Help with a few facts about road widths, cycle lanes etc

[summerdays]

I've just found out about a proposed change of layout that will affect me and that I'm not convinced is being done for the right reasons (to make more vehicle movements rather than increase safety). I only have 2 days to write my response so I don't want to spend ages trawling around the internet for the facts and know some of you have them tatoo'd on your brain. Please help me.

I need to know recommended minimum cycle lane width ... I think its 1.5m and in one of the proposals its going to be less than that.

What is the recommended lane width for main route traffic (A-road) or is there one... and if its 2 lanes and one of those lanes will involve lorries turning left at traffic lights.

How wide is a construction lorry?

And what is the name of the mirrors that they can install at junctions to help lorries see behind?

Can you help me?

 

[benborp]

The mirrors are known as Trixi mirrors. Sorry I don't have time to find the other info.

 

[Speck]

HGV width = 2550mm-2600mm

http://www.roadtransport.com/RoadLegal/11947/weights-dimensions-plating.html

 

[summerdays]

The mirrors are known as Trixi mirrors. Sorry I don't have time to find the other info.

Thank you - I've tried searching on here this morning looking for mirrors (which obviously comes up quite a bit) and Boris as I thought I remembered a post with his name in it but couldn't find it. I'm trying to think of any way that they could improve the cyclist safety since the rest of the stuff they are proposing looks as if its going the opposite way.

 

[Speck]

http://www.sustrans.org.uk/assets/files/guidelines/Highway Links.pdf

 

[summerdays]

HGV width = 2550mm-2600mm

http://www.roadtrans...ns-plating.html

Thank you - it even mentions the turning circle which is one of the points I'm worried about.

 

[psmiffy]

Lo c a l T r a n s p o r t N o t e 2 / 0 8 ​

​

​

​

[font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"]O c t o b e r 2 0 0 8 ​

[/font][/font][/font]
Local Transport Note 2/08:-Cycle Infrastructure Design

7.4 Cycle lane widths ​

7.4.1 [font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"]A cycle lane offers cyclists some separation from motor traffic. Under the National Cycle Training Standards, cyclists are trained to ride in a safe position in the carriageway which is usually at least 1 metre from the kerb edge to avoid gulley grates and debris, and to ensure that they are within the sightlines of drivers waiting at side roads.

[/font][/font][/font]7.4.2 [font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"]Cycle lanes should be 2 metres wide on busy roads, or where traffic is travelling in excess of 40 mph. A minimum width of 1.5 metres may be generally acceptable on roads with a 30 mph limit. For cycle feeder lanes to advanced stop line arrangements, a minimum width of 1.2m may be acceptable. Cycle lanes less than 1.2 metres wide cannot easily accommodate tricycles or childcarrying cycle trailers wholly within the lane.

[/font][/font][/font]7.4.3 [font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"][font="OKLEH Y+ Helvetica Neue"]Cyclists can overtake each other within a 2metre wide lane and easily remain within it when looking back to check for traffic, or when avoiding kerbside drainage grates, etc. Drivers do not always realise that cyclists need to move away from the kerb to avoid surface hazards and may expect cyclists to stay in lane regardless of its width. A narrow cycle lane may therefore give motorists (misplaced) confidence to provide less clearance while overtaking than they would in the absence of a cycle lane. At localised carriageway width restrictions, designers can continue a fullwidth advisory cycle lane alongside a substandard allpurpose lane, or the cycle lane can simply be discontinued. A narrow cycle lane should not be used here.

[/font][/font][/font]

 

[summerdays]

Thanks - I've just been to see the junction and spotted a flaw (I think) in their proposals in that if the left hand lane is a filter lane (which is when pedestrians cross), and its meant to increase the number of large vehicles through that junction - then the fact they will have to make a tight left hand turn after changing one lane to two lanes is going to be a problem - just watched a lorry turn at a neighbouring junction and saw the problems it had inching around the corner (pedestrian traffic islands in the middle of the side roads).

Now to prepare my letter.

 

[marinyork]

Best of luck. Just fought one here and lost that sounds almost identical from the brief description (they are constructing it now).

 

[psmiffy]

Good Luck - Try bullet pointing your observation/objections - they are not good at reading a lot of joined up text and will try to reply to the whole rather than individual points - also will help if you need to write a follow up letter if they do not address a particular issue in their reply - prepare a follow up letter in case you do not recieve a reply within 5days - their QA systems say they must reply

 

[summerdays]

I emailed it given the 2 day time restraint... and so I've already had a reply ... at least it sounds like they are not going to squeeze a narrow bike lane inbetween the 2 lanes - so the feeder lane will disappear and I will wait to see how it turns out in practise - don't think I will have long to wait.

Most points were answered and it does say I can phone for more detail/discussion if I want. Didn't comment on the mirror idea and failed to understand one of the points so I will probably reply but I feel as if that's what I've spent most of today doing.

Before and after modification to an "A-road" do they have to monitor and record flow and also numbers of accidents? (not that they would get to hear about minor accidents that occur).

 

[psmiffy]

Before and after modification to an "A-road" do they have to monitor and record flow and also numbers of accidents? (not that they would get to hear about minor accidents that occur).

Almost certainly there would have to be a reason why they think it is necessary - there would need to be some sort of stimulus - accidents etc - costs money therefore there would have to be a perceived "cost benifit" - so therefore they would have carried out some sort of study before the design costs and the subsequent construction budget were approved - could ask for it under freedom of Information

 

[summerdays]

Almost certainly there would have to be a reason why they think it is necessary - there would need to be some sort of stimulus - accidents etc - costs money therefore there would have to be a perceived "cost benifit" - so therefore they would have carried out some sort of study before the design costs and the subsequent construction budget were approved - could ask for it under freedom of Information

Oh I know why - its to cope with a large increase in lorry movements from a large construction site (500 pd).

 

[psmiffy]

Oh I know why - its to cope with a large increase in lorry movements from a large construction site (500 pd).

So therefore the money for the changes will be coming from the developer - the LA can ask for almost what they want assuming its practical