Contraflow cycle lane - Opinions?

"Josey" wrote 1000 words in message

Found a copy of the plans, here:

http://tinyurl.com/y8eq7s

Josey said:

"Josey" wrote 1000 words in message

Found a copy of the plans, here:

http://tinyurl.com/y8eq7s

Now, if only you could trust people to not park too close to the
hatchings you might stand a chance of not getting doored. At least this
way it will be easier to spot potential trouble as all the cars will be
facing you. The bits marked Area 1 & 3 would put you in potential
conflict with the traffic, but I doubt it travels too fast on that road.

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

After things go from bad to worse, the cycle will repeat itself.

Josey said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

I'd be quite concerned about cyclists going the wrong way up the new
cycle lane. If the road is already quite dodgy then most cyclists
would cut down there. Mind you, 1.5 + 0.5 in emergency should be
enough space for two bike to just pass.

How are pedestrians going to be kept out of the cycle lane? I don't
have a suggestion for this one: Railings would prevent them jumping on
the pavement if they were in the way and could make the cycle lane
narrow if they were too high; putting the parked cars between the cycle
lane and pavement would expose cycles to the oncoming cars who might
not expect it in a one way street plus it would be easy for cars to
park on and block the new lane.

Will there be kerbs along the hatched area so cars can't park in it?
(or the cycle lane) Shouldn't get any problems with cars overhanging
the kerbline as they will be parallel parked.

Josey said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

There is one in the city centre of Bristol, (near the Bus station and
New police station). It is good that it allows you to avoid a busy round
about, which I cycle on if needed anyway. However they are so rare that
enough people don't expect them to make them dangerous.

Quoted message said:

The one I'm looking at the proposal for is:

About one and half meters wide;
At road level;
Positioned between the pavement and car parking bays mostly;
With a half a meter buffer (hatched) between the cycle lane and the parked
cars;

So people will get out of their cars, look for cars going up the street,
but not check the cycle lane.

Quoted message said:

There are no junctions in the road, but several shop driveways etc crossing
the cycle lane.
Total length, I guess 800+ meters;
Very busy road, in town;
Cycle lane is one-way for cycle traffic (contraflow to the road).

You will still get some cyclists using it the wrong way.

Quoted message said:

No give-way signs anywhere (at least not visible in the planning
application)
The carriageway is appx 4+M wide.

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines, best
practices etc, safety etc.

It needs to be well signed (for motorists and pedestrians). Have
strictly enforced double yellow or red route lines, painted red/green
with a non-slippery paint.

IMHO I think that 800 meters (1/2 a mile) is a bit long for one of
these. They should only be used (if at all) for short by-passes round
one way systems.

Martin.

Martin Dann said:

Quoted message said:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

It needs to be well signed (for motorists and pedestrians). Have
strictly enforced double yellow or red route lines, painted red/green
with a non-slippery paint.

IMHO I think that 800 meters (1/2 a mile) is a bit long for one of
these. They should only be used (if at all) for short by-passes round
one way systems.

Martin.

I have just look at the plans specifically the cross-section

Proposed cccbpppppVVVVVVVVppppp

c=cyclists, b=buffer,p=parking and V=motorised Vehicles.
each character represents 0.5m of road

So you get a cycle lane between parked cars and the pavements.
This is a recipe for disaster. People (esp. children) will jump out the
car straight into your path.
You will also find pedestrians using the lane as a footpath.

I would prefer pppppbcccVVVVVVVVppppp

Martin.

Martin Dann said:

I would prefer pppppbcccVVVVVVVVppppp

not ccccccccccccccccccccccccc? :o)

peter.

On 01/04/2007 21:37:37 'Josey' nospam@josey said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Quoted message said:

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow
cycle lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

Quoted message said:

The one I'm looking at the proposal for is:

Quoted message said:

About one and half meters wide; At road level; Positioned between the
pavement and car parking bays mostly; With a half a meter buffer (hatched)
between the cycle lane and the parked cars; There are no junctions in the
road, but several shop driveways etc crossing the cycle lane. Total
length, I guess 800+ meters; Very busy road, in town; Cycle lane is
one-way for cycle traffic (contraflow to the road). No give-way signs
anywhere (at least not visible in the planning application) The
carriageway is appx 4+M wide.

Quoted message said:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines, best
practices etc, safety etc.

Quoted message said:

Jc.

Why don't they seperate it with a kerb?

--

Buck

I would rather be out on my Catrike

http://www.catrike.co.uk

"Josey" <nospam@josey> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

Our 'best' one cuts out a long detour but suffers from pavement lemmings and
plonker bus and taxi drivers. Care needed when using.

In some German towns cyclists may travel the 'wrong' way on all one way
streets without benefit of any painted tarmac. Their experience is
apparently good -- but then German drivers are more bike (and pedestrian)
aware and less homicidal to anyone not in a 4x4.

T

Buck wrote on 05/01/2007 08:07 +0100:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines, best
practices etc, safety etc.

Quoted message said:

Jc.

Why don't they seperate it with a kerb?

You mean like
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/priority/bloomsbury/torringtonplace.html
?

--
Tony

"...has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least
wildly inaccurate..."
Douglas Adams; The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

On 01/05/2007 08:34:35 Tony Raven said:

Quoted message said:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Jc.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why don't they seperate it with a kerb?

Quoted message said:

You mean like
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/priority/bloomsbury/torring-
tonplace.html ?

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane should be,
it's either that or ride the carriageway, this putting cycles on pavements
or token farcilities with painted line segragation is just no good.

--

Buck

I would rather be out on my Catrike

http://www.catrike.co.uk

in message <[email hidden]>, Josey

('nospam@josey') said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way
roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow
cycle lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

It depends, although I'd approach it with scepticism.

Quoted message said:

The one I'm looking at the proposal for is:

About one and half meters wide;
At road level;
Positioned between the pavement and car parking bays mostly;

That's pretty dangerous in itself, unless there's clear room for a car
occupant to open a door and step out without impinging on the cycle lane.

Quoted message said:

With a half a meter buffer (hatched) between the cycle lane and the
parked cars;

Not nearly sufficient (and wouldn't comply

Quoted message said:

There are no junctions in the road, but several shop driveways etc
crossing the cycle lane.

Not particularly a problem.

Quoted message said:

Total length, I guess 800+ meters;

What is the length of journey which is saved by taking the contraflow? What
gradients are involved in the contraflow, and what in the route avoiding
it?

Quoted message said:

Very busy road, in town;
Cycle lane is one-way for cycle traffic (contraflow to the road).
No give-way signs anywhere (at least not visible in the planning
application)
The carriageway is appx 4+M wide.

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

Can parking be practicably eliminated? Alternatively, could parking be
permitted only on the side of the street away from the cycle lane?

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and we had run out of gas for the welding torch.

Buck said:

On 01/05/2007 08:34:35 Tony Raven said:

Quoted message said:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
> best practices etc, safety etc.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> Jc.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Why don't they seperate it with a kerb?

Quoted message said:

You mean like
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/priority/bloomsbury/torring-
tonplace.html ?

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane should be,
it's either that or ride the carriageway, this putting cycles on pavements
or token farcilities with painted line segragation is just no good.

looks a bit like an over engineered dogs dinner to me. Unless the
pictures show the road uncharacteristicly quite what is the point? It
looks ok on it's own terms inasmuch as it doesn't fall into some of the
common traps of cycling facilities but what problem is it trying to
solve that wouldn't be better addressed than spending all that capital
on paying people GBP2/day[1] to cycle to work? Is there any back
story?

best wishes
james

[1] or whatever the motivational amount was supposed to be

Tony W said:

"Josey" <nospam@josey> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

In some German towns cyclists may travel the 'wrong' way on all one way
streets without benefit of any painted tarmac. Their experience is
apparently good -- but then German drivers are more bike (and pedestrian)
aware

More aware than who? German cyclist fatalities increased by 21% in 2005
(IRTAD), compared to the 10% UK increase (RCGB).

--
Matt B

Martin Dann said:

Martin Dann said:

Quoted message said:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

Quoted message said:

I have just look at the plans specifically the cross-section

Proposed cccbpppppVVVVVVVVppppp

c=cyclists, b=buffer,p=parking and V=motorised Vehicles.
each character represents 0.5m of road

Quoted message said:

I would prefer pppppbcccVVVVVVVVppppp

That is what I would prefer too. There is one of those where I work.
Ebury Street in London SW1 is a long road which is one way for cars in
two directions towards the middle has contra-flow cycle lanes. The
parking bays on the cycle lane side are much wider than normal giving
a buffer zone.

The scheme opened in 2002 and was joint runner-up for the LCC award
for best cycle scheme.

http://www.westminstercyclists.fsnet.co.uk/schemes.htm#Ebury%20Street

The only downside of it is that numpty cyclists insist on riding the
wrong way down the cycle lane instead of using the road and that
delivery drivers like to park in it - there a lot of hotels and shops
down there as well as the houses and offices.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Buck said:

Quoted message said:

<http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/priority/bloomsbury/torringtonplace.html>

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane should be,
it's either that or ride the carriageway, this putting cycles on pavements
or token farcilities with painted line segragation is just no good.

It looks like overtaking would be a nightmare, which would largely
defeat the object of cycling in the first place.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Buck said:

On 01/05/2007 08:34:35 Tony Raven said:

http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/priority/bloomsbury/torring-
tonplace.html ?

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane
should be,

I don't like black-painted iron bollards in teh middle of teh lanes
without any signs, reflectors or markings. Perhaps someone should try
sticking something similar between the lanes used by motor vehicles.

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

Simon Brooke said:

in message <[email hidden]>, Josey

('nospam@josey') said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way
roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow
cycle lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

Is the road 2-way now? If not, why is the echelon parking this way round?

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

About one and half meters wide; At road level;
Positioned between the pavement and car parking bays mostly;

That's pretty dangerous in itself, unless there's clear room for a car
occupant to open a door and step out without impinging on the cycle lane.

Quoted message said:

With a half a meter buffer (hatched) between the cycle lane and the
parked cars;

It would be slow and not very safe, with pedestrians and car doors to
avoid. Plus traffic into and out of driveways would not reliably give way.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Total length, I guess 800+ meters;

You wouldn't want to ride this distance at walking pace.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Very busy road, in town;
Cycle lane is one-way for cycle traffic (contraflow to the road).
No give-way signs anywhere (at least not visible in the planning
application)
The carriageway is appx 4+M wide.

Do you mean between the rows of parked cars? This is not good for
with-flow cyclists, as drivers will expect to pass but will not have
space to do so safely.

The high traffic means a contraflow lane is needed, according to
government guidance, but I wouldn't segregate it. Lose the parking on
the contraflow side, but keep angled (if lots of parking space is
insisted on) or parallel parking on the other side.

With angled parking, that should give something over 5m of carriageway
width to play with. This allows with-flow drivers to pass with-flow
cyclists by encroaching on the contra-flow cycle lane - which is not
as dangerous as it sounds, especially if speeds are controlled.

With parallel parking on both sides, there'd be over 6m between -
enough for bike + any motor vehicle, but not bikes both ways with a
motor vehicle between.

IOW less segregation gives better use of space and better progress for
everyone.

Colin McKenzie

--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

Josey said:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

The first question is, does the road really have to be one-way? One-way
streets engender higher speeds unless they are done carefully. Two-way
streets with a 20 mph limit are preferable. However, if this is not
possible, a one-way street can accommodate contra-flow cycling without a
separate lane if it has a 20 mph limit in my opinion. If the speed limit
is above 20, (why?) a separate cycle lane is needed and particular
attention is needed at junctions.

Simon

Quoted message said:

looks a bit like an over engineered dogs dinner to me. Unless the
pictures show the road uncharacteristicly quite what is the point? It
looks ok on it's own terms inasmuch as it doesn't fall into some of the
common traps of cycling facilities but what problem is it trying to
solve that wouldn't be better addressed than spending all that capital
on paying people GBP2/day[1] to cycle to work? Is there any back
story?

Westminster Council had a certain amount of money to devote to "cycle
facilities", and contractors on call, would be my guess.

That cycle lane is near my workplace. More than half the cyclists I see
in that area use the road instead.

Roger