Tanner Row cycle lane plan branded as “ridiculous”

7:58am Monday 11th February 2013 in News By Press reporter

SAFETY checks are to be carried out on a one-way street where cyclists could be allowed to ride towards oncoming traffic.

Transport chiefs at City of York Council agreed in December to consult over a contra-flow cycle lane in Tanner Row, between North Street and Rougier Street, to make it easier for the authority’s staff and visitors to cycle to and from its new HQ at West Offices.

North Yorkshire Police has said the move could put cyclists at risk because drivers and pedestrians may be confused about the new arrangements.

The council says it has received only one response to the public consultation and engineers will carry out a road safety audit this week. If approved, the contra-flow lane is due to come into force next month.

Resident Andrew Clark, in an objection letter to the council, said the changes would “endanger the lives of cyclists” because of the road’s layout.

He said cyclists would be forced to use the wrong side of the road when delivery vehicles were loading and unloading and would be directly in the line of traffic heading the other way, and described the proposals as “ridiculous”.

Council officials have said Tanner Row had good visibility and adequate signs and new road markings would be used to raise awareness.

Comments(40)

gmc_1963 says...
8:12am Mon 11 Feb 13

I wouldn't use it

Report this post »

gmc_1963 says...
8:21am Mon 11 Feb 13

"Transport chiefs at City of York Council agreed in December to consult over a contra-flow cycle lane in Tanner Row, between North Street and Rougier Street, to make it easier for the authority’s staff and visitors to cycle to and from its new HQ at West Offices"

I think you will find that there is a duty of care to reduce the risk associated with any change like this to be As Low as Reasonably Practicable. That is the overriding principle and not to make it easier to cycle to any new offices.

If this change increases the risk to road users and someone is injured or dies as a result, those who approved it can expect to answer for their actions in a court of law.

Report this post »

fixedfanatic says...
8:24am Mon 11 Feb 13

I would use it.

Report this post »

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...
8:31am Mon 11 Feb 13

The way Tanner Row is used at present, you would think it was already 2 way traffic. Must admit, I used it regularly myself a few years back, as a cut through from Rougier to North Street when I worked in town.

Report this post »

xtc says...
8:39am Mon 11 Feb 13

NoNewsIsGoodNews wrote:
The way Tanner Row is used at present, you would think it was already 2 way traffic. Must admit, I used it regularly myself a few years back, as a cut through from Rougier to North Street when I worked in town.
Yes now the gates are opened when heritage office oppo says they should nt be and the hotel moving guest cars ,guest cars blocking road won't be long before accidents,injury occur

Report this post »

nearlyman says...
8:59am Mon 11 Feb 13

Sounds about as sensible as the Fulford Road bus lane................
......only a matter of time I fear.

Report this post »

Pete the Brickie says...
9:36am Mon 11 Feb 13



Transport chiefs at City of York Council agreed in December to consult over a contra-flow cycle lane in Tanner Row, between North Street and Rougier Street, to make it easier for the authority’s staff and visitors to cycle to and from its new HQ at West Offices.



Shouldn't this particular group of council workers be concentrationg on maintaining the city's roads to an acceptable standard ie fixing potholes before worrying about saving fellow employees a few seconds on their daily commute in their own time whilst at the same time putting them and other road users at additional risk?

Report this post »

anti-rant says...
9:48am Mon 11 Feb 13

http://www.quickmeme
.com/meme/3sus2v/

Report this post »

roskoboskovic says...
10:50am Mon 11 Feb 13

this has merrett and d agorne written all over it.talk about blinkered vision.snarl up the traffic with overuse of traffic lights,design unworkable junctions,put up parking charges,close streets in york to motorists.anyone would think that they didn t want people to come here.

Report this post »

Von_Dutch says...
11:03am Mon 11 Feb 13

*Rolls eyes* There was 1 solitary objection - if any of you lot are / were so bothered by the proposal why didn't you reply to the consultation?

A contra-flow cycle lane is a fairly commonplace feature throughout the UK and abroad. It's not something 'new and dangerous'. It's a sensible proposal. Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...

Report this post »

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...
11:21am Mon 11 Feb 13

Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...


Maybe it has something to do with the Water End fiasco, or perhaps the Fulford Rd bus lane circus, or just the fact that traffic lights and other street furniture have been designed to cause artificial traffic jams, so the good people of CYC can feel justified in bringing a congestion charge to the city.

Or maybe, people are sick to death of having to queue behind bikes been ridden by Councillors and eco mentalists, that live within a stones throw of the city centre, and constantly spouting off about cycling and cycling related products, while spending their day cruising around town in an open top tour bus creating more congestion and pollution for the people that have no choice but to use their cars, mainly because public transport in York is a waste of time and road space.

I'm going for a lie down now.

Report this post »

nearlyman says...
11:47am Mon 11 Feb 13

' There was 1 solitary objection '
Not everyone will regularly pass this way and so will obviously not have had chance to see the proposal......You cannot seriously think it is anything other than utterly ridiculous and dangerous...
Some of us have more to do in our lives than scour every council document in detail. Thats why we elect and pay councillors to do so. Pity some of them cannot even read their paperwork these days.......to bust no doubt making sure they can claim all that is 'due' to them.

Report this post »

Von_Dutch says...
11:50am Mon 11 Feb 13

It's the fact that The Press uses the headline 'Cycle lane plan branded as “ridiculous” ' when it was just one solitary member of the public who said this is what amuses me the most... I mean if a few dozen comments had come back from the consultation saying that then fair enough, but again it's The Press trying to sensationalise anything cycling related.

In tomorrow's news "Chocolate is putrid and vile" *

* (says one member of the public)...

Report this post »

pedalling paul says...
11:59am Mon 11 Feb 13

Von_Dutch wrote:
*Rolls eyes* There was 1 solitary objection - if any of you lot are / were so bothered by the proposal why didn't you reply to the consultation?

A contra-flow cycle lane is a fairly commonplace feature throughout the UK and abroad. It's not something 'new and dangerous'. It's a sensible proposal. Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...
Quite right. Plus a 2011 change to the DfT's signing rules have made it easier for councils to allow cyclists to travel in both directions along streets that have reviously been converted to one-way.

Until 2011, Councils wanting to allow cyclists to cycle in a contraflow direction had to build expensive engineering measures to create a dedicated contraflow cycle lane at the entry point to the one-way street.

That rule has been scrapped by Transport Minister Norman Baker. Now a simple "Except cylists" sign can be added under the "No Entry" one, which brings us into line with the rest of Europe.

There seems once again to be several commentators here, who believe that buying a car buys the right to a clear road at peak times. You are part of the problem. (I do not include blue badge holders nor those for who a car is essential). Cyclists and public transport are part of the solution.

Check http://www.itravelyo
rk.info/ to learn how you can help York avoid future gridlock.

Report this post »

AngryandFrustrated says...
12:08pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Von_Dutch wrote:
*Rolls eyes* There was 1 solitary objection - if any of you lot are / were so bothered by the proposal why didn't you reply to the consultation? A contra-flow cycle lane is a fairly commonplace feature throughout the UK and abroad. It's not something 'new and dangerous'. It's a sensible proposal. Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...
Had I knew about this hair-brained scheme, I would have objected, but I do have better things to do with my time than scour CofYC consultations online 3 times a day to see if they launch one with no publicity.

"North Yorkshire Police has said the move could put cyclists at risk because drivers and pedestrians may be confused about the new arrangements"

I'm more inclined to believe them than any of our city officials, whether elected or otherwise, and the other self servers who look for an opportunity to insert a cycle lane around every corner, irrespective of whether or not it would be safe.

And as for those that state these lanes are in other continental cities - they may be but we have different driving laws and different driving styles and therefore to compare the 2 is a false comparison.

Report this post »

Stevie D says...
12:08pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Von_Dutch wrote:
A contra-flow cycle lane is a fairly commonplace feature throughout the UK and abroad. It's not something 'new and dangerous'. It's a sensible proposal.
In theory, contra-flow cycle lanes are perfectly sensible and can be an effective way to help cyclists get around town while managing motor traffic.

However, in the specific case of Tanner Row, the road is so narrow and so often has parked or waiting vehicles that it would be totally unsuitable – and as it doesn't go anywhere useful, of no benefit. Cyclists can just as easily, and far more safely, use existing routes via Rougier Street or George Hudson Street.

Report this post »

WixiBoy says...
12:10pm Mon 11 Feb 13

can they not just use the pavement as they do everywhere else?

Report this post »

Von_Dutch says...
12:18pm Mon 11 Feb 13

AngryandFrustrated wrote:
Von_Dutch wrote: *Rolls eyes* There was 1 solitary objection - if any of you lot are / were so bothered by the proposal why didn't you reply to the consultation? A contra-flow cycle lane is a fairly commonplace feature throughout the UK and abroad. It's not something 'new and dangerous'. It's a sensible proposal. Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...
Had I knew about this hair-brained scheme, I would have objected, but I do have better things to do with my time than scour CofYC consultations online 3 times a day to see if they launch one with no publicity. "North Yorkshire Police has said the move could put cyclists at risk because drivers and pedestrians may be confused about the new arrangements" I'm more inclined to believe them than any of our city officials, whether elected or otherwise, and the other self servers who look for an opportunity to insert a cycle lane around every corner, irrespective of whether or not it would be safe. And as for those that state these lanes are in other continental cities - they may be but we have different driving laws and different driving styles and therefore to compare the 2 is a false comparison.
http://www.yorkpress
.co.uk/news/10095242
.Police_concerns_ove
r_planned_cycle_lane
/

I hardly scour CYC publications. However i remembered this was featured in The Press two months ago and raised 44 comments (mostly negative - people are entitled to their views after all). However my point is that out of the several dozen blasting the proposal as dangerous in the previous article, only 1 person could be bothered to reply to the consultation, and he's a local resident.

Report this post »

nasrudin says...
12:22pm Mon 11 Feb 13

If it's that little road running next to Salt and Peppers, I don't really see the problem -- it's not exactly a busy street, and is very handy for joining the cycle path along the river both ways, either straight out of town north, or along North st heading southward.

It's much easier than having to cycle along than George Hudson and trying to turn right at the lights from Micklegate (that junction isn't much fun as a cyclist!)

I do wonder whether the complaints here are from cyclists worried about an unsafe implementation, or the usual, and frankly odd, cyclist bashing that's so often in comments here...

Report this post »

AngryandFrustrated says...
12:44pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Von_Dutch wrote:
AngryandFrustrated wrote:
Von_Dutch wrote: *Rolls eyes* There was 1 solitary objection - if any of you lot are / were so bothered by the proposal why didn't you reply to the consultation? A contra-flow cycle lane is a fairly commonplace feature throughout the UK and abroad. It's not something 'new and dangerous'. It's a sensible proposal. Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...
Had I knew about this hair-brained scheme, I would have objected, but I do have better things to do with my time than scour CofYC consultations online 3 times a day to see if they launch one with no publicity. "North Yorkshire Police has said the move could put cyclists at risk because drivers and pedestrians may be confused about the new arrangements" I'm more inclined to believe them than any of our city officials, whether elected or otherwise, and the other self servers who look for an opportunity to insert a cycle lane around every corner, irrespective of whether or not it would be safe. And as for those that state these lanes are in other continental cities - they may be but we have different driving laws and different driving styles and therefore to compare the 2 is a false comparison.
http://www.yorkpress .co.uk/news/10095242 .Police_concerns_ove r_planned_cycle_lane / I hardly scour CYC publications. However i remembered this was featured in The Press two months ago and raised 44 comments (mostly negative - people are entitled to their views after all). However my point is that out of the several dozen blasting the proposal as dangerous in the previous article, only 1 person could be bothered to reply to the consultation, and he's a local resident.
Well just as you don't scour the CofYC consultations, I don't scour this website every day!

As an aside, there is also some dodgy reporting on this issue. The report states that there has only been one reply to the consultation and that that reply was from a local resident. That cannot be correct, because clearly NYP have also commented and lodged their objection!

Report this post »

invisibleman says...
12:58pm Mon 11 Feb 13

It is quite a narrow street and is only about 100 feet long. What is wrong with cyclists dismounting and walking thier bikes along the foot path? like that happens any way..........

Report this post »

Buzz Light-year says...
12:59pm Mon 11 Feb 13

I'm going to take the opposite stance than would be expected on this.

Whilst I think contraflow cycle lanes are a good idea and would help me out a lot I don't think Tanner Row is suitable for it.

The speed some of the cars and vans coming round that corner from North Street and the line they take makes it very dangerous.

How do I know this?
I tried it once and just as I passed Flares I was nearly wiped out by a 7.5 tonner. It was hairy scary and dangerous.
Not done it since!

Report this post »

yorkshirelad says...
1:08pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Contra-flow cycle lanes are common in Europe and with due care from all road users, should be perfectly safe.

There are plenty in the UK already (I think mostly in London) and it wouldn't be the first in York either.

Fine to debate the technical merits or otherwise of a particular scheme, but many objections simply demonstrate a backwards view of cycling and essentially simple prejudice.

The Press spin is unfortunate and this type of newspaper spin is maybe why we seem so unable to cope with anything that appears new or remotely different.

Report this post »

M.Blanc says...
3:07pm Mon 11 Feb 13

So the Police said that it is unsafe, dangerous and would put pedestrians and cyclists at risk....and the council decide to go ahead anyway! Fantastic. What do we pay these idiots for?

Report this post »

m dee says...
4:02pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Just wish some people would not keep comparing with other parts of Europe the road setups/road laws are not the same.

Report this post »

lowbeam says...
4:21pm Mon 11 Feb 13

I have never read so much drivel in all my life..it is almost impossible to 'speed' on this short stretch of road,and if you have not noticed,cyclists use it the 'wrong' way all the time! And what would the police force know? They are not exactly renowned for their cycling skills are they?

Report this post »

nasrudin says...
4:49pm Mon 11 Feb 13

It would appear the logical solution would be close it to vechicles?

Widen the pavement, which is quite narrow there anyway, and have a nice, wide, two-way cycle lane?

Report this post »

Caecilius says...
5:09pm Mon 11 Feb 13

NoNewsIsGoodNews wrote:
Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...


Maybe it has something to do with the Water End fiasco, or perhaps the Fulford Rd bus lane circus, or just the fact that traffic lights and other street furniture have been designed to cause artificial traffic jams, so the good people of CYC can feel justified in bringing a congestion charge to the city.

Or maybe, people are sick to death of having to queue behind bikes been ridden by Councillors and eco mentalists, that live within a stones throw of the city centre, and constantly spouting off about cycling and cycling related products, while spending their day cruising around town in an open top tour bus creating more congestion and pollution for the people that have no choice but to use their cars, mainly because public transport in York is a waste of time and road space.

I'm going for a lie down now.
Often get stuck behind a bike, do you? The only times I've seen it happen have been when some motorist, having made the choice to get where he's going by taking his car down a narrow one-way street, finds to his fury that a cyclist refuses to squeeze into the gutter to allow him to overtake where there isn't enough space to do so safely - often driving far too fast into the bargain. Every time I have to queue, whether on the road or humbly waiting to cross it, it's because of cars. If you care to look, you'll find that's why you have to queue, too. As Paul says elsewhere, you're part of the problem.

Report this post »

pedalling paul says...
5:24pm Mon 11 Feb 13

m dee wrote:
Just wish some people would not keep comparing with other parts of Europe the road setups/road laws are not the same.
Wrong...it's us that drive on the wrong side of the road!! And an island mentality will not d the UK any long term favours.

Report this post »

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...
6:35pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Caecilius wrote:
NoNewsIsGoodNews wrote:
Why always the constant negativity with ANYTHING in this city...


Maybe it has something to do with the Water End fiasco, or perhaps the Fulford Rd bus lane circus, or just the fact that traffic lights and other street furniture have been designed to cause artificial traffic jams, so the good people of CYC can feel justified in bringing a congestion charge to the city.

Or maybe, people are sick to death of having to queue behind bikes been ridden by Councillors and eco mentalists, that live within a stones throw of the city centre, and constantly spouting off about cycling and cycling related products, while spending their day cruising around town in an open top tour bus creating more congestion and pollution for the people that have no choice but to use their cars, mainly because public transport in York is a waste of time and road space.

I'm going for a lie down now.
Often get stuck behind a bike, do you? The only times I've seen it happen have been when some motorist, having made the choice to get where he's going by taking his car down a narrow one-way street, finds to his fury that a cyclist refuses to squeeze into the gutter to allow him to overtake where there isn't enough space to do so safely - often driving far too fast into the bargain. Every time I have to queue, whether on the road or humbly waiting to cross it, it's because of cars. If you care to look, you'll find that's why you have to queue, too. As Paul says elsewhere, you're part of the problem.
Hmmm, strange reply to my post.

So because the only time you have seen it happen is in narrow one-way streets, that means it doesn't happen at any other time?
Well if you say so then it then it must be true, because you obviously know about my commutes than I do.

And would just like to add that I have been driving for over 20 years (12 of those years in various driving jobs) and never had a single point on my license or an accident.

So I feel that I am more than qualified to judge what I see happen on the roads on a daily basis.

Report this post »

NoNewsIsGoodNews says...
6:40pm Mon 11 Feb 13

pedalling paul wrote:
m dee wrote:
Just wish some people would not keep comparing with other parts of Europe the road setups/road laws are not the same.
Wrong...it's us that drive on the wrong side of the road!! And an island mentality will not d the UK any long term favours.
You might drive/ride on the wrong side of the road Paul (it wouldn't suprise me one bit) but according to the Highway Code, of which you love to quote from, I'm pretty sure that driving on the left is the norm in this country.

Report this post »

Reverend J says...
6:52pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Used this road the wrong way on a bike tons of times. It's common place in Brighton where I now reside and it works perfectly well.

Report this post »

Paul Meoff says...
7:56pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Agree it could be dangerous to cyclists given the poor standards of driving often seen in York. Just ban cars from Tanner Row alongside the Corner Pin. Only needs a lockable bollard at the Wellington Row end to give emergency access and job done. Occasional deliveries can still be made from the Rougier Street end.

Report this post »

spottycow says...
7:58pm Mon 11 Feb 13

AS long as the council take the flack i will gladly mow down cyclists coming down the street the wrong way

Report this post »

Paul Meoff says...
8:50pm Mon 11 Feb 13

spottycow wrote:
AS long as the council take the flack i will gladly mow down cyclists coming down the street the wrong way
Is that because you are low class scum?

Report this post »

yorkborn66 says...
10:30pm Mon 11 Feb 13

Transport chiefs at City of York Council agreed in December to consult over a contra-flow cycle lane in Tanner Row, between North Street and Rougier Street, to make it easier for the authority’s staff and visitors to cycle to and from its new HQ at West Offices.



This has got to be a joke. Tanner Row is to narrow. If this goes ahead someone will be injured or killed, most definitely a cyclist. Forget the anti cycle, anti car, hostility. This is a recipe for disaster.

Report this post »

NickPheas says...
11:23am Tue 12 Feb 13

Sounds lethal. There are always cars parked on Tanner Row and trucks trying to squeeze past them. It would only take about sixty seconds extra to head up by The Maltings and Aviva and use the existing roads.

Report this post »

lezyork1966 says...
1:17pm Tue 12 Feb 13

There was probably only 1 objection as no one knew about it!

I cycle past there all the time, i never knew, the wife cycle past to work everyday, she doesn't know about it

like anything the council wants approval for it hides away from the public till its done.

scammers every one of them.

Report this post »

Buzz Light-year says...
8:39pm Tue 12 Feb 13

NickPheas says...
There are always cars parked on Tanner Row and trucks trying to squeeze past them.

Total fiction. Completely untrue.
Did you mean Colliergate?

Report this post »

Magicman! says...
1:19am Thu 14 Feb 13

I wouldn't use the Tanner Row contraflow, simply because the road is not wide enough to safely support this. Sure I can cycle over the Snake Pass or along the Woodhead Pass, but cycling along a narrow street like that towards oncoming traffic just seems bonkers.

Also, just up the road there is an access point for cyclists to the Aviva building and the riverside cycle route there... wouldn't it just make more sense to improve access to/from that cycle route rather than some stupid half-baked lane along Tanner Row??

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree