one can eat ice cream

Colin McKenzie said:

Tim Hall said:

However the road is quite narrow, in places almost too narrow for two lanes of traffic. The
Magic Red Asphalt Cycle Lane makes everything even narrower. To make it all OK though, it's an
advisory cycle lane only (broken white line border) and there's a sign on a lamp post saying
it's an advisory lane only, please use as normal traffic lane.

Well, it's useful if the magic cycle lane is contraflow, possibly preventing a long
detour. Is it?

I'm not sure I'd find a contraflow cycle lane which oncoming traffic is instructed to ignore useful.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

[Posted and mailed]

In message <[email hidden]> Tim Hall

Quoted message said:

Wending my way through Richmond (on Thames) this afternoon I spied another useless cycle
farcility. A one way street with two lanes plus a Magic Red Asphalt Cycle Lane. So far nothing
special.

However the road is quite narrow, in places almost too narrow for two lanes of traffic. The Magic
Red Asphalt Cycle Lane makes everything even narrower. To make it all OK though, it's an advisory
cycle lane only (broken white line border) and there's a sign on a lamp post saying it's an
advisory lane only, please use as normal traffic lane.

What is the point? (rhetoroical)

Could you give an indication where this is as it is on my patch ?

Yes it sounds silly but I have been asking for a similar feature to make it clear to cagers that
cyclists are entitled/advised to move across to position ourselves in approach to a roundabout.
(central Teddington - there is not room for a proper separate cycle lane berween the left and
ahead lanes. )

Regards Paul Luton
--
CTC Right to Ride Representative for Richmond upon Thames

Tim Hall said:

What is the point? (rhetoroical)

Another cycling Farcicality worthy of note is formed by the new

Dovercourt Bay. Ramsay Road has been successfully reduced to a 30 mph limit thanks to the provision
of cycle tracks and a widened central reservation. Just one problem: people are allowed to park on
the cycle tracks! So now cyclists have to veer out into a narrower car lane in order to make any
progress. I fear the pavements are a safer place for cyclists with road planners like this at work!

Rgds

Martin

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:36:09 +0100, Paul Luton <[email hidden] > wrote:

Sorry for the delay. Hols.

Quoted message said:

Could you give an indication where this is as it is on my patch ?

Not too sure, as I'm not from round those parts. However according to my sister who art in Kingston
it could be George Street.

I got to it by coming out of Richmond Park past the Star and Garter home, taking a left into
Richmond town centre. IIRC the road then went round to the left infront of a department store, and
into this street. It was shared with lots of buses at one point. The two lane oneway section began
after the road curved round to the right. At the junction left would have taken me towards Kingston,
right took me back into Richmond.

Quoted message said:

Yes it sounds silly but I have been asking for a similar feature to make it clear to cagers that
cyclists are entitled/advised to move across to position ourselves in approach to a roundabout.
(central Teddington - there is not room for a proper separate cycle lane berween the left and
ahead lanes. )

So why bother with the cycle lane?

Tim
--
In space no one can eat ice cream

In message <[email hidden]> Tim Hall

Quoted message said:

On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:36:09 +0100, Paul Luton <[email hidden] > wrote:

Sorry for the delay. Hols.

Quoted message said:

Could you give an indication where this is as it is on my patch ?

Not too sure, as I'm not from round those parts. However according to my sister who art in
Kingston it could be George Street. The two lane oneway section began after the road curved round
to the right. At the junction left would have taken me towards Kingston, right took me back into
Richmond.

Probably Eton Street which is uphill and IMO quite wide enough for a cycle lane and two MV lanes.
The "ignore this lane" notice is probably the work of the new "cycling has zero priority"
Conservative council.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes it sounds silly but I have been asking for a similar feature to make it clear to cagers that
cyclists are entitled/advised to move across to position ourselves in approach to a roundabout.
(central Teddington - there is not room for a proper separate cycle lane berween the left and
ahead lanes. )

So why bother with the cycle lane?

To make the point that cyclists have the right and should be expected to move out of what is
becoming the left turning lane. The council wants a cycle lane on the footway crossing each arm with
no priority.

--
CTC Right to Ride Representative for Richmond upon Thames

On Tue, 26 Aug 2003 22:14:24 +0100, Paul Luton <[email hidden] > wrote:

(I wrote this bit)

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Not too sure, as I'm not from round those parts. However according to my sister who art in
Kingston it could be George Street. The two lane oneway section began after the road curved round
to the right. At the junction left would have taken me towards Kingston, right took me back into
Richmond.

Probably Eton Street which is uphill and IMO quite wide enough for a cycle lane and two MV lanes.
The "ignore this lane" notice is probably the work of the new "cycling has zero priority"
Conservative council.

Strangely enough I was back there today, so had a closer look. I was getting my streets confused.
Eton Street is as you say wide enough for a cycle lane plus 2 MV lanes. The road with the offending
sign in, although I didn't go along it today, was North/East of the station.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes it sounds silly but I have been asking for a similar feature to make it clear to cagers that
cyclists are entitled/advised to move across to position ourselves in approach to a roundabout.
(central Teddington - there is not room for a proper separate cycle lane berween the left and
ahead lanes. )

So why bother with the cycle lane?

To make the point that cyclists have the right and should be expected to move out of what is
becoming the left turning lane. The council wants a cycle lane on the footway crossing each arm
with no priority.

Got it. What you're doing sounds like a good response to the council so called plan.

Tim
--
In space no one can eat ice cream