It's a classic

wafflycat said:

http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/facility-of-the-month/

Going by the linked correspondence it seems the council do, in fact, expect
cyclists to use the lane (re-inforced by the broken line at the start).
Idiotic.

Simon Bennett said:

wafflycat said:

http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/facility-of-the-month/

Going by the linked correspondence it seems the council do, in fact, expect
cyclists to use the lane (re-inforced by the broken line at the start).
Idiotic.

but later they say that the bike is there to denote that the bike is
painted to make riders aware that they can use the road; this is novel.
Paint out the bike would seem the safest thing

MartinM said:

Paint out the bike would seem the safest thing

Agreed. To the uninitiated (cyclists AND motorists), it looks like the
narrow space should be used by bikes. Punch-up, anyone?

PhilD

--
<><

Simon Bennett said:

Going by the linked correspondence it seems the council do, in fact,
expect cyclists to use the lane (re-inforced by the broken line at the
start). Idiotic.

Thick white lines like that will also be slick in the wet.
All the more reason to avoid it.

MartinM said:

Simon Bennett said:

wafflycat said:

http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/facility-of-the-month/

Going by the linked correspondence it seems the council do, in fact, expect
cyclists to use the lane (re-inforced by the broken line at the start).
Idiotic.

but later they say that the bike is there to denote that the bike is
painted to make riders aware that they can use the road; this is novel.
Paint out the bike would seem the safest thing

i agree completely.
But embarrassingly, I also understand the Council's position - they are working within the
regulations, but are creating confusion to those who don't understand road signs.
A painted cycle on the road does not indicate a cycle lane if it is not enclosed by a
while line. it is purely a 'cycle route' (yes, I know all roads are cycle routes too).

We have lots of these around us - the intention being to remind motorists that there may
encounter cyclists on the road.
The sections so marked are usually a road part of a longer route. the picture indicates
that this may be the case here as the end of some red tarmac can be seen.

The practice of cheap 'traffic calming' by painting a white line to narrow a road becomes
dangerous as too many pig-ignorant drivers believe any area to the left of a while line is
a cycle lane. If a road is better being narrowed, then it should be done properly with
physical kebs and verges, not a left over pot of paint.

John B

With attitudes like that from the council I could understand someone
with a spare can of black paint painting over the cycle symbol
themselves.
Iain

John B said:

The practice of cheap 'traffic calming' by painting a white line to narrow
a road becomes dangerous as too many pig-ignorant drivers believe any area
to the left of a while line is a cycle lane. If a road is better being
narrowed, then it should be done properly with physical kebs and verges,
not a left over pot of paint.

I agree with most of what you say, but not that point.
I argue that pinch points are dangerous to cyclists, and why do away with
space on a perfectly good road, which the cyclist could use as escape
space in an emergency?
I'm a fan of psycological traffic calming - naked streets and all that.
I'm all for the lines, but I do take your point that we cannot get into a
situation where cyclists are encouraged or forced to use the verge strip.

John Hearns said:

John B said:

The practice of cheap 'traffic calming' by painting a white line to narrow
a road becomes dangerous as too many pig-ignorant drivers believe any area
to the left of a while line is a cycle lane. If a road is better being
narrowed, then it should be done properly with physical kebs and verges,
not a left over pot of paint.

I agree with most of what you say, but not that point.
I argue that pinch points are dangerous to cyclists, and why do away with
space on a perfectly good road, which the cyclist could use as escape
space in an emergency?

I am not advocating pinch points, but narrowing over the whole length of the
road.
Wide roads simply encourage faster speeds and more overtaking.

John B

MartinM said:

but later they say that the bike is there to denote that the bike is
painted to make riders aware that they can use the road; this is
novel. Paint out the bike would seem the safest thing

Actually the bike symbol might be quite useful is coupled with an arrow
directing out onto the main carriageway. Motorists might even notice it
and realise that the main carriageway is where bikes are intended to go
and not into the narrow gutter strip.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Tony Raven said:

Actually the bike symbol might be quite useful is coupled with an
arrow directing out onto the main carriageway. Motorists might even
notice it and realise that the main carriageway is where bikes are
intended to go and not into the narrow gutter strip.

But that is absolutely not what the council wants in this case.It seems they
want the symbols to be misinterpreted; yet another a cycle ghetto buy
stealth.

Quoted message said:

With attitudes like that from the council I could understand someone
with a spare can of black paint painting over the cycle symbol
themselves.

The bicycle symbol is confusing and should be removed immediately. Of
course it's a route available to cyclists - it's a road from which we
are not explicitly excluded. We don't need a bicycle symbol to tell us
that.

However, even without the symbol the white line would still be mistaken
for a cycle lane by both motorists and cyclists. Yet another excuse for
motorist aggression.

--
Dave...

dkahn400 said:

The bicycle symbol is confusing and should be removed immediately. Of
course it's a route available to cyclists - it's a road from which we
are not explicitly excluded. We don't need a bicycle symbol to tell us
that.

I like the idea of roads for cyclists with motor car symbols painted on
them ;-)

John B

John B said:

I am not advocating pinch points, but narrowing over the whole length of
the road.
Wide roads simply encourage faster speeds and more overtaking.

There is traffic calming on a wide road near where I live, which has seen
fatal accidents. The paint was applied in the middle, to create a hatched
area which effectively narrows the road. I think the road engineers said
at the exhibition I went to that drivers are unsure if they are allowed to
cross the hatched area. So in this case in Warrington I would say out the
paint in the middle.
Sadly on my road they've also put in pinch points, and at least one
pedestrian refuge which is too narrow. Sigh.

John B said:

I like the idea of roads for cyclists with motor car symbols painted
on them ;-)

:-) Not quite the same thing, but I saw some new signs near here for the
first time this morning where cars and bikes appeared at least to get
equal billing. There are a plenty of signposted cycle routes around
here, mostly off-road, but I see they have now sign-posted some new ones
which appear to be a combination of tracks and small roads, and are
longer distance ones than the others (well, apart from the Grand
Randonee) On the road sections they have put up green rectangular signs
with a car and a bike side by side, saying 'partargeons la route' which
means something like 'let's share the road'. Which I thought was rather
nice.

T'would be better still if they put a horse on the picture as well.

darfc :-)

--
Holly, in France
Gite to let in Dordogne, now with pool.
http://la-plaine.chez-alice.fr

I've just ridden through Forest Row, there is a new similarly wide
strip enclosed by a white line (with hashed lines on the driveways)
painted green if you please, no bike symbol, GOK what it is for, I
certainly didn't use it. Will ask East Sussex CC.

the one on the other side of the road is even norrower but has no white
line.

John B said:

MartinM wrote:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Simon Bennett said:

wafflycat wrote:

>
http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/facility-of-the-month/

Going by the linked correspondence it seems the council do, in fact, expect
cyclists to use the lane (re-inforced by the broken line at the start).
Idiotic.

but later they say that the bike is there to denote that the bike is
painted to make riders aware that they can use the road; this is novel.
Paint out the bike would seem the safest thing

Quoted message said:

i agree completely.
But embarrassingly, I also understand the Council's position - they are working within the
regulations, but are creating confusion to those who don't understand road signs.
A painted cycle on the road does not indicate a cycle lane if it is not enclosed by a
while line. it is purely a 'cycle route' (yes, I know all roads are cycle routes too).

Quoted message said:

We have lots of these around us - the intention being to remind motorists that there may
encounter cyclists on the road.
The sections so marked are usually a road part of a longer route. the picture indicates
that this may be the case here as the end of some red tarmac can be seen.

Quoted message said:

The practice of cheap 'traffic calming' by painting a white line to narrow a road becomes
dangerous as too many pig-ignorant drivers believe any area to the left of a while line is
a cycle lane. If a road is better being narrowed, then it should be done properly with
physical kebs and verges, not a left over pot of paint.

Very few people understand road signs. Take the very common "no
smoking" sign of a cigarette enclosed by a red circle with a bar
through it. Strictly speaking that means "the previous restriction
against smoking has been lifted". But we know that smokers are as
unlikely to be familiar with the Highway Code as car drivers.

--
Chris Malcolm [email hidden] +44 (0)131 651 3445 DoD #205
IPAB, Informatics, JCMB, King's Buildings, Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK
[http://www.dai.ed.ac.uk/homes/cam/]

Tony Raven said:

Actually the bike symbol might be quite useful is coupled with an arrow
directing out onto the main carriageway. Motorists might even notice it
and realise that the main carriageway is where bikes are intended to go
and not into the narrow gutter strip.

Indeed.

But how likely is it those motorists who cause trouble will notice
that kind of subtlety? The arrow looks more like graffiti than an
'official' marking. Ample ambiguity to satisfy a true believer's
self-righteousness.

--
not me guv

John Hearns said:

Thick white lines like that will also be slick in the wet.
All the more reason to avoid it.

Nasty choice. Either ride further out than you might otherwise do
(potentially giving drivers a legitimate gripe) or risk the paint.

--
not me guv

MartinM said:

I've just ridden through Forest Row, there is a new similarly wide
strip enclosed by a white line (with hashed lines on the driveways)
painted green if you please, no bike symbol, GOK what it is for,

It's a corralling line for the potholes. They're not allowed to
encroach on the main surface of the road, so they all line up on the
left of this line to gaze enviously at the quadruple sets of alloy rims
rushing past at great speed just beyond their reach, whilst feeding
hungrily on the occasional double sets of alloy rims pottering past in
their kill zone.

R.