Birmingham Worst cycle city (from a commuting Noob) !

Epoch

Hi
Recentlystarted commuting around the place in Birmingham and have noticed the lack of nearly any cycle provision.

Yes there are some boxes at the Start of junctions but North B'ham where i live is quite frankly stupid.

Just out side the jewlery quater a cycle lane starts and ends within 10m and doesnt serve any purpose.

If any one knows Birmingham the new juction near Snow Hill is the worst cycle experience i have. You get sucked to one side compressed by numerous buses then hav to cross 2 lanes to get into central bham.

Any one else have opinions bout b'ham as a cycle city, I have only just started commuting and already resorted to pedestrian crossings and pushing!

ratty2k

http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.u ... -the-month

Just to show you that its not just Birmingham!!! This is where I live, and show some of the facilities? :? from around the country.
I wish coincils would stop using cycle lanes as a way of getting funding.

spring91

Try checking out side roads and canals to avoid the most dangerous places. Could you use the footbridge on Ludgate Street and Livery Street to avoid Snow Hill? Birmingham is car obsessed city which often makes cycling more fun as the traffic is at a standstill.

graham_g

After a while you appreciate the lack of facilities as it means you don't get grief from drivers about not being in the cycle lane!

I'd heartily recommend reading John Franklin's Cyclecraft book - then you'll be well equipped for dealing with some of the bigger junctions just by cycling in an assertive manor.

That said, I'm out west in Quinton and am lucky that there's nice roads all the way in through Edgbaston where there's plenty of room.

BentMikey

I'll second Graham's comment - get Cyclecraft and then you won't bother with cycle lanes any more. Most seem either dangerous or slow and a waste of time.

Massimo

I've been commuting in & out of Brum for 15+ years. It is, without a doubt, one of the most cycle unfriendly places in the country. Not only in terms of provisions for cyclists, but in the general attitude of motorists. I think it must have something to do with its history as the centre of the car industry - anyone not in a car is to be despised and should not be allowed on the road. It sound harsh I know, but motorists in Birmingham REALLY don't like cyclists.

graham_g

Motorists in Brum really don't like anyone - including other drivers, buses, pedestrians and themselves. It's a misery inducing city if you tie yourself to four wheels.

Garry71

The canal path runs past Snow Hill, and I think it goes northwards towards Sutton.
You can get on the canal next to the building site at the junction of Constitution Hill and Summer Lane at the bottom of Snow Hill. Its nearly opposite the guitar shop on the corner, but the other side of the main road.
Southwards from there it goes past the BT tower, Summer Row, NIA, Gas St Basin, and towards Edgbaston. At Gas St Basin, it splits up into different canal routes.

Garry

ps If you can't find the entrance, just follow the smell of piss.

spring91

The canal splits at the back of the NIA - straight on towards Smethwick or left to Gas St / University / Bourneville. If your route can be done via canals then you could say that Birmingham is the best city for cycling. I know a couple of people who have fallen in so it helps if you can swim.

richk

Maybe I'm just lucky but I have a choice of two mostly 'not on road' routes to take for my commute (Northfield to Edgbaston). OK, it would be shorter to go straight down the Bristol Road (A38) but that's a route I avoid in the car a peak time, never mind on a bike.

We've seen the city centre become more ped friendly over the past few years, so maybe there's hope yet?

grimmison

I've been in Brum three weeks now, having moved from Sheffield, and the lack of any usable cycle facilities was quite noticeable at first (I'm not a big fan of off-road lanes). There seem to be quite a few ASLs but no way to get past the traffic to actually reach them.

Having said that, it is nice having well-surfaced and wide roads and as long as you stick yourself in the middle of a lane and stare out drivers when you want to change lanes it doesn't seem to bad. The drivers in Birmingham seem to be less courteous but much more switched on than elsewhere - I haven't had any close calls... yet.

graham_g

Good point on the road surfaces - they're a good deal better than some other large cities I've cycled in, particularly London. ASL's are best accessed by overtaking (not undertaking!) and I was pleased to see new ASL's installed near me that don't have a kerbside cycle lane on the approach well, they do, but it's about 6" long.

Transport geek reasoning: Guidance for traffic engineers (TSRGD) dictates that ASL's MUST have a cycle lane on the approach. This of course is not actually a good thing as it might encourage cyclists to undertake in an unsafe manor - fortunately the city council was able to apply the 6" cycle lane get-out clause so that any 'jobsworth' type scrutiny is survived!

misterben

OK - noob question, but what's an ASL?

h i r 0

ratty2k wrote:

http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/facility-of-the-month

Thanks for a giggle-filled lunch-time.

Jacomus-rides-Gen

ASL - Advanced Slaughter Line, that encourages cyclists to filter on the left at junctions.

or alternatively...

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/16.htm
154: Advanced stop lines. Some junctions have advanced stop lines or bus advance areas to allow cycles and buses to be positioned ahead of other traffic. Motorists, including motorcyclists, MUST stop at the first white line reached, and should avoid encroaching on the marked area. If your vehicle has proceeded over the first white line at the time the signal goes red, you MUST stop at the second white line, even if your vehicle is in the marked area.

Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 43(2)

thebongolian

When I'm home in Brum the locals seem more suprised to see a cyclist on the road than aggressive towards me though it's been a while since a I regularly cycled round the city

As long as you are assertive and make sure you are seen it seems to be OK inlcuding up down Hagley and Perhsore Roads, round Five Ways and down Broad Street.It probably helps that I'm a reasonably fast cyclist though.

Far nicer to use the canals though if you can.

Tariq

Cycle facilities, cycle lanes...NO! The whole point of a bike is its ability to bring a freedom not afforded to motorised transport. Not only beneficial for exercise and money-saving, its primary purpose is to bring freedom of movement.

I suggest that you complete your journey using any 'land' available, as long as it is not too dangerous. Cycle lanes are not necessary because the pavement is ideal (it is illegal but that does not make it wrong to use them). Canals and occassionally roads when there is little traffic, sometimes it is safer to ride the wrong way up a road! I think we should all oppose anything which restricts cycling freedom, like cycle lanes and the likes. I am sure more people would take up cycling if it was marketed as a fun and safe activity alongside pedestrians, canals, parks but not motorists. I know it is not totally safe on the pavement but does anyone know how many cyclists have died or had serious injuries on pavement versus road, if so I would appreciate the stats.

Incidentally, I have cycled in Birmingham for over ten years and I think the 'land' available for cycling is excellent, I always complete a seven mile journey in 28-32 mins on a combination of road, pavement, car parks and town centres. I've lost count of the number of times I have passed sensible police officers who have quite rightly ignored me riding on the pavement.

Bicycles are not part of the traffic, they should aspire to go beyond the traffic, the helicopter, not the car should be the role model.

Massimo

That last sentence is brilliant! Everyone should quote it at least once in the next seven days

Jacomus-rides-Gen

Tariq
the pavement is ideal (it is illegal but that does not make it wrong to use them).

It really does!

Speeding is illigal, is that still wrong?

How about intimidation?


Cycling on pavements is too fast, and is intimidating to pedestrians.

I reckon (very scientifically, mind :P ) that your journey would be faster if you cycled properly.

How far is it?

Tariq

Hi everyone,

I agree that cycling fast on the pavement is sometimes intimidating to some pedestrians, however, only a reckless cyclist would do this. When the pavement is clear ride at 15-20mph, when built up slow down to 7-12mph, one has to use ones own good judgement.

With regrads to it being wrong to cycle on the pavement, well it is if we assume that the law relating to this (and speeding) is right, but common sense suggests that there is nothing wrong with cycling on the pavement.

I agree with you Jacomus that my journey would be faster by road, but it would be too hurried, too full of concentration, I'd miss all the wonderful feminine forms around Birmingham. Besides, cycling should be a pleasure, the journey is to be enjoyed for its own sake and not seen as a means to an end.

I will take the advice of an earlier poster and quote myself!!

Bicycles are not part of the traffic, they should aspire to go beyond the traffic, the helicopter, not the car, should be the role model.

misterben

Tariq wrote:

common sense suggests that there is nothing wrong with cycling on the pavement.

Common sense tells me you're wrong.

Tariq

I should have been clearer. Common sense suggests that there is little wrong with cycling on the pavement, of course, it is not ideal, but compared with riding in the road it is certainly less dangerous; I don't think anyone seriosuly disputes this.

thebongolian

Tariq wrote:

I should have been clearer. Common sense suggests that there is little wrong with cycling on the pavement, of course, it is not ideal, but compared with riding in the road it is certainly less dangerous; I don't think anyone seriosuly disputes this.

,deep breath and count to 10...

Jacomus-rides-Gen

Tariq
When the pavement is clear ride at 15-20mph, when built up slow down to 7-12mph, one has to use ones own good judgement.

Replace "pavement" with "road and you speed figures with 40-unlimited and you are close to the SS strapline :shock: (Sorry, but I couldn't resist doing that, it was just asking for it!)

The problem comes with judgement - some people have it, many don't.

I just don't understand why you think that cycling on the pavement is better than the road - I find that most of the time cycling on the road relaxes me, it is very very rare indeed for me to arrive somewhere by bike and feel stressed.

Cycling on the pavement is also more dangerours than the road.

Though I am one of those cyclists who enjoys riding very fast (unless its a descent though, curiously), and pavement acceptable speeds are brain melting for me. I have to ride therough a small ped area between two of my companies offices every morning, and I find the 7km/h I stick to through there agonizing. I can feel my bike wanting to push faster and all the peds still look at me daggers - which is fair enough. So I pootle through and try not to get in anyones way. In the evening its not a prob, as i can get out onto the one way road so don't have to ride through.

Peds don't like cyclists on pavements because they cannot tell what the cyclist is going to do.

graham_g

Tariq - you obviously have had the most amazing luck in the world not to have a car take you out at the bottom of the driveway.

Tariq

Cycling on the pavement is not 'BETTER' or worse than on the road, it is merely another, route to complete ones journey. Those who dipute what I say are unable to provide any data which suggests that road is safer than pavement, I would still like to know how many fatalities/injuries there have been on road versus pavement.

I always feel safer on the pavement but I often ride on the road too, sometimes the wrong way up the road because I deem it to be safer. The main point is not to be prescriptive about where one should ride, those who insist it must be on the road are as wrong as those who insist it should be on the pavement; Commuting and general cycling should be about enjoyment as much as 'getting there fast'. The bike does not have a will to go fast, it is the rider who has the desire for speed.

I have not been 'taken out' by a car backing out from its drive because I expect it to happen and I ride accordingly, I've had a few near misses but far fewer and less serious than on the road. Pedestrians are not scared of cyclists, they are familiar with them, most sensible cyclsits will anticipate early and avoid pedestrians even having to decide which side of pavement to move to. Furthermore, I'd sooner bump into a person than a vehicle.

One thing I will concede is that a lycra clad cyclist with a road bike may look more elegant on the road than pootling along on the pavement. I thank the people who have posted here, yet I still remain genuinly unconvinced that cycling should be a solely road activity with regards to commuting.

misterben

I probably shouldn't be feeding here, but:

Cycling on the pavement is not "another option" - it's illegal and dangerous for the pedestrians. Your bike is a vehicle, albeit a special one, and, like a car, shouldn't be on the pavement, regardless of speed. Just because it's safer for _you_, doesn't mean it's safer - that's the argument that drivers use for getting cyclists off the road. You can cause plenty of damage to other pavement users, even if you cycle slowly.

Phil R

I really don't think there is an argument here, among responsible cyclists.

The pavement is for pedestrians, not cyclists.

Tariq, it does not matter what the figures are for the road or pavement being safer. You should not ride a bicycle on the pavement. Would you ride a motorcycle on the pavement, just because you deemed it safer? (Safer for yourself only I presume) :roll:

You probably would, seeing as though you ride "the wrong way up a road" as you put it, because you "deem it to be safer" :shock:

If I were driving my car and a cyclist came towards me on the wrong side of the road, I would be far from impressed.

If I were walking along the pavement and a cyclist came past me I would feel the same.

Regarding your comment "those who insist it must be on the road are as wrong as those who insist it should be on the pavement". What??? I don't think anybody is insisting you ride solely on the road. There are other places to ride, but the pavement is not one of them.

I'm sorry to say this, but I think it's people like you who give cyclists a bad name.

Tariq

Cycling is very rarely dangerous for pedestrians, it is more dangerous for drivers who have to swerve to avoid cyclists. Only a inconsiderate cyclist would use the pavement on a bulit up pavement, otherwise there are very few pedestrians about. A skateboard is a vehicle too, so whould it only be used on the road, what about motorised wheelchairs? Personally I feel that cyclists ought to elevate themselves above the traffic, not to class them selves as vehicles, it serves to box us in and limits the freedom of movement to be had.

As I wrote earlier, dozens of police officers have ignored me when I cycle past them, some even on bikes! So they don not deem it to be a hazard worthy of even a ticking off, and I applaud their common-sense.

Phil: I ride the wrong way up a road if their is no oncoming traffic and nothing behind me about to turn/pull-over. It is safe and sensible and I recommend it to all safe, freedom seeking cyclists (sorry to sound like Bush!)

Contrary to giving cycling a bad name, riding on the pavement actually puts me in touch with those who are yet to be converted to this marvellous pastime, pedestrians often talk to me about cycling and I urge them to give it a go, no driver would do that! So cycling on the pavement is not only safer but also more responsible and creates a positive impression.

Finally, I should point out that my cycling is usually 60%:40%, road to pavement. Once again, thanks for the posts and I accept that some disagree with me, strongly so it seems but that is the whole point of a forum and some of you have made excellent points.

Massimo

You're scaring me now - remind me wher you cycle in Birmingham so I can avoid it...

graham_g

It's only because it's Birmingham that no-one cares (we are but nutters for not driving). If you were to take your pavement cycling antics to London/York/Hull/Cambridge etc. it wouldn't be long at all before you either got a ticket, an earful or worst case scenario, a beating.