In a victory for one council's persistence to complete an active travel project, the number of collisions and incidents on a Swansea road where a cycle lane was built have been significantly reduced, Swansea Council having persevered with the bike lane despite "irresponsible" spread of "misinformation" during its construction.
WalesOnline reported the reduction in incidents on Mayals Road in Swansea, a route where a one-mile stretch of cycling infrastructure was installed in 2020-21. In the 10 years leading up to 2020 there had been "26 vehicle-related accidents [collisions]", nine of which were classed as serious.
> "Intimidating behaviour" sees police called to cycle lane consultation, as council cancels next event to "protect members of staff involved"
As per South Wales Police stats, in the three years prior to its construction there were six incidents on the road, three classed as serious and three "slight" ones, Swansea Council reporting that in the same three-year timeframe since the active travel project was completed there has been just one "slight" incident, which involved the driver of a vehicle and a pedestrian.
The project, which consists of an on-road cycle lane segregated from drivers and pedestrians (although at some junctions it returns to the road), was funded by Welsh Government investment and also saw the speed limit reduced to 20mph.
> "Far more pleasant for walkers and cyclists": 20mph speed limit analysis hailed "astonishing", with drivers' journeys just 45 seconds longer
A councillor from the area said it was especially "pleasing" to see the collision numbers fall as the council "had to contend with some misinformation that was being distributed irresponsibly" during the construction, suggesting the new route was "dangerous and would lead to more accidents [collisions]".
"When these routes are designed, a lot of effort goes into ensuring the improvements have road safety at the heart of them and consider all road users," Cllr Andrew Stevens said. "It's pleasing to know that the works carried out along Mayals Road have led to a safer environment for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists.
"A major part of our efforts to increase walking and cycling routes across Swansea is to create a safe environment that gives the public confidence to choose sustainable modes of transport such as cycling and walking."
Cycle lanes are a popular target for NIMBY objection and criticism from local residents, the example set by Swansea Council suggesting that there are road safety gains to be achieved if projects are seen through.
Despite the apparent success in reducing collisions, one Mayals Road resident told the Welsh news website that "cyclists never had a problem" on the route before the cycle lane. Paul Kane claimed that the active travel scheme has not brought any benefits, an attitude seemingly at odds with the statistical facts provided by South Wales Police and celebrated by Swansea Council.
Add new comment
20 comments
Some more local knowledge :
1. Nimbys/drivers get upset that 'lycra louts/mamils/tour de france wannabees' (delete as appropriate) don't use the cycle path. Many do uphill but as has been saud it's safer to stay on the road coming fuwn if you're doing mote than 20mph
2. The uptake by less experienced cyclists has also been criticised, hence the argument that 'noone uses the path'. The main reason is that it's a bit of a path to nowhere. Once you reach the top and the cycle path ends you're on an extremely busy narrow A road with cars thundering past. The council and many others have tried to extend the path to the next villages which would increase take up massively but it's been constantly blocked by landowners
I find that the stop lines for the joining traffic, such as shown in the top picture, are very often ignored by motorists. I am always very wary around them, and often think that the road is safer.
Motorists are quite happy to ignore any painted lines where they feel they want to proceed. Give way, no overtaking (especially in Lancs, eh wtjs?) etc.
OTOH we can simplify that: people are quite happy to ignore any painted lines ...
Motorists and the police are quite happy to ignore any painted lines where they feel they want to proceed
https://upride.cc/incident/cu14umk_fiesta_uwlcross/
https://upride.cc/incident/ds16wjx_peugeot_uwlcross/
Agree. Pretty much every junction I pass a drivist has their car nose sticking out into traffic and generally only looking in one direction
Paul Kane claimed that the active travel scheme has not brought any benefits.....
To him.
I bet Singleton & Morrestin Hospitals noticed a reduction in injured persons.
But but increase in cases of high blood pressure (possibly after going online)?
The word "dangerous" when applied to cycle lanes by motorists means "I'm such a dangerous driver that I might snap and mow down a little kid on a bike if I feel my god-given right to drive my car is in any way impeded."
Now now - be fair! I think it also means "...and I might get a nasty shock when I fling open my door and hop out onto the 'pavement' without looking only to find a cyclist pass me closely! And give me an earful about 'dooring'!"
I lived in Swansea before and after the new tracks were installed, and cycled along the Mayals Rd a couple of times each week. I'm sorry to say that I never used the downhill cycle track because, erm, I thought it was dangerous, or more accurately, would be dangerous at the speeds easily and safely achieved on the road. Why? Because it is narrow, has a few kinks, and adds junctions. The uphill track is pretty useful.
Thank you for the local knowledge. One out of two ain't bad? And you get the best of both worlds currently... Presumably there are people who wouldn't be happy sending their children down the road etc.?
Or is it through your forebearance in not using it that there has been a reduction in crashes?
If incidents have decreased but people still don't feel it's safe is it not "improve the track" further (the alternative would be "further reduce the motor traffic volume / speeds - guessing that is not on the table?)
Looking at it (online, assuming it's not changed much since 2022) it's ... mixed. Seems to have some shared space bits (bad), bit narrow, BUT it has half-competent bus stop bypasses (good). The side roads are also mixed - far from Dutch (not proper "continuous cycle / foot path") but OTOH don't make cyclists divert.
It was the side roads that put me off even though they are marked to give the track priority. I was used to taking primary position for the best view along the side roads before the track was in. The illusion of control, maybe.
I agree that it is a perfectly decent facility for cycling at lower speeds, say <20 kmh, which is why the uphill side worked well for me. It is a fairly long and steep hill, freewheeling down will get you to 40-50 kmh.
I assume the speed limit for motors is now 20 mph, although I had moved away before that change and as a fairly 'main' road it might have remained 30 mph
Also worth noting that Swansea and the surrounding region has some pretty good cycle infrastructure. You can make it most of the way to the Bannau Brycheiniog on good (wide, well surfaced, direct, straight, not excessively busy, few intersections) shared use paths. It also has some bizarre stuff, not least signs asking you to cycle at max 5 mph in singleton park.
Thanks! Haven't visited Swansea, another for the list...
Edinburgh has similar crossings "protected by colour!" at some juctions but still technically a cycle lane not cycle path / track. Mostly they work OK since the examples have good sight lines - so I (as a cyclist looking out for myself) can pre-empt issues.
We do have a (mostly) better example of what the UK might usefully do next in urban areas (CCWEL between Murrayfield and Haymarket - streetview here. Still LOTS of space for motor traffic though!).
In general "shared use paths" do not good cycling infra make. Although I make good use of the ones in Edinburgh ("I'm 'umbly grateful...") they only "work" for a very low level of walking and cycling. And it doesn't take many dog walkers to stuff them up for cyclists. (Never mind they're not friendly to those with visual impairments either).
If they "succeed" - get more users - your speed is going to come right down - unless you care less about pedestrians. However with sufficient space that could be rectified simply by clearly demarking cycling and pedestrian space. Ideally with colour / markings and a level change. Though it will still take a generation or so for people to learn. I suspect this Dutch idea "works" mostly because there are sufficient cyclists to essentially force pedestrians to keep to "their" space.
Anyway I hope the UK doesn't have to "transition" through much more of this "shared use" kind of stuff (again caveat - except in naturally very low demand cycling and walking areas, like the Dutch do in the countryside).
"Edward! There IS a Swansea!"
I think I've been up there on the Gower Getter audax. I vaguely recall being very grateful for the cycle route so I could get off the road and drop my pace to a more manageable level up the hill!
Have the 'Welsh News Website' published an apology for spreading Mr Kane's lies?
Even when you are able to ram the real stats down their throats the NIMBY's will still whine.
They prefer their alternative facts to real ones. They believe something, therefore it must be true.
Stupidity. https://bigthink.com/thinking/bonhoeffers-theory-stupidity-evil/#:~:text...'s%20%E2%80%9Ctheory%20of%20stupidity%E2%80%9D%3A,take%20steps%20to%20fight%20it.