Lethal Ŧ Junk-tions: Developers’ Most Common Cycling Junction Mistake?

[mjr]

I've written http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2015/11/18...elopers-most-common-cycling-junction-mistake/ to explain to local planners and politicians why the very common way that cycle tracks cross side roads is very dangerous and should be changed.

Is it clear enough? Could it be better? And do you agree with it?

 

[13 rider]

Seems clear enough to me, yes I agree . Like at lot of cyclists if the main road wasn't really busy I be on the road to avoid giving way at the junction defeating the point of the cycle path

 

[Profpointy]

the obvious, simplest, cheapest, AND SAFEST solution is get rid of the bloody lot and ride on the road

 

[summerdays]

If I was on the road I'd still need to look forward, back and to the side.

I think it is important to reduce speeds of vehicles but having tighter corners, but for me, more important is having good sight lines foe me to see if it's clear, the further down the side road if there is vegetation near the junction the shorter the view.

 

[Flying Dodo]

Yup - diverting the cycle crossing to be further away from the T-junction is the way to do it, if you have segregated paths. In the Netherlands, often, but not always, the cyclists would then have right of way to cross, meaning the cars have to stop and give way (as per the Sustrans recommendation).

 

[summerdays]

the obvious, simplest, cheapest, AND SAFEST solution is get rid of the bloody lot and ride on the road

Depends on the road, I prefer the cycle path next to the ring road to the road itself but some of the junctions could be better designed.

And if the crossing is along way down the side road then cyclists won't use it such as the Bromley Heath roundabout where many of the cyclists will take routes that the planners didn't assume they would.

 

[mjr]

the obvious, simplest, cheapest, AND SAFEST solution is get rid of the bloody lot and ride on the road

Which is great but doesn't encourage cycling unless you do something drastic to the road such as prohibit through motorists, which often no politician will support so it doesn't happen. If you want to disprove this: is there any place where mass cycling has been achieved without protected space? (actually, please don't reply to that here - https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/o...re-road-space-to-cyclists.167505/post-3341362 might be a better place to reply, or a new topic)

Like at lot of cyclists if the main road wasn't really busy I be on the road to avoid giving way at the junction defeating the point of the cycle path

Yes, that's one indicator that a cycle track has been botched.

And if the crossing is along way down the side road then cyclists won't use it such as the Bromley Heath roundabout where many of the cyclists will take routes that the planners didn't assume they would.

...and that's another. I've seen some truly breath-taking routes through a local crossroads where planners really skimped on cycling, only provided cycle tracks around two sides in a sort of L-shape in such a way that making the cycle track turn in either direction means stopping for five red lights and doing four slaloms... so many rejoin the carriageway before the crossroads and turn like a car, but a few just ride directly between the two roads completely ignoring all road markings and lights... basically ignoring everything except fences... and I'm not talking about stereotypical cyclists here. Some of the most direct riders are hefty manual workers, dressed shoulders-to-ankles in hi-vis and using toe-capped boots to propel battered old MTBs. It brings a smile to my face when locals ignore the planners that blatantly and it works for them

 

[PhilDawson8270]

There's a horrible one in Manchester I cross regularly. I hate using it as a car driver due to the horrible cycle lanes.

It is like a merge of the first and second images in the link.

But the distances are all wrong, and essentially makes cyclists give way to queueing traffic. Pointless really, as on the main road they would obviously have priority. And make far better progress, especially in rush hour.

That is nothing though compared to if there's no queue. Cyclists essentially have right of way as the road markings force the cars to give way, the problem is the buildings either side means that you cannot see into the cycle lane when looking left. Your only option is to pull out very slowly while looking, but by the time you can see your bonnet has already enroached into the cycle lane. But the distances in which you can see is atrocious, It forces drivers to pull out without being able to see properly into the cycle lane, while 99% of the time it's clear. All it takes is for the timing to be unfortunate, and there's a collision.

https://goo.gl/maps/A5jVUM56hvG2

In busy traffic when cars are waiting, the cyclists would make better progress on the road. In quiet traffic, the visibility to the left for cars is poor, and you cannot see into the lane till your bonnet is in the cycle lane.

 

[subaqua]

Lethal junctions. Most of the left turns off the segregated clusterfrack that is CS2 . Have rode that for 4 years off and on. Never been hooked. What happened tonight , because I wasnt able to be in a primary position. Thanks for that you segregationist tosspots.

Ride in the road and get abuse and threats because I should be in the special cycle lane, or ride in the dangerous cocking lane cos it's crap.

Well done LCC . Wonkers.

 

[mjr]

Sorry to read that @subaqua but you really need to attack TfL for not doing what LCC wanted. Most junctions on CS2 don't have tight corners for motorists because the splitter kerb stops too far back, making them effectively the first example in my article. CS2 is basically a very expensive way to improve things slightly between junctions while making junctions worse.

 

[Pete Owens]

I've written http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2015/11/18...elopers-most-common-cycling-junction-mistake/ to explain to local planners and politicians why the very common way that cycle tracks cross side roads is very dangerous and should be changed.

Is it clear enough? Could it be better? And do you agree with it?

Cycle tracks crossing side roads is certainly an inherently dangerous arrangement (for exactly the reasons you state) - increasing the risk of crashing by a factor of 3-10 depending on the direction of travel of the cyclist. This is why such side paths are such an extraordinarily bad idea in urban areas where side road junctions are common. Indeed that danger is the reason why designers mark the priority the way they do - on the grounds that the more vulnerable road user with better all-round visibility is more likely to exercise the extreme caution needed to negotiate such a junction safely. (the Dutch compared the relative crash risk of different priority arrangements with cycle tracks crossing roundabout entrances - which is why they now allocate priority to motors). The only way to negotiate these things safely is to dismount and cross as a pedestrian.

The supposed "solution" of allocating priority to cyclists may make the path usable for high-speed cyclists who are not worried about their own safety, but it will be every bit as lethal - you are just requiring drivers to look through the same angles as cyclists are expected to on the traditional arrangement. The diagram showing the track bending away also has nothing to do with safety - this further reduces the mutual awareness of road users on conflicting paths - and if anything gives drivers that cyclists are turning, before swerving across their path at the last minute. The only reason the highway engineers promote that arrangement is so that turning vehicles that stop to give way at the cycle track do not impede the al-important flow of motor traffic on the main road.

 

[subaqua]

Sorry to read that @subaqua but you really need to attack TfL for not doing what LCC wanted. Most junctions on CS2 don't have tight corners for motorists because the splitter kerb stops too far back, making them effectively the first example in my article. CS2 is basically a very expensive way to improve things slightly between junctions while making junctions worse.

How about leaving it as it was as it worked , as I could ride primary in the bus lane. And not get offed . Again a triumph of stupid shouting down sense. How proud will you all be as segregationists when somebody gets killed as a result of your feckwittery .

Oh I wasn't go only one to be hooked either. Happened to another guy about 5 mins earlier so I was being cautious .

And They are constructed fecking terribly. For that money we could have prosecuted properly and that would have done more .


Useless wonder . Stay in Norfolk and Somerset and stay the feck out of London you daffodil ( I said the d word)

 

[Markymark]

I hate cycle lanes. They do more harm than good. Cycling would be safer and easier without them.

 

[Markymark]

The very worst aspect is because they exist it therefore means I should be on it.

 

[subaqua]

I hate cycle lanes. They do more harm than good. Cycling would be safer and easier without them.

I was being open minded. 5 years never been offed till I ride in segregated " safe" space. Fought hard for by LCC . Oh yes it wasn't what they wanted , but did they protest . Like feck.

I want to meet one of the plums that said it was a great idea. And put my hands round scrawny frickin necks. For going for a soft option. Daffodiling bar stewards.