That worthless and dangerous cycling infrastructure

[MartinC]

2) I don't think the width of the cycle lane is crucial,

Wow. Maybe you don't cycle in them?

 

[Mad at urage]

Nah - it's a posthoc rationalisation. .

Always good for establishing a consensus, that!

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

This is what a cycle lane should look like.

The road is one-way for cars, incidentally.

Utrecht.

 

[Richard Mann]

[/size]

I do. Not all traffic will slow down when lanes narrow, especially on a road which doesn't provide the visual cues of being "hemmed in" (multilane roads or roads where the narrowing has been implemented by hatching the road surface), and all this is doing in that case is putting 30mph traffic even closer to novice cyclists at 10-12mph.

I'd agree - I thought that's what I said. If traffic space isn't effectively constrained then width is an issue. If it is constrained then width isn't crucial.

I guess this comes down to whether you believe traffic can be constrained. If you haven't seen it, then I can understand your doubts, but it does seem to work here.

 

[Richard Mann]

You still haven't addressed why you advocate cyclists being treated as second class citizens...

Hmm. I get a congestion-free clearway into town, and the cars get stuck in queues. Doesn't feel very second class to me.

Maybe it's because average cycle trip length is shorter here, so cycle lanes look like congestion-busters to us. If you're cycling more than a couple of miles, I guess they feel more like cycle lanes are keeping you out of the way of the cars, and making you second class?

 

[theclaud]

Presumably the flouncer can confirm it themselves?

Flonceurs almost always deny enflouncement as such.

 

[Richard Mann]

Or how to roll out the program to include every road.

Every road? No, just urban main roads.

The current stage in the program is clarifying the description, so someone from elsewhere can understand what's possible.

 

[Mad at urage]

Hmm. I get a congestion-free clearway into town, and the cars get stuck in queues. Doesn't feel very second class to me.

Maybe it's because average cycle trip length is shorter here, so cycle lanes look like congestion-busters to us. If you're cycling more than a couple of miles, I guess they feel more like cycle lanes are keeping you out of the way of the cars, and making you second class?

I can squeeze through past congestion without a cycle lane thanks. All a cycle lane of the kind you describe (width unimportant, 0.5m clearance past parked cars) does is put me in danger because car drivers assume I must use it.

Second class citizens because we are used as mobile bollards, rather than treated as vehicle operators with a right to use the whole of the road.

 

[MartinC]

Every road? No, just urban main roads.

The current stage in the program is clarifying the description, so someone from elsewhere can understand what's possible.

Ah, do you have a detailed plan of how this (a cycle path on every urban main road) will be done in Oxford yet? When you have we'll be able to see what you really mean.

 

[Richard Mann]

And what of the concern that every bit of cycle lane reduces the drivers' experience of encountering cyclists, making the roads outside your program more dangerous?

Other roads get different treatments - C roads get cushions (or point closures); residentials get parking-alternation. Or whatever else it takes to make them <20mph. Main roads outside towns get tracks alongside, insofar as there aren't alternative quiet routes (at about the rate of one per decade). None of that is particularly novel.

The hard one is really-heavy traffic main roads in towns (more than 20,000 mvpd) that still serve cyclist desire lines. Bus lanes is usually the place to start.

 

[Richard Mann]

Ah, do you have a detailed plan of how this (a cycle path on every urban main road) will be done in Oxford yet? When you have we'll be able to see what you really mean.

Who said anything about cycle paths? The plan is to have cycle lanes (or bus lanes). It'll be mostly done during the course of LTP3 if funding comes available.

 

[Red Light]

Nah - it's a posthoc rationalisation. They were putting in cycle lanes long before I got here.

I agree. Cycling round Oxford I see the same sort of narrow inadequate un-thought out cycle lanes painted in as I see in many other towns and cities without an active cycling campaign group. i.e you've got the default option. I see no evidence that you and your good colleagues at Cyclox have done anything other than let them get on with it.

 

[Red Light]

Always good for establishing a consensus, that!

Yes, I'm sure Richard is seeing a clear consensus here for what he is doing apart from a few noisy individuals

 

[Red Light]

0.5m clearance is FA use when someone throws the 1.2m+ door open in front of a cyclist moving at 12+mph. Further disregard for safety here.

Come on, be fair, "This isn’t enough room for a car door to open, but it appears to be enough room for the cyclist to dodge round if a door opens in front of them."

 

[Richard Mann]

Why not? How about we use the Dutch Cycle Balance audit methodology to assess provision. Quick ruffle through for cycle facilities.....ah here they are......cycle parking. No mention of anything else. Probably because the person that oversees it says "How many cycle paths or lanes a town has in not important."

I found an English language description of the Bicycle Balance. Seems to be measuring all sorts of stuff that are properties of cycle facilities (smoothness, lack of obstruction etc), and the proportion of short trips (try achieving that with vehicular cycling), and the proportion dissatisfied with road safety (ditto). So it doesn't measure the km of paths directly, but I'd doubt a road-based approach would score very highly at all.


http://media.fietsersbond.nl/Engels/Information about the Cycle Balance.pdf