Cycle lanes Abbey lane

[Guest sibon]

it's sad that so many cyclists use the footpath (which is illegal and dangerous) but then motorists make the roads unsafe for bikes so, what can you do?

 

I don't know, but breaking the law and making pavements unsafe for pedestrians isn't the answer.

[altus]

I don't know, but breaking the law and making pavements unsafe for pedestrians isn't the answer.

No it isn't, but neither is Sheffield Council's habit of putting in dangerously narrow cycle lanes that encourage drivers to break the law by overtaking when there isn't enough room to do so safely.

[xsf7]

No it isn't, but neither is Sheffield Council's habit of putting in dangerously narrow cycle lanes that encourage drivers to break the law by overtaking when there isn't enough room to do so safely.

 

Isn't it Amey responsible for "Streets Ahead" . Doubtless they will have got even more tax-payers money for their shoddy, pointless and not-fit-for-purpose work.

[altus]

Isn't it Amey responsible for "Streets Ahead" . Doubtless they will have got even more tax-payers money for their shoddy, pointless and not-fit-for-purpose work.

I'm pretty certain they are just following instructions from the council. Sheffield council have been putting down stupidly narrow cycle lanes for far longer than Amey have been involved with the roads.

[grand]

maybe people who ride bikes everyday and want more cycle lanes would like to pay some sort of road tax to help fund all these lanes for cyclists

[Guest sibon]

No it isn't, but neither is Sheffield Council's habit of putting in dangerously narrow cycle lanes that encourage drivers to break the law by overtaking when there isn't enough room to do so safely.

 

I watched a car overtaking a cycle at the island near the railway bridge on Abbey Lane, last night. There was enough room, but only just. That was down to the skill of the driver and cyclist, rather than road design.

 

Personally, I never overtake at such horrendous pinch points. A bit of driver education wouldn't go amiss.

[altus]

maybe people who ride bikes everyday and want more cycle lanes would like to pay some sort of road tax to help fund all these lanes for cyclists

You obviously don't understand how roads are funded. As a start, try looking up the amount of council tax that gets spent on highways and then consider that cars wear out the roads about 10000 times as fast a cyclists do.

[srtaylo0]

It's worth noting that these cycle lanes are not new.. they have been there for a good few years. Perhaps down to age, they have faded.

 

You can still see them on google maps...

 

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.3355351,-1.4979472,3a,75y,276.34h,65.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1saQu8_rn1RjS3mpPjhg-13g!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

Having cycled up there many times I can concur - they are useless and cause confusion.

 

On the comment about cycling on the pavement on abbey lane... I think a lot of people leave millhouses park, perhaps with children, and don't want to get onto abbey lane, favoring instead to ride on the pavement over the rail bridge before joining the old tram way bit just after dalewood road.

 

At the top of Abbey Lane I think a lot of people with children ride on pavements going to or coming from school. I'm not saying it's right, more I can see given confidence levels why people do it.

 

Maybe rather than calling out the legalities of cycling on pavements we should take a view of .... "cyclists on the pavement should be seen as a flag which indicates that road and cycle infrastructure design is not adequate. "

<http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2015/01/how-poor-design-creates-conflict.html>

 

I think its an interesting viewpoint.. that people don't do things intentionally to be difficult or break the law they do it because they want to feel safe and some designs negate feeling safe.

 

Abbey lane has two examples of this that are called out in this thread...

1. People choose to cycle on the pavement so they feel safe.

2. The silly cycle paths just cause confusion.

 

So what could be done.. Maybe the money spent on painting the silly cycle lanes should have been spent on making the pavement a combined cycle/footpath with decent segregation (not sure its wide enough though especially at the bottom).

 

Encourage people to use the old tram way... that might have meant changing the priority at junctions and figure out a decent way for people to regain the carriage way at bocking lane roundabout.. or perhaps creating a new cycle path over hutcliffewood road and on up abbey lane, perhaps finishing at abbey lane primary school. Again perhaps make the pavement wider and create a combined cycle / footpath.

 

Having seen the number of Abbey Lane primary school kids on bikes and scooters I think this would have been well used - I think there would have been demand.

 

I think though the planners went for the easy option of just replacing what was there previously and not using the resurfacing work to make a safer environment.. an opportunity missed. But given the number of roads and rework currently going on then how can the over stretched planners think of everything ?

[rogets]

The sort of people who moan about cycle lanes are probably the kinds of people who drive to work in a car, no passengers so one person per car

 

An no doubt have a staffy dog at home called Rocky

[Cyclone]

maybe people who ride bikes everyday and want more cycle lanes would like to pay some sort of road tax to help fund all these lanes for cyclists

 

If you could find such people, they'd probably point out that they pay VED for the cars they are leaving at home and in fact for reducing congestion and pollution they'd rather have a refund on that VED thanks.

They might also say, if you think road tax exists then you should be immediately disqualified from thinking about or driving any vehicle.