“Hare-brained” segregated bike path will “prioritise a small handful of cyclists over thousands of commuters” and increase collisions, councillors claim

Quote:

Bartoli also accused the Labour-controlled council of “spending other people’s money”, despite the funding being supplied by the government’s Active Travel Fund

Whose money do councils normally spend?

Thanks for the local knowledge

100% agreed!  I grew-up in Whitley Bay, and while I haven't lived there for a long time I too know the area well.  This cycle path looks like an excellent scheme.

It seems to me that these two councillors were possibly having a quiet snooze in the council meeting and were rudely awakened by hearing the word "bicycle",  and responded by trotting-out their well-worn, and totally irrelevant,  clichés...

A (Swedish) friend of mine was, until recently, working in Turku, Finland. He, and others, thought it was quite normal to commute to work by bike, even in the winter when it was usually well below zero, he'd often brush the snow off his saddle at the end of a day's work and crack on. He'd also make me green with envy when he posted pictures of the bike lanes out there, often well away from roads and with their own bridges and underpasses. 

Have you thought about standing for office?

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

For once I'd like to see councils reject schemes supporting tiny minority pompous self important bigoted individuals and do what they are paid to do - look after the vast majority of residents who just happen to own cars. It's time these entitled lycra f**kwits realise they are in the minority and shut the f**k up.

I've often wondered why Lisa Simpson chose a baritone sax.

perce wrote:

I've often wondered why Lisa Simpson chose a baritone sax.

Oddly she started with an alto given to her by "Bleeding Gums" Murphy, but for reasons never explained it later became a baritone. Bit of a mystery, that.

Ah yes - haven't been.  I read the various critiques of the proposed Rake Lane roundabout designs (North Tyneside Living Streets, Ranty Highwayman) beforehand.  While I'm not sure they've been completely addressed it actually looks pretty good?

It's not really much like a standard Dutch design (urban style mostly here, and non-urban / non-cycling priority design here).  That's because of the the massive size.  That makes speed on entry / exit a potential issue (and can complicate sight lines etc.)

However they seem to have slightly tightened some of the entry angles to reduce speed and the roundabout / entries are a single lane which also should help.

Before

After

I guess it's all about the speed and number of vehicles.  If the speed entering or exiting hasn't been sufficiently addressed (which is harder with a large radius) then it won't be as safe or pleasant.  Too many vehicles and it's the wrong design entirely!

Local here.

The user experience of the roundabout is mixed, drivers just don't pay attention, entering the roundabout they'll more often than not stop for pedestrians (but not always) presumably because the zebra is a recognised marking, but I'd say 8/10 times if you;re on a bike then you;re invisible. Its partially down to the arrangment that you;re not actualy on the rbt but are crossing it and theres no perpendicular lead in to the crossing point - its an immediate right turn from the cycle track.  I always signal if I'm crossing but its not often I can juts carry on regardless safe in the knowledge any car exiting the rbt is going to stop.   Primarily though its down to drivers just not looking - on entry to the rbt at the point they should be looking for you they are target fixated on the circulatory traffic and will just carry on regardless and stop on the crossing.

Thanks for info!

We have one that was painted a bit like a Dutch roundabout e.g. red parts - but it's rather wide and has no cycling infra on it at all! (Couple of cycle lanes lead up to it including one that traps you...)

I'm wary of designs which require others to get it right for me to be safe.  I think the standard Dutch design tries to reduce that dependence by e.g. slowing the dangerous mode (motor vehicles), ensuring parties have best possible sight lines and cross at right-angles, having only one thing to deal with at a time etc.

OTOH it still sets the expectation that the cars will stop for you.  I think that's why David Hembrow argues for a marginally less convenient design. (Image on right below.) That gives priority to the drivers at the crossing point - or seen the other way doesn't lead cyclists to expect drivers to stop.

Now this isn't a popular opinion in NL!   Cyclist expect to get priority except outside of built-up areas in NL.

But maybe would make sense as a starting point for the UK - where drivers aren't used to looking for cyclists and certainhly not giving way? (And of course if there are too many vehicles this kind of roundabout is not appropriate for cycling anyway - often the case in the UK...That would require some other arrangement.)

Ironic of Cllr Bartoli to use that phraseology given the following inconvenient article:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/boris-johnson-seen-campaigning-to...

Don't bring logic into a discussion based on prejudice

Seriousness is a better argument.

There is evidence that cyclists hit Peds at similar rates to cars.

It's just that recorded incidents are 25% lower. Because leaving dirt from wheel on trousers isn't recorded, while needing a concussion check after being knocked down is... (Basically bottom level of severity for both cars and bikes)

Of course we should focus on incidents involving harm...

The scheme is popular with a majority. Tories only like democracy when it's in their favour.

A six-week public consultation conducted by the local authority, starting in October 2021, recorded that out of more than 11,000 comments made, 6,965 were in favour. The consultation also recorded that 68% of the 1,500 respondents believed they would travel more sustainably if the scheme was permanently implemented.

I've used the Rake Lane roundabout which is Dutch style and it's great for walking and cycling. As a driver it's also fine but you need to pay attention. I suspect the Tory councillors are rubbish drivers.

gazza_dout wrote:

of more than 11,000 comments made, 6,965 were in favour.

Given there's a 'small minority of cyclists', to get those sort of numbers in favour of the scheme is quite impressive.

It got me thinking, it's really hard to get these schemes approved if it relies on a popularity vote. The whole point of these schemes is to encourage people to change their behaviour and, in general, people don't like change.

The metro runs up along the coast that way; why on earth would anyone choose to drive into the city centre instead?