Rye Lane cycle lane confusion and danger

[Huggers]

despite living here years, ive never noticed that the bit of pavement that looks exactly like the rest of the pavement in Rye Lane is a cycle lane, not till today when cyclist and me nearly collided, side stepped each other and just missed toppling each other. I was upset and the young woman was very upset but it was nobodys fault. But looking at it, I see no indication it is a cycle lane except some tiny cycle motifs which weren't even present on that stretch of cycle pavement, down to the left coming out of Morrisons archway. I think the cycle lane should be painted pink or something. People must be bashing into each other all the time. I am also partially deaf so immune to bells.

[titch juicy]

Huggers my old buddy, not to belittle your complaint, it's very valid, but this exact subject has been covered on here on a fair few occasions.

[Huggers]

I wondered but couldn't be arsed to trail through the threads. Well now its come to my attention I can go all Boadicea on its arse.

[Huggers]

hmm just put in search 'rye lane cycle' and didn't get any specific reference to this designated yet unmarked strip of pavement.

[nxjen]

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1783127,page=1

This is a link to one of the recent threads. I agree the cycle lane should at least be painted in a contrasting colour.

[ianr]

A couple of meaty threads to be getting on with.

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1783127,1786230

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?20,1624090

[Huggers]

yes I see now. Paint It Pink is my advice.

[edhistory]

Does this mean that this "cycle lane" does not have the legally required markings?

[Huggers]

well that's what I think edhistory

[rendelharris]

It has been covered many times before but it's worth saying again, it's utterly useless, makes pedestrians hate cyclists and cyclists hate pedestrians because nobody knows what's going on - it's absurd. I always go round via Bellenden, it makes for a longer journey but worth it to avoid one of the most idiot bits of infrastructure in London.

[edhistory]

Here's an extract from the official Traffic Signs Manual Chapter 3 [2008].

Can anyone locate a copy of Chapter 5 and get s screen-grab of the required Diagram 1049 or 1049.1 white lines?

========================

17.33 Where a footway (forming part of a road) or footpath (e.g. through a park) has been converted to a route shared by pedestrians and cyclists, signs to either diagram 956 or 957 are used. These prohibit the use of the route by any other vehicles. The sign to diagram 956 indicates an unsegregated route. It should be located where the shared route begins and must be used as a repeater, at regular intervals(direction 11), to remind both pedestrians and cyclists that pedal cycles can be legally ridden on the footway or footpath. The sign to diagram 957indicates a segregated shared route that should be delineated by a continuous white marking to either diagram 1049 or 1049.1 (see para 16.15 in Chapter 5). The sign may be reversed in a mirror image according to which side of the route is used by cyclists and which side by pedestrians. The sign should be located at the start of the segregated route and must be used as a repeater at regular intervals along the route (direction 11).

[rendelharris]

Chapter 5 can be found here https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/223667/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-05.pdf and the diagram you want is on page 97. Not sure it's that helpful though as (I assume, anyway) the Rye Lane cycle provision presumably counts as either a shared pavement or off-road cycle lane, so the mandatory markings don't apply.

[JohnL]

I know about it (from here) - but Rye Lane is such chaos everyone just makes do.

I still remember some guy getting flattened by a bus wing mirror.

[Nigello]

I know about it (from here) - but Rye Lane is such chaos everyone just makes do. >>> Maybe it is because everyone is just making do that it is such chaos? Discuss! (Bad planning is at least partly to blame, making it hard for people to know who should go which in turn leads to a "sod it" attitude and lack of care as regards other people, IMHO.)

[Phlox]

Trying to imagine how a blind or partially sighted person copes, were they to accidentally stray onto it. I've had some close shaves there, as it's easy to forget.

[Borky]

some cyclists ride like entitled fools. Some pedestrians do not expect to be sharing a pavement with cyclists - unsurprisingly . if you are unable to stop in time on a busy walkway like to top end of the lane, then you are going too fast and deserve to drowned in the rye pond

I blame the grammar school system

[Nigello]

Trying to imagine how a blind or partially sighted person copes, were they to accidentally stray onto it. I've had some close shaves there, as it's easy to forget.

If only more people thought like this. It is really easy to forget that some people are infirm/poor of sight or hard of hearing so that is what feeds annoyances like pavement-cycling/overgrown bushes etc. Hopefully threads like this will persuade people to think about others less able-bodied.

[sally buying]

Evening Standard today

Cyclists have complained that new security barriers on London?s bridges make roads less safe for them, just hours after they were installed to protect pedestrians from terror attacks.

Campaigners said the reinforced fences, which have been set up in cycle lanes to shield crowds walking on bridges, were a ?crush risk? and showed a ?total lack of consideration? for the welfare of cyclists.

The sturdy partitions were put in place overnight on crossings at Waterloo, Lambeth and Westminster in response to the deadly terror strike in the heart of the capital on Saturday evening.

[rendelharris]

Here's the full story: http://www.standard.co.uk/news/crime/london-terror-attack-cyclists-voice-concerns-over-unsafe-security-barriers-on-capitals-bridges-a3557326.html

It seems a perfectly fair question to ask why the barriers haven't been placed between the cycle lanes and the road, protecting both cyclists and pedestrians, rather than between the cycle lane and the pavement as they have been, which does indeed increase the risk for cyclists of being crushed against the barriers without enhancing safety for pedestrians at all.

[Abe_froeman]

If they don't enhance safety for pedestrians at all then a better question is why they bothered in the first place.

[rendelharris]

I expressed myself poorly: I meant they don't make pedestrians any safer when placed between pavement and cycle lane than they would if placed between cycle lane and road.

Looking at the pictures there also seems to be a double whammy as the barriers appear to be taking up a good two feet of the cycle lane width, so they're pushing cyclists into an area where they're more likely to be hit while at the same time ensuring that the consequences of an accident will be more severe.

[edhistory]

rendelharris Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Chapter 5 can be found here

Thanks rendelharris.

We now have the law about the signage and ground markings that make a "cycle lane" legal.

There seems to be some doubt about whether this is in fact a "cycle lane".

We now need to find the Traffic Management Order [TMO] that permitted the introduction of a "cycle lane". This should be somewhere in the London Gazette.

[Abe_froeman]

Understood Rendel!

I think given what has happened in the last three months bicyclists are going to have to accelg finding safer alternative routes if they cant cross these bridges safely. It's for the greater good.

[ianr]

The Southwark public notice announcing the Rye Lane plans is available at http://www.2.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/3116/frequently_requested_traffic_orders. The actual TMOs are attached to the response to https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/en/request/traffic_management_orderplan_for. Or is the actual cycleway later than 2010?

[rendelharris]

There's no need for alternative routes though Abe - moving these barriers to the outside rather than the inside of the cycle lanes would create instant popup segregated cycle lanes, at no extra cost, with an enhancement to cyclist safety, no diminution in pedestrian safety and no inconvenience to the motorist. Who loses?