Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

news

Dutch-style cycle lane planned for Manchester's Oxford Road in major revamp

Public consultation opens next week into overhaul of busy thoroughfare as part of TfGM's Bus Priority scheme...

Transport for Greater Manchester is planning to introduce segregated cycle lanes along a one-mile stretch of the city’s busy Oxford Road, under proposals for a major revamp of the thoroughfare that will be open for public consultation from next Wednesday 22 May until Wednesday 26 June.

The scheme, which forms part of TfGM’s Cross City Bus Priority initiative, aims to give precedence to buses, pedestrians and cyclists along Oxford Road and includes bust stop islands with a cycle lane running behind them, similar to those that Transport for London plans to install as part of its revamp of Stratford High Street.

TfGM says that it intends to restrict access to some sections of Oxford Road to buses, taxis, emergency vehicles and bicycles, the latter using Dutch-style cycle lanes, while junctions and road crossings will be improved for pedestrians, who will also get wider pavements.

Councillor Andrew Fender, Chair of the TfGM’s Committee said: “With traffic levels rising, it’s crucial that we make sure people can easily get around our city by more sustainable transport – in this case, by bus, bike or on foot.

“The bus priority package is one of the largest investments in the Greater Manchester bus network in decades.

“Giving buses priority will allow bus operators to introduce services that cross through the city centre free from traffic, without need for passengers to change service.

“Oxford Road is one of the busiest bus routes in Europe and we want it to offer a European style travel experience, not just for bus passengers, but pedestrians and cyclists.

“I encourage everyone who lives, works in or travels through our city centre to take a look at these plans and have their say.”

Councillor Nigel Murphy, Manchester City Council’s Executive Member for Environment, added: “The city is growing and we need to make sure that our transport system supports this growth.

“These plans will boost investment along the routes and support emerging business and commercial centres. They allow full access to businesses along the route and general traffic will be accommodated on other parallel routes.

“The changes we are proposing are essential to delivering a more sustainable transport system connecting people with employment, education, health, leisure and shopping and providing real alternatives to the car.”

Details of the consultation will be available online from next Wednesday 22 May, and leaflets will also be distributed within Manchester city centre and to 40,000 properties in the area affected.

Recently, Transport for Greater Manchester submitted its bit for £20 million of Cycle City Ambition funding towards its Vélocity 2025 project. Here’s a short video of its plans.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

33 comments

Avatar
John_the_Monkey replied to bambergbike | 10 years ago
0 likes
bambergbike wrote:

It isn't realistic to expect faster cyclists to use the road while slower ones share the path with the zombie pedestrians. Drivers will see the path, decide that all cyclists should be on it and hassle the cyclists who don't use it, so some fast cyclists will be deterred from using the road, maybe after a near miss.

Essentially what happens now then?

I see punishment passes of people who don't take to the path by Oxfam/Whitworth Park pretty regularly. The difference is that the facility in that case is meandering and indirect - heading towards Rusholme, in particular, it's somewhat better going into the city, admittedly, although a bit interesting at funfair time.

TfGM haven't built this yet - so it's a chance to say "Please make it wider" "maintain it properly" and so on. It's also a chance to fold our arms and declare that it'll never work, ever, of course.

Avatar
pmanc replied to bambergbike | 10 years ago
0 likes
bambergbike wrote:
pmanc wrote:

Do you have any links to back up your comments that German cycle infrastructure is considered dangerous and the Germans are giving up on the idea?

My point - I may not have made it very clearly - was that the Germans are increasingly moving away from off-carriageway infrastructure and towards putting cyclists on the road (in urban contexts)...

I'm not being deliberately obtuse here, but the problem here seems to be that the cycle specific facilities in question are "old" or "poor quality", and then you appear to be moving on to say that on-carriageway infrastructure is the best alternative. Why not "newer" or "better-quality" facilities? One reason given is the lack of space in an urban environment. The PDF you link to doesn't appear to write off segregated paths altogether, but it does seem, to me, to be badly misguided. The use of the term "protection lane" appears to describe a lane which offers no protection (since cars are allowed to drive in it)? FFS. If the space exists for cars then surely it exists for bikes? It just depends on your priorities. And surely, if you're pushed for space, prioritising smaller lighter forms of traffic which pollute less is a good idea?

We all know that most people will not regularly cycle sharing a carriageway with motor vehicles over a certain speed or volume, and all the "active press and PR work" in the world won't convince them otherwise. Like these people who keenly go on bikeability courses only to cycle home on the pavements afterwards and sadly lock the bike away in the shed again for another decade. The photos in that ECF article do not show cyclists next to lorries. Wouldn't it be a shame if, having seen a dramatic increase in the modal share of cycling, German cities force all the cyclists into the traffic and put everybody off again.

Avatar
bambergbike replied to pmanc | 10 years ago
0 likes
pmanc wrote:

We all know that most people will not regularly cycle sharing a carriageway with motor vehicles over a certain speed or volume.

Absolutely. A blanket speed limit of 20 mph or 30 kph in urban areas (properly enforced and supported by cyclist-friendly traffic-calming measures) would be hugely helpful. So would a big clampdown on dangerous overtaking.

I also fully agree with you that "protection lanes" or "advisory lanes" are rubbish. In Germany they seem to work, more or less. Cars have enough room to overtake cyclists properly, and lorries and buses usually wait behind cyclists until it is safe to pass. But they probably work despite rather than because of the design - I've certainly seen helmet camera videos of advisory lanes not working very well in Dublin (close passes by high-sided vehicles). If cyclists and large vehicles are sharing the carriageway and there isn't enough space for a large vehicle to overtake a cyclist safely, I think "share the road" bicycle "sharrows" work better than lines that wrongly suggest that there is space for large motor vehicles to overtake.

I cited official German guidance to show general trends, but that's not to say that I (or most German cycle campaigners) find it all good. I'm just enthused by the increasing reliance on on-carriageway provision because it seems to result in facilities that are more comfortable and convenient to use.

I cycled across town and today and at one point I had a choice:
I could use a (mostly) on-carriageway cycle lane on a road used by cars, trucks and buses. Or I could use a quieter road designated as a "bicycle street", meaning that cars are only allowed use it at bicycle speeds and must yield to cycle traffic. The latter road is also "residents only", I think. There is on-street car parking, but not much traffic. Both of these solutions reflect strands of current German thinking, as they both cross bridges that have just been rebuilt; neither facility is outdated.

I opted to use the busier road with no physical separation from motor vehicles beyond a white line(marked with stone rater than paint, but not raised). Even though it was a longer route, it was still more convenient: better sightlines, no zombie pedestrians, no on-street car parking, no clumsy street furniture, no need to use my brakes or my bell.

Pages

Latest Comments