World’s Shortest Cycle Lane?
Digg! this story.
There’ve been a couple of posts in the last few days about short, stupid, pointless cycle lanes - Bike Hugger has one, and so does Slate V (seen on the excellent Bicycle Diaries). The trouble is that both of these examples were from the USA, and as we know, everything’s bigger in America. The thing is though, in this contest, it’s smallness that wins. So that means that the UK now has a chance to be a world leader in two bike-related things:
- Indoor track cycling (woo woo wooo!)
- Stoopid, pointless, badly-designed bike lanes.
To prove it, I took a ride out yesterday to Gateshead, to record one of my favourites:
It’s at the point that I start acting like I’m in the Four Yourshiremen Sketch:
Bike Hugger: “Where I come from, the bike lanes are only 34 seconds from end to end.”
Karl: “34 seconds? Luxury! Our bike lanes are only 10m long, which at an up-hill speed of just over 12 mph, means you can cycle their whole length in just 2 1/2 seconds.”
Can you come up with a stoopider bike lane than this? Post your comments here - extra points for staying in character with a Yorkshire accent!
Logbook Activity
- Type: Cycle
- Date: 03/31/2008
- Time: 03:05:19
- Total Time: 2:15:00.00
- Distance: 30 miles
- Average Speed: 13.33 mph
Filed under: Cycle, Ranting, Newcastle, Silly Stuff, Road Safety, Gateshead
[…] Whitley Bay triathlete Karl McCracken reckons this 10-metre cycle lane in Gateshead could be the world’s shortest. Sadly, he’s probably wrong. SHARETHIS.addEntry({ title: “Is this the world’s shortest cycle lane?”, url: “http://quickrelease.tv/?p=377″ }); « Cycling’s medal success makes mass media sit up and take notice […]
Hi Karl
Funny vid, but somebody somewhere will have stills or movies of an even shorter one.
10m? Seems long to me.
“Aye, but tell that to kids these days, and they won’t believe a word of it!”
I sadly have to agree. But I want to see those shorts bike lanes - it’s time to start trying to shame the councils who think that this is ‘provision’ into doing something beyond pure tokenism.
[…] Stupid bike lanes Everybody is talking about the stupidest bike lane video, but Karl in the UK posts a video of his 10 meter bike lane in the UK.Do you know of any shorter? Via Carlton. […]
That’s a good one, Karl.
Dear Carl,
The reason for this lane is to take the cyclist from the on road cycle lane on Mill road to the new shared use path which is currently under construction on Quarryfield lane . With out this section of lane there wouldn’t be a safe connection between the on road and off road.I hope this resolves the problem of this apparently short section of route and that you will inform your web sites that while it is currently a short section of lane it will when construction is complete in the next month or so form part of extensive cycle facilities introduced to serve the new business park and college site.
Neil Frier
Team Leader Traffic Projects and Rights of Way
Of course, I’m not at all convinced about why it would be unsafe without this section of cycle lane, and have contacted Neil to set up a meeting to discuss this, and cycling provision more generally.
More details when I have ‘em.
It’s nice to see the reach of your blog posting. Also nice to see that someone involved in cycle lane provisions took the time out to respond to this too!
[…] It turns out that here in the UK we really are world class. After seeing my short bike lane film, DaveP suggested on quickrelease.TV that I look up the Warrington Cycle Campaign’s pages. They have a feature called Cycle Facility of the Month, pouring ridicule on the daft things our town planners do to ‘help’ cyclists. […]
Why do councils feel the need to push cyclists onto pavements? Surely motorists should be reminded that cyclists have every right to cycle on the public highway (except the motorway). As a racing cyclist, I refuse to be bumped up and down kerbs and dodge glass and other rubbish on shared pavements.
Nice section of fencing jutting out into the cycle lane. Perhaps Mr Frier could get the contractors to tidy up a bit.
@ JonathanS - I wholeheartedly agree!
@ Tony - would be nice, wouldn’t it? They had [I think] his boss, Nick Clennett on the TV on Wednesday night defending the cycle lane. Curiously enough, the offending item had been moved by the time the TV cameras arrived.
There is an even shorter on in Harrow. It runs along side a set of traffic lights on Northolt Road and measures just 15 ft from end to end. its sole purpose appears to be to get bikes through red lights as it by-passes the signals by running on the pavement to the left of the lights. Great in rush hour traffic
I used to live in Harrow! Northolt Road in rush hour - glad to get away from it to the ‘tranquility’ of Tyneside
Karl,
Very stupid but not the world’s shortest. Sadly not even close to Gateshead’s shortest. Have a look under the Tyne bridge, on the Gateshead side. Along Hill Gate (the road which goes in front the of Sage) there is an much shorter cycle lane - it’s probably less than two bike lengths. I can (just) long jump the entire length of it.
Andy
@ Andy -
!
Couldn’t see it on the all-seeing, all-knowing and watching-you google maps, but I’ll take your word for it - is it actually under the bridge itself, thereby evading satellite detection?
Neill, This type of cycle lane, going from off the road onto the road and off again is likely to see a cyclist hit by a vehicle. With all the distractions a motorist has to deal with this little section of cycle path would barely be noticed let alone avoided.
A driver would cut likely drive straight through the “obstruction” and take out any cyclist who has suddenly appeared in their path.
Drivers tend to use ALL of the road that is available for driving in, I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to skid to a halt to avoid a driver who has decided that a (much, much longer than this) cycle lane was for driving in, road markings be damned.
Like Jonathan I ride a racing bike and its safer to be present on the road 100% of the time….and at my usual 20mph speed safer for pedestrians too, who wander all over cycle lanes as well.
[…] I stopped for some fuel under the Tyne Bridge, and had a look at the 3m length of cycle lane that Andy mentioned on Friday. I took a photo, but with my phone . . . the lens of which is covered in lint & fluff. So it’s not a very good or clear photo. […]
The Rights of Way officer has given a reason that it’s the section that brings the path onto the road. I hate them even more than the road traffic islands that pinch the road in.
Cycle lanes should be on roads, not paths. There’s never a pavement long enough to make it worthwhile and they are frequently interrupted with junctions, where the cyclist is expected to keep stopping and give way – and bugger to the journey time. Nevermind that a simple white line is hardly enough to deter pedestrians to stay out of the lane, especially with their backs to you. Some of us can cruise at 20mph which is far too fast for most idiot bike lanes.
Dave - my thoughts aren’t too far off this, and I’m going to make a film in the next week or so (just as soon as it stops snowing!) to illustrate the point.
Surely needs a ‘Cyclists Dismount’ sign at the end.
Here in Watford we have a cycle lane through the town which uses 4 different types of lane (2 way, then south goes on the road with the buses, north on a pavement, then this is reversed, then south just ends with a Dismount sign). All this in just half a mile, and the council safe cycling initiative which suggests cyclists to get off and walk if there are pedestrians about (but you do get a free bell if you sign up to it).
Well, we all like to laugh at daft bike lanes don’t we? However, two things to notice: first, the road seems a bit “under construction”, with works going on to the left; second, the lane is defined by a broken line making it an “advisory” lane (which means cars can legitimately enter it but should give some sort of priority to cyclists). I suspect the original intention was that the advisory lane should sit next to the traffic island (which was subsequently set further up the road). Positions thus it WOULD make sense despite its length. Traffic islands restrict width and introduce conflict between cars and bikes. The presence of an advisory lane within such a constriction provides SOME protection to cyclists, encouraging cars to wait until the constriction is passed before overtaking. I would sooner see a short advisory lane next to the island rather than the road hump which has finally been installed.
Length isn’t everything.
Graham
Yep, it is under construction - the line from Gateshead Council is that this part of lane is necessary to make safe the transition from road to (yet to be built) shared bike / pedestrian path. At the moment, it’s just a building site, with standard rather than drop down kerbing, so there’s no real indication of what’s going to be there.
I have to say that I didn’t know about the dotted lines. If cars can legitimately enter the cycle lane, but have to give priority to cyclists, isn’t that the same as a normal road without a cycle lane? Put it this way, it is illegal to run cyclists over, even if they aren’t protected by this sort of lane! So actually, I don’t think it provides any protection, and given that this area has a mandatory 20mps speed limit, it still seems pretty pointless to me.
And finally - “Length isn’t everything” - fnnnaaar!
Having a laugh at a ‘daft bike lane’ isn’t really the point, is it? ‘Daft’ bike lanes aren’t just silly - they are genuinely dangerous to cyclists.
As Commuter Dave pointed out, bike paths don’t work for most cyclists, and they make drivers believe that we shouldn’t be on the road - I’ve lost count of the times I have had abuse from drivers for cycling on a road next to a ridiculous bike path (which crosses 8 junctions in 2 miles, is only on one side of the road, and normally occupied by old ladies with shoppers or mums with double-buggies).
Thoughtless cycle lanes, like the one in Karl’s video are just as bad - if it is still under construction, why is the cycle lane there at all? It is at best misleading and stupid, but more likely to encourage drivers approaching the traffic island to think that cyclists are out of the way and fair game for overtaking, when there isn’t really space.
You know what? Bikes were on the roads first. (’tell that to the kids these days, and they won’t believe you…)