A major new West Midlands segregated cycle lane installed in April has attracted criticism from local riders who say it is "ridiculous" and "dangerous", however the council and the area's cycling and walking commissioner insist it has been designed to encourage less-confident cyclists.
BirminghamLive reports the first phase of the two-way three-metre-wide Solihull cycle lane links the town centre, retail parks and surrounding villages, and while the council says it will "encourage local people to get active" and is "safer than traditional cycle lanes", some local club cyclists disagree.
The Blossomfield Road lane replaced the painted cycle lanes (seen below in April 2021) which UK-based riders will be all too familiar with.
However, speaking to the local news website, two members of Solihull Cycling Club said the new infrastructure is "not designed for cycling".
"It's not designed for cycling, especially heading into town," one of the club riders said. "You're heading into traffic. It's stop-start, you're having to take your feet out and come across [to where the cycle lane resumes on the other side of the road]. The [old] system wasn't broken."
The other added: "It's not ideal, if you're travelling into town, when you do use it, you're having to come across, potentially into the path of people coming out of town. It's not particularly safe, my worry is the build up of debris, unless they sweep it regularly, it's the ongoing maintenance of it really.
"I imagine pot holes are going to develop at some point and the road surface is going to deteriorate."
BirminghamLive visited the site to film a video of the infrastructure, available on their news story, which shows some bike lane wands already missing, a series of wands narrowing the entrance to the lane (presumably to stop motorists using it), and pinch points with raised speed bumps to allow those waiting at bus stops to walk across the lane to the road.
In other places, cyclists must dismount and cross the road at a pedestrian crossing to continue to use the lane on the other side of the road.
And while acknowledging the benefits of the infrastructure for families, they suggested it could lead to other problems. "The only time I used that bike lane was on my way to a time trial, so I was in my full race getup. Two scallies on mountain bikes coming the other way decided to swerve in front of me then narrowly miss a head-on collision," the second rider continued.
"They clearly did this on purpose. If this happens to me on my first and only time using it I can't imagine what it's like for other cyclists who perhaps aren't so confident."
When asked if the infrastructure was revolutionary, one of the riders quipped, "It will cause a revolution". Both say it is "dangerous" and choose to avoid the lane or use alternative routes
Designed for less-experienced riders
However, West Midlands Cycling and Walking Commissioner, Adam Tranter, addressed the comments, saying: "In truth — experienced cyclists who are cycling faster speeds, are more confident or are riding in groups, may prefer to continue to use the road, which is their right and totally acceptable under the Highway Code.
> Adam Tranter appointed first West Midlands Cycling & Walking Commissioner
"We know that more people want to cycle in the West Midlands but don't feel it's safe enough. Two-way cycle tracks like this one give dedicated space away from cars and we find people less confident appreciate this set-up. The plan is to continue to develop and expand the route based on future funding and feedback can be taken into account for improvements."
Solihull Council's cabinet member for environment and infrastructure, Cllr Ken Hawkins, believes the lane will attract users of all ages and abilities, and suggested the infrastructure is not necessarily there for more experienced riders.
"We have been able to create these three-metre-wide two-way cycle lanes by altering the existing road space and our engineers have also ensured that they can be used flexibly in case of emergencies," he told Birmingham Live.
"More confident and experienced cyclists who would rather cycle at speed on the road with cars and buses still can. The cycle lane has been created in order to offer another option and encourage less-confident cyclists.
"It is really important that as a council we provide choices, encourage and support cycling and walking in many different ways so that travelling without polluting the borough or using up the earth's finite supply of oil is a workable option for people."
In addition to the two Solihull Cycling Club members, another local rider, Gemma Queenborough, said the lane "seems ridiculous".
"It starts by Tudor Grange and only goes to the Co-op. The money would have been much better spent on creating cycle paths on roads which do not have them. The old cycle lanes seemed to work much more efficiently and safer," she said.
Add new comment
56 comments
Agree. (Thanks for the local knowledge BTW). Can't think of a good alternate for the loaded "subservience" though without waffling about "convenience for all modes is important but especially for the most efficient".
I think Dutch drivers do have slightly more consciousness that there will be cyclists in the environment. That's helped by how the infra handles conflict points but also them regularly encountering cyclists (because lots) and most drivers cycling at some point. I doubt drivers there are on average "better".
I was like this chap - first time in NL I wasn't looking at the infra, it was all just foreign. Second time I noticed it and found it confusing. Third time I'd learned the rules and quickly just "got on with it" and soon wasn't thinking about it.
I still pick up nuances from the increasingly vast blogosphere about this. One consistent thing is that - like here - most people within a system have hazy or incorrect notions of how it really works, or what's important. It's not important to know and it's "normal".
It would...this scheme cost 10% of what a high quality cycle route would cost.
Well it's a matter of perspective, personally I'm fed up with the compromises, being made to feel grateful for rubbish infra & treated as a second class citizen.
Yet if we follow the now long established & successful Dutch design principles to this stuff, you automatically through design, deliver safe cycling routes for those less confident, those that just want to get A to B and the wielrenfiets, who actually just want to get out into the countryside and hate dealing with suburban traffic as much as all the other cyclists do.
But we dont we persist with this well something is a bit better than nothing, what do the less than confident riders do when this stuff just stops on the road, hop back into their cars ?
Well in many areas and on many roads you compromise or you demolish housing to cater for the ideal. The roads were designed for horse and cart and consist of old Victorian terraces.
I totally concur with you on new builds though. As around me there is a lot of new development where the infrastructure could've been built in, but instead we have shared paths.
But there is a huge overlap on what different groups need, and invariably objections to complaints about a lane not being suitable are met with responses that it was designed for 'x' type of rider (conveniently not the questioner), despite it also not being suitable for 'x' because of the issue being complained about;
I get responses to stating that a lane isn't wide enough that it 'is built for leisure cyclists who are slower and just want to be away from cars" etc. They don't like me pointing out that if the lane isn't wide enough for a fit club rider to average 20mph safely (in absence of traffic), then it almost certainly isn't wide enough for my colleagues handcycle to use AT ALL. A narrow lane doesn't help children (who will make mistakes so need margin of error), parents (who need to be able to keep children in eyesight), active travel with cargo bikes that need space etc...
It isn't unusual to see arguments that 'we don't have space' while ignoring that there is space for 3-4 lanes of motor traffic (2 lanes + parking on both sides is relatively common)
One word...money.
We don't commit enough funding to cycle infrastructure.
Generally agree - just being pedantic: is it appropriate to describe a party-popper or cracker as a "boom"? If you went for "fad", now ... I'm keen for this to happen but the champagne's on ice until we move from scraping along at a share of a few % of journeys (spot the boom here). For the UK - for parts of the UK - 10% of journeys would be a real boom. And elevate us up to join Helsinki!
Impossible to judge without a decent map or video of the route, soundbites may make easier copy to publish but are in no way helpful to understanding if there are fundamental problems with this setup or not.
100% THIS
Our own IanMSpencer comes from this neck of the woods. I'm not sure if it was this section or another that comprised his first posts of good but flawed infra where the bike lane at an island entrance was regularly crossed. But he might be able to give a balanced view (even though he is a roadie) when he appears.
Edit: This is from Apr2022 so still under construction but the main parts are.
I wonder what happens to cyclists on the "wrong side of travel" when the lane finishes here
Bus stop pinch point?
Who has priority at this junction?
Hmmm, expect encroaching cars unfortunately.
Bikes going straight across can stay on the road (if confident enough), bikes coming the other way have to go on pavement and walk across crossing?
The route does continue the other side but streetview has not been updated since. Granted some of the parts here are nothing to moan about if consideration has been covered by both the council and lane users. The bus stop pinch points should not be too harsh with the ramps and have very good drainage to stop pools of water that normally collect near these. And should have signage stating the cyclists priority direction. However with others I can see their could be issues like the endings.
It's hard to say much from the snapshots provided above and on the linked Birmingham Mail article, but my immediate impression is that it looks pretty good (albeit not perfect) whilst you are within the cycle lane, but like so many bits of cycling infrastructure it just gives up when you need it most i.e. junctions, and entry/exit is a problem.
If it is a two-way cycle lane, then presumably people will be arriving towards the orange bollards in the photo above - what exactly are they meant to do then?
The video on the Birmingham Mail article appears to be filmed at the other end, where the cycle lane simply vanishes as it reaches a junction, and there is a clear potential for conflict from vehicles moving into the left-hand lane (especially given vehicles going straight are instructed to use that lane). Furthermore, presumably cyclists heading in the other direction will be wanting to join at that point - again, it is entirely unclear how they do so.
Why are they asking club cyclists about cycling for transport?
As for the lane itself, by all means criticise it for not being up to Dutch standards otherwise celebrate the fact that something positive has been done. Btw I regularly commute on a full on race bike in Lycra into and out of town on both fast roads and segregated cycle lanes and there is no problem unless you are being a dick about it. Just slow down and allow for other people to make mistakes, just as you would car drivers
Because everyone's natural stereotype about cyclists is that of a club cyclist in full kit. Thus do we erase the experiences and invalidate anyone who doesn't ride a bicycle for recreational purposes.
FWIW, I've taken to commuting in lycra (it gets sweaty) but wearing a backpack, which to me at least seems like I'm not catering to that stereotype as much.
Agreed. Car enthusiasts (eg racing and rallying), wouldn't be consulted about roading for transport. The lycra brigade are similarly incongruous with regard to roading design that's not intended as a sports venue.
Imo, cyclists decked out in lycra and multi-coloured logos and cycling 'Tour de France-style' in great drafting pelotons having scant consideration for other users (including recreational riders) are what gives cycling a bad rap.
To avoid the stereotype, (now as a recreational rider) my preferred kit comprises a plain hi-vis shirt or vest and lycra cycle shorts UNDER regular shorts. Also, when riding in a group, we spread out enough to avoid being an obstructive peloton.
Recreational and commuting cyclists can get along in reasonable harmony for the most part whereas it seems to me that the swarms of elites in loud uniforms are the ones "being a dick about it".
Hooray, another first poster who doesn't like cyclists with their pesky "multicoloured logos" and "loud uniforms." What absolute drivel.
I wonder if they also disguise their bike as an SUV...?
Can't wait to hear you views on runners with their technical tops and bottoms and specialist shoes.
Not to mention their expensive Garmins.
I'm pleased to see some of the wide range of opinion out there expressed. We've just had "bike advocates are 'dangerising cycling' " from one poster who I'd guess was an 'elitist' (vehicular cycling is the way?). Now "the problem is those 'scortchers' - the conspicuous out-group, MAMILs in noisy colours". Which would appear to be more common at least.
Sounds like Schroedinger's cyclists again - too fast and too slow.
Right now people are free to wear lycra, you can "cycle as a vehicle", you can cycle in any clothing. (It's great, I do all these sometimes). Yet almost nobody cycles. And "cyclists" of any kind are often the target of irritation / aggression. Why?
Could a reason be because there aren't many cyclists they're viewed as strange out-group? There aren't many because most people do not feel safe cycling on the roads? And cycling is not really pleasant or convenient for the average person? And that if you make it both it turns out that the "fast" can still go fast - indeed everyone goes faster overall.
Really because when I'm driving I prefer to overtake one group of cyclists where I only need one safe overtaking opportunity rather than meeting lots of individual cyclists where I need lots of safe overtaking opportunities
I think a classic case of some lane is better than no lane (or painted lane, same difference). As Steve K says, the needs of confident club riders who ride at speed are not consistent with those of the less confident, the less physically able, the commuters, the cargo bikers or the shoppers who might need such segregated infra.
There is approximately 800m of segregated infra near my house on Coundon Road, Coventry which may seem piddling small but is a massive blessing for me to go shopping in, especially when on the way back home when I am fully laden.
While people are right to point the imperfections of this present infra, I think we should pick our battles and see its introduction itself as being a significant initial victory.
Same as the cycle lanes being installed in London, and that are pushing me to actually cycle most of the way to work. Far better than a white line either side of the road. This isn't about club rides it's about cycling as transport, moaning about stopping is like me moaning that my train stops at stations I don't need.
On the one hand - and nothing against them - but the needs of cycling clubs should not be the focus of segregated infrastructure. On the other hand, no cycle line which requires you to dismount is fit for purpose.
And I agree with brooksby - motorists need to be educated that some cycle lanes are aimed at slow, non-confident cyclists, and it may still be appropriate for faster, more confident cyclists to continue to use the main carriageway. This is certainly the case on same lanes on my commute.
No doubt seeing some cyclists ignore the lane does and will grip driver's steering wheels. But drivers don't refresh their misrememberings of the highway code. Driving seems to put many people in a state of frustrated irritation. Plus a few people driving are ready to go full Travis Bickle at a second's notice. So would any conceivable "education" change anything?
But why are we still making "cycle infra" which is incompatible with moving at a decent speed? Higher average speed in urban areas being more effective than "I can keep up with the cars - until the next red light".
(I believe at the root of that is our primate in-group / out-group and fairness drives. Civilised to "fair's fair - yes we gave you minorities some of the road. But you're not even paying for it so you can't have it be convenient as well. Or even worse for motorists (us) to see you going faster.")
Well - it being a cycle lane in the UK it's unlikely to be free from sin. Or road debris, crossing roads or entries to driveways.
However it does at least look wide though - a sufficient minimum width for side-by-side cycling. Albeit a bit narrow if it's supposed to be two-way. Why do cyclists always need to be single-file when people rarely arrange themselves like that when walking, or in cars, on the train or on a bus? Or even on some group rides?
It shouldn't get potholes quicker than the carriageway with motor traffic on it. Assuming it wasn't knacked originally.
"Dangerous cycle paths" is a common trope amongst a certain section of cyclists (sometimes to bizarre extremes). Of course the UK authorities have obliged by building some Escher-puzzles of pitiful and dangerous "infra". However - after basic training it's not that complicated or hard to do it right.
He definitely needs to tell the motorists that![](/sites/all/themes/rcc/images/smilies/45.gif)
I think it looks like a massive improvement on the painted bicycle gutters that were there before.
If they were resurfacing the road, it would have been a relatively cheap way for them try out creating a cycling corridor. Some thought has been put into the areas it links too. My only concern would be how junctions are navigated and what the markings at side roads will be like.
I'm pleased to see them taking out the wide centre line hatchings on urban roads like this. There's simply no need to create right-turn refuges and wide separation of oncoming vehicles where the speed limit is low, especially with the cycle lane being made wide enough for emergency vehicles to use.
Pages