Cycle lane priority over side roads

[Richard Mann]

I don't think cyclists on the path should be required to have to decide to deviate or otherwise...

This is just what pedestrians do as a matter of course. An 8m speed table just makes it reasonably possible for a cyclist to do it too.

 

[snorri]

This is just what pedestrians do as a matter of course. An 8m speed table just makes it reasonably possible for a cyclist to do it too.

Pedestrians are treated even worse than cyclists by present design standards.
It's reasonably possible but the inconvenience would result in the majority of cyclists staying on the main road, I would think.

 

[benb]

I don't think it's particularly inconvenient.
Casual cyclists, I'm sure, would prefer to use something like this rather than be on the carriageway.

 

[snailracer]

I don't think it's particularly inconvenient.
Casual cyclists, I'm sure, would prefer to use something like this rather than be on the carriageway.

I presume this is a photo from somewhere where folks drive on the right, so it doesn't show the bit of the junction we are interested in - the bit where the traffic on the main road gives way to the cyclist crossing the side road.

 

[qigong chimp]

...Surrey County Council are consulting about cycle provision on my local A road, the A24 from Leatherhead to Ashtead. Their proposal, predictably, is just to redesignate the pavement as a shared use cycle path..

Ask them if they propose to consolidate the re-designation of this sliver of highway with a Traffic Restriction Order, ensuring right of way over it is exclusive to pedestrians and cyclists.

 

[buggi]

can we please just start a petition to get rid of all cycle lanes and paths. they are just a danger to cyclists in so many ways.

 

[fattyowls]

Hi! I don't think "bending" is a good idea. I know that the dutch engeneers seem to love that form, but accident research in Germany proved this to be the most dangerous of all forms. Look at this stats:

http://bernd.sluka.de/folien/gif/mitLZA1.gif

Notice that they merged the stats for cycle lanes and mixed traffic, because otherwise it would have been to obvious that mixed traffic is the safest form.

Translation:
Fahrbahn=cyclists on the carriageway (mixed traffic)
Radfahrstreifen=cycle lane
Radweg=cyclepath
Furtabsetzung: measure on how far the cyclepath is removed from the main road in junctions
gering=slight (0-2 meters)
mittel=middle (2-4 meters)
weit=far (>4 meters)

black are the accidents with cyclist in the right direction, white are the accidents with salmon cyclists, checkers are miscancellous accidents

 

[mr_cellophane]

black are the accidents with cyclist in the right direction, white are the accidents with salmon cyclists, checkers are miscancellous accidents

So it's safer to cycle against the traffic flow

 

[HLaB]

Ask them if they propose to consolidate the re-designation of this sliver of highway with a Traffic Restriction Order, ensuring right of way over it is exclusive to pedestrians and cyclists.

FWIW, its Traffic Regulation Order.
I don't hold much faith in driver behaving to them legal or not

 

[fattyowls]

So it's safer to cycle against the traffic flow

No. The data you see is for one way cycle facilities. There is, however, a certain number of cyclists riding against the prescribed direction. Their involvement in accidents is higher than their actual numbers, so its more dangerous to cycle on the wrong side.