The Cyclist's Compromise

Whilst considering the previous post regarding the Strand I read an article on road.cc which inspired me to conduct a little experiment.

The Strand is the best, most direct route, from one side of the city to the other, but it is also treacherous and when it comes time to argue for a segregated cycle path alongside the Strand I'm sure we'll be told, what about this or that other route, because people planning cycle routes will send cyclists all over the place to prevent having to actually put in a safe cycle path.

So I set myself an experiment, the premise of which is - I am an office worker living near the Marina where there are lots of flats at the south end of the Strand, I work in an office in the commercial district, Old Hall St is the centre of the commercial district. If I want to commute to or from work each day, which route should I take? There were just two rules

1. Do not break the law.
2. Do not dismount.

So no riding on the pavement except shared use, no running red lights, and remain on the bike at all times, as cyclists should never be expected to dismount as we don't expect car drivers to get out and push.

Route 1 Sustrans
For time saving only this leg was done in reverse though it turned out the wind was following me in this direction and it felt much easier.

This is the Sustrans route, for the most part it follows NCR 56 along the riverside. It is almost all on shared use paths some sections are heavily cobbled, some are narrow. As I was riding on the shared use path I cycled considerately, I had to come almost to a stop at one point and ask three ladies to step aside so I could pass, they did so but one did remark (in a non-aggressive way) that 'We're on the pavement, you should be on the road'. I thought this was amusing as I never ride on pavements and on this rare occasion that I try riding on shared use I get told off. On the plus side, the route is almost completely traffic free.

2.88km in 11min 20s

Route 2 Through the city

I think in terms of danger this is even worse than the Strand, there are so many points of conflict, traffic lights, junctions, filter lanes, hills, it was just a nightmare and at 3.85km much longer, at commuting hours I could have cut off a bit of distance by going up Lord St and Church St, but these are off limits to bicycles during the day. No matter though it is still a route nobody would ever choose. (PS to the cab driver who raced past me and then slammed on to pull over and drop off a fare, you are a c***)


Route 3 The Strand

This is the most direct route, at 2.35km it is half a kilometre shorter than the Sustrans route, it was also three minutes faster despite the wind being against me and spending at least 1m sat at traffic lights. On the other hand I received punishment passes from two consecutive cab drivers. This is the route any utility cyclist would want to take, the shortest, flattest route, though many would be forced to choose a less convenient route out of fear for their life.

Cycling in the city will only take off when routes like the Strand are turned in to places people can happily, safely cycle. They should not be 8 lanes wide with no cycle path, they should not have luscious green central reservations while cyclists risk death and injury. The developers of the Strand have only one question to ask themselves "Would I let my children cycle along here?" If they can't answer it 'Yes' then they aren't doing their jobs.

Liverpool Strategic Investment Framework

Yes, in typical local authority speak, it's a mouthful, but it's a big name with big ideas that wants to change the look and feel of the city over the next 15 years.

It is the follow-up development plan from Liverpool Vision, the people who brought us the Strategic Regeneration Framework 2001, that plan included Liverpool ONE, the Arena, the re-imagining of Lime St and aiming to be the 2008 European Capital of Culture; so we can be fairly confident that the things Liverpool Vision dreams up have a good chance of being implemented.

Here's the promo video



Launched on 1st November at an event hosted at the Echo Arena the SIF is a new plan to bring a more coherent structure the the recent developments and the city as a whole, you can read the whole plan here. There are fewer of the major set-pieces that the SRF 2001 brought to us, the SIF seems more concerned about improving the overall feel of the city rather than large set-piece building projects and for the most part it looks very hopeful.

If this were a Bond movie what has gone before would be the dramatic pre-credit sequence, the plot and the character exposition are still to come.

Of most interest to us is what this will all mean for cyclists, as I have shown in the past, the opportunity provided by new developments and lots of money can easily be missed if there is a lack of will or imagination. It is vital that with this latest plan the developers understand that no city can consider itself to be a city of the 21st century without building in to its very fabric the most efficient form of transport known to man.

Thanks to Gas2 for this graphic

The SIF doesn't say an awful lot about cycling but it does offer a little encouragement. One of the proposals is called 'Great Streets' and recognises the importance, attractiveness and opportunity available in some of the city centre's largest roads; the Strand, Dale St, Water St, Lime St and Hope St. The SIF says

Improvements to pedestrian and cycle movement along Water Street / Dale Street, to provide a continuous safe and legible route from the Waterfront to Lime Street Station. The street is currently dominated by buses and little else, with the streetscape quality inconsistent. With Princes Dock becoming a point of embarkation and disembarkation for the world’s cruise liners, this will present significant opportunities to invest in the public realm, to generate significant visitor footfall and leverage private sector investment.

Exhibition Road in London is cited as an example of what this might mean, I've not visited Exhibition Road so I'm not exactly sure what this means, but as a shared space there is always the problem of might is right.

The Strand is to be given several pedestrian 'bridges' at key points, the thought being that the Strand is like a river bisecting the city, this is a polite way of putting it. The Strand is a hostile urban motorway with tens of thousands of motor vehicles travelling along it each day most of whom seem to be breaking the speed limit, often by a considerable margin, 50mph in a 30mph zone is commonplace. It cuts off the retail and transport sectors in the centre from the tourist attractions at the riverside. The current situation is, frankly, shameful and embarrassing to think that the hundreds of thousands of tourists visiting the city have to negotiate this route to see some of the city's best sights. The plans for the Strand seem *ahem*, unambitious and I will deal with them in a separate post.

The document returns later to consider walking and cycling as a separate issue.

In terms of connectivity, Liverpool has a legible grid of streets at a scale that is appropriate for walking and cycling around the centre.

However, there are areas of the city that are disconnected and feel ‘cut-off’ from the City Centre’s activity and energy due to the detailed design of street layouts which focus primarily on vehicle movement with walking and cycling considered secondary. Improving the connections for walking and cycling along key strategic routes will help to ‘tie-in’ currently dislocated areas into the city core.

Improving the journey for walking and cycling can involve:
• Appropriate sign posting
• Improved lighting
• High-quality surfaces which show continuation throughout the route
• Improved priority in favour of people walking and cycling, and
• Promotion of the route to the visitor where appropriate.  

They are making some of the right noises but we won't really know until we see the detail of the plans.

Overall I think the general aim of the SIF is admirable and by making it a more livable city it will encourage the investment it seeks. It's now up to us to make sure we aren't fobbed off with unsuitable cycle facilities and in this aim we must be uncompromising, only the highest standards of infrastructure must be allowed. Opportunities have been missed in the past, one again Liverpool is given the opportunity to become a leading 21st century city, one of the best cycling cities in the kingdom, let's hope this time the developers can see which way the tide is turning on the Mersey.

How much space do you need?

A letter has appeared in this week's Wirral Globe complaining about cyclists riding on the road rather than the cycle path on the promenade at New Brighton, King's Parade. No particular details are given about the exact location or time of day or the ages or genders of the cyclists. All we know is that there were four or five of them, riding two abreast on the road, traffic had to slow to overtake them and they can be described as 'ignorant'.

King's Parade begins at the location in the map below and heads north east from here, it's a lovely place for a stroll or a ride the only thing that makes it unpleasant is the weight of traffic when it is busy and the speed of traffic when it is quiet.

View Larger Map

It is a section of the North Wirral cycle route and forms a link between two other promenades where there is no motor traffic.

It is a 30 mph dual carriageway boulevard with a promenade alongside the seafront. The part I measured from Google satellite view is approximately 31m wide from seawall to the edge of the inner field. This is divided up, give or take...

• 3m pedestrian path
• 2m cycle path
• 7.5m road
• 2.5m central reservation
• 8m road with an additional 4m wide parking lane
• 4m pavement

Points of note about these dimensions. 

• The 2.5m wide central reservation is unnecessary on a 30mph road.
• Each lane, including the parking lane is 4m wide, this is twice as wide as a car and 1.5m wider than a bus or container wagon.

Look at how dwarfed the car is by the width of the parking lane.

The road is not that heavily trafficed for its size except for on the sunniest days of summer however cars do tend to speed along it, I have seen cars doing 60-70mph when the road is quiet, 40mph is common at all times.

The pavement on the sea wall side of the road is popular with walkers out for a stroll and dog walkers, though they do have a tendency to stray into the cycle lane, and it is popular with families so there can be many small children running around the pavement.

Cars park on both sides of the road, but only the westbound side has an official parking lane, on the eastbound side cars park against the kerb in lane 1.

So firstly, since the cycle path is provided what is it like for a cyclist to use? This varies depending on time of day/year. If it is quiet then it is reasonably adequate, there are no junctions of note to cause you to stop but the surface is made of paving slabs rather than smooth tarmac, you can cruise along at a fair old pace. On a busy day it is much different, children, balls, dogs, inattentive walkers, fishing lines being tossed around, it's a very hazardous place for the cyclist and the other pavement users, consequently great caution must be shown and speeds reduced to below 10mph, sometimes lower, and it's not uncommon to have to come to a halt while an errant child or beast is removed from the cycle lane by its owner. One might also come across other cyclists of varying speeds travelling in either direction on this rather narrow 2m wide lane, again causing you to slow or stop. There is also one platform type area where the cycle lane disappears entirely.

As a result faster riders might think it convenient to use the road rather than the cycle lane, as is their right. The road is broad, direct and has reasonably good visibility, only hampered by the cars parked along it which can range in number from a handful to hundreds.

A cyclist heading eastbound will, if there are no parked cars, occupy the first metre or two of the lane; or if there are parked cars, the space between the car and the dividing line to lane 2. Even riding two abreast they are unlikely to venture in to lane 2. Leaving the entirety of lane 2 to the motor traffic. On the westbound side a cyclist can cycle within the parking lane as it is so broad, at worst they might ride in lane 1 but again lane 2 will always be free. Either way, motorists always have one entire lane to themselves and if they are delayed by cyclists it is almost certainly because the cyclists will be passing parked cars on the westbound carriageway, yet it is the cyclists who get the stick rather than the drivers of the parked cars.

Let us agree with the author of the letter on one thing, that it would be better if the cycles were not using the road, it would also be better if they were not using the pavement and there is clearly enough space to allow this. There is so much space that you could improve the environment for every type of road user without inconveniencing any of them, we have 31m of available space to play with!

The 3m pedestrian space can become 3.5m on the shore side and the lesser used 4m path on the inland side can become 3.5m. Cyclists can have 4m wide dual direction paths on either side of the road. The road can become 2x3m lanes and a 2m parking lane in each direction. The central reservation can be got rid of.

[Edit - for a much better idea than mine see Mark's comment below.]

From my knowledge of the area I think the author's complaint is probably unnecessarily picky, the road is so broad they couldn't have been inconvenienced for more than a few seconds, the cyclists probably had good reason to prefer the road to the cycle lane and it's quite possible that cars being parked on the road was the cause of the cyclists being in the way. In any case for any council wanting to implement some seriously quality cycle infrastructure the vast amounts of space available in this area surely make this a 'gimme' for a showcase facility, it only requires the will and the money. Until then faster riders will continue to use the road and motorists will simply have to put up with it.

Crossing the Rubicon

I have at various time lived and worked in Liverpool and the Wirral and not always on the same side of the river at the same time. For anyone not familiar with the area the River Mersey is a natural barrier between Liverpool and south Lancashire to the north and Wirral and Cheshire to the south. The whole region has been called Merseyside since the 1974 although the term is not universally popular, with many people preferring the historical names of Cheshire and Lancashire.

In any case the river is a great physical (and cultural) divide in the region and various outfits have been offering ways to cross it since 1318, starting with local monks, then local landowners following the dissolution of the monasteries, later still came steam boats in 1815 followed by trains through the newly constructed Mersey Railway Tunnel in 1884. In 1934 the first road tunnel between Birkenhead and Liverpool opened but just 30 years later it was congested enough that work began on another tunnel linking Wallasey and Liverpool, they now carry 95,000 vehicles per day between them.

The intrepid cycling commuter or tourist therefore has, nominally, three means of crossing the river. Let's look at each in more detail...

The Mersey Ferry - The ferry runs most days of the year, at peak time of the day it operates to a Commuter timetable and through the middle of the day to a Cruise timetable. The commuter fare is £2.10 for a single and £2.60 for a return. The ferry leaves each landing stage roughly every 20 minutes in the morning or 30 minutes in the afternoon when it also visits Woodside. To take a bicycle on board is free and very popular, being on the ferry is a nice way to start or end a day's work, there is also a good camaraderie amongst the cycling commuters. The main problem with the ferry is that if you miss it you have a bit of a wait until it comes around again, not particularly convenient.

Merseyrail - Trains run from all across the Wirral in to four stations on a loop line under the city centre. Prices vary but the very minimum fare is Hamilton Square to James St, a distance of less than a mile and taking less than five minutes, but it costs £2.30sin/£2.80ret. Due to the two stations being in different 'zones' none of the weekly or monthly tickets seem to be any cheaper. This was quite annoying for me as I would like to get a good ride in by cycling right all the way to Birkenhead rather than getting the train from one of the nearer stations, and then just get the train to hop across the river and carry on by bicycle again. But there is no monetary saving in doing this. Furthermore there are some physical issues. Some stations only have very small lifts for a couple of people, or you have to carry your bicycle on the escalator, not easy if it's a 27kg Dutch bike! The carriages on the trains are fully seated except for one little spot where two seats have been removed for bicycles of wheelchairs. Unfortunately this spot also has fold down seats which are frequently occupied and I would feel a little silly asking somebody to move so I can put my bike there for one stop.

The only remaining place then is in the area immediately in front of the doors, this is possible, but at the busiest times you might have to wait for another train if there isn't space to get in. Also parking in from of the doors has on at least one occasion led to me being told off by a lady for blocking the exit (although I was getting off at the next stop).

The trains are made up of three carriages, if I had my way I would remove all seating from one of the carriages, this would allow a lot more people and bicycles on.

 The Mersey Tunnels - With regard to cycling through the Mersey tunnels the rules are... 

Bicycles are not permitted through the Kingsway [Wallasey] Tunnel. Through the Queensway [Birkenhead] Tunnel, they are not allowed between the hours of 6:00am to 8:00pm, Monday to Friday, 7:00am to 8:00pm on Saturday and 8:00am to 9:00pm on Sunday. Please note, the time limits during a Sunday are only operational between 1st April and 30th September inclusive.

The mid week time restriction effectively makes cycle commuting through the tunnels impossible for most day workers, I've done it a few times before 6am but it's not a particularly pleasant experience. Head down, go like a bullet and get out as fast as possible. What's most annoying though is that going through the tunnel is toll-free for bicycles making it the only free way of crossing the river. The toll for cars is £1.50 each way making this cheaper than a single on either the train or ferry.

For all commuters each mode has its own disadvantages which ought to make price the deciding variable, but the return price for each, £2.60/£2.80/£3.00 are so close that people probably choose their mode of transport for other reasons. I expect many people with the convenience of a free parking space at their destination will choose to drive. The ferry passengers seem to like the fresh air and a natter. The people on the train are grumpy, in a rush, sleepy, hungover or just plain anti-social.

As a cyclist I would prefer not to have to stop, get off and take a train or ferry then start riding again ten or fifteen minutes later, riding through the tunnel would be preferred if it were safe, but that would require a leap of imagination that I fear is beyond Mersey Tunnels, converting the two outside lanes of the Birkenhead Tunnel into cycle lanes, not something they are about to do to satisfy an unproven level of demand that probably isn't there anyway at the moment.

The second option which should be achievable is reducing the fare between Hamilton Sq and James St to £2 return and making some of the carriages more cycle friendly.

Updated 0700 24/10/12 to add pictures

In Praise of Liverpool City Council (sort of)

Last night I was heading to the Wavertree area of town from the city centre, I used to live in Wavertree when I was a student but I've not been back there walking or cycling in 10 or 12 years. I took the route that I used to stagger walk each day to and from the pub university, it involves going along Myrtle St, across Crown St Park and then down Smithdown Lane.


View Larger Map

Unfortunately I can't remember what Myrtle St used to look like but I think it must have been a typical side road, one lane each way, arrow straight, high kerbs, I got a hell of a surprise when I returned there. Just look at all the Dutchness in these pictures

A 20 mph zone, speed humps, those two are now recognisable on British Streets, but look what else there is, an advanced, protected traffic light for cycles with it's own sequence. A zigzagged road designed to naturally slow vehicles by not being completely straight.

The road leads to a residential area which has no access for cars to the main road on the other side so there is no rat running.

However a bit of filtered permeability later and we have a lovely dedicated cycle path (yes there does seem to be pedestrians walking in it in this photo from Google)

At the top of this path we meet Crown St running perpendicular to us, Crown St used to be busy with fast moving traffic, but LCC has installed quite broad cycle lanes and speed humps along its length. Best of all though is the traffic lights that cross Crown St from the cycle path into the park, ride up to them at a slowish pace and they change automatically so you never have to stop!

So why am I only sort of praising Liverpool City Council?

It's quite simple really, this little 200m stretch of path proves that somebody at LCC knows exactly how to implement the Dutch model, all the major principles are in evidence here.

• Segregation in time and space
• Reduced speed zones
• Traffic calming road design
• Reducing traffic through restricted access
• Maintaining momentum and allowing cyclists to go the shortest most direct route while sending cars the long way and reducing their priority in the hierarchy.

So the simple question is if they can do it here, why not everywhere else?

It is also interesting that this is the only place in the city I have found with this standard of infrastructure, between the university and the residential area with the largest student population, it's as though the Council think only students want to cycle. Generally speaking they don't have kids, probably don't carry a lot of equipment or huge amounts of shopping and have fairly restricted travel needs. The mindset at the council must be that people with slightly greater needs or money than students won't want to cycle, if you have kids for example, but of course if you have kids and want to cycle segregated facilities are even more important.

Liverpool is not exactly a rich city either with some of the most deprived wards in the country, it's not just students who are too poor to drive. The poorest areas are in the north of the city, Bootle and Walton yet these are the areas with some of the worst cycling facilities. Meanwhile the leafy south of the city seems to have a few more cycle lanes. It was noticeable too that at the Liverpool Cycle Forum meetings most of the participants lived in the south of the city and were perhaps better educated and more affluent than the city average.

But what about the poor people in the north? Without decent cycle facilities many will be forced to scrape together just enough money to keep a car on the road, reducing the money they have to spend on other necessities and comforts, if they could cycle they may have more money to spend in their local areas rather than it going to multinational corporations, people on bicycles shop in their areas and spend more money in their towns, this is why cycling infrastructure is a good investment.

A5038 Cycle Lane (Hatton Garden Suicide Lane)

The A5038 cycle lane starts out in Kirkdale near the junction with Hawthorne Road and takes the intrepid cyclist on a wonderful two mile trip into the centre of town. Mostly it is just magic paint, but fortunately the cars tend to keep out of it as the road is pretty wide, not is there much parking on it, largely because there is no reason anyone would ever want to stop.

There's even a feature I thought was rather nice, at one point the cycle lane mounts the pavement to by pass a roundabout and afterwards drops back on to the road, at which point we get this little bit of kerbing so the cyclist doesn't need to negotiate with traffic, however my joy at seeing this may say more about my low expectations than anything else.




As we get closer to town things get a little worse, if anyone from DOFAS Office Furniture of Vauxhall Road, L3 6DL is googling themselves, MOVE YOUR EFFING VANS *shakes fist*, it was parked there on the day I went past and apparently on the day the Google van went past. The solid white line indicates a lane reserved solely for the use of cyclists, not the parking of company or customer vehicles. This is particularly buggersome because immediately after this are traffic lights at the junction with Leeds St, the cars were queuing back past the shop and there was not enough space between illegally parked cars and stationary cars to get past and reach the ASZ.



As we move into town things get better, the junction with Tithebarn St is about as good as it gets when it comes to magic paint and ASZs, even allowing you to go straight on against the flow of traffic down a one way street, the most direct route into town.


A nice solid well painted lane down Hatton Garden and we now see the reason for it, it runs right past the door to Merseytravel's Head Office, lucky them, however I can't see any reason they couldn't have segregated the lane properly. Though all is not what it seems, there is a good reason I call this the Hatton Garden suicide lane, terribly witty, I know, read on...


At the bottom of the one way street is a dual carriage way, leading off the dual carriageway and on to Hatton Garden is a fairly large radius turn that can be taken at 40mph no problem. Immediately before this the cycle lane simply ends. It spits you out into oncoming traffic with a 30-50mph speed differential. Usually when I see a 'Cycle Lane Ends' or 'Cyclists Dismount' sign I think to myself "why on earth have they put that there?"

This one really means it though, try and cycle out of the end of this lane and you're going to get squished, the only thing for it is to dismount, cross the road, cross Tithebarn St and then continue. Such a shame, you've followed the lane for 4km and then 200 metres before you reach the centre of town it tries to screw you.

A566 Knowsley Road Cycle Lane

Wandering around a few evenings ago I happened upon a cycle lane I haven't seen before which runs along the A565 between Bootle and the docks, through a small shopping area.

The main feature of the lane is how it prioritises traffic, we've got the usual non-mandatory lane with a  lot of its magic paint worn away now, some speed humps, good, some pinch points created by pedestrian islands, not so good. Most obviously though, the recessed parking, to whomever created this lane, cyclist are not only beneath the motorcar, not only are they beneath the parked motorcar, cyclists are beneath the momentarily open door of a parked motorcar, for wherever the two may conflict the open door has priority.



 Indeed, on every occasion along this road where cars may park, the cycle lane disappears. Did I stop existing? Surely not, in fact on every occasion it disappears and the cyclist has to pass parked cars they have to renegotiate with whatever vehicle is behind them.

The road is wide enough for a segregated cycle lane, but they haven't bothered putting one in, so we get these constant points of conflict between cars, bikes and pedestrians and where they exist the car usually wins. The local authority obviously doesn't want to be found liable for putting a cycle lane in a dooring zone so the easiest thing to do is simply abrogate any responsibility and throw the cyclist back at the mercy of the motorist. The cyclist must check over their shoulder, negotiate with anyone behind and  then move out into traffic and away from the door zone. This stretch of road is about 1km long (0.62 miles) and within that the cycle lane disappears 12 times, 7 times for the opening of car doors, 3 times for bus stops and twice for pedestrian crossings.



Despite all that, for one brief glorious moment cyclists are segregated from cars, as we pass the pedestrian island, a great void zone has opened up down the middle of the road and lo, for all of one metre the cycle lane is protected by a secondary pedestrian island.


For the full effect have a look at Streetview