coloured cycle lanes

I know there are some colonials on this list and, in any case, most of
the wrongheadedness posted here isn't specifically Antipodean.

http://www.abc.dotars.gov.au/green_bicycle_lanes.htm

The link explains why coloured cycle lanes are A Very Good Thing (The
authors seem to really believe this in good faith) and solicits
feedback on the use of coloured lanes.

Here is the start of the article (don't forget to snip it):

best wishes
james

WHY USE COLOURED BIKE LANES?
Clearly marked bicycle lanes supported by signs and pavement markings
are intended to promote an orderly flow of traffic by establishing
specific lines of demarcation for bicycles and other vehicles.1

Bike lanes help define road space, provide cyclists with a path free
of obstruction, decrease the stress levels of cyclists riding in
traffic, encourage cyclists to ride in the correct roadway position
and indicate to motorists that cyclists have a right to be on the
road. Studies have shown that well designed bicycle facilities
encourage appropriate behaviour and reduce the likelihood of crashes.2

Coloured pavements for on-road bicycle lanes are used to:

*educe the chance of conflict between motor vehicles and bicycles;
*enhance the visibility and recognition of bicycle lanes;
*improve cyclist safety in high conflict areas; and
*increase the skid resistance of the pavement in a critical area for
cyclists.

The treatment is usually applied to those sections of bicycle lanes,
which are frequently crossed by motor vehicles eg. left turn slip
lanes.

EVIDENCE BASE FOR THE USE OF COLOURED BICYCLE LANES
There is good evidence internationally that coloured bicycle lane
treatments can reduce the chance of conflict between motor vehicles
and bicycles – that the safety benefits of coloured treatments can be
high. A study conducted in Denmark found that blue painted bicycle
lanes at intersections resulted in a 38% decrease in bicycle crashes
and 71% reduction in fatalities and serious injuries.3 Forni,
Colquhoun and Hasen reported in 1997 a study of the use of coloured
surfacing in road layouts in Europe. They found that the colour red is
the most commonly used pavement colour for road safety in Europe.4
However, colours including yellow and other combination colours have
been successfully used to reduce speeds and accidents.4 The study
suggested adopting green coloured surfacing for schemes that aim to
identify sections of road for use by certain vehicles such as buses or
bicycles.4

A Victorian trial5 conducted by VicRoads in June 2001 to evaluate
motorists' and cyclists' understanding of the use of coloured bicycle
lanes has yielded positive results. The trial did not attempt to
compare the use of one colour against another. However, the results of
the evaluation demonstrated that the use of coloured bike lanes was
generally accepted by both cyclists and motorists, that cyclists
perceived the colour increased their safety, and that the treatment
should be used in other bike lanes, especially in high conflict areas.

I know there are some colonials on this list and, in any case, most of
the wrongheadedness posted here isn't specifically Antipodean.

http://www.abc.dotars.gov.au/green_bicycle_lanes.htm

The link explains why coloured cycle lanes are A Very Good Thing (The
authors seem to really believe this in good faith)

Got to the limitations of coloured cycle lanes but it focused exclusively
on the limitations of colour, rather than cycle lanes. I suppose that's
logical really. They use the word pavement to refer to the road surface
which confused me for a while - I thought they were just talking about
pavemnt lanes at first.

I'm fairly neutral about the provision of on road cycle lanes. They can
be useful for filtering through traffic when they're not blocked, but
they tend to disappear at junctions anyway. Apart from that they seem
mostly redundant - it's not like they make cars pass with more room -
because you're in your lane they don't seem to move right at all. I
think it effectively means you're riding in the gutter position even when
you're at the extreme right of the lane.

I'm not sure how they make it less threatening for cyclists to ride
either. The article suggested that they make it clear that the cyclist
is allowed on the road, but I tend to think cycle lanes make it less
obvious that cyclists are allowed in areas of the road not covered by the
lane.

It goes without saying that pavement cycle lanes are horrible little
things if you want to go more than very slow or don't like stopping for
every blasted junction and constantly give way to dopey pedestrians[1].
Occasionally useful if they provide a shortcut but other than that only
useful for adults who can't ride on the road safely or kids that aren't
allowed.

[1] I do find it hard not to walk on the 'pretty' pavement tho, so I can
see why they do it.

james wrote:
I know there are some colonials on this list and, in any case, most of
the wrongheadedness posted here isn't specifically Antipodean.

http://www.abc.dotars.gov.au/green_bicycle_lanes.htm

The link explains why coloured cycle lanes are A Very Good Thing ...

This is pretty much received wisdom among transport planners in London.

Of note is that the research seems to compare coloured cycle lanes
with uncoloured ones - not with no lane at all.

Colin McKenzie

--
The great advantage of not trusting statistics is that
it leaves you free to believe the damned lies instead!

Regardless of whether cycles lanes are ever a Good Thing at all, the
"colouring" (in London at least) is achieved by using a rougher grade of
tarmac. This considerably increases rolling resistance. Great!! Not.

~PB

Bike lanes help define road space, provide cyclists with a path free
of obstruction

and somewhere for people to park their cars

encourage cyclists to ride in the correct roadway position

in the gutter, where cyclists belong

and indicate to motorists that cyclists have a right to be on the
road.

Er... no.

Studies have shown that well designed bicycle facilities
encourage appropriate behaviour and reduce the likelihood of crashes.2

Experience has shown that well designed bicycle facilities are few and far
between.

d.

Colin Blackburn wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 13:25:30 +0100, Pete Biggs
wrote:

Regardless of whether cycles lanes are ever a Good Thing at all, the
"colouring" (in London at least) is achieved by using a rougher
grade of tarmac. This considerably increases rolling resistance.
Great!! Not.

In Oxford, the only place I have seen coloured lanes being coloured,
it is not rougher tarmac but an additional coating of (a synthetic
looking) grit glue to the underlying black tarmac.

AFAIK they do this here in London Town Devine too. Certainly they do with
the red bus lanes - you could tell with the one on London Bridge coz the
stuff came off during the summers of 2002 AND 2003.

Not much risk of it doing that /this/ year. Bah!

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
================================================== =========
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
================================================== =========

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 13:25:30 +0100, Pete Biggs
wrote:

Regardless of whether cycles lanes are ever a Good Thing at all, the
"colouring" (in London at least) is achieved by using a rougher grade of
tarmac. This considerably increases rolling resistance. Great!! Not.

In Oxford, the only place I have seen coloured lanes being coloured, it is
not rougher tarmac but an additional coating of (a synthetic looking) grit
glue to the underlying black tarmac.

Colin

Dave Larrington wrote:

Regardless of whether cycles lanes are ever a Good Thing at all, the
"colouring" (in London at least) is achieved by using a rougher
grade of tarmac. This considerably increases rolling resistance.
Great!! Not.

In Oxford, the only place I have seen coloured lanes being coloured,
it is not rougher tarmac but an additional coating of (a synthetic
looking) grit glue to the underlying black tarmac.

AFAIK they do this here in London Town Devine too. Certainly they do
with the red bus lanes - you could tell with the one on London Bridge
coz the stuff came off during the summers of 2002 AND 2003.

What ever it is, it's slower to ride on than "normal" road :-( ...after
it's been down for some time at least (can feel smooth when freshly laid).

~PB

On Wed, 14 Jul 2004 15:41:02 +0000, Geraint Jones wrote:


roughening up the approaches to lights is glued on with something
distinctly yellow, and it comes off in great flat plates, at least when
applied to placews where the asphalt is regularly wet.
We need a geologist or a geographer here.
Isn't it freeze/thaw action which does that?

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
...
james wrote:
I know there are some colonials on this list and, in any case,
most of
the wrongheadedness posted here isn't specifically Antipodean.

http://www.abc.dotars.gov.au/green_bicycle_lanes.htm

The link explains why coloured cycle lanes are A Very Good Thing
....

This is pretty much received wisdom among transport planners in
London.

Of note is that the research seems to compare coloured cycle lanes
with uncoloured ones - not with no lane at all.

Colin McKenzie


Well, it's a general principle in traffic engineering that, in order
to minimise ugliness and distractions, you should have as few signs
and markings as possible.

Specifically, it's a principle that coloured paving should be rare,
reserved for where special emphasis is needed.

In other words, if a scheme needs Technicolor, it's pretty much a
sign that it has already failed, or would fail, in black-and-white.
You should look on the paint as a warning from the traffic
engineers - green for danger.

I suppose I should go off and look at the drawings in chapter 6 of
London's draft "Design Standards for Cycling in London" to see how
often they recommend green paint, but frankly I can't face that right
now

Jeremy Parker

The fact that green is now spreading onto a higher and higher
fraction of our bike lanes, so much so that it is essentially routine
now, tells us something, I think.

Jeremy Parker