Monday 13 December 2010

The Unreachable Cycle Lane - London Road

Ever wondered how magical cycling can be? Look no further than London Road by Piccadilly Station, here you will find a cycle lane built for the magical appearing cyclist...

I just couldn't work out how any cyclist could legally reach the beginning of this lane, it just appears, going northbound on a crossing island between the southbound one-way traffic and the tram tracks. I couldn't even see the traditional Cyclists Dismount sign in the area.



If you aren't walking past you just wouldn't know it was there.



The pavement lane just appears on the island, turns into a short piece of segregated track,



before turning into a contraflow cycle lane, alongside a car parking bay, though some drivers prefer the pavement.



After the road becomes two-way at a car park exit the facility ends in a reasonable advanced stop bay, but not before the lane is squeezed down to barely more than the width of the double yellow lines.



Still, since it is so difficult to get to, I don't suppose many people use this route.


View Larger Map

4 comments:

  1. Layout here was changed about 1 or 2 years ago, as part of the Fire Station Quality Bus Corridor scheme. Previously, since the early 1970s, buses went up/down London Road, inbound was bus/cycle/taxi only.

    Few people that continue to use it hop onto the narrow footway, avoid the tramwire poles, cross the tracks and join it.

    The odd on pavement section is for the Route 66/86 toucan crossing from Store St, it is signposted (diagram included!).

    It has even been repainted today (14/12) with 'CITY' direction above the cycle symbol!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Take it that was this scheme http://www.gmpte.com/firestation/proposals.html

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes it is! Scheduled completion was mid-November 2008. Yet some of it (Fairfield Street ASLs) have only just been done. It will all be reconfigured yet again when Aytoun Street becomes two-way as part of the Cross-City Bus improvement scheme.

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete