Bus stop island between cycleway and road

[saaby93]

Before and after


Speed hump in the cycle lane - see the cyclist waiting for the pedestrian
Good or not?

Edited by saaby93 on Monday 10th March 11:12

[zcacogp]

The only thing in it's favour is that it doesn't make the cyclists wait behind the bus (in the exhaust, natch) for it to stop and then pull away again, or to have to try and get past it by riding into oncoming traffic.

Speed bumps in cycle lanes are a BAD idea, but maybe a clue as to how the urban planners are starting to think ("Speed kills, yeah? Therefore all those nasty fast cyclists need to be SLOWED DOWN"). I also don't like the fact that there will be lots of changes of surface along that cycle lane, which will make it dangerous to ride when wet and uncomfortable to ride when dry.


Oli.

[sandman77]

I think it is a great idea, removes all conflict between buses (and other motor vehicles) and bikes and should improve journey times for everyone. Win win situation. The only change I would make is add a zebra crossing for bus passengers crossing the cycle lane.

[anonymous-user]

Seems reasonable to me.

Does make me laugh that the picture omits the queue of cars stuck waiting behind the bus though!

[mini1380cc]

That speed bump will likely be used as a ramp in an attempt to "get air" which needs a good build up of speed.

[paulrussell]

Quite a good idea. I think the speed bump is there only to make sure there is no change in surface level, so disabled and elderly can get across easier.

[zcacogp]

You could do that with a dropped kerb each side, and thus not inconvenience cyclists.

[Nigel Worc's]

I can see the merits of the idea, but in practice, expecting/hoping cyclists are going to stop for pedestrians is somewhat unlikely.

[sooperscoop]

zcacogp said:

You could do that with a dropped kerb each side, and thus not inconvenience cyclists.

I think it's meant to inconvenience them, or at least snap them out of their stupor so that they are are more aware of their surroundings and the presence of pedestrians, as well as slowing down the majority of them

[Rich_W]

I don't see how taking cyclists from the road and putting them in an area where pedestrians are is a good idea. Especially as the vast majority of people will just pass the bus anyway. Surely better to make the bus stop have a proper lay by. So that traffic on the road is not held up when the bus has to stop.


As ever, town/road planner in "not really understanding human nature" shocker.

[Dammit]

It's a terrible idea, the majority of experienced cyclists will ignore the cycle path and use the road, the inexperienced ones may use the path- until a pedestrian steps straight into their path without looking.

Then it'll rain, and due to no drainage having been thought of it'll turn into a pond.

[405dogvan]

I see no point as cyclists operate on a "we cycle where the fk we want" basis - expecting everyone else to leap out of their way..

There's a stretch of road near here which goes

Grass Verge
Wide single/dual-carriage roadway
Wide pavement
Cycle path
Wide Pavement
Grass Verge
Gravel Carpark
Sand Dunes
Cycle/Ped Combined Path
Sand Dunes
Beach

The only one of those cyclists don't use is the beach - at least it's the only one where I've not almost been hit by one...

[Dammit]

Had you considered wearing some high visibility clothing and a helmet? Sounds like your chosen mode of transport is quite dangerous.

[Rich_W]

405dogvan said:

I see no point as cyclists operate on a "we cycle where the fk we want" basis - expecting everyone else to leap out of their way..

...
Wide single/dual-carriage roadway Legal

Cycle path Legal


Gravel Carpark Legal

Cycle/Ped Combined Path Legal



The only one of those cyclists don't use is the beach - at least it's the only one where I've not almost been hit by one...

I love how in the cases above you have the blind idiocy to complain you were nearly hit by a bike. Do you often find yourself walking down train tunnels and then complain that you nearly got run over by a train? Or maybe going for a nice stroll on the M1 and then wondering why everyone is so aggressive towards you

[anonymous-user]

They're about to build 2 of these on fairly major roads in Cambridge.

I have my doubts but will wait and see what happens. Cycling discipline in Cambridge is poor in general - but that's not unexpected with 17% of all traffic being cycle. My biggest concern is cyclist/pedestrian conflict, due equally to peds waiting in the cycle lane, and cyclists not slowing down though sheer bloody-mindedness. Also, due to the bus stops serving the five park and ride sites, the frequent buses will hold up cars, as the width for the cycle lane has been stolen from the carriageway.

Time will tell. I know one thing though. The bloody fruitcake cycling lobby still won't be happy.

Eta an interesting (to me, at least) video-rendering here. I'm not sure about a few legalities - the unproven cycle zebra crossing, and the signing of the path/bus stop/road interface, but it could work. After all, there are by-laws in place just up the road in Newmarket which give horses priority, so maybe Cambridge could do similar.

Oops - the link: http://www.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/CMSWebsite/Apps/N...

Don't look at the proposed drawings on that site, they're embarrassingly wrong. They're not mine, I might add, but as a fellow engineer I feel a bit bad for the guy that did them...

Edited by OpulentBob on Monday 10th March 23:29

Edited by OpulentBob on Monday 10th March 23:42

[Nigel Worc's]

Rich_W said:

I don't see how taking cyclists from the road and putting them in an area where pedestrians are is a good idea. Especially as the vast majority of people will just pass the bus anyway. Surely better to make the bus stop have a proper lay by. So that traffic on the road is not held up when the bus has to stop.


As ever, town/road planner in "not really understanding human nature" shocker.

PMSL, the town planners here have been closing bus laybys so the buses hold the traffic up !

[Dammit]

OpulentBob said:

They're about to build 2 of these on fairly major roads in Cambridge.

I have my doubts but will wait and see what happens. Cycling discipline in Cambridge is poor in general - but that's not unexpected with 17% of all traffic being cycle. My biggest concern is cyclist/pedestrian conflict, due equally to peds waiting in the cycle lane, and cyclists not slowing down though sheer bloody-mindedness. Also, due to the bus stops serving the five park and ride sites, the frequent buses will hold up cars, as the width for the cycle lane has been stolen from the carriageway.

Time will tell. I know one thing though. The bloody fruitcake cycling lobby still won't be happy.

What are you trying to say here- that if this percentage was higher the discipline would be better, or worse?

[anonymous-user]

I think with the amount of cycles, and considering the demographic that ride them, a lower amount of traffic would lead to fewer examples of poor cycling. Ever had to tackle a squad of Chinese students trying to navigate through Cambridge on a wet December evening? Chaotic is a compliment. More than once I've found them riding directly at me, no lights, middle of the road in to oncoming traffic. My 4 mile cycle commute is 100% off road (cycle lanes) and I'm in the minority of cyclists.

PS I'm a road safety engineer, and while I haven't got stats/proof for the above, it's an educated opinion, not an anti-cycling rant

Edited by OpulentBob on Monday 10th March 23:37

[anonymous-user]

Nigel Worc's said:

PMSL, the town planners here have been closing bus laybys so the buses hold the traffic up !

That'll be the bus companies - as statutory consultees of the highways dept/committees - moaning that their buses run late because cars never let them out of lay-bys... I had to remove one in Basildon for EXACTLY that.

[405dogvan]

Rich_W said:

405dogvan said:

I see no point as cyclists operate on a "we cycle where the fk we want" basis - expecting everyone else to leap out of their way..

...
Wide single/dual-carriage roadway Legal

Cycle path Legal


Gravel Carpark Legal

Cycle/Ped Combined Path Legal



The only one of those cyclists don't use is the beach - at least it's the only one where I've not almost been hit by one...

I love how in the cases above you have the blind idiocy to complain you were nearly hit by a bike. Do you often find yourself walking down train tunnels and then complain that you nearly got run over by a train? Or maybe going for a nice stroll on the M1 and then wondering why everyone is so aggressive towards you

You're definately a cyclist because you missed the most fundamental rule of riding/driving which is "don't crash into other things".

You also missed the fact that because there are many options, cycles are on ALL OF THEM - which means we pedestrians are in the firing line no matter where we go.

Most cyclists I see seem to think they're immune to the rules of course. They assume peds will magically leap out of their path - they assume cars will give way on roads - they assume drivers will see them as weave through carparks and - worst of all - they transition between those things at-will with minimal regard for others. Traffic lights they ignore - pavements they abuse and we're supposed to tolerate it because they're "getting fit" or somesuch st.

I'll back more cycle lanes when cyclists stop ignoring the laws which exist already - otherwise there's no point at all.

Oh - and you'll need a licence because you're getting points for failing to do so - that would improve cycling standards MASSIVELY.

Edited by 405dogvan on Tuesday 11th March 17:56