Is this a cycle lane?...

[GrasB]

Barely room for a ped.

Where is that? I recognize it but can't place it. I want to say Oakington Rd, Westwick but I'm almost certain that's wrong.

 

[Alien8]

Where is that? I recognize it but can't place it. I want to say Oakington Rd, Westwick but I'm almost certain that's wrong.

Histon -> Cottenham I assume ... but of course they also now have a shiny-new extra-wide shared-use path as well along there.

It is a classic bit of road for getting verbals from drivers.

 

[GrasB]

Histon -> Cottenham I assume ... but of course they also now have a shiny-new extra-wide shared-use path as well along there.

Have they sorted out the lamp posts yet? Last time I went down there there was a couple of nasty places where the lamp posts seriously restricted the effective width of the pavement regardless of how wide the pavement appeared.

It is a classic bit of road for getting verbals from drivers.

Yeah that's a classic "check you speedo you moron" as I'm cycling along at 25-30mph

 

[gaz]

The DFT state (although i'm having difficultiy finding where) that these are to be used to denote cycling routes and where cyclists should be positioning them selves. I suspect that the application of the sign in this case, is incorrect.

 

[dawesome]

We have these here in Norwich: the Yarmouth road is covered with them .... they are to remind drivers that there cyclists using the road, on roads that are not wide enough for an additional seperate cycle lane.

Yep, they are modelled on trials in hackney and Cambridge, I ride that road on my commute.

 

[briantrumpet]

And they probably make more sense than the ridiculous lane in Ambleside:

.

At least they are not pretending there's a cycle lane.

(Photos from http://cyclinginfo.co.uk/blog/1680/cycle-lanes/best-size-cycle-lane/)

 

[GrasB]

Actually that type of cycle lane is very effective if you ride in the middle of the cycle lane. It gives a strong visual indication of the space required by the cyclist & for the most part motorists tend to respect the lane when passing a cyclist.

 

[snorri]

Because creating a cycle lane through a pinch point gives drivers a lane to pass (too closely) at the pinch-point (because they think that the cycle lane magically protects the cyclist who should therefore be wholly in that lane).

Perhaps my wording was not clear, the guidelines state a bypass for cyclists should be provided at pinch points, this allows the cyclist to go straight through and the lane separation safeguards the cyclist from the impatient overtake.

 

[HLaB]

Perhaps my wording was not clear, the guidelines state a bypass for cyclists should be provided at pinch points, this allows the cyclist to go straight through and the lane separation safeguards the cyclist from the impatient overtake.

OT, it allows the cyclist to go through a p'ture zone the other problem is the extra conflict added when the cyclist rejoins the traffic flow which can be worse than the original overtake unless there is a motorist who is clearly going too fast and wont give way, I'll always go round them.

 

[GrasB]

Bypass lanes are LETHAL! I've gave up using them within a week of pinch points being installed with them since on numerous occasions I've ended up having to do an emergency stop as motorists simply carry on through as though the cyclist isn't there & nearly take me out with their nearside wing.

 

[pshore]

Alien8 is correct. It is just inside the 30mph zone heading s/b out of Cottenham on the B1049 to Histon. The picture was taken the other day and there are no plans to widen that part. About 200yds on is where the cyclepath starts.

Have they sorted out the lamp posts yet? Last time I went down there there was a couple of nasty places where the lamp posts seriously restricted the effective width of the pavement regardless of how wide the pavement appeared.

Lamp posts in Histon have now been set back. The Histon part is quite good if you cycle under 15mph. Not perfect for the faster rider - still a bit undulating due to the drop kerbs in one stretch; a dodgy side road crossing; and other side roads have annoyingly sharp bends but otherwise safe. The path between Histon and Cottenham is having the final part widened right now. Still crossing fingers for solar edge lighting.

 

[WJHall]

The DFT state (although i'm having difficultiy finding where) that these are to be used to denote cycling routes and where cyclists should be positioning them selves. I suspect that the application of the sign in this case, is incorrect.

These markings were applied to some roads in Bristol in the final phase of cycling city. Although the idea of using a general marking to double up as indication that there are cyclists about, and to show cycle routes, without appearing to confine them to a lane has some merit, in practice:

(a) They can look like indications of where cyclists should ride, and unfortunately, they tend to lie in the door zone, because they were placed with respect to the carriageway edges, but there are always parked cars. Near junctions they often appear to imply a leftward position that would lead straight under the next row of parked cars.

(b) The 'cycle routes' tend to be the NCNs, which in this part of Bristol are not the routes that anyone with local knowledge will actually use.