‘Deathtrap’ fears over new York contraflow bike lane

if that is the correct image, then from what i can see, it is double yellow lines. so parking there for 45 minutes isnt allowed! i think loading for 20 minutes is the limit....

Then-councillor, now-Honourable member for Cambridge, Julian Huppert was told that he would have 'blood on his hands' when he made the case for installing contra-flow cycling in Cambridge. No deaths yet, and not even aware of increase in likelihood of accident. The fact that these routes allow you to (legally) avoid busy main roads is almost certainly a gain for safety.

Plus there's no shortage of two-way routes round here where it isn't possible for cars to pass each other at the same time. People manage, and give way.

contra-flow lanes are a stoopid idea unless they're fully segregated. Delivery trucks park over them and you then play chicken with oncoming traffic and pedestrians tend to only look in the direction of traffic when they are crossing the road

I find most cycle lanes everywhere are poorly designed and thought out; I see a lot that you can't access unless you join them where they start but if you want join them somewhere along their route you are blocked by high kerbs and grass verges and Armco barriers. Painted on cycle lanes in cities are no better as they are usually just seen as parking lots.
This one seems pretty dangerous, drivers are not going to expect bikes to be coming the wrong way down a one way street, also riders entering and leaving Tanner Row will be making a manoeuvre contra to all other traffic which has got to be dangerous. I think this needs some major rethinking.

I don't have a problem if drivers cross over the white line to pass a parked truck.

But given the obstruction is (presumably) on their side, they have to give way to oncoming traffic. Which here would be bikes.

Or does Mr Stannard imagine a world where, on seeing an oncoming bike, a parked truck, and a narrow gap, most drivers will think "better put my foot down"?

Lot of fuss over the contra-flow.

It's really a two way street, cycles only along one direction and a solid white for do not cross.

Drop a copper in and stop any driver that crosses the line.

I find the majority of cycle lanes to be in monumentally thick places. I can think of one contraflow in Glasgow that does work, but even this one after 50 yards hits a very busy pedestrian area and ceases to be of use.

That particular stretch of road is 2 way - between junctions with George Hudson Street and Barker Lane. The one way bit is north east, between junctions with George Hudson street and North Street.

Had a scout around with Google Streetview, as I don't live near York. This is a monumentally thick place to put a contraflow cycle lane (those two words should never be in the same sentence in the first place). It's not a major thoroughfare, if morons are using it to get illegally towards the Ouse, one would have to ask why they're not using the much more obvious routes along Station Road and Micklegate, and targetting cycle safety measures there.

Here's some pics of the one way bit, facing in a southwest direction / same direction as one way traffic. You may need to put your helmet on and a cushion on your desk before viewing the pics.

Edit: second pic

I am the only one who can't see anything like a bike lane in the photo?

There seems to be no mention of the extent to which cyclists illegally have been travelling in the contra-flow direction and I'm reminded of a comment from a former officer with York Council on his (polite) response to any complaints about provision of parking spaces. "We are only required by the law to provide roads for moving traffic so I suggest you find somewhere to park for yourself - we won't be providing one".

Quite frankly the expectation that road surfaces which cost a lot to build and maintain, are provided for storing private property often for long periods (most private cars are idle for on average 95% of the time) is something which has crept in over the past 50 years, along with the need to waste paint and signs indicating where parking is not permitted. Let's return to the simplicity of the Highway Code signage of the 1930's put up signs showing where parking is permitted, and have the clear understanding that it is not permitted at all other places. This does not preclude stopping to load or unload a vehicle but abandoning it as an obstruction - no.

Of course this would then really deliver the proper market economy for the provision of places to park a car or truck, and quite likely reduce the total pay-out on parking fines made by UK motorists, who might just begin to accept the cultural adjustment of paying to park their cars when these are not in use.

So Mr Stannard might need to consider how he manages his transport resources - I suspect that disabled parking space is used by one vehicle throughout the day, and as for a delivery truck stopped for 45 minutes to make a delivery, those haulage operators must be well loaded profit-wise to be able to afford such long periods of their trucks standing still and not moving goods around.

Mr Stannard's concern for the welfare of cyclists is so touching, don't you think?