New Oxford cycle lane really does give you the hump! (From Oxford Mail)

Here we go again cyclist " they think they are GODS of the road" are winging yet again despite the fact that they are segragated from traffic.Do they not realise that it is against the law to drive over a 'footway' without a dropped kerb to give access to property? If they road!(rode) at a reasonable pace taking into account other 'road' users ie pedestrians they would have no problem. As for showing an idiot on a BMX bike airborn to illustrate this story I consider that to be irresponsible journalism at its worst! The 'Cyclops' of this world are irresponsible enough without that kind of encouragement .

“You wouldn’t have cars dipping up and down 6in every few feet on the road, so it’s thoughtless to expect cyclists to do that."

Actually you would, given the quality of the roads round here!! there called potholes!

Zimmer "Do they not realise that it is against the law to drive over a 'footway' without a dropped kerb to give access to property?" yes but there is no reason for the council to have installed the raised sections of the kerb. It would be better/safer if they had a dropped kerb the whole length of the cycle lane. This would have been a simple solution at no cost if it was done properly in the first place.

This riduculus excuse for cycle provision has come about because the county council still doesn't have anyone with specific responsibility for cycling within the transport department. They claim that they don't need one because all their planning officers take into account the needs of cyclists. This policy is clearly failing, and someone should be tasked with ensuring the needs of cyclists are considered during all stages of transport infrastructure development (preferably someone who actually uses a bike in Oxford).

I'd much rather no cycle path than a bad quality cycle path.

There is not point in segregating cyclists from traffic if all you are doing is making them share poor quality tracks with pedestrians.

Why not drop the kerb after the footpath and before the cycle path?

What a waste of money if you have to avoid cycle paths and cycle on the road to be able to cycle at a responsible pace.

Agree with Zimmer - such a sensible contributor to the OM site.

The photo stunt is like showing a motorcyclist doing a wheelie up the road -it can be done, but shouldn't.

Another two ironic four letter security words from the OM computer: okay and safe

al_oxford wrote:
Zimmer "Do they not realise that it is against the law to drive over a 'footway' without a dropped kerb to give access to property?" yes but there is no reason for the council to have installed the raised sections of the kerb. It would be better/safer if they had a dropped kerb the whole length of the cycle lane. This would have been a simple solution at no cost if it was done properly in the first place. This riduculus excuse for cycle provision has come about because the county council still doesn't have anyone with specific responsibility for cycling within the transport department. They claim that they don't need one because all their planning officers take into account the needs of cyclists. This policy is clearly failing, and someone should be tasked with ensuring the needs of cyclists are considered during all stages of transport infrastructure development (preferably someone who actually uses a bike in Oxford).

The need for segragation arises for cyclist own safety because cyclists fail to conform to the Highway Code and such devices as raffic signals and adhereing to directions of Road Signs both Mandatory and Advisory. Huge lengths of unraised footpaths would lad to cclist,pedestrians and traffic becoming merged into what would become a carriage way for all.

Anyone who cycles in Oxford knows that the cycle provision is laughable when you consider the relatively large numbers of people regularly cycling. The fact that there is no-one directly responsible in the council is a sad indictment - they clearly rely on the fact that Oxford has a tradition of cycle commuting. Segragation is a tool purely to allow drivers to pay less attention to what is going on around them - not something to be encouraged in my opinion. All evidence from less car-centric countries shows that integration and sharing of carriageway space is safer for all - Even if it does mean drivers have to slow down and stop using their phones.

Zimmer "Huge lengths of unraised footpaths would lad to cclist,pedestrians and traffic becoming merged into what would become a carriage way for all."

I would urge all to have a look at the concept of shared space as a means of improving the aesthetics of the urban environment as well as lowering accident rates.
http://en.wikipedia.
org/wiki/Shared_spac
e

If we were all forced to look out for each other then the streets would be a safer place.

Simple answer. The police catch the CYCLO-TERRORISTS and ban them from the road. Then all sensible road users can get on with their lives. P.S. note to all cyclists when you start obeying the highway code, paying road tax, and all have insurence. You might get some respect on the road. Until then you will get on the road the same as you give

Old zimner wrote:
Simple answer. The police catch the CYCLO-TERRORISTS and ban them from the road. Then all sensible road users can get on with their lives. P.S. note to all cyclists when you start obeying the highway code, paying road tax, and all have insurence. You might get some respect on the road. Until then you will get on the road the same as you give

Final resorting is the classic moto-centric rhetoric based on Tabloid mistruths rather than facts. Far more drivers flout the highway code by speeding, mobile phone use accelerating through amber lights etc etc. We all pay road tax, drivers however pay vehicle excise duty. And if cyclists did have to pay this pro-rata to the wear on the road network - with the administration included it would cost us all money! Same answer for insurance, lets not forget that it is the speeding tons of metal on the road that are responsible for the thousands of deaths and many more serious injuries per year not the bicycle. Once the ignorant amoung us appreciate the facts then all sensible road users can get on with their lives safely.

The 'cycle lane' also drops over a circular arrangement of kerb stones into each side road - very useful and safe.
I'm sure there is lots of useful advice on the internet for road planners who struggle to deal with these things.

Another embarrassing blunder courtesy of OCC. If I had come up with this or had been responsible for this incompetence, I would hide in a corner in shame.

Old zimner wrote:
Simple answer. The police catch the CYCLO-TERRORISTS and ban them from the road. Then all sensible road users can get on with their lives. P.S. note to all cyclists when you start obeying the highway code, paying road tax, and all have insurence. You might get some respect on the road. Until then you will get on the road the same as you give

"Get on the road the same as you give" is a dangerous attitude to show Old Zimmer.

You must show respect and care at all times for all road users. When you fail to do this, for what ever reason, you become a danger to yourself and others.

Don't let your ego get in the way of being a safe driver.

Pay road tax and insurance then you can have your say. Until then, ride at a safe pace sensibly on the cycle paths that have been provided for you, they are there for a reason!

Oxford Lad wrote:
Pay road tax and insurance then you can have your say. Until then, ride at a safe pace sensibly on the cycle paths that have been provided for you, they are there for a reason!

By your logic I am due a rebate for all the motorways maintained and built, as that comes out of my VAT, income tax and council tax contributions. Insurance in a non-starter - you only have to look at the DfT's own stats (gained from the Police and A+E no less)

I dont understand this severe lack of understanding of the UK road tax scheme. It isnt that hard to comprehend - my guess is many are simply chosing to ignore the truth in the hope of gaining some selfish advantage, or an underlying jealousy at how mobile cyclists are during heavily congested traffic.

Well I have some bad news and general truths for the egocentric motorist who cries foulplay over taxation: you created this mess.

Your bad driving has put everyone's insurance up and made it nigh on impossible to get insured under 25. Your bad driving has lead to an increase in insurance payouts and this includes some massive personal injury payouts. Your bad driving has pushed many a law abiding cyclist into using pavements (and I quite agree no one should cycle on pavements).

Overuse of the motor has also lead to untold damages to road surfacing due to the weight of modern vehicles and the traction the emit upon the surface.

Also I will add: when did it become the cyclists problem that we dont pay VeD?

You're directing your "concerns" at the wrong people.

Old zimner wrote:
Simple answer. The police catch the CYCLO-TERRORISTS and ban them from the road. Then all sensible road users can get on with their lives. P.S. note to all cyclists when you start obeying the highway code, paying road tax, and all have insurence. You might get some respect on the road. Until then you will get on the road the same as you give

That brush must have tarred a lot of people...

as a bus driver which uses this route every day i beleave that this cycle lane could be made safer for the cyclist. on the junction of headly way the cycle lane comes off the curb into the road,it would be safer to re join the pavment/ cycle lane on the opposite side of the road but the curb is raised and dropped around the corner so the road markings make the cyclist join the bus lane. i think this is going to be hotspot for accidents with cyclists and buses. on the outher hand, how many times has everyone been in a bus when theres traffic jams in the car lane and a cyclist is in the bus lane going slower than walking pace when theres a cycle lane right next to them.as this cycle lane has been provided for them they should use it and be greatfull. if there moaning about the bumps then what are the things on the road called??? speed bumps??? so outher drivers do have bumps in the road. as your going over the new pedestrian crossing theres a strange rise in the road suface. at first we all thort it was a speed bump but as it all finished and marked up now theres now signs or roadmarkings warning us of this bump. if your not familliure with the road you could easilly lose controll or even damage the underside. there are so many things wrong with this section of road. anuther one is how difficult they have made it to turn out of the garage. and the bus gate is in theory a good idea but again i think its in the wrong place as there is to much happining in that area allready with the garage and a junction on either side of the road. i beleave that this section of road will have lots of accidents on it not just the cylists but cars aswell.

agree werzel very bad design and will cause problems for traffic coming out of the garage and lime walk as well. Traffic going to the garage will also trigger the sensor and turn the lights red.

werzel wrote:
as a bus driver which uses this route every day i beleave that this cycle lane could be made safer for the cyclist. on the junction of headly way the cycle lane comes off the curb into the road,it would be safer to re join the pavment/ cycle lane on the opposite side of the road but the curb is raised and dropped around the corner so the road markings make the cyclist join the bus lane. i think this is going to be hotspot for accidents with cyclists and buses. on the outher hand, how many times has everyone been in a bus when theres traffic jams in the car lane and a cyclist is in the bus lane going slower than walking pace when theres a cycle lane right next to them.as this cycle lane has been provided for them they should use it and be greatfull. if there moaning about the bumps then what are the things on the road called??? speed bumps??? so outher drivers do have bumps in the road. as your going over the new pedestrian crossing theres a strange rise in the road suface. at first we all thort it was a speed bump but as it all finished and marked up now theres now signs or roadmarkings warning us of this bump. if your not familliure with the road you could easilly lose controll or even damage the underside. there are so many things wrong with this section of road. anuther one is how difficult they have made it to turn out of the garage. and the bus gate is in theory a good idea but again i think its in the wrong place as there is to much happining in that area allready with the garage and a junction on either side of the road. i beleave that this section of road will have lots of accidents on it not just the cylists but cars aswell.

Use it and be greateful?

Perhaps we should apply that logic to other things, then? How about the limited drugs NICE commission for cancer - perhaps patients on the NHS should be greatful for that?

Or how about the Police service in crime hotspots, perhaps people should be greatful there?

Or how about the appalling pensions the elderly are given? Perhaps they should be greatful?

My point is we should never do things to a substandard when there is common sense reasoning for providing something that needs to work.

Your second point about speed bumps is also a red herring. Speed bumps have to be spaced out further than driveways (check out the road planning guidelines online) which makes them more practical to negotiate on cycle. If you are constantly bobbing up and down you lose momentum and cycling becomes a chore. Facilities like this quickly dont get used for a reason.

I think you're going to have to get used to cyclists for a while yet. ;-)

If you are constantly bobbing up and down you lose momentum and cycling becomes a chore. Facilities like this quickly dont get used for a reason...


have you seen headington hill? why is there a cycle lane all the way up the hill when theres a perfectly safe pavment to use. all but a few very fit cyclists get half way up the hill and stop and get off and pushthere bike the rest of the way. so there walking in the raod with large vehicles driving past. how is headington hill not a chore? and since when have cyclists been worried about a few bumps? surley it adds to the experiance. these people that want to save the enviroment by cycling to work need to realise that its not all going to be easy sailing. if they want to get on there bike and get to work without so much as a bit of effort over a few bumps then i think thats ridiculous. if they want to get to and from work with out a struggle they should get the bus. afterall thats the reason why this bus lane has been put in there to start with.