A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Cycle lanes



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 11th 09, 10:05 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
lardyninja
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 194
Default Cycle lanes



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes

LN

--

Never knowingly understood


Ads
  #2  
Old September 11th 09, 12:34 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
GeoffC
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 156
Default Cycle lanes

lardyninja wrote:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes

Comparing two passages in that article:

" Teams at Leeds and Bolton universities, supported by CTC, the national
cyclists' organisation, put a camera on the back of a bike being ridden
along three roads in the north of England. Analysis of the footage revealed
that drivers gave up to 18cm (seven inches) more space to cyclists on
stretches without cycle lanes. The findings question the perceived wisdom
that slapping down strips of green paint and white lines makes riding
safer."

and

" Can lanes be effective?
Only when they're properly built and in the right places. Government
standards require cycle lanes to be two metres wide, with a minimum width of
1.5 metres. But all the lanes used in the latest research fell short - and
CTC believes that the same is true of the "vast majority" of Britain's bike
lanes."

might lead one to conclude that the study does not prove that cycle lanes in
general are dangerous but rather that a poor implementation (ie narrow
lanes) is the problem.

--

Geoff


  #3  
Old September 11th 09, 05:00 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Jeremy Parker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 522
Default Cycle lanes


"lardyninja" wrote in message
...


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes


The Indie seems highly confused by the subject, not even being sure
whether or not a cycle track is a lane or not. Assuming we are
talking about lanes, in the sense of things formed by a line painted
on the roadway, it's not true that they have been around nearly as
long as bikes. Modern lanes stem form the lanes first invented in
Davis, California, in 1967, as a compromise between the influx of
bike riding students at the new university campus, and the anti-bike
rural locals, who wanted bikes banned from the roads altogether

Jeremy Parker


  #4  
Old September 11th 09, 05:11 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Jeremy Parker
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 522
Default Cycle lanes


"GeoffC"

[snip}

The independent discusses cycle lanes


[snip]

[It] might lead one to conclude that the study does not prove that
cycle lanes in general are dangerous but rather that a poor
implementation (ie narrow lanes) is the problem.


Well, dabbing some paint onto a road doesn't make that road any
wider, which might be why adding an extra lane into the existing
space often results in a lane that is too narrow.

This study does seem to agree with the Warrington Cyclists study of a
year or two ago, and with studies in Florida and California.

There are things that the study didn't investigate:

1. The "gun barrel effect" as American traffic engineers have called
it: Do bike lanes encourage cars to drive faster?

2. The effect of bike lanes at intersections. Do bike lanes
encourage cyclists to kill themselves by getting inside left turning
lorries, or making strange right hand turns

3. How often are bike lanes blocked by, for example, cars nosing out
of driveways, or cars (or buses) stopping to drop people off or pick
them up

Jeremy Parker


  #5  
Old September 14th 09, 12:23 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mark[_19_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Cycle lanes

On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:05:35 +0100, lardyninja
wrote:



http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes


"Analysis of the footage revealed that drivers gave up to 18cm (seven
inches) more space to cyclists on stretches without cycle lanes".

That would be a certain collision then, since a lot of drivers don't
give much more room than this.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

  #6  
Old September 14th 09, 01:47 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Keitht
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,631
Default Cycle lanes

Mark wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:05:35 +0100, lardyninja
wrote:


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes


"Analysis of the footage revealed that drivers gave up to 18cm (seven
inches) more space to cyclists on stretches without cycle lanes".

That would be a certain collision then, since a lot of drivers don't
give much more room than this.

Seven inches? -- I bet they thought it was much bigger than that.

--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
  #7  
Old September 14th 09, 02:39 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Mark[_19_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 197
Default Cycle lanes

On Mon, 14 Sep 2009 13:47:21 +0100, Keitht KeithT wrote:

Mark wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:05:35 +0100, lardyninja
wrote:


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes


"Analysis of the footage revealed that drivers gave up to 18cm (seven
inches) more space to cyclists on stretches without cycle lanes".

That would be a certain collision then, since a lot of drivers don't
give much more room than this.

Seven inches? -- I bet they thought it was much bigger than that.


I don't detect any sign of intelligent thought in this behaviour.

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Due to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
[Reply-to address valid until it is spammed.]

  #8  
Old September 14th 09, 03:00 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,237
Default Cycle lanes

Keitht wrote:
Mark wrote:
On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:05:35 +0100, lardyninja
wrote:


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...d-1785239.html

The independent discusses cycle lanes


"Analysis of the footage revealed that drivers gave up to 18cm (seven
inches) more space to cyclists on stretches without cycle lanes".

That would be a certain collision then, since a lot of drivers don't
give much more room than this.

Seven inches? -- I bet they thought it was much bigger than that.


Only the females.


  #9  
Old September 14th 09, 04:16 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Eleanor Blair
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 38
Default Cycle lanes

Phil W Lee wrote:
In a recent discussion, no member of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign
was able to find a single cycle lane within the city that even met the
MINIMUM width of 1.5 metres, never mind the standard of 2 metres.


You are remembering incorrectly.

Many of the lanes I measured were indeed under that width, and there
definitely aren't any of 2 metres, but I found more than one place that
was 1.7m wide.

--
http://lnr.livejournal.com/
  #10  
Old September 16th 09, 07:51 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Judith M Smith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,735
Default Cycle lanes

On Fri, 11 Sep 2009 21:23:26 +0100, Phil W Lee
phil(at)lee-family(dot)me(dot)uk wrote:

snip


In a recent discussion, no member of the Cambridge Cycling Campaign
was able to find a single cycle lane within the city that even met the
MINIMUM width of 1.5 metres, never mind the standard of 2 metres.





You are pathetic - I recall this being stated and refuted previously -
I think in the cambridge transport group.


You will shortly be telling us that 3,000 pedestrians die every year
as they trip on the pavement - despite this also being pointed out as
another one of your favourite lies.


(PS What "standard" of 2m?)
--
The BMA (British Medical Association) urges legislation to make the wearing of cycle helmets compulsory for both adults and children.

The evidence from those countries where compulsory cycle helmet use has already been introduced is that such legislation has a beneficial effect on cycle-related deaths and head injuries.
This strongly supports the case for introducing legislation in the UK. Such legislation should result in a reduction in the morbidity and mortality associated with cycling accidents.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To Those who Don't Want Cycle Lanes Nuxx Bar UK 13 February 11th 09 12:32 AM
Are cycle lanes any use? David Lloyd UK 45 June 13th 07 03:03 PM
Now we know what cycle lanes are for David Hansen UK 10 June 22nd 05 02:29 PM
Almost knocked Off. Why Cycle Lanes are Bad. [email protected] UK 23 June 8th 05 12:12 AM
Cycle Lanes AndyP UK 33 December 8th 03 01:43 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.