First bus stop bypass for cyclists installed on Manchester’s Oxford Road

Urban_Manc wrote:

Why not instruct bus drivers to give priority to cyclists overtaking them and enforce a strict 20mph limit on all other vehicles, use average speed cameras and fixed cameras, also presumed liability will make a massive difference in driver behaviour.

Bus stop by-passes are a recipe for disaster and dumping a zebra crossing in the middle of it will create further grievances and conflict.

Presumed liability mas a marginal effect. Most European countries have it, but cycling levels still vary. Sustainable safety is what truly matters, one part of which is homogeneity of mass, speed, and direction. Buses and bicycles should not mix.

Your plan wouldn't work. However, bus stops bypasses are usually slightly different in design in the Netherlands. There is no cycle track set back. Instead, there is a traffic island between the cycle track and road. This space is otherwise used for things like parking, pedestrian crossings, etc. In either case you haven't shown that this creates ''disaster''.

Argos74 wrote:

And you still couldn't pay me to use it.

Took one for the team, and rode up there this morning. Ye gods. I predict carnage. It's the wrong place to put this. There's three supermarkets (Morrisons, Lidl, Tesco), Cafe Nero, Subway, Superdrug and, oh FFS, a Wetherspoons. Lots of foot traffic coming and going out. Recipe for disaster. I saw two cyclists almost hitting pedestrians on the cycle path, and it wasn't even busy.

There's another one being built further down opposite Platt Fields Park. This is the right place to put something like this. The segregated bits are still a dogs arse, and the approach to the Mosely Road junction is still awful though.

There is another one being built outside Sainsbury. The godawful cycle path with poles and trees in hasn't been touched. FFS. The rebuilding does at least address the crappy road surface. But we will still have a massive amount of foot traffic crossing the cycle path. And taxi drivers who sit in the cycle lane dropping off, picking up, or waiting for a call from the office, and hoping it's Sainsbury shopping pickup.

The journey up on the dual carriageway was quick and uneventful. The journey back was slow and dangerous. 2 near misses in the space of 3 miles (attempted T bone and left hook).

@bikecellar

The poles either side of the crossing were fitted as this is what guide dogs react to - therefore they won't just walk out in to the cycle lane at the crossing point - disability groups were consulted on this it says.

cdl wrote:

I discovered last night that this cycle path is just wide enough to avoid another cyclist who stopped dead in front of me with no warning.

I've not seen this in person yet, as I have no desire to cycle through the double parking death trap bandit town that is Rusholme but I was wondering about what this is going to be like when a bus pulls in and pedestrians stream across the bike lane on the zebra crossing.

If you have a long chain of bikes and the first bike has to haul the anchors on to stop to allow someone to cross surely at some point there is going to be a pile up?

cdl wrote:

I discovered last night that this cycle path is just wide enough to avoid another cyclist who stopped dead in front of me with no warning.

Perhaps you shouldn't have been tailgating him.

stem wrote:

I'd favour a layby that busses pull into when stopping. You could have flashing signs saying "TAKE THE LANE NODDY!" to gently indicate that unconfident cyclists should move out from the kerb if a bus is there.

Are you serious!?

kwyken wrote:

Help me out here. why design a traffic layout that encourages pedestrians to cross the cycle lane? so what did I miss?

Its much safer to have pedestrians cross the cycle path to catch the bus than having buses crossing the cycle lane to pick up passengers. Pedestrians just walking down the footway don't have to cross the cycle lane.

HarrogateSpa wrote:

The more important thing for me is that the Twitter video shows a segregated lane behind the bus stop, then nothing afterwards except a painted bicycle. We need continuous infrastructure, not isolated bits. But maybe further work is planned, and that's coming?

The most dangerous section to cyclists (possibly one of the most dangerous sections in Manchester) is the road that continues northwards on from this bit.

They have plans to add more provision in for cyclists on this road but it's only in one direction from this point.

You've got two guesses to figure out which direction that provision is in: North or South.

As an added bit of information, the road that runs parallel to this has recfently been redesigned making it horrendously hostile to cyclists. This has lead to at least one death and plenty of injuries. It's been leaked that this decision to avoid putting cycling provision in and give motorised traffic more priority and the ability to go faster was in fact a deliberate move.

Road.cc should consider removing this nasty ad hominem attack from "Farrell" whoever that may be. If "Farrell" wants to "grow some" and tweet and comment here and at The Guardian and elsewhere in their own full contactable name instead of as some kind of anonymous troll then there might be grounds for leaving whatever they say published.

As it is their approach of nasty sneering, nasty jeering and nasty smearing has no place in this discussion. In my opinion.

Whether that sneering, jeering and smearing is against me (in a role on which I spend many many hours and days, often challenging those who are actually designing and building things to do better) or as often the case against engineers, planners and other officers, or against organisations even, it is a poor strategy to disrespect and attack others particularly when you seem to have little grasp of what is really going on..

I have excellent relations with the leadership and members of Greater Manchester Cycling Campaign, have been a member, have supported rides to promote space for cycling, have helped build Manchester City Council members to the top three in the #spaceforcycling league table, have ridden on rides to lobby party conferences for more investment, have spoken at events, and also taken part in some monthly rides and mass events.

As a member of TFGM Committee with a role in championing cycling to other members of the committee and a role to challenge officers I have been pleased to see interest growing from beyond just a handful of members of that committee.

Many to be honest were more interested or entirely interested in the past in the very important sustainable modes that are buses, and trains, and trams, and in big highways projects (which do also in some cases support sustainable modes). A few were interested when it came to cycling in keeping cyclists out of the way of their cars - those ones know who they are, and are now reformed.

Now we not only have regular and systematic reporting but we have all 33 members of the committee taking an interest in speaking and at least 99% supportive of investment in people on bikes and on foot. I would expect that the next time they are asked to support a step change in that investment they will listen and they will support that change too.

Meanwhile as a back bench councillor in my own District I have always tried to support the excellent work being done by the excellent GM Love Your Bike to challenge planning reports to get more cycling parking and storage and safety into them.

Now as a member of the Planning Committee I am pleased to see developments coming in front of us with 75% and even 85% parking for cycles.

I don't think we will ever see another TFGM annual report or budget with no reference to the C word. And the outline GM2040 transport strategy shows a massive step change towards active travel and liveable city and conurbation.

Whether I am following a particular Twitter account or not - and yes, I did block an at times rather feral style GMCC account for a time - I take the time to answer many, many queries.

Sometimes these queries arise from excitable nonsense posted by those who should know better. But I answer patiently nonetheless. And I soak up a fair bit of the sneer, her and smear tendency also. Colleagues often wonder at how anyone puts up with some of it, still less an unpaid advocate for the exact same causes. But I decided to block the group's Twitter feed (for a time) when, shrinking violet that I am, I found the tone and content of that high volume feed to be unacceptable.

Obviously the viewpoints of GMCC members remained readily available by conversing with them and by interacting with their individual accounts.

The comments in this thread and elsewhere about the particular piece of infrastructure under discussion vary quite widely. This has been deemed the best example in the UK and significantly better than the award-winning Brighton examples or London's by many.

Thanks for those comments.

The greatest theme in the criticism of the bus stop by-pass appears to be that it is not part of a protected network or route.

It is a trial for an element that is being used in multiples. Very sensible. I repeat: it is a trial. There will be 13 of these towards the City and also (under different funding) a similar number on most stops southwards to Didsbury.

The fragments of infrastructure which are now being installed - in a re-scheduled programme designed to avoid a 7km long pinch point and excessive traffic disruption including to cyclists - will soon be joined up into a continuous largely separated route.

If we are able to introduce the TRO restricting private cars from the inner section of the route well ahead of its completion, in the next few weeks even, we will do that,

Chrisplol wrote:

The greatest theme in the criticism of the bus stop by-pass appears to be that it is not part of a protected network or route.

Um... no. My criticism from half an hour's observation of it in action would be that the bus bypass already constructed could potentially lead to conflict and collisions between pedestrians and cyclists, and one under construction could lead to more of the same. Also doesn't address the major underlying safety issues with the route in general from the new infrastructure, and areas which have not been addressed.

If you're at Tuesday's space4cycling ride, would be happy to ride down with you afterwards to look at the unaddressed issues, and how the new/under construction infrastructure could lead to worse safety rather than better. Coffee and cake's on me. Ask around or contact me on Reddit.

therealsmallboy wrote:

I can't help but think that people are just going to stand about in the red cycle lane area especially when it's busy and end up blocking it. It gets really busy there.

It does indeed get busy there - busy with cyclists. I doubt it'll take long for most people to realise that the cycle lane isn't somewhere they should stand.