# Fantastic Cycle Lane Design!



## thomas (21 Apr 2010)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267554/Britains-barmiest-bike-lane-wide-rest-road.html







Hehe, the cycle lane is actually wider than the remaining section of the lane.

Obvious fussing from the Daily Mail article, but actually...I'd quite happily use that cycle lane lol.


----------



## Norm (21 Apr 2010)

I'm wondering if it further reinforces the idea that it is ok to drive in a cycle lane. 

I know it's got broken lines and I would like to think that it would start to encourage the perception that cyclists can be 6-8 feet from the kerb without getting tooted, but I doubt many who don't ride bikes will see it as such.


----------



## marinyork (21 Apr 2010)

Excellent work. Only error is they probably should have claimed 6 inches to a foot of the lane to the right and given it to the centre lane.


----------



## Riding in Circles (21 Apr 2010)

All it needs now is a concrete divider, hehe.


----------



## psmiffy (21 Apr 2010)

It is great - I have ridden on similar in Europe - THe dotted line says its is OK to drive in the cycle lane when there are no cyclists but if you want to overtake the cyclist this is where you have to be


----------



## just jim (21 Apr 2010)

Look at that generous overtake though! If only that lady had stayed away from the gutter.


----------



## gaz (21 Apr 2010)

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&s...=GDymsMyZo4TCabU82o5RGg&cbp=12,263.73,,0,5.61

How about the other end of the spectrum...

Cycle lane is raised and then you are forced to give way to traffic which is forced to swerve into you. Utterly pointless! and dangerous.


----------



## wafflycat (21 Apr 2010)

Norm said:


> *I'm wondering if it further reinforces the idea that it is ok to drive in a cycle lane. *
> 
> I know it's got broken lines and I would like to think that it would start to encourage the perception that cyclists can be 6-8 feet from the kerb without getting tooted, but I doubt many who don't ride bikes will see it as such.




As it's an advisory lane only, not a mandatory lane, it's acceptable for a motorist to drive in the lane. Of course the usual rabid rantings of ignorant petrolheads are burgeoning in the Wail comments section...


----------



## ColinJ (21 Apr 2010)

That one looks pretty sensible to me, but I agree - move the centre line over to the right another foot or so.

Take a look at these two short cycle paths on opposite sides of the A646 near Cornholme, Lancashire.

There is a children's play area opposite the houses and a pedestrian refuge in the centre of the road to help parents and kids get over to it. This effectively makes the road pretty narrow so vehicles might have had to slow down for a few seconds when they came up behind cyclists there. What could be done about this unacceptable delay? Get the useless gits off the road for a few yards, of course. The fact that they would then have to reenter the traffic flow 30 yards further on doesn't present any potential hazard of course because cyclists, having yielded to the traffic, can now wait as long as necessary to get back onto the road again...

(Since that photo was taken, markings have been added to the lay-by to show that a cycle path goes through it.)


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (21 Apr 2010)

Looks like a daft idea to me leaving that space for cars. Why have they left any part of it at all for cars? Why do drivers think they should be allowed on the roads, when they don't pay road tax?

When they pay road tax, then they can use the road!


----------



## arallsopp (21 Apr 2010)

Sheffield_Tiger said:


> Looks like a daft idea to me leaving that space for cars. Why have they left any part of it at all for cars? Why do drivers think they should be allowed on the roads, when they don't pay road tax?
> 
> When they pay road tax, then they can use the road!



LOL.


----------



## chap (21 Apr 2010)

Now *that's* a cycle superhighway!


----------



## StuartG (26 Apr 2010)

thomas said:


> Obvious fussing from the Daily Mail article.


Liked this one ...

Two normal coloured tarmacs went into the pub for a drink. As they were ordering a red tarmac came to the bar. 

One of the normal tarmacs said to the other "Watch him, he's a cyclepath".


----------



## 661-Pete (27 Apr 2010)

I strongly advise a brush and a tin of dark grey paint, and paint that silly line right out again. Motorists need to know how much room to give a cyclist when overtaking, on *every* road, not just on a road with a bit of artwork painted on. If you're a good driver you can overtake a cyclist on any road provided that it's safe to do so.

That's one of the eternal problems with cycle lanes. They aren't everywhere and if used too indulgently, a novice cyclist suddenly confronted with a road without one may feel intimidated.



StuartG said:


> Liked this one ...
> 
> Two normal coloured tarmacs went into the pub for a drink. As they were ordering a red tarmac came to the bar.
> 
> One of the normal tarmacs said to the other "Watch him, he's a cyclepath".


The version of that one which I heard a while ago, was a bit longer :


> A lump of black tarmac walks into a bar, orders a pint and as the barman is serving him, it says to him “I’m f***ing hard I am.”
> The barman looks a little taken aback, but says to him “Really, sir, that’s very nice for you.”
> The black tarmac sits down to drink his pint. When he is ready, he walks back up to the bar and orders another pint. Again, the barman serves him the pint and again the black tarmac says “I’m f***ing hard I am.” The barman is finding this stranger still, but again he says “Really, sir, that’s very nice for you.”
> This happens a few more times until the door to the pub opens and in walks a lump of red tarmac. Seeing the red tarmac, the black tarmac gets up and runs out of the back door. The red tarmac walks up to the bar and orders a pint.
> ...


----------



## thomas (28 Apr 2010)

I don't get it


----------



## Nigel-YZ1 (6 May 2010)

In the Rotherham area: Cycle Lane = Road Narrowing Method.

Meadowbank Road - Wider islands, wider hash markings, cycle lane in one direction only.

Brampton Bierlow - Wider islands, road humps, bus laybys filled in (so the bus blocks the lane), cycle lanes less than 100m long. I'll not mention the £47,000.00 bit of metal plate they call a sculpture!

To me a cycle lane is a waste of paint, designed to further restrict cyclists as legitimate road users. As a road user I demand the same rights and considerations regardless of whether I'm riding my bike or driving my 200bhp coupe.
It's up to those who don't experience both sides to learn how to work with the other or take the bus (and block the road at every Rotherham bus stop).


----------



## steve30 (9 May 2010)

Nigel-YZ1, regarding cycle lanes in Rotherham, I'd say Broom Lane is the worst one. Ever since it was painted in the early part of the last decade (2002 ish?), there have always been cars parked in it, making it unusable.

I believe that was part of some 'Traffic Calming Measures', which included spikey bits of pavement and bus stops opposite each other. 

The one on High Street in Maltby isn't much better either as it is quite thin and is very close to parked cars.


----------



## orbiter (14 May 2010)

just jim said:


> Look at that generous overtake though!


That's the whole point of the 'advisory' cycle lane. They work excellently on minor roads in Holland. And they help teach drivers how much space they should give to bikes.


----------



## Riverman (15 May 2010)

thomas said:


> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1267554/Britains-barmiest-bike-lane-wide-rest-road.html
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Doesn't that picture just show that the lines are incorrectly placed, as if the car followed the lines they'd be on the otherside of the road?


----------



## AnotherEye (13 Jun 2010)

No lane for cyclists coming in the other direction?


----------



## ColinJ (13 Jun 2010)

AnotherEye said:


> No lane for cyclists coming in the other direction?


I think the wide cycle lane is for slow-moving cyclists going uphill. Hopefully, the cyclists coming down the hill would be travelling at nearer the speed of the traffic.


----------



## matthew (15 Jun 2010)

Riverman said:


> Doesn't that picture just show that the lines are incorrectly placed, as if the car followed the lines they'd be on the otherside of the road?



No it is spot on, if there is no cyclist you are allowed to drive in it, but if there is a cyclist using the lane you must use the oncoming lane to perform a safe overtake.


----------



## DavieB (28 Jun 2010)

matthew said:


> No it is spot on, if there is no cyclist you are allowed to drive in it, but if there is a cyclist using the lane you must use the oncoming lane to perform a safe overtake.



Is that the same rule for the blue boxes in front of the stopline for cars?


----------



## AnotherEye (28 Jun 2010)

DavieB said:


> Is that the same rule for the blue boxes in front of the stopline for cars?


No, even if there are no cyclists in the 'boxes', motor vehicles should not stop ahead of the main stop line (I think the fine is 60 pounds, bring it on). There are circumstances whereby they are exempt (Lights change when they are in that position and unsafe to move forward?).


----------



## Over The Hill (7 Jul 2010)

OK until a bus is at the bus stop! Then you are out into the traffic.


----------

