Cycle facilities are rubbish - reason # 4792

[magnatom]

"salient conspicuity admonitory cognizant cognizance ameliorate tokenistic tangential pellucid adversarial perjorative odious"

Watch out Origamist! The plain English campaign has a posse!

You do come across as using big words for effect, i.e. look at me, I know what I am talking about! I do agree with some of what you say origamist (not all I might add!) but it might be worth keeping the language a little simplier. This forum is for everyone and not everyone has a degree in English!

 

[Origamist]

You do come across as using big words for effect, i.e. look at me, I know what I am talking about! I do agree with some of what you say origamist (not all I might add!) but it might be worth keeping the language a little simplier. This forum is for everyone and not everyone has a degree in English!

"A little simplier" - brilliant.

Sorry about my vocab, Magnatom. I'll try and dumb down to your level

 

[magnatom]

"A little simplier" - brilliant.

Sorry about my vocab, Magnatom. I'll try and dumb down to your level

Oan yersel big man!

 

[Cab]

That said, if you are seriously suggesting that motorists struggle to see and understand what the cycle lane in front of the junction signifies,

No one would, I hope, state that they don't know what such a lane signifies. The question really is whether or not they care. Every day, I encounter motorists waiting behind the cycle lane line rather than the main give way sign at junctions. They know they're not meant to, but they choose not to.

 

[Origamist]

No one would, I hope, state that they don't know what such a lane signifies. The question really is whether or not they care. Every day, I encounter motorists waiting behind the cycle lane line rather than the main give way sign at junctions. They know they're not meant to, but they choose not to.

I have made this point earlier in the thread:

"Of course, some drivers won't give two hoots about paint on the road, others might."

 

[Bollo]

We're all in danger of agreeing violently here:

For a driver approaching from a side road...

• There's red paint at the junction. I think the red paint isn't that visible from the side road, but you're not going to agree. I don't have a problem with that.
• Like Mags said, even if the red paint is physically visible, it doesn't mean that it will enter the consciousness of an approaching driver. He or she is probably looking for other more familiar or important visual cues and can easily filter this information out.
• Even if the driver sees the red paint and recognises it as a cycle lane, he or she can then decide to use this as the unofficial junction edge and straddle the lane, rather than waiting at the correct junction marking, like Cab and O said.
• As for providing an extra warning to give way to cyclists. Mmmmmm. Shouldn't the driver be looking anyway? For all traffic? I know, its not an ideal world and they may work as a visual reminder to look for bikes, but I'm not convinced.

For a driver on the main road:

Its a strip of red paint called a cycle lane, and cyclists should bloody well be in it. My road tax paid for it after all. Lanes for cars are a little bit wider than cars, so lanes for bikes should be a little bit wider than bikes. If I stick in my lane and the pedalling hippie stays in his, then what's the problem? God I hate cyclists!

Hey! I'm back on topic!

 

[magnatom]

Nicely summed up Bollo!

 

[Origamist]

We're all in danger of agreeing violently here:

For a driver approaching from a side road...

• There's red paint at the junction. I think the red paint isn't that visible from the side road, but you're not going to agree. I don't have a problem with that.
• Like Mags said, even if the red paint is physically visible, it doesn't mean that it will enter the consciousness of an approaching driver. He or she is probably looking for other more familiar or important visual cues and can easily filter this information out.
• Even if the driver sees the red paint and recognises it as a cycle lane, he or she can then decide to use this as the unofficial junction edge and straddle the lane, rather than waiting at the correct junction marking, like Cab and O said.
• As for providing an extra warning to give way to cyclists. Mmmmmm. Shouldn't the driver be looking anyway? For all traffic? I know, its not an ideal world and they may work as a visual reminder to look for bikes, but I'm not convinced.

Point 1: We don't disagree that the cycle lane is harder to spot when approaching from the minor road (as opposed to going down the main road), but I do believe that they will be seen by most drivers.

Points 2 and 3. No substantive dispute here (is "substantive" too big a word, Magnatom?)

Point 4 - If you remember my original comments I used the word "maybe". I am not "convinced" either.

 

[Bollo]

Good, all friends again.

 

[Cab]

I have made this point earlier in the thread:

"Of course, some drivers won't give two hoots about paint on the road,
others might."

Its the 'some' that I take issue with.

Many drivers simply don't get what all of the lines are for while they're out driving; sure, you can ask them when they're not concentrating on the road and they'll answer correctly, but thats not reality out on the roads. Watch them at a junction where there is a cycle lane on the main road they're pulling out on; are they looking primarily at the kerbside, at the cycle lane, or at the traffic? Do they stick their noses straight out into the cycle lane or do they wait entirely and patiently behind the give way sign? You know the answer to this, you've presumably seen it.

 

[Bollo]

Its the 'some' that I take issue with.

Many drivers simply don't get what all of the lines are for while they're out driving; sure, you can ask them when they're not concentrating on the road and they'll answer correctly, but thats not reality out on the roads. Watch them at a junction where there is a cycle lane on the main road they're pulling out on; are they looking primarily at the kerbside, at the cycle lane, or at the traffic? Do they stick their noses straight out into the cycle lane or do they wait entirely and patiently behind the give way sign? You know the answer to this, you've presumably seen it.

For all the mild ribbing I've been responsible for in this thread it is well worth giving the paper that O attached the once over. One of the points (I think) it makes is that successful cycle facilities set out to make motorised traffic subservient to or responsible for the safety of non-motorised traffic, and I include peds in that. Trying to solve the problem using explicit, heavy-handed and often inadequate segregation removes any sense of responsibility from the driver - "I'm in MY lane - anything else is YOUR problem".

 

[Origamist]

Its the 'some' that I take issue with.

Many drivers simply don't get what all of the lines are for while they're out driving; sure, you can ask them when they're not concentrating on the road and they'll answer correctly, but thats not reality out on the roads. Watch them at a junction where there is a cycle lane on the main road they're pulling out on; are they looking primarily at the kerbside, at the cycle lane, or at the traffic? Do they stick their noses straight out into the cycle lane or do they wait entirely and patiently behind the give way sign? You know the answer to this, you've presumably seen it.

"Some" seems reasonable to me, not to you. Fair enough.

 

[HJ]

One of the over looked factors in all of this is numbers of cyclist on the road. In the more advanced parts of Europe (and elsewhere) cycling is not seen as fringe activity the way it is here. Cycling is seen as a normal part of everyday life, so not only are driver more used to seeing cyclist, they are also more like to be cyclist them selves and understand the needs of other road users, which is why Hi Viz and cycle helmets are rarer in this places...

 

[Origamist]

One of the over looked factors in all of this is numbers of cyclist on the road. In the more advanced parts of Europe (and elsewhere) cycling is not seen as fringe activity the way it is here. Cycling is seen as a normal part of everyday life, so not only are driver more used to seeing cyclist, they are also more like to be cyclist them selves and understand the needs of other road users, which is why Hi Viz and cycle helmets are rarer in this places...

It was in the paper I alluded to, which I had forgotten about myself until Bollo reminded me. See post 12 for the link. I can see how you might have missed it though - the rest of this thread is a squabble-fest.