Contraflow cycle lane - Opinions?

On 01/05/2007 08:34:35 Tony Raven wrote:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.

Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

Jc.

Why don't they seperate it with a kerb?

You mean like
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigni...sbury/torring-
tonplace.html ?

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane should be,
it's either that or ride the carriageway, this putting cycles on pavements
or token farcilities with painted line segragation is just no good.

--

Buck

I would rather be out on my Catrike

http://www.catrike.co.uk

in message , Josey
('nospam@josey') wrote:

What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way
roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow
cycle lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

It depends, although I'd approach it with scepticism.

The one I'm looking at the proposal for is:

About one and half meters wide;
At road level;
Positioned between the pavement and car parking bays mostly;

That's pretty dangerous in itself, unless there's clear room for a car
occupant to open a door and step out without impinging on the cycle lane.

With a half a meter buffer (hatched) between the cycle lane and the
parked cars;

Not nearly sufficient (and wouldn't comply

There are no junctions in the road, but several shop driveways etc
crossing the cycle lane.

Not particularly a problem.

Total length, I guess 800+ meters;

What is the length of journey which is saved by taking the contraflow? What
gradients are involved in the contraflow, and what in the route avoiding
it?

Very busy road, in town;
Cycle lane is one-way for cycle traffic (contraflow to the road).
No give-way signs anywhere (at least not visible in the planning
application)
The carriageway is appx 4+M wide.

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

Can parking be practicably eliminated? Alternatively, could parking be
permitted only on the side of the street away from the cycle lane?

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Morning had broken, and we had run out of gas for the welding torch.

Buck wrote:

On 01/05/2007 08:34:35 Tony Raven wrote:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.

Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

Jc.

Why don't they seperate it with a kerb?

You mean like
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigni...sbury/torring-
tonplace.html ?

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane should be,
it's either that or ride the carriageway, this putting cycles on pavements
or token farcilities with painted line segragation is just no good.

looks a bit like an over engineered dogs dinner to me. Unless the
pictures show the road uncharacteristicly quite what is the point? It
looks ok on it's own terms inasmuch as it doesn't fall into some of the
common traps of cycling facilities but what problem is it trying to
solve that wouldn't be better addressed than spending all that capital
on paying people GBP2/day[1] to cycle to work? Is there any back
story?

best wishes
james

[1] or whatever the motivational amount was supposed to be

Tony W wrote:
"Josey" nospam@josey wrote in message
...
What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

In some German towns cyclists may travel the 'wrong' way on all one way
streets without benefit of any painted tarmac. Their experience is
apparently good -- but then German drivers are more bike (and pedestrian)
aware

More aware than who? German cyclist fatalities increased by 21% in 2005
(IRTAD), compared to the 10% UK increase (RCGB).

--
Matt B

Martin Dann wrote:

Martin Dann wrote:

I'm really looking for some feedback to take to a planning meeting.
Specifically with regard to it's compliance with planning guidelines,
best practices etc, safety etc.

I have just look at the plans specifically the cross-section

Proposed cccbpppppVVVVVVVVppppp

c=cyclists, b=buffer,p=parking and V=motorised Vehicles.
each character represents 0.5m of road

I would prefer pppppbcccVVVVVVVVppppp

That is what I would prefer too. There is one of those where I work.
Ebury Street in London SW1 is a long road which is one way for cars in
two directions towards the middle has contra-flow cycle lanes. The
parking bays on the cycle lane side are much wider than normal giving
a buffer zone.

The scheme opened in 2002 and was joint runner-up for the LCC award
for best cycle scheme.

http://www.westminstercyclists.fsnet...Ebury%20Street

The only downside of it is that numpty cyclists insist on riding the
wrong way down the cycle lane instead of using the road and that
delivery drivers like to park in it - there a lot of hotels and shops
down there as well as the houses and offices.
--
Phil Cook looking north over the park to the "Westminster Gasworks"

Buck wrote:
http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/priority/bloomsbury/torringtonplace.html

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane should be,
it's either that or ride the carriageway, this putting cycles on pavements
or token farcilities with painted line segragation is just no good.

It looks like overtaking would be a nightmare, which would largely
defeat the object of cycling in the first place.

--
Danny Colyer URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

On Fri, 05 Jan 2007 08:44:06 GMT, Buck wrote:
On 01/05/2007 08:34:35 Tony Raven wrote:

http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigni...sbury/torring-
tonplace.html ?

I would advocate a few more like that, that's how a cycle lane
should be,

I don't like black-painted iron bollards in teh middle of teh lanes
without any signs, reflectors or markings. Perhaps someone should try
sticking something similar between the lanes used by motor vehicles.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|

Simon Brooke wrote:

in message , Josey
('nospam@josey') wrote:


What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way
roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow
cycle lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

Is the road 2-way now? If not, why is the echelon parking this way round?

About one and half meters wide; At road level;
Positioned between the pavement and car parking bays mostly;

That's pretty dangerous in itself, unless there's clear room for a car
occupant to open a door and step out without impinging on the cycle lane.

With a half a meter buffer (hatched) between the cycle lane and the
parked cars;

It would be slow and not very safe, with pedestrians and car doors to
avoid. Plus traffic into and out of driveways would not reliably give way.

Total length, I guess 800+ meters;

You wouldn't want to ride this distance at walking pace.

Very busy road, in town;
Cycle lane is one-way for cycle traffic (contraflow to the road).
No give-way signs anywhere (at least not visible in the planning
application)
The carriageway is appx 4+M wide.

Do you mean between the rows of parked cars? This is not good for
with-flow cyclists, as drivers will expect to pass but will not have
space to do so safely.

The high traffic means a contraflow lane is needed, according to
government guidance, but I wouldn't segregate it. Lose the parking on
the contraflow side, but keep angled (if lots of parking space is
insisted on) or parallel parking on the other side.

With angled parking, that should give something over 5m of carriageway
width to play with. This allows with-flow drivers to pass with-flow
cyclists by encroaching on the contra-flow cycle lane - which is not
as dangerous as it sounds, especially if speeds are controlled.

With parallel parking on both sides, there'd be over 6m between -
enough for bike + any motor vehicle, but not bikes both ways with a
motor vehicle between.

IOW less segregation gives better use of space and better progress for
everyone.

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at
the population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as
walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

Josey wrote:
What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.

The first question is, does the road really have to be one-way? One-way
streets engender higher speeds unless they are done carefully. Two-way
streets with a 20 mph limit are preferable. However, if this is not
possible, a one-way street can accommodate contra-flow cycling without a
separate lane if it has a 20 mph limit in my opinion. If the speed limit
is above 20, (why?) a separate cycle lane is needed and particular
attention is needed at junctions.

Simon

Josey wrote:
What's the considered opinion of a contraflow cycle lane on one-way roads?

Useful on some occasions, like being able to head South along New North
Road / Pitfield Street.

On some roads totally useless in my opinion, eg St Pancras Way / Royal
College Street NW1 where it would be much simpler if cyclists just used
the one-way system like everyone else. Must be a very unfit cyclist who
finds the slight detour (if any) unacceptable.
In any case St Pancras Way gets my vote for one of the worst cycling
"facilities" I have encountered (and avoid using).

Good thing or bad? In the past I've only come across one contra-flow cycle
lane, and it has a death-trap junction, so I never use it.


The one I'm looking at the proposal for is:

About one and half meters wide;
At road level;
Positioned between the pavement and car parking bays mostly;

If there is a contraflow cycle lane then there must be no parking on
that side of the road at any time. And there must be a partition
between the cycle lane and the oncoming carriageway, as is the case on
Pitfield Street.

There is a car-parking area near the roundabout at the North end which
is completely segregated.