Wide cycle lane dividers: are they a waste of space & can I motorcycle on them?

[TimC]

Why not just ride a bicycle and enjoy the new motor-free facilities?

[T42]

Best way to find out if it's OK to ride a motorbike on them is to wait until you see a policeman standing on one and then try to ride past him on it. He'll tell you.

[MikeFromLFE]

(Disclaimer - it's a /very/ long time since I motorcycled in London)

Speaking as a motorcyclist & cyclist (& pedestrian & car driver) I don't consider that I have a right, when riding my motorbike, to travel faster than other motor vehicles. If I can accelerate away, or filter safely, then fine, bit after all I'm just another motor vehicle user on the highway.
There's no magic formula associated with motor biking that means you must get to the front of every queue, sometimes you are left sucking exhaust gasses, and admiring the view.
If the wide strips encourage more bicyclists then excellent!

And maybe this ought To be in "Vroom "

[Cudzoziemiec]

There's another reason for those dividers being wide. Cars, buses and lorries have projections: most obviously mirrors but also lights, load straps and loads themselves. For some reason, even when these are permanently part of the vehicle from new, EU regs do not count them as part of the vehicle width; so a 255cm wide HGV with mirrors 25cm wide actually occupies over 3 metres of width. Cyclists also have projections: elbows, bar ends, pannier straps and occasionally mirrors too. Motorbikes have the same. Then there are cars pulling trailers and caravans. For some reason car drivers (lorry drivers seem far better about this) often forget that their trailer might be wider than their vehicle; and that even when it's the same width, the combination's dynamic envelope is wider. So a wide dividing strip prevents (or rather mitigates against) conflict and collision between two streams of vehicles – just like the central reservation of a dual carriageway is always wider than its barrier and sometimes wide enough to drive a car on.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

And maybe this ought To be in "Vroom "

Porkins has ignored the very clear dividing line between this place and "Vroom".  .

[RibbleRouser]

Just an observation from a non-Londoner, it seems a sad sight seeing a grid locked road next to a cycle path being used by one pedestrian and one mobility scooter.

[mrcharly-YHT]

Just an observation from a non-Londoner, it seems a sad sight seeing a grid locked road next to a cycle path being used by one pedestrian and one mobility scooter.

That is because the cyclists have already got where they were going while the rest were stuck in traffic.

[red marley]

Just an observation from a non-Londoner, it seems a sad sight seeing a grid locked road next to a cycle path being used by one pedestrian and one mobility scooter.

Just an observation from a Londoner, most of these proper cycle paths are not yet complete and so contain short sections with major works at either end restricting access. Even the completed sections are only a few weeks old.

If you really want to overcome the problems of major urban motorised congestion (e.g. the c.30,000 - thirty thousand! - annual deaths caused by poor air quality), you can't just build new infrastructure to accommodate existing behaviours. You have to anticipate and build for significant future change and not judge failure/success over a matter of weeks.

[MikeFromLFE]

Just an observation from a non-Londoner, it seems a sad sight seeing a grid locked road next to a cycle path being used by one pedestrian and one mobility scooter.

I think this is an old picture from before the path was officially opened

Sent from my P01W using Tapatalk

[RibbleRouser]

[Kim]

Just an observation from a non-Londoner, it seems a sad sight seeing a grid locked road next to a cycle path being used by one pedestrian and one mobility scooter.

I think this is an old picture from before the path was officially opened

I believe so.  It went round the interwebs with some facetious comment about how it's all very nice for grandma.  As if disabled people don't benefit from cycle paths.  When the picture clearly shows a disabled user benefiting from a cyclepath that isn't even finished yet.

[T42]

T'other point being that traffic'd probably be just as gridlocked without the cycle lane.

[Jurek]

The only thing which surprises me Nick, is your level of disregard for vulnerable road users.
Peds will use it because a) they can and b) they're not expecting to encounter any traffic (motorised or otherwise) on it - so they won't be looking out for any - unlike what they usually do when they cross the road.

There's also the chance of you encountering conflict with vehicle occupants deciding that it is quicker for them to walk to their nearby destination than it is to sit in the stationery traffic, and make their exit from the car without looking, because b).

[Cudzoziemiec]

Just an observation from a non-Londoner, it seems a sad sight seeing a grid locked road next to a cycle path being used by one pedestrian and one mobility scooter.

I think this is an old picture from before the path was officially opened

You can see a temporary road sign on the pavement at bottom right.

[De Sisti]

You can see a temporary road sign on the pavement at bottom right.

Tell us what it says (or is depicting)?

[perpetual dan]

So I'm not allowed to ride on them. But when there are no peds around, I probably will. I'd better find out what the punishment might be. Here's a typical one at Vauxhall- it grows from 1 foot in width to about five feet https://goo.gl/maps/TbN8tW5XfTP2

If I were going to ride on it, then I'd worry about it shrinking from five feet to one all of a sudden. At that point you're trying to rejoin a jammed up carriageway in front of someone that you've just undertaken with your dodgy manoeuvre. You won't be thanked.

Another reason to make them that wide: it creates a safe overtaking distance. Drivers of big vehicles on crowded roads often drive at 40mph with wing mirrors overlapping the pavement to the left. Cyclists getting past each other at rush hour will often ride with their wheel somewhere near the kerb. That picture looks a bit like the legal overtaking distance in some other countries.

[Nick H.]

The only thing which surprises me Nick, is your level of disregard for vulnerable road users.

Oh for heaven's sake. Most of the time I'm not segregated from them, am I? If I was disregarding them I'd be knocking them down like ninepins, wouldn't I? Every day people using smartphones (or stoned or drunk or whatever) walk out in front of me. Car passengers open doors without looking. It's my responsibility, as operator of a heavy lump of metal, to be observant and make allowances. So I don't complain. I don't shout or rev or use my horn. I don't really expect pedestrians to take any responsibility for their lives. I want them to feel free to amble about with their head in the clouds. That's the way I like cities to operate.  If I hit a ped or a cyclist I'd never forgive myself.  Even if they tried to commit suicide by jumping in front of me it's still my responsibility to prevent a collision.  I don't just take care not to hit them - I also aim to anticipate their next move so I can avoid frightening or inconveniencing them.  At junctions I always see things from the point of view of the cyclists and pedestrians there and ensure they have space to do whatever they want to do.  I'm happy to sit behind them and block the traffic if I think they need some space. I don't need rules and lines and boxes and kerbs to force me to do any of this. So if I ride on a traffic island/divider I'll do it as considerately as I do everything else.   

[Cudzoziemiec]

You can see a temporary road sign on the pavement at bottom right.

Tell us what it says (or is depicting)?

Either a man pulling a very large party popper or a snake climbing a wall.

[tom_e]

It's my responsibility, as operator of a heavy lump of metal, to be observant and make allowances. So I don't complain. I don't shout or rev or use my horn. I don't really expect pedestrians to take any responsibility for their lives. I want them to feel free to amble about with their head in the clouds. That's the way I like cities to operate.  If I hit a ped or a cyclist I'd never forgive myself.  Even if they tried to commit suicide by jumping in front of me it's still my responsibility to prevent a collision.  I don't just take care not to hit them - I also aim to anticipate their next move so I can avoid frightening or inconveniencing them.  At junctions I always see things from the point of view of the cyclists and pedestrians there and ensure they have space to do whatever they want to do.  I'm happy to sit behind them and block the traffic if I think they need some space. I don't need rules and lines and boxes and kerbs to force me to do any of this. So if I ride on a traffic island/divider I'll do it as considerately as I do everything else.   

That's a fine sentiment, but unfortunately it's not the way the world works.  I think the same about no-cycling in pedestrian areas.  A sensible controlled cyclist is no more dangerous than someone pushing their bike.  But there are selfish arseholes out there with bikes too, and it's much easier to have a rule for 'no cycling' in those areas than to mandate good behaviour.

If everyone drove perfectly considerately we wouldn't need speed limits.  We wouldn't need red light cameras.  We wouldn't need pedestrian crossings.  But we do, because we need easily explained rules to enforce.  We also need safety margins because people make mistakes, and at the very least others should be protected from that.  Hence speed limits, pavements for pedestrians, etc. 

At the end of the day I think a policeman would try to nick you for it.  Do you fancy your day in court, or are you just going to try and avoid getting caught?

[Tigerrr]

That raised motorcycle lane is big enough to pull a wheelie on, and spin up some smoke from the back to follow. It is as wide as Evel Kneivels run up to a 50 bus leap. Which might be the best way to get past the traffic jam.
Mind you I would only use it that way in a responsible manner myself, with due regard for other users.

[Jurek]

The only thing which surprises me Nick, is your level of disregard for vulnerable road users.

Oh for heaven's sake. Most of the time I'm not segregated from them, am I? If I was disregarding them I'd be knocking them down like ninepins, wouldn't I? Every day people using smartphones (or stoned or drunk or whatever) walk out in front of me. Car passengers open doors without looking. It's my responsibility, as operator of a heavy lump of metal, to be observant and make allowances. So I don't complain. I don't shout or rev or use my horn. I don't really expect pedestrians to take any responsibility for their lives. I want them to feel free to amble about with their head in the clouds. That's the way I like cities to operate.  If I hit a ped or a cyclist I'd never forgive myself.  Even if they tried to commit suicide by jumping in front of me it's still my responsibility to prevent a collision.  I don't just take care not to hit them - I also aim to anticipate their next move so I can avoid frightening or inconveniencing them.  At junctions I always see things from the point of view of the cyclists and pedestrians there and ensure they have space to do whatever they want to do.  I'm happy to sit behind them and block the traffic if I think they need some space. I don't need rules and lines and boxes and kerbs to force me to do any of this. So if I ride on a traffic island/divider I'll do it as considerately as I do everything else.

Now you're starting to sound funny. 
I like you.

[benborp]

Part of the reason that these new dividers are so wide is because they are separating two-way cycle lanes from the main carriageway. The cyclists using the lane where it is closest to the main carriageway will be cycling towards oncoming traffic, under such circumstances generous separation is pretty much a requirement, though there is the hateful east London practice of putting two-way, shared use cycle routes alongside major dual carriageways with the nearside lane immediately adjacent to the cycle path. A conventional kerb serves to condemn wayward cyclists to a fall into the path of oncoming traffic that probably isn't observing the 50mph limit. Riding a motorcycle along these new dividers pretty much negates those welcome safety and comfort benefits.

[Asterix, the former Gaul.]

This reminds me of those red light jumper threads.  No, I'm not talking about a pullover ..

[De Sisti]

[quote ]
..... which might be the best way to get past the traffic jam.
[/quote]
People in traffic jams should realise that others have the same right to be on the road
at the same time as them, so they should just accept it, or travel earlier/later to avoid it.
If they can't then they should be patient and accept it as one of those things in life that
they cannot control.

[Mr Larrington]

You're not stuck in traffic, you are traffic.