Warning over new bike lane trial in Gillygate (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
News coverage for York, Ryedale, East Yorkshire, Harrogate and Selby.
Popular topics: Community Stadium | Snow | Germany Beck | ftr | Queen's visit | Council tax
Warning over new bike lane trial in Gillygate
9:22am Tuesday 15th June 2010 in
-
- By Jennifer Bell » jennifer.bell@thepress.co.uk
LORRIES and buses will be allowed to edge into new cycle lanes which are to be trialled on one of York’s busiest streets.
The routes for cyclists pedalling along Gillygate are being introduced following a city-wide public consultation, but York’s former cycling champion has branded them confusing, potentially dangerous and “a scheme too far”.
The feeder lanes, funded through the Cycling City York initiative, will be launched within weeks, but Gillygate’s narrow nature means wider vehicles will be forced to straddle part of the routes, and cyclists have been warned they should only use the lanes when traffic is flowing slowly or at a standstill.
Their introduction came after hundreds of York residents who completed a Cycling City York questionnaire said they wanted improvements to aid cyclists in streets such as Gillygate, with the new lanes aimed at leaving them enough room to reach an advanced stop line at the head of traffic queues.
“One of the issues which kept cropping up was the need to improve facilities on some of the busiest but narrowest streets in the city centre to help cyclists negotiate queuing traffic,” said Cycling City York programme manager Graham Titchener.
“The nature of these streets posed a real problem for us and meant we were very limited in what we could do. However, we’re confident the cycle feeder lanes we’re trialling will make a real difference to both cyclists and motorists.”
But Coun Joe Watt, who formerly held the cycling champion role, said: “On narrow roads such as Gillygate, a cycle feeder lane is not practicable.
“The lane is a non-standard feature which will not be understood by cyclists and other road users. Consequently, it is likely to increase the hazards to cyclists.
“I understand and encourage the council’s ambition to get more of us cycling. However, the Gillygate lane is a scheme too far and Cycling City should concentrate on schemes which provide safe separation of cyclists from motor traffic and pedestrians, such as dedicated cycle routes.”
Coun Brian Watson, whose Guildhall ward includes Gillygate, said the move was aimed at making the junction less “dangerous”, adding: “By trialling these lanes, we will learn from the reaction and feedback we get how successful they are and whether they become a permanent fixture.”
Cyclists’ spokesman Paul Hepworth said any changes that looked at improving road conditions for cyclists should be welcomed.
Comments(81)
smudge1
says...
9:31am Tue 15 Jun 10
York’s former cycling champion has branded them confusing, potentially dangerous and “a scheme too far
To the council
You are killing our residents with these ridiculous road markings (Fulford Road example... a couple of weeks after scheme finished and a resident who has cycled for years round here is seriously injured having to cross a bus lane to get to a cycle lane !!!) Leave them as they are and stop all this health and safety nonsense,we are all capable of cycling down a normal road as we have done for years.
sheps lad
says...
9:32am Tue 15 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:50 of them from you know who!
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
smudge1
says...
9:34am Tue 15 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:Lizzie Browning
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
Perhaps you can come up with some sensible comments instead of predictions. Or are you Mystic Meg in disguise ???
AngryandFrustrated
says...
9:37am Tue 15 Jun 10
“I understand and encourage the council’s ambition to get more of us cycling. However, the Gillygate lane is a scheme too far and Cycling City should concentrate on schemes which provide safe separation of cyclists from motor traffic and pedestrians, such as dedicated cycle routes.”
It says it all really. He should know what he's talking about given his past role. Another hairbrained scheme by this current Council and its shabby Executive. I predict that the scheme will waste money because it will cause chaos and not make the route into York any safer or better for the cyclists, especially as the road is not wide enough to accomodate proper cycle lanes.they should only use the lanes when traffic is flowing slowly or at a standstill.
"cyclists have been warned they should only use the lanes when traffic is flowing slowly or at a standstill". Excellent guidance! That's all the time then given that Gillygate is at a standstill most of the day!
Well done Waller and Co - give yourselves a big pat on the back! BTW, how long will the trial last, and will there truly be an independent review because this Council is hardly famed for its accountability!
PS - Lizzie Browning - I suspect your prediction will come true!!
yorkandproud
says...
9:38am Tue 15 Jun 10
TooRelaxed
says...
9:44am Tue 15 Jun 10
.
Gillygate is best avoided by bike anyway. If you're off to Bootham or Clifton, cut through Bootham Park Hospital, if you're off to the other side of town use Lord Mayor's Walk and Deangate.
1speedisalluneed
says...
9:58am Tue 15 Jun 10
redr
says...
10:03am Tue 15 Jun 10
I've cycled up and down Gillygate at least a couple of times a week for over 30 years. This is sheer stupidity.
Lizzie Browning
says...
10:07am Tue 15 Jun 10
smudge1 wrote:And this adds what to the debate, precisely?
Lizzie Browning wrote:Lizzie Browning
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
Perhaps you can come up with some sensible comments instead of predictions. Or are you Mystic Meg in disguise ???
My views on the cycle lanes mainly centre around the fact that they are little used. I also think they are somewhat unfair to all those who either can't cycle or simply don't like it. Surely all this money would be better spent in providing a public transport system which people want to use. Namely one which is cheap, quick, efficient, but above all else - can bypass all the stationary traffic. So I'd have more bus lanes, train provision and possibly trams and less cycle lanes, I guess is my view. I realise this may be more expensive and have to be introduced piece meal, but surely its better than tinkering with numerous junctions and roads, for cycle routes which are barely used. At least public transport is inclusive - it can be used by the elderly and infirm, small children, the disable and heck, even those who maybe don't want to cycle! It can be used in the snow and when its hissing down with rain too.
All this money towards cycle routes is elitist and the proof is in the pudding; no beggar is using them! Look at how many cycled 20 yrs ago - kids going to school, BREL workers, etc. Now we just have pretty coloured lanes with no beggar in them and pedestrians who have to look over their shoulder every tick.
So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?
1speedisalluneed
says...
10:11am Tue 15 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:"So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?" opinion is people should make there point using less characters. Do you really think we need War & Peace?
smudge1 wrote:And this adds what to the debate, precisely?
Lizzie Browning wrote:Lizzie Browning
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
Perhaps you can come up with some sensible comments instead of predictions. Or are you Mystic Meg in disguise ???
My views on the cycle lanes mainly centre around the fact that they are little used. I also think they are somewhat unfair to all those who either can't cycle or simply don't like it. Surely all this money would be better spent in providing a public transport system which people want to use. Namely one which is cheap, quick, efficient, but above all else - can bypass all the stationary traffic. So I'd have more bus lanes, train provision and possibly trams and less cycle lanes, I guess is my view. I realise this may be more expensive and have to be introduced piece meal, but surely its better than tinkering with numerous junctions and roads, for cycle routes which are barely used. At least public transport is inclusive - it can be used by the elderly and infirm, small children, the disable and heck, even those who maybe don't want to cycle! It can be used in the snow and when its hissing down with rain too.
All this money towards cycle routes is elitist and the proof is in the pudding; no beggar is using them! Look at how many cycled 20 yrs ago - kids going to school, BREL workers, etc. Now we just have pretty coloured lanes with no beggar in them and pedestrians who have to look over their shoulder every tick.
So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?
Taken for a Mug
says...
10:28am Tue 15 Jun 10
BTW Press, any vehicle will be able to straddle the lane as it will only be an advisory cycle lane.
lucy smith
says...
10:29am Tue 15 Jun 10
Taken for a Mug
says...
10:37am Tue 15 Jun 10
So Paul, before any accidents happen are you 100% behind these proposals for Gillygate?
Security word neck-line!!
Lizzie Browning
says...
10:37am Tue 15 Jun 10
1speedisalluneed wrote:Taxed your tiny brain did it? Will include some pictures next time.
Lizzie Browning wrote:"So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?" opinion is people should make there point using less characters. Do you really think we need War & Peace?
smudge1 wrote:And this adds what to the debate, precisely?
Lizzie Browning wrote:Lizzie Browning
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
Perhaps you can come up with some sensible comments instead of predictions. Or are you Mystic Meg in disguise ???
My views on the cycle lanes mainly centre around the fact that they are little used. I also think they are somewhat unfair to all those who either can't cycle or simply don't like it. Surely all this money would be better spent in providing a public transport system which people want to use. Namely one which is cheap, quick, efficient, but above all else - can bypass all the stationary traffic. So I'd have more bus lanes, train provision and possibly trams and less cycle lanes, I guess is my view. I realise this may be more expensive and have to be introduced piece meal, but surely its better than tinkering with numerous junctions and roads, for cycle routes which are barely used. At least public transport is inclusive - it can be used by the elderly and infirm, small children, the disable and heck, even those who maybe don't want to cycle! It can be used in the snow and when its hissing down with rain too.
All this money towards cycle routes is elitist and the proof is in the pudding; no beggar is using them! Look at how many cycled 20 yrs ago - kids going to school, BREL workers, etc. Now we just have pretty coloured lanes with no beggar in them and pedestrians who have to look over their shoulder every tick.
So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?
1speedisalluneed
says...
10:40am Tue 15 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:No just nodded off by the time I reached the end zzzzzzzzzzzzz, pictures would be an improvement.
1speedisalluneed wrote:Taxed your tiny brain did it? Will include some pictures next time.
Lizzie Browning wrote:"So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?" opinion is people should make there point using less characters. Do you really think we need War & Peace?
smudge1 wrote:And this adds what to the debate, precisely?
Lizzie Browning wrote:Lizzie Browning
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
Perhaps you can come up with some sensible comments instead of predictions. Or are you Mystic Meg in disguise ???
My views on the cycle lanes mainly centre around the fact that they are little used. I also think they are somewhat unfair to all those who either can't cycle or simply don't like it. Surely all this money would be better spent in providing a public transport system which people want to use. Namely one which is cheap, quick, efficient, but above all else - can bypass all the stationary traffic. So I'd have more bus lanes, train provision and possibly trams and less cycle lanes, I guess is my view. I realise this may be more expensive and have to be introduced piece meal, but surely its better than tinkering with numerous junctions and roads, for cycle routes which are barely used. At least public transport is inclusive - it can be used by the elderly and infirm, small children, the disable and heck, even those who maybe don't want to cycle! It can be used in the snow and when its hissing down with rain too.
All this money towards cycle routes is elitist and the proof is in the pudding; no beggar is using them! Look at how many cycled 20 yrs ago - kids going to school, BREL workers, etc. Now we just have pretty coloured lanes with no beggar in them and pedestrians who have to look over their shoulder every tick.
So there you go - my opinion. What is yours?
meme
says...
10:58am Tue 15 Jun 10
If we really need these routesd then be innovative
oldgoat
says...
11:21am Tue 15 Jun 10
GIllygate is barely wide enough for cars as it is.
LORRIES and buses will be allowed to edge into new cycle lanes which are to be trialled on one of York’s busiest streets.
Never stopped them ignoring cycle lanes anywhere else that I've ever seen! The one on Station Rise is a classic case in point, frequently covered by a line of traffic waiting for the left filter.
Please, planners. Common sense should take over here before you get so carried away with yourselves that you end up alienating motorists.
Older Sometimes Wiser
says...
11:39am Tue 15 Jun 10
meme wrote:For once an innovative idea looking at solving the real problem. If only we had City councillors capable of taking this and doing a trial to see if it works.From my experience this seems unlikely, as their "blinkers" are welded on!
Why not take a cycle lane along the moat of Lord mayors walk and then around the back of gillygate along the wall Off road completly and if its not physicaly possible to go behind gilygate why not go under the city wall into Minster precincts
If we really need these routesd then be innovative
hifive
says...
11:39am Tue 15 Jun 10
Baffling....
fate
says...
11:42am Tue 15 Jun 10
AngryandFrustrated
says...
11:58am Tue 15 Jun 10
lucy smith wrote:I do not think that we will get a sensible comment from PP on this one - when this story first reared its head in that the Council were going to debate whether or not to go ahead with this idiotic idea (especially as the cycle lanes will not meet the recommended width), he was surprisingly absent from the comments. I asked the same question and rec'd a rather bland response, neither for nor against the idea. Methinks that he is having to toe the party line on this one - let's face it - he's full of bikes this and bikes that on every other story except this which is the one most relevant to his usual rantings. That's what you get in party politics!
Where's the pedalling one on this, come on Paul enlighten us.
BTW - can anyone tell me why Lendal Bridge was closed this morning and how long it is going to be closed? There has been no mention of the closure on any of the traffic reports I have seen.
sj61
says...
12:02pm Tue 15 Jun 10
I'm with Fate on this one - there are too many of these bits and pieces of bicycle lanes in and around York - neither one scheme or the other. Where they do put them there is always chaos and they don't work properly.
Quite a dangerous initiative I reckon - someone will get seriously injured or killed before long - and then who will be to blame? Saw two cyclists knocked off their bikes last week - on the same day - the schemes aren't working properly! But what do you expect with this shower making the decisions and pedalling paul spouting useless rhetoric all over the place.
hifive
says...
12:04pm Tue 15 Jun 10
sj61
says...
12:04pm Tue 15 Jun 10
But what then about the THOUSANDS of York residents who haven't said they want it - what about their views and overwhelming majority?
sj61
says...
12:07pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Hmmm, let me think how long this dangerous hair brained scheme is gonna work before it costs the taxpayer some more money to get it reversed or revised!!!!
York Fox
says...
12:13pm Tue 15 Jun 10
York Fox
says...
12:17pm Tue 15 Jun 10
hifive
says...
12:18pm Tue 15 Jun 10
York Fox wrote:Do you know why? The pavement is a complete mess! As is the road surface for that matter! Though knowing the council, they'll probably ignore both pressing matters and stick in a cycle lane!
Angryandfrustrated - Lendal bridge is closed for a week from yesterday between the hours of 1900 and 0700...hope that helps!
hifive
says...
12:30pm Tue 15 Jun 10
York Fox wrote:Ah! Yes, I'm rooting for tha as well - looks terrible and is still dangerous!
Oh and it's for resurfacing and hopefully that means the horrible tarmac they put down after the cold weather ruined the paving stones.
AngryandFrustrated
says...
12:32pm Tue 15 Jun 10
York Fox wrote:Nice to see that all the road signs are accurate and up to date - NOT! On Bootham, there is no mention of it only being closed during the evening and overnight, so God knows how many people have taken unnecessary diversions this morning!
Angryandfrustrated - Lendal bridge is closed for a week from yesterday between the hours of 1900 and 0700...hope that helps!
Many thanks York Fox :-)
To Hifive - I DO want to hear PPs opinion on this, not because I want to have a go, but because as a non cyclist myself, I am interested in his views given that he spouts everything bike at every opportunity. From my recollection of the previous story on this, all the cycle groups objected to the idea and panned it because the road isn't wide enough to put in cycle lanes and therefore, CofY Council could be increasing the risk of accidents. Luckily for us, we have a Council that does what it wants and ignores the views of those groups that know what they are talking about!! The fact that PP is quiet on this, does, in my humble opinion, speak volumes!!
hifive
says...
12:40pm Tue 15 Jun 10
AngryandFrustrated wrote:Fair dos, it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular it's just that the goading can get just as annoying as the man himself ironically enough!
York Fox wrote: Angryandfrustrated - Lendal bridge is closed for a week from yesterday between the hours of 1900 and 0700...hope that helps!Nice to see that all the road signs are accurate and up to date - NOT! On Bootham, there is no mention of it only being closed during the evening and overnight, so God knows how many people have taken unnecessary diversions this morning! Many thanks York Fox :-) To Hifive - I DO want to hear PPs opinion on this, not because I want to have a go, but because as a non cyclist myself, I am interested in his views given that he spouts everything bike at every opportunity. From my recollection of the previous story on this, all the cycle groups objected to the idea and panned it because the road isn't wide enough to put in cycle lanes and therefore, CofY Council could be increasing the risk of accidents. Luckily for us, we have a Council that does what it wants and ignores the views of those groups that know what they are talking about!! The fact that PP is quiet on this, does, in my humble opinion, speak volumes!!
Whilst he is quiet I can confirm as a cyclist myself that Gillygate is a very short stretch of road which I've never struggled to get down. Personally, it's so short I don't see why it constitutes any upheaval like this! There are many more difficult roads to cycle down - if this one proves problematic I'd question whether or not people should even be out on a bike! The only obstruction that ever occurs is the bus stop half way down, but it's not a major issue and this "scheme" hasn't changed that anyway! Waste of time and money. I wonder who filled out the questionnaires? Small children? I know I didn't get one!
lucy smith
says...
1:07pm Tue 15 Jun 10
sheps lad wrote:Over 30 so far.
Lizzie Browning wrote: Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)50 of them from you know who!
MarkyMarkMark
says...
1:08pm Tue 15 Jun 10
And besides, since the line down the side of the cycle track is a broken white line (by intent, not just because the road surface is breaking up!) thne actually, there's nothing to stop any other vehicle using that space if it needs to - even on wider roads.
If we really wanted "exclusive rights" for cyclists then we'd be insisting the council painted them on with solid white lines.
But as a cyclist, I'm happy to share . . . and as a motorist, I'm happy to share.
yorkdweller
says...
1:13pm Tue 15 Jun 10
1speedisalluneed
says...
1:56pm Tue 15 Jun 10
TooRelaxed
says...
2:07pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Silver
says...
2:09pm Tue 15 Jun 10
B.Dole
says...
2:27pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Silver
says...
2:44pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Silver wrote:Oh and this was today.
Seeing as I've had someone at work have their back window broken by a cyclist hitting into the back of their car on this road I'm not thinking it'll be safe to put a cycle lane or another cycle down there myself
evelyn_trent
says...
3:13pm Tue 15 Jun 10
moneyforwhat
says...
3:22pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Garrowby Turnoff
says...
3:29pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:This is comment 43.
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
17 to go!
1speedisalluneed
says...
3:31pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Garrowby Turnoff wrote:Is this technically a comment?
Lizzie Browning wrote:This is comment 43.
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
17 to go!
B.Dole
says...
3:34pm Tue 15 Jun 10
1speedisalluneed wrote:Is that??
Garrowby Turnoff wrote:Is this technically a comment?
Lizzie Browning wrote:This is comment 43.
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
17 to go!
Once peddling pillock creeps out from under his rock the real comments will begin, this is just the warm up act ;-)
yorkshirelad
says...
4:00pm Tue 15 Jun 10
These sort of lanes in the narrow streets of historical cities are common all over the continent - anyone ever been to Delft for example? Or any of a hundred other continental cities?
Shock! Horror! A little cycle lane...
You've gotta laugh :-). This sort of reaction is getting funnier...
Taken for a Mug
says...
4:09pm Tue 15 Jun 10
1speedisalluneed
says...
4:17pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning
says...
4:30pm Tue 15 Jun 10
yorkshirelad wrote:Its very easy to play the 'rational man above all this pettiness' but in fairness, you can use that argument to belittle anything. We all have issues which we feel strongly about and others we don't. It may only be cycle lanes here, but the changes have caused traffic chaos and also (allegedly) serious injury with the potential for worse.
Well, the predictable huff and puff again! I occasionally send the link to my friends in Holland - it amuses them and puzzles them at the same time...
These sort of lanes in the narrow streets of historical cities are common all over the continent - anyone ever been to Delft for example? Or any of a hundred other continental cities?
Shock! Horror! A little cycle lane...
You've gotta laugh :-). This sort of reaction is getting funnier...
This is also a forum in which to discuss local issues - not the Oxford debating society. But then hey, its easier just to mock everything, isn't it?
pedalling paul
says...
4:32pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Some also have strange notions about my current employment. Adding two and two seems to be making five.
For myself, I understand that the cycle lanes are experimental. There were similar ones recommended for Museum St. which Cllr. Galloway decided not to proceed with, until the results of the Gillygate experiment were evaluated.
The new lanes are advisory and it is not an offence to straddle them with a motor vehicle. They will perhaps be of some help to cyclists passing narrow bodied cars, but not wider vehicles eg buses.
But cumulative small savings in cyclist journey times, can add up to create a "door to desk" commute time which is competitively quicker than by eg private car. So fewer car journeys = more peak capacity on our roads.
1speedisalluneed
says...
4:40pm Tue 15 Jun 10
AngryandFrustrated
says...
4:44pm Tue 15 Jun 10
pedalling paul wrote:You have managed to make quite a lengthy comment without actually telling any of us whether or not you are in favour or against the scheme which to me suggests you are either a politician or should be!!!
I wonder why some commentators believe that I am who they think I am. Some also have strange notions about my current employment. Adding two and two seems to be making five. For myself, I understand that the cycle lanes are experimental. There were similar ones recommended for Museum St. which Cllr. Galloway decided not to proceed with, until the results of the Gillygate experiment were evaluated. The new lanes are advisory and it is not an offence to straddle them with a motor vehicle. They will perhaps be of some help to cyclists passing narrow bodied cars, but not wider vehicles eg buses. But cumulative small savings in cyclist journey times, can add up to create a "door to desk" commute time which is competitively quicker than by eg private car. So fewer car journeys = more peak capacity on our roads.
You were equally evasive in your posting on this story when it first reared its head a couple of months ago - I seem to remember that you commented that it would be an "interesting" council meeting or words to that effect.
As you try to bring bikes into virtually all your postings, irrespective of the substance of the stories you post on, and as you are usually forthright in your views, why are you being so coy on this one? Is it because maybe, just maybe, even you believe that cycle lanes on Gillygate are a waste of time and expense and could, potentially, cause more problems than they will solve?
yorkshirelad
says...
5:32pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Hmmm....Its not me that mocks everything vaguely progressive in York. From the footstreets to every safety feature for cyclists to the modern design of the Millennium Bridge to bendy buses.... all very common across Europe and all created huff and puff here in York. Yes...I bet you've all forgotten the huff and puff over the footstreets 'it'll kill York shops etc etc blah blah blah'.
Just perhaps we should be a little bit more open minded about things that are new or different?
yorkshirelad
says...
5:36pm Tue 15 Jun 10
es of rats...heaps of rubbish...petitions.
..campaigns...
Err - in the end seems to be no problem really and we've saved on landfill fees.
I just think we should all cool it and realise that some changes just might be for the better in the end.
Lizzie Browning
says...
7:09pm Tue 15 Jun 10
yorkshirelad wrote:Agree about the refuse - was thinking the other day what a success that has been despite the fuss.
Sorry...forgot another York over-reaction... 'Alternate Week bin collections'...plagu
es of rats...heaps of rubbish...petitions.
..campaigns...
Err - in the end seems to be no problem really and we've saved on landfill fees.
I just think we should all cool it and realise that some changes just might be for the better in the end.
But then, people talk, people gossip, it has always been thus. We talk about stuff which effects us - this is a forum for York residents, what do you expect people to talk about - the cocoa production of the American South?
GemmasPress
says...
7:42pm Tue 15 Jun 10
sheps lad
says...
8:35pm Tue 15 Jun 10
GemmasPress wrote:Why are you not watching the football??
Step too far...craziness!! Another waste of money!
Prob
says...
8:44pm Tue 15 Jun 10
.
Just wanted to show my absolute disgust for the purpotrators of the arson attack on the main story. I live round the corner and it's made me seriously consider my location. Students a problem? No. It's scum like that.
petethefeet
says...
8:47pm Tue 15 Jun 10
Oh, and Joe Watt was no cycling 'champion' - cycling 'chump' more like.
King Edward
says...
8:57pm Tue 15 Jun 10
mockaroundtheclock
says...
9:01pm Tue 15 Jun 10
sciencefan
says...
9:52pm Tue 15 Jun 10
And this lane is a stupid idea!
Pleb
says...
1:16am Wed 16 Jun 10
Respect for each others' needs can benefit both cyclists and motorists.
The same situation applies approaching the Clifton Green junction but motorists rarely use the opportunity to move into a notional left-turn lane.
Pleb
says...
1:16am Wed 16 Jun 10
Respect for each others' needs can benefit both cyclists and motorists.
The same situation applies approaching the Clifton Green junction but motorists rarely use the opportunity to move into a notional left-turn lane.
Expat Bob
says...
1:25am Wed 16 Jun 10
Expat Bob
says...
1:30am Wed 16 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:think thats 66 now Liz...........
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
yorkdweller
says...
8:14am Wed 16 Jun 10
B.Dole wrote:When will you learn that congestion is here to stay, unless you get out of your car. Oh and it's been broke for a number of years now.! P.s is't Clifton Green, Clifton Bridge & Water End all one scheme (So just 2 then).
These Cycle schemes are nothing more than a cancer that is gradually taking hold of every major route into and around York. When will they learn? Clifton Green, Clifton Bridge, Water End, Fulford Road... the list just goes on and on... if it isn't broke, don't fix it! I only wish the same ethos could be applied to our ruddy council!
Lizzie Browning
says...
8:40am Wed 16 Jun 10
Expat Bob wrote:Whoohoo! That it - psychic powers, I'm going to be burned as a witch!
Lizzie Browning wrote:think thats 66 now Liz...........
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
<hides> :-)
Taken for a Mug
says...
8:56am Wed 16 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning wrote:I thought it was the Martha character that needed burning...
Expat Bob wrote:Whoohoo! That it - psychic powers, I'm going to be burned as a witch!
Lizzie Browning wrote:think thats 66 now Liz...........
Prediction: 60 comments by the end of the day on this one. :-)
<hides> :-)</hides>
Elle
says...
9:04am Wed 16 Jun 10
hifive
says...
11:16am Wed 16 Jun 10
sciencefan wrote:Same here! Why do people think he represents cyclists anyway? Due to the vague mention of some who's also called Paul in the article? He has his own opinions and the rest of us have ours and more often than not, other cyclists will disagree with him! Why does it even matter so much that he has his say? Plenty of cyclists have have stated their opinion on these lanes, but everyone seems to ignore them and do the whole "Oh, I wonder what PP has to say?"
I'm a cyclist and Paul us not my spokesman!!! And this lane is a stupid idea!
Stop wondering! You've already decided that you won't agree with him so it's fruitless! Instead try listening to the reasonable cyclists who are all for bikes, but with a nice dollop of common sense thrown in for good measure.
1speedisalluneed
says...
11:27am Wed 16 Jun 10
hifive wrote:Couldn't agree more, he does not represent my view as a cyclist and the one time that I met him he was rude to the point of being arrogant.
sciencefan wrote:Same here! Why do people think he represents cyclists anyway? Due to the vague mention of some who's also called Paul in the article? He has his own opinions and the rest of us have ours and more often than not, other cyclists will disagree with him! Why does it even matter so much that he has his say? Plenty of cyclists have have stated their opinion on these lanes, but everyone seems to ignore them and do the whole "Oh, I wonder what PP has to say?"
I'm a cyclist and Paul us not my spokesman!!! And this lane is a stupid idea!
Stop wondering! You've already decided that you won't agree with him so it's fruitless! Instead try listening to the reasonable cyclists who are all for bikes, but with a nice dollop of common sense thrown in for good measure.
alfie
says...
12:37pm Wed 16 Jun 10
TooRelaxed
says...
1:00pm Wed 16 Jun 10
Elle wrote:Wrong. You need to read the Highway Code, section 151.
just laughing away at this scheme. basically, its just a normal road system - cyclists breaking the law by under-taking, and still no more room for the other vehicles. what a waste of money being spent on painting the road surface.
Yorkborneinbse
says...
5:42pm Wed 16 Jun 10
.......' they should not be seen as a universal solution. Where
provided, they should be a minimum of 1.5m wide'........
Sensible to start this measurement 250mm from the Kerb edge, So, I reckon, with the reflective red Lollipop stuck to the offside of the bike, Cyclists will be near the middle of Gillygate !!!! = GridLock. Well done YCC you shower of ***sters.
B.Dole
says...
9:45pm Thu 17 Jun 10
Lizzie Browning
says...
8:50am Fri 18 Jun 10
alfie wrote:A certain irony there which I am sure the Press chuckle over. A non-story with 76 replies! Make that 77. ;-)
Another non-story from York Press
meme
says...
2:34pm Mon 21 Jun 10
Has the cycle lane at Clifton Green been a success and was it worth it financially? That’s the question many, including Councilors, are asking themselves so here is the chance for you to decide based on the exact figures.
Firstly the actual cost was £562,000 according to City of York Council figures
Secondly the total numbers of cyclists using this route, Eastbound, between 7 am and 7 pm, are as follows
September 08 388
September 09 521
November 09 491
The figures are broken down even further
Sept 08 8.00am until 9.00 am 85
Sept 09 8.00am until 9.00 am 126
Sept 08 5.00pm to 6.00 pm 23
Sept 09 5.00pm to 6.00 pm 39
So was it worth the trouble? The extra cost appears to be some £4,225.56 per extra cyclist being generous or £5,456 using November figures.
I leave it for you the people of York to decide
yorkshirelad
says...
5:06pm Mon 21 Jun 10
'The works commenced on 24th November 2008 and were completed on 7th October 2009, at an estimated cost of £7.12m'.
Most of us can see that despite all the uproar schemes to enhance the safety of cyclists and pedestrians cost peanuts compared to the costs of dealing with motorized traffic.
That's still the case if you post all your figures in multiple threads, meme of skelton.
meme
says...
5:20pm Mon 21 Jun 10
Thats fine.... I just want people to know then they can make up their own minds rather than base their opinions on meaningless statistics.
Frankly as I have property interest in Greencliffe drive but also cycle I am interested to see whether people think its good value or not
As for your statistics re Hopgrove they are worthless without knowing traffic numbers as we have no idea what, if any value, was created. Plus I am aware that Monks Cross developers contributed, I believe £2 million, to the cost.I dont think that happened at Clifton but I may be wrong
Yorkshirebird28
says...
6:07pm Mon 21 Jun 10
More News stories
- Teenager airlifted to hospital after sledging accident
- Hamster fried alive in York city centre
- Sweet treat for ‘lovipop’ twins
- ‘Pirate’ puss Gordon is latest sculpture on York’s cat trail
- Scheme to boost cycling hailed a success
- Two arrested in Acomb burglary probe
- Council leader launches attack on minister
- Out-of-town complex critic says he wants what’s right for York
- Survivors ‘lucky to be alive’ after crash landing
- Fears over future of local ward committees
A cyclist riding in Gillygate, York, yesterday
Most popular
Local Information
Enter your postcode, town or place name
Lizzie Browning says...
9:24am Tue 15 Jun 10