Are LCC in LaLa Land?

[alexb]

There's a little stretch of shared use path on the run up to Albert Bridge. It avoids some irritatingly narrow filtering that I used to have to do every day. Now I pootle up that path and make a simple left right turn onto the bridge. It's been a revelation in terms of stress levels. I use it both ways now.

However, I really wouldn't want to use something similar over the whole of my route.

What I'd like to see though is little bits of thoughtful infrastructure that make junctions a bit easier, or allow me to cut a corner at traffic light controlled junction.

That bus lane bypass I've seen makes no sense to me, the cyclist turns off the carriage way, slows to a safe speed to avoid pedestrians and then has to merge back into the traffic.

Why not make the bus do that? Pull the bus right off the road with a strip of kerb seperating the bus from the rest of the road, other buses and cyclists just go straight on. The bus lane could then kink back into the road with the rest of the traffic forced through a chicane so the bus emerges directly into its own lane - here cycles could cut across the lane and into the bus lane. There used to be something analogous on Chelsea bridge where the traffic was directed out from the carriageway and bicycles went straight on into a new cycle lane. This seems to have changed in a recent road redesign though.

[AndyMorris]

Another benefit to segregation that nobody seems to have hinted on: It allows cycle traffic to keep flowing when the motor vehicles are jammed.  Even a shared-use pavement can be useful in that situation, though good quality segregation that allows cycling at speed is much, much better.

So is segregation a safety (subjective or objective) issue or just a matter of letting us get thru traffic more easily. LCC portray it as a necessity, before the 8's to 80's will even think of getting on a bike.

Maybe you're all road-warriors with narrow drop-barred bikes and nerves of steel or something, but even some experienced cyclists don't like filtering, some cycles are impractical to filter on at the best of times, and sometimes the motorists deliberately set out to make it difficult for you.

You don't need nerves of steel, its less stressful than using the facilities we get.

[Kim]

Another benefit to segregation that nobody seems to have hinted on: It allows cycle traffic to keep flowing when the motor vehicles are jammed.  Even a shared-use pavement can be useful in that situation, though good quality segregation that allows cycling at speed is much, much better.

So is segregation a safety (subjective or objective) issue or just a matter of letting us get thru traffic more easily. LCC portray it as a necessity, before the 8's to 80's will even think of getting on a bike.

Both?

Maybe you're all road-warriors with narrow drop-barred bikes and nerves of steel or something, but even some experienced cyclists don't like filtering, some cycles are impractical to filter on at the best of times, and sometimes the motorists deliberately set out to make it difficult for you.

You don't need nerves of steel, its less stressful than using the facilities we get.

You need to be able to balance your bike through narrow gaps without wobbling into wing mirrors etc, while maintaining an awareness of the traffic situation, and keeping your spidey-sense tuned for potential lemmings and doorings.  It's actually quite hard work.

While I'm the last person who could be described as an apologist for inadequate facilities, Silly Sustrans Gates, for all their many faults, don't contain frustrated humans who may jump out and assault you if you cock it up and touch the post.

[jane]

I agree with you Jo and your sentence that I've bolded gives me great concern for what future campaigning is going to be delivered by the LCC.

Plus, the horrible taunts (which I've been hearing) of Oliver and his own ideas has been very inappropriate. Coupled with an increasing snobbishness of local LCC campaigners by HQ. Its all too apparent if you are on Twitter.

I'm on twitter (well, Lewisham Cyclists is) and I haven't seen this.  We must be missing some cycling related feeds, I guess.  such personal attacks are inexcusable, if this is happening.   Oliver has worked long, hard and honestly for cyclists in Hackney and across London. 

[Ham]

This morning, about half of the Stratford system was open (the western half, going west) so I used it.

You know what? It's good. Stratford High Street has long been one of the worst bits for anyone contemplating cycling in to work from the East, there are no practical alternatives (there is one off road-ish alternative, but I wouldn't describe it as practical and not many know about it). As ever nothing is perfect, those bus stops will probably work, but the Bow Roundabout looks like it will still be a danger spot. There is a massive ASL, but that will count for nothing when it clogs up with traffic. Anyway, I will likely use it out of preference from the flyover.

If all the roads like Startford High Street got this treatment I for one would be happy.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Yes, I like bus lanes for exactly that reason.

Unfortunately, they tend to have buses in them.

Except in Bristol, where they have parked cars instead.

[AndyMorris]

You need to be able to balance your bike through narrow gaps without wobbling into wing mirrors etc, while maintaining an awareness of the traffic situation, and keeping your spidey-sense tuned for potential lemmings and doorings.  It's actually quite hard work.

You don't have to, you can always wait in line.

[MartinC]

In a thread where people are being labelled 'fundamentalist segregationists' and similar language? I think a little hyperbole to make a point is deserved, especially as davelodwig's words were the most eloquent on this thread so far.

Your point makes no sense to me.  If your complaint is that people are being labelled then arguing that more labelliing will help is a bit odd.  If you want a consensus then you need a more inclusive approach

I certainly agree that segregation is a part, but only a part, of making things better.  Vehicular cycling where segregation can't happen is part of the solution too.  The main thrust of the post I quoted was that there was only one agenda and that we must all support it regardless.

I agree with Clarion - driver attitude is the most important thing.  Everything derives from this.  Perceptions of cycling safety are driven by driver attitude, sometimes very directly - people know how they drive and know that they wouldn't like to be cycling with people driving the way that they do.  Even segregation depends on driver attitude - unless some one persuades drivers to allow road space and budget for it then it can't happen on any scale.

[Cudzoziemiec]

I think it depends on (and affects) societal attitude more than just drivers'.

[PeteB99]

Yes, I like bus lanes for exactly that reason.

Unfortunately, they tend to have buses in them.

Except in Bristol, where they have parked cars instead.

And in Chester where cycles are banned from the bus lanes.

[clarion]

And Liverpool, where the ex-bus lanes are now full of jammed motor vehicles full of cretins who thought the bike was holding them up.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Yes, I like bus lanes for exactly that reason.

Unfortunately, they tend to have buses in them.

Except in Bristol, where they have parked cars instead.

And in Chester where cycles are banned from the bus lanes.

That's a strange rule. I suppose the bus co, or someone, decided cyclists were delaying the buses. But do cyclists take notice of this rule? Do the police enforce it?

[hellymedic]

Not directly answering Cudzo's question but the police were very keen to enforce a no cycles bus lane in London.
This might have had tragic results.

[PeteB99]

Yes, I like bus lanes for exactly that reason.

Unfortunately, they tend to have buses in them.

Except in Bristol, where they have parked cars instead.

And in Chester where cycles are banned from the bus lanes.

That's a strange rule. I suppose the bus co, or someone, decided cyclists were delaying the buses. But do cyclists take notice of this rule? Do the police enforce it?

The one I'm most familiar with is the one on the Nth bound Wrexham road which has 6 buses an hour scheduled. I've never seen police enforce it. I used it illegally for a few months until I got a punishment pass from a bus which skimmed my elbow. Now I use the 4 foot wide 2 way shared bit of the pavement I'm afraid it's not a principle I'm prepared to die for. 

OT the signage for that bus lane is only legal  with an associated TRO is there an online D/B of TROs anywhere?

[Cudzoziemiec]

TROs should be accessible somewhere in your local authority, I'd guess most have them online.

[PeteB99]

TROs should be accessible somewhere in your local authority, I'd guess most have them online.

Not Chester. They publish a few recent ones but this lane must be at least as old as the Park and ride - 10 years at a guess. I might understand it if there were a lot of buses but the only ones scheduled are every quarter hour from the Park and Ride and one every half hour from Wrexham. It's not the only one either.

[MartinC]

I think it depends on (and affects) societal attitude more than just drivers'.

Yes, that's probably a more precise expression of what's meant.  However we have a society where you could easily argue that drivers and society's attitude were one and the same thing.

[Kim]

You need to be able to balance your bike through narrow gaps without wobbling into wing mirrors etc, while maintaining an awareness of the traffic situation, and keeping your spidey-sense tuned for potential lemmings and doorings.  It's actually quite hard work.

You don't have to, you can always wait in line.

Yes, exactly.  That was the point I was making.  If you aren't up to filtering, for whatever valid reason, you can either wait in the queue, or if one is available use a segregated facility to make better progress.  It's what I usually do.

[matthew]

That bus lane bypass I've seen makes no sense to me, the cyclist turns off the carriage way, slows to a safe speed to avoid pedestrians and then has to merge back into the traffic.

Why not make the bus do that? Pull the bus right off the road with a strip of kerb seperating the bus from the rest of the road, other buses and cyclists just go straight on. The bus lane could then kink back into the road with the rest of the traffic forced through a chicane so the bus emerges directly into its own lane - here cycles could cut across the lane and into the bus lane. There used to be something analogous on Chelsea bridge where the traffic was directed out from the carriageway and bicycles went straight on into a new cycle lane. This seems to have changed in a recent road redesign though.

The issue with this is simply that if the modal shift to cycling we all desire occurs then the bus will have to pull left through the stream of cyclists to access the layby and then either wait for a gap or bully it's way back out again. This in of itself is fine provided that the bus drivers all behave courtiously when trying to pull in and out and the cyclists extend equally courtiously to let the bus in and out.

[Kim]

That bus lane bypass I've seen makes no sense to me, the cyclist turns off the carriage way, slows to a safe speed to avoid pedestrians and then has to merge back into the traffic.

Why not make the bus do that? Pull the bus right off the road with a strip of kerb seperating the bus from the rest of the road, other buses and cyclists just go straight on. The bus lane could then kink back into the road with the rest of the traffic forced through a chicane so the bus emerges directly into its own lane - here cycles could cut across the lane and into the bus lane. There used to be something analogous on Chelsea bridge where the traffic was directed out from the carriageway and bicycles went straight on into a new cycle lane. This seems to have changed in a recent road redesign though.

The issue with this is simply that if the modal shift to cycling we all desire occurs then the bus will have to pull left through the stream of cyclists to access the layby and then either wait for a gap or bully it's way back out again. This in of itself is fine provided that the bus drivers all behave courtiously when trying to pull in and out and the cyclists extend equally courtiously to let the bus in and out.

I reckon a give way line in the bus lane would take care of that.  At least on paper.

[Cudzoziemiec]

Do you mean the bus should give way to the cyclists or the cyclists to the bus? If we ever get to a modal shift with a near constant stream of cyclists, I can't see either working.

It does occur to me that perhaps the "floating bus stops" are floating in the wrong place. If the road is wide enough for a bus lane, then you could have the cycle lane carrying straight on and the bus stop on an island to its right. This would only work on wide roads, because otherwise the waiting bus would block the whole road - and if it's a quiet enough road for that not to matter, it probably doesn't need any infrastructure. Also, without bends the cyclists in the cycle lane would approach the crossing pedestrians at higher speed, probably.

[clarion]

On CS7, there are pretty much constant streams of cyclists, and buses do find it hard to pull in, as there is rarely a bus length between cyclists.

[Kim]

Do you mean the bus should give way to the cyclists or the cyclists to the bus? If we ever get to a modal shift with a near constant stream of cyclists, I can't see either working.

Cyclists (and taxis, motorbikes, whatever) in the lane should give way to the bus leaving the stop.  It's just formalising what's already in the highway code.

[Cudzoziemiec]

That makes sense and I'd have thought would work when the bus is pulling out - indeed it's only courtesy really. But, as Clarion notes, I was thinking about letting the bus pull in to the stop. There's several ways to think of it: as lanes of traffic. In this case, the bus is in lane 2 and has to wait for a gap in lane 1 - the cyclists - so it can pull in, just like it would if it had been in the "fast lane" of a dual carriageway. Or we could adopt the principle that a stream of less traffic (the bus) gives way to one of more traffic, just like a minor road giving way to a major one. But in practice - nobody ever thinks of a stream of cyclists as a traffic lane in its/their own right, do they? It/they are thought of as being part of a larger lane. Perhaps the (an) answer would be to give cycle lanes the same legal status as other traffic lanes? Obviously this would need amendments to the HC and probably laws, as well as a big re-education/publicity action.

[clarion]

If it's a shared lane, and the buses are staying in the lane (which, tbf, is much of the time on CS7), then the flow of cyclists is funnelled through past the stopped bus in the widened part of the lane.  As the bus pulls away, some cyclists complete their manoeuvre and pull in, others slow down and either abandon the overtake, allowing the bus to pull ahead, or don't start.  Some eejits do still try their chances, but it's not very effective usually.

Much smoother, less disruptive, and immensely simpler and cheaper than any of the other solutions proposed.