Parking in bike lanes « CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum

CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Parking in bike lanes

(28 posts)

Started 10 years ago by UtrechtCyclist
Latest reply from Rosie

No tags yet.

UtrechtCyclist
Member

Hi all,

it's been six weeks since we moved here from Utrecht and the cycling infrastructure is better than we expected, but one thing that really troubles us is parking in bike lanes. Good bike lane design isn't trivial, but there are some simple things that urban planners repeatedly get wrong, such as thinking that you're helping cyclists by building a bike lane where people can park.

Most local councils will not have a large designated cycle path team who are clued up on good cycle design practice. They also rely on the matched funding from central government / sustrans for these schemes.

Is there a case for lobbying for a simple statement in the documents from central government/sustrans saying something along the lines of 'No scheme featuring a section of bike lane upon which vehicles are allowed to park will receive funding'?

Hopefully such a simple statement might serve the dual purpose of preventing dangerous infrastructure being built and educating urban planners as to good practice. Is there such a statement in the current documents? I'm assuming not from looking at Melville drive...

Posted 10 years ago #
bdellar
Member

Such a statement would be a MAJOR step forward here in Edinburgh!

The council struggle between pleasing cyclists, and pleasing drivers.

So they spend lots of money on cycle paths that drivers can park in.

Posted 10 years ago #
gibbo
Member

'No scheme featuring a section of bike lane upon which vehicles are allowed to park will receive funding'

That might just result in no schemes having bike lanes.

I would argue that Edinburgh has practically zero km of on-road bike lanes.

Even Mayfield Road where, in stretches, the bike lane is to the right of parking bays wouldn't count, IMO, because how do the cars get to those parking bays?

(I was once almost taken out by a driver backing out of a parking space there.)

So, when stats are compiled to say how many km of bike lanes each city has, I think those stats should ignore anywhere cars are allowed to park or are allowed to drive over.

Posted 10 years ago #
Min
Member

So, when stats are compiled to say how many km of bike lanes each city has, I think those stats should ignore anywhere cars are allowed to park or are allowed to drive over.

I agree. Most cycle lanes are only put in as a box ticking exercise so that councils can look good with their xx miles of bike lanes.

Posted 10 years ago #
slowcoach
Member

Have stats been compiled to say how many km of bike lanes each city/council has? As mentioned above such stats would be hard to meaningfully compare either between areas or within an area over time, so it probably isn't worth trying to compile them.
If there was to be some reward (government funding?!) based on length of cycle lanes, it would be fairly easy to put in cycle lanes that weren't needed, instead of the harder work of putting them on busy roads and where drivers want to park.

Posted 10 years ago #
I were right about that saddle
Member

You want a laugh? The Road Traffic Act 1988, section 21(1);

21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks.

(1)Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [F71mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence.

and 21(4);

(4)This section does not extend to Scotland.

Our cycle tracks are specifically available for motor vehicles to park in.

Posted 10 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"where drivers want to park"

That is part of the problem.

Dealing with it is another part.

Some drivers clearly just want to park where they want - and do - irrespective of laws/rules.

Councils (officers and politicians) have decided that it's ok to park in some places all or part day, for free or not.

Councils 'have to' balance needs/rights etc.

The simple facts are that more people have cars and (in general) want to use them more.

But another fact is that Edinburgh's Victorian (and pre) areas are not (fortunately) getting more roads/parking spaces (on road at least).

So, in general, decisions to continue with driving/parking as usual - or REALLY try to reduce the number of cars/parking in parts of the city where LOTS of people live/work/visit - are political.

Since the 70s Edinburgh has done 'not too badly'. The Congestion Charge referendum was a mistake. There wasn't a 'do you want' vote in London. Here it was forced by the Scottish Parliament (Lab/Lib I think).

So 'the public' didn't vote for 'big idea change' (for many reasons).

Politicians should have done more to implement changes (and still could). CEC squandered the 'tram disruption opportunity' - instead of saying (politely and positively) 'get used to it, we are transforming your city, it (LibDems) said 'we are really sorry, we'll get back to 'driving as usual' as soon as possible.

One thing about CCE is that it can't really be seen as "anti-car" - most people here have them and (I assume/hope) use them 'sensibly'.

As 'cyclists' we may be a minority - but that is partly due to a (UK wide) status quo that (in general) seems will to give people more 'rights'/consideration when they are using cars rather than when the choose not to.

This attitude/reality needs to change.

Posted 10 years ago #
slowcoach
Member

IWRATS: that part of RTA 1988 doesn't extend to Scotland because of Roads (Scotland) Act section 129 (6) "A person who parks a motor vehicle (“motor vehicle” having the same meaning as in the Road Traffic Act 1972) wholly or partly on a cycle track commits an offence." ?

Posted 10 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"For Parking versus cycling lanes the council presumably don't think there is a crisis"

http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5#post-167766

(See conclusion!)

Posted 10 years ago #
Morningsider
Member

It's worth noting that a cycle track is effectively a road for bikes, e.g. the NEPN. Cycle tracks are not on-road cycle infrastructure. The parking restrictions mentioned above only apply to off-road infrastructure.

As many of you know, there are two kinds of on-road cycle lane.

1. Mandatory (denoted by a solid white line and created by a Traffic Regulation Order). It is an offence for a car to enter a mandatory cycle lane during its hours of operation, including to park. There are almost none of these.

2. Advisory (denoted by a broken white line). These have no legal backing and it is not an offence for a car to enter an advisory cycle lane. Unless there are parking restrictions (yellow lines) then parking is allowed. Almost all cycle lanes are advisory. They are literally just lines of paint on the road. Drivers can choose to ignore them.

It's not that we don't have the tools, the policies or the know how. What is lacking is political leadership. No-one is willing to strip out parking, remove road space from cars and allocate substantial budgets to cycling. Until this happens, we will be stuck with terrible advisory infrastructure that tries not to inconvenience drivers.

Posted 10 years ago #
Snowy
Member

Good summary by Morningsider. And thus I suppose, ironically, the only mandatory cycle lanes are the green ones we share with buses and taxis.

Since most drivers will become increasingly unaware that there is even an advisory lane in place (see discussions on invisible red chips) we can logically expect advisory cycle lane parking to increase.

The council simply shouldn't be allowed to count advisory cycle lanes as infrastructure.

Posted 10 years ago #
Min
Member

And thus I suppose, ironically, the only mandatory cycle lanes are the green ones we share with buses and taxis.

And drivers park in those anyway.

Posted 10 years ago #
SRD
Moderator

utrechtcyclist - i share your pain. my first act of cycling advocacy 5 years ago was to suggest to the then councillor responsible for cycling that the lanes that allow parking on them shouldn't be included in our list of infra. I notice we don't get those stats quoted to us much anymore...

btw, for those on FB we've been having exactly the same discussion on the Pedal on parliament FB page, if you want to join.

Posted 10 years ago #
UtrechtCyclist
Member

Thanks all, the issue of convincing the council that they should build bike lanes upon which you're not allowed to park seems like a long and slow struggle! Convincing councils to build world class cycling infrastructure will always be a political struggle, and progress is incremental, but this wasn't really my point.

Edinburgh council, and councils generally, build a lot of cycling infrastructure that falls a long way short of being world class, but it's still the case that some bits are better than others.

Advance stop lines for example are helpful to me only when I see the light turn red and so know how long I have to get into the box before the cars will start moving. Shared use pavements are useful only to me when I am on time and don't need to cycle above 10mph. Bus lanes are pretty terrifying, but in the case that the rest of the traffic is gridlocked they do at least provide very confident cyclists with a place in which they can travel considerably faster than the cars.

Each of these substandard pieces of 'cycle infrastructure' is at least of benefit to some cyclists some of the time. To my mind, cycle lanes upon which you can park (I'm thinking Forrest road at the top of MMW) are not, they are dangerous. We shouldn't veto all new infrastructure which falls short of being perfect, but we should try to prevent the worst kind of lanes being built.

Sustrans and central government yield great power with their matched funding, and in theory the people controlling this spending are on our side. So if we think that bike lanes underneath parked cars are worse than lots of other bike infrastructure, can't we stop it receiving matched funding? In theory, the only people we would need to lobby for this are the people who are meant to be on our side...

Posted 10 years ago #
UtrechtCyclist
Member

Thanks @SRD, I'll check out the pedal on parliament page.

Posted 10 years ago #
crowriver
Member

@chdot, there's quite a good account of the failed Edinburgh Congestion Charge on wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edinburgh_congestion_charge

@UtrechtCyclist. yes Forrest Road is dreadful. Cycled along it yesterday evening with my son (on his own bike) and whilst the traffic was light, all the cars parked either side meant we were at the mercy of buses and 'boy racers; cruising the streets for Saturday night thrills. That whole triangle of streets is quite hair raising to cycle: the Potterrow bypass encourages drivers to drive too fast, and the various lanes throw cyclists around in the middlke of the traffic making us rather exposed. Still, the area is, incredibly, better than it used to be, but marginally so.

Posted 10 years ago #
bdellar
Member

I like the idea that we focus on this one thing, though.

Maybe we should just always speak out and object to bike paths that cars can park on.

Posted 10 years ago #
KeepPedalling
Member

Interesting how politically difficult it is to get even tiny crap bits of cycle infrastructure. The general perception is that roads are for cars, paths are for pedestrians and cycle lanes are for car parking.

We have only one piece of wonderful cycle infrastructure in Edinburgh where you don't have to worry about loose dogs, pedestrians or trucks. However, it's only 250 metres long and it just takes you back to where you started. Meadowbank velodrome - and yes the cooncil wants to knock it down asap.

Thank goodness we have so many good people pushing for better infra cos it's not an easy task!

Posted 10 years ago #
chdot
Admin

Need a few more like this -

Posted 10 years ago #
drnoble
Member

@chdot

But preferably with a distinct coloured surface that can actually be seen! I think those red chips must cost more than gold, considering how sparingly they are being laid

Posted 10 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"But preferably with a distinct coloured surface that can actually be seen!"

Agreed.

Unfortunately this seems to be a lost cause.

Officials seem to have convinced councillors that it's 'too expensive'.

I bet no calculations for safety - or encouraging more people to cycle - were factored in.

Posted 10 years ago #
Luath
Member

@chdot and preferably with a solid white line, unless the extra paint is 'too expensive'?

Posted 10 years ago #
threefromleith
Member

Since cycle lanes bounded by dashed lines are utterly pointless as cars can legally drive and park in them, I've stopped referring to them as cycle lanes as they're NOT.

They're parking bays. Nothing else.

It's time the council stopped wasting the cycling budget on these parking bays and started building proper, segregated infrastructure instead.

Posted 10 years ago #
HankChief
Member

"Surfacing
Description

Variation in the surfacing material/colour is used in cycle lanes including across junctions faces, separated lanes and ASLs. Colour is used to increase the visibility of the cycle facilities to other road users.

Red Chipped Surfacing is the main choice for cycle surfacing and should be used throughout the city on all types of cycle lanes, ASLs and Bus Lanes.

The final decision on what type of surfacing to be used should be discussed with the cycle team and local roads manager.

Chipped Surfacing
The main advantages of red chipped HRA over coloured applied colour are;
• it has much a longer lifespan (around twice or more)
• indicative whole life costs are less
• mitigation of streetscape issues regarding bright coloured surfacing in sensitive areas
• elimination of unsightly surface flaking in bus and cycle lanes and ASLs
• elimination of frequent black irregular patches in lanes due to utilities work
• weather when laying is less problematic (it can affect lifespan of thermoplastic screed)
• Utilities can reinstate excavations in a single operation (patching thermoplastic screed involves an additional process, a factor in the current high frequency of black patches in bus and cycle lanes)

If there is a requirement to use applied surface due to unusual circumstances a cold applied plastic resin (MMA) should be used."

http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/3577/cycle_environment-draft_for_consultation

My favourite is that it avoid bright colours in sensitive areas. I hope that this means that they will ban red and yellow cars from the new/old town.

No list of disadvantages of the red chips - like they are hard to see so limited effectiveness.

Posted 10 years ago #
neddie
Member
TBH I don't really care how 'red' the 'cycle lanes'/parking bays are.

What is more important is:
- enforcement
- repainting the white line regularly
- making them mandatory (solid white line)
- preventing parking in them
Posted 10 years ago #
Bigjack
Member

Well said all.The examples of next-to-useless on road bike lanes are all over the city. Prime examples are Gilmore Place all day; outside Balgreen Primary School, especially at school run time; outside Blackhall Primary School-all day; Melville Drive, especially on Sundays when football and tennis on in The Medows,and to many more to mention. We still have a long long way to go.

Posted 10 years ago #
Rosie
Member

https://www.flickr.com/photos/147964020@N07/35993803973/in/dateposted-public/

Triple whammy at Quay 2 Fountainbridge
1. Almost total pavement parking. That's where the buggy-pushers cross.
2. Parked car with hazards
3. Parked on cycle lane

Posted 7 years ago #
Rosie
Member

Should have said blue car is the one with the hazards. The hazard being to pick up someone.

Can't drag the photie over.

Posted 7 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.

// CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum

About This Forum

CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Parking in bike lanes

Reply

RSS Feeds

Links