Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Council spends £55k turning cycle lane into car parking

Following lobbying from residents Stoke-on-Trent council will move cyclists onto shared pavement with pedestrians

Stoke-on-Trent council is spending £55,000 to turn a cycle lane into car parking.

Following lobbying from residents on Harpfield Road, who had taken to parking on the “rarely-used” cycle lane when no other spaces were available outside their homes, the council will create one lane for cycles and pedestrians to share, while turning the existing bike lane into car parking.

The council says changes will make it easier for people to park, while improving safety for those who cycle, who will no longer face collision with motor vehicles when they drive across the bike lane, or leave cars on the bike lane itself.

City council cabinet member Jack Brereton told the Stoke Sentinel: "We have recently consulted with residents on a scheme which will improve road safety as well as access in Harpfield Road.

"In particular the work will reduce current hazards for both pedestrians and cyclists.

"The scheme is also designed to help improve residential parking and will allow residents to park much closer to their properties."

Harpfield Road is unusual in the UK in that it has an off-road cycle path and separate footpath running along its one mile length on each side of the road, from Harplands Hospital to Newcastle Road, although the route does not give cyclists priority at junctions and numerous driveways along its length open onto the cycle path. 

Work started on Monday to remove the cycle lane between houses 95-119. According to Google Streetview, some houses have car parking on their front gardens, while a number of cars can be seen parked along the cycle track and footpath. No-one seems to park on the road, despite a lack of double yellow lines. 

Resident Gareth Barker told the Sentinel: "I have seen cyclists struggle and have a few close calls with cars as they have parked up.

"You can't put a price on people's safety and I think this will make things better for everyone, not just the people who live here."

"Designated parking would alleviate many of the problems as I think most of the people who park on the pavement are residents, who do so for convenience, rather than people visiting the hospital. The only issue is where exactly they will place the spaces."

One visitor, whose elderly mother lives on Harpfield Road, told the Stoke Sentinel: "I'm not sure why they think this will help with people's safety.

"I have never actually seen a cyclist go down this street, and I visit here all the time. They always use the road anyway. To me, it seems like a big waste of money."

Stoke-on-Trent was designated one of the UK's 18 “cycling cities” in 2008, receiving government funding for cycle infrastructure, parking and the promotion of cycling. The funding, which increased the city’s cycle network from 124km to 161km (including greenways, shared use footpaths, on-road cycle lanes and bus lanes shared with cyclists), ended in 2011 and was not renewed.

 

Add new comment

24 comments

Avatar
BarryBianchi | 6 years ago
0 likes

You really can't fault a Council when it comes to paying through the nose for nonsense.

This reminds me of a ride I did recently that took in Godalming, Surrey.  Into which on the main road for part of the way there is, pleasingly, a cycle lane (only one way mind) in the form of a painted white line at the side of the road.

However, as you near town, the Council in their brilliance have placed new pedestrian "refuge islands" in the middle of the road in several places, which force the traffic right to the kerb.  How have they dealt with the cyclists?  Simple, the white line stops a few metres before the island pinch point, and carries on after. About as dangerous a solution as you could imagine.  Shortly after in any event, it turns into the usual fiasco with cars parked across the cycle lane anyway.

  With ficktards like that in charge, what hope is there?

Avatar
Condor flyer | 8 years ago
1 like

Only in Britain! All off-carriageway cycle lanes like this are doomed from the outset because cyclists lose the priority that is automatically theirs when using the road running alongside. The precedent was set over 70 years ago when the first dual-carriageways were built with cycle lanes constructed to run parallel, none of them with priority over side roads. The irony is that many of these cycle lanes are of decent width and properly surfaced, unlike the shared use footpaths dodging lamposts and bus stops, which are horrible to ride on because they receive no engineering whatsoever.

The best form of cycle lane is that provided by a white line on the road itself.  Drivers tend to follow white lines. The problem, as always, comes when vehicles park on them.

Avatar
iso2000 | 8 years ago
0 likes

Well shoot me down but I sympathise with the resisdents on this street. I lived on a similar but busier road to this and it's not about parking near home but finding anywhere to park that wasn't on a cycle path or caused traffic disruption.  We have to remember that roads aren't just there to get from A to B but people like us actually live on them.

 

 

Avatar
mike the bike replied to iso2000 | 8 years ago
2 likes

iso2000 wrote:

......  We have to remember that roads aren't just there to get from A to B but people like us actually live on them. 

 

Possibly true but it's their primary function.  Car parking should be the very last thing on the planners' agenda and only after everything else has been satisfied should provision be made for people to store their vehicles.

Avatar
Rapha Nadal | 8 years ago
0 likes

We've got a shared pavement/cycle path along the seafront in Brighton.

It's a fucking liability, especially in the summer, with stupid parents letting their kids run around in it, people nonchantly walking down it hand in hand admiring the view and not paying attention to anything around them and those who see nothing in front of them but their phone screen.

Awful idea.

Avatar
alansmurphy | 8 years ago
4 likes

Just to be clear on road cc's 2 main stories today:

Cyclists in Manchester are charged £50 for riding on pavement due to endangering pedestrians

Cars in Stoke are blocking cycle lanes so being rewarded with £55k car park and putting cycles on pavements.

Genius!

Avatar
jonathing | 8 years ago
1 like

Presumably the council will charge each householder the £2300 cost for their parking space as undoubtedly it'll add to to value of their property.

Avatar
Cranky Acid | 8 years ago
4 likes

Sad state. £55,000 of taxpayers money used to help people store their private property slightly closer to their homes rather than sort out the problems with some old and, not particularly well designed, actual cycle infrastructure.

When segregated lanes get raised at planning meetings the cry is always that changes to drainage will be prohibitively expensive. This will not be the case here as it was built for the purpose. It just needs basic changes to junctions to bring it up to modern design standards and enforcement to stop people parking on it and you'll have the basis of some good infrastructure that kids and more vulnerable users may actually use. Of course it still needs to connect to places people want to go but removing it shrinks any network opportunities and makes cycling even less likely to be taken as the convenient option it should often be.

Avatar
Bob's Bikes | 8 years ago
1 like

Just use the road after the cycle lane is removed, but remember to take primary position and it's not your fault that you can only cycle at 8mph.angel

Avatar
jestriding | 8 years ago
1 like

@ Frog:   Yes, I'd noticed how all those cities with inadequate cycling facilities were all recording incredible growth in cycling; especially amongst the young and women...

Avatar
Christopher TR1 | 8 years ago
2 likes

No surprise that no one uses the cycle lane if you have to give way to side roads. Pointess having segregated cycle paths if they are done this poorly.

I'm just not sure how it costs 55 grand to take down a couple of cycle path signs!

Avatar
middleagedspread replied to Christopher TR1 | 8 years ago
0 likes

Christopher TR1 wrote:

No surprise that no one uses the cycle lane if you have to give way to side roads. Pointess having segregated cycle paths if they are done this poorly.

I'm just not sure how it costs 55 grand to take down a couple of cycle path signs!

Probably the whole ridiculous idea started with a  company with close ties to the council needing work to do.

Avatar
1961BikiE | 8 years ago
4 likes

In some ways a sad loss to a very forward thinking scheme from sometime in the 50's I believe. This was a properly segregated cycle lane. I've rarely ever used it in my 54 years as even before the scourge of it being used as a car park it had problems. Being segregated, even in the days when the roads and gutters were regularly swept, it was often full of "rubbish" that you worried would lead to punctures. This is still true as well as having dodge the parked car at certain points.

Once again car is king.

Avatar
ragtag | 8 years ago
4 likes

"The scheme is also designed to help improve residential parking and will allow residents to park much closer to their properties." 

Yeah, because walking is just meh 

Avatar
frogg | 8 years ago
1 like

in my opinion, dedicated cycle lanes are a failure; we are road users and only need a 1 meter lane at each side of the road. Everyone is happy: pedestrians have a dedicated pavement , drivers are not hampered by riders and riders keep the road user status. 

But then, this lane should be clear of any parking car ... It's the road after all, not a cycle lane.

 

Avatar
EddyBerckx replied to frogg | 8 years ago
6 likes

frogg wrote:

in my opinion, dedicated cycle lanes are a failure; we are road users and only need a 1 meter lane at each side of the road. Everyone is happy: pedestrians have a dedicated pavement , drivers are not hampered by riders and riders keep the road user status. 

But then, this lane should be clear of any parking car ... It's the road after all, not a cycle lane.

 

 

you need a read up on the issue a bit more in my opinion 

Avatar
Paul_C replied to frogg | 8 years ago
0 likes
frogg wrote:

in my opinion, dedicated cycle lanes are a failure; we are road users and only need a 1 meter lane at each side of the road. Everyone is happy: pedestrians have a dedicated pavement , drivers are not hampered by riders and riders keep the road user status. 

But then, this lane should be clear of any parking car ... It's the road after all, not a cycle lane.

 

On road cycle lanes actually encourage close passes as motons believe they can just breeze past without hitting the cyclist as long as they keep their wheels in the car lane...

If you want to see a really stupid situation try this:
https://goo.gl/maps/8JcFsNjyQXD2

That pathetic bit of cycle lane gives a false sense of security and actively encourages motons to go for it at the pinch point...

and this is no fun either being a 50 mph road and the cycle lane doesn't meet current guidelines at all
https://goo.gl/maps/W451StYzKuN2

Avatar
CygnusX1 replied to Paul_C | 8 years ago
1 like

Paul_C wrote:

On road cycle lanes actually encourage close passes as motons believe they can just breeze past without hitting the cyclist as long as they keep their wheels in the car lane... If you want to see a really stupid situation try this: https://goo.gl/maps/8JcFsNjyQXD2 That pathetic bit of cycle lane gives a false sense of security and actively encourages motons to go for it at the pinch point...

Scary. Those "lanes" past the island don't even look wide enough for a bike with drop bars to fit in between the kerb and the White Paint of Protection. Hybrids and MTBs with wider bars would definitely be overhanging the main carriageway putting them at risk of being clipped by drivers thinking the lane is theirs.

 

   

 

Avatar
Paul_C replied to CygnusX1 | 8 years ago
0 likes
CygnusX1 wrote:

Scary. Those "lanes" past the island don't even look wide enough for a bike with drop bars to fit in between the kerb and the White Paint of Protection. Hybrids and MTBs with wider bars would definitely be overhanging the main carriageway putting them at risk of being clipped by drivers thinking the lane is theirs.

 

   

 

It's worse than that, it's not possible for the vast majority of cars to negotiate the ped refuge without going into the cycle lane...

Avatar
Cranky Acid replied to frogg | 8 years ago
2 likes

frogg wrote:

in my opinion, dedicated cycle lanes are a failure; we are road users and only need a 1 meter lane at each side of the road. Everyone is happy: pedestrians have a dedicated pavement , drivers are not hampered by riders and riders keep the road user status. 

 

You may be but then you are only thinking of yourself and your band of merry mates. The majority of people don't want a 1m lane and mixing it up with motor traffic. Protecting your little clique of enthusiasts interests in this way is what has been holding back cycling as a form of mass transport for decades. Get a grip and try thinking about other people for a change.. like the 28% who don't ride a bike but would like to. How do you think NL got 40% share? Certainly not by sticking them in the gutter and just screaming High viz everytime there's a near miss. 

Avatar
wycombewheeler | 8 years ago
3 likes

Why aren't yhe parking on their drives? These house have enough space between the house and the pavement.

Quotes that cyclists have had near misses with people parking on the lane suggest the drivers are at fault not the infrastructure.

Avatar
Mungecrundle | 8 years ago
11 likes

Too be honest, having no cycle lane is preferable to a poorly designed one. No way would I use this designated lane shared with pedestrians and which yields to every minor side road. It's simply not safe unless you slow to walking pace which then makes the whole cycling thing rather pointless.

Avatar
Chris James replied to Mungecrundle | 8 years ago
2 likes

Mungecrundle wrote:

Too be honest, having no cycle lane is preferable to a poorly designed one. No way would I use this designated lane shared with pedestrians and which yields to every minor side road. It's simply not safe unless you slow to walking pace which then makes the whole cycling thing rather pointless.

Me neither. i would just cycle along the road!

Avatar
Housecathst | 8 years ago
9 likes

Brilliant, so a rubbish cycle lane doesn't get used, partly because inconsiderate motorists use it to park and then get reward by the council giving in and handing them free public land to park their cars, and it's to going to cost council tax payers for the work to be done too. 

Latest Comments