It wouldn't hurt to rethink cycle routes around the city in general - what few there are are patchy and inconsistent with respect to signage and road markings. May I add Five Ways Island as another example of a poorly thought out (and even more poorly maintained) cycle route. It's often not clear which side (certainly to many pedestrians) which side is the cycle side. Not to mention the inconveniently-placed billboards and other street furniture effectively blocking some of the ends. A consistent use of colour coding would be nice - it currently varies across the city centre between green, red and none at all.
As for cycle parking - how about a requirement of all car parks in the city centre to have free, covered and secure cycle parking?
Jez Higgins
· 11 months ago
More cycle parking would certainly be welcome, as some part of the city are sorely lacking. I'm uncertain how useful more cyclepaths would be, particularly as the placement of some of the current cyclepaths is idiosyncratic at best. The contraflow along the upper stretch of Hurst Street, for example, apparently requires you to cycle over parked cars. Oddities like that aside, cycling round the city centre is pretty easy. Queensway aside, traffic speeds are generally pretty low, and alternative routes to busy roads are usually easy and obvious. BCC's cycle map is, by the way, fab.
Study after study shows the best way to make cycling safer is simply to have more cyclists. I imagine the best way to encourage more cycling in the city centre is make cycle access to city centre easier. One easy way would be to improve the surface of the canal towpaths. I suspect that would have a bigger impact than a few metres of cyclepath along Colmore Row.
dave harte
· 11 months ago
It's the Grand Union canal that badly needs its towpaths looked at. The Worcester canal out to Kings Norton is great (bit sloshy after rain but not too muddy) but as early as Small Heath the Grand Union is just a mess. Shame for bikes and for runners.
dave harte
· 11 months ago
Actually - rereading my comment I realise I've strayed outside the city centre so it should be ignored.
The interesting thing here is that cycle parking is part of the overall parking plan. I suspect that cars will dominate the discussion on that one. Far better to have a separate overall cycling plan.
Joanna Geary
· 11 months ago
I agree that more cycle parking would be useful. Although I understand the argument for not adding new cycle paths, I would suggest that an assessment of the ones in existence would be worthwhile.
In addition to the contraflow on Hurst St, the contraflow near the High St (opposite Boots) is nonsensical and dangerous. Pedestrians fail to look and buses do not give enough room. Perhaps, in some circumstances where the pavements are wider, we could look at drawing new cycling lanes.
Dave Harte
· 11 months ago
Leicester have a secure city centre bike park with lockers, bike shop, changing rooms - perhaps that's an idea we could use in Brum?
Nicky Getgood
· 11 months ago
Dave, that Leicester bike park looks fab, it'd be great to have a resource like that in Birmingham. Some more secure bike parking would be great, bike thefts in the city are rife and something I've had problems with myself. Agree with the improvements to canal towpaths, but cycling along the canals is one of my favourite pastimes so I'm probably biased. I do feel cycle paths through the city could definitely do with improvements, I often feel pretty unsafe cycling through the city as it is.
chrisunitt
· 11 months ago
I love the idea of the bike park and I also agree that, although cycling around the city centre is relatively easy, there are many areas where the cycle routes seem to have everyone but cyclists in mind.
Is there a cycling lobby in the city who can be asked to double-check any proposed cycle routes? By getting cyclists involved in the planning process we might avoid a few blunders.
Dave Harte
· 11 months ago
"Cycle parking requirements will be included in the Parking Strategy."
We should be wary of having cycle parking issues separated out into the city parking strategy as suggested above - it would be given scant attention I would guess. Actually there is already a city cycling strategy which the Big City Plan doesn't seem to reference. The links on the council website don't work for me so I haven't read it but Friends of the Earth do a summary of it. As the BCP deals just with the centre a city-wide cycling strategy should be welcomed since one of the barriers to bike use is the difficulty of tackling the major road arteries which don't have cycle paths.
Our potential to be a cycling city is a bit stuffed in the short-term anyway as the extra government funding for an exemplar cycle city went to Bristol.
cmbainbridge
· 11 months ago
chrisunitt "Is there a cycling lobby in the city who can be asked to double-check any proposed cycle routes?"
There's Pushbikes, who are Birmingham based. Their constitutions suggests that this is the sort of thing they are interested in. Perhaps they are already involved?
I agree with all of the comments above and there are plenty of cities we can learn from that already integrate cyclists into overall travel policies e.g Amsterdam, Copenhagen and Berlin to name just a few. At the moment New York has employed a Danish adviser to help develop its cycling plans - why don't we do that?
Julia Gilbert
· 11 months ago
As an inexperienced and infrequent cyclist, I have to say that I would be much more inclined to cycle if there were dedicated cycle paths (not shared with buses, pedestrians or other vehicles) that were completely separate from the road, but also that weren't in really deserted, lonely places. I realise that there is limited room within the city centre, but there are lots of roads that have wide grass or concrete verges along them. I think that we should add cycle paths alongside, but completely separate from existing roads wherever possible.
The cycle map is really useful and I have found a mainly off-road way of getting from home to work, but the existing cycle paths go through some really deserted areas which I find quite threatening. Better signposting would certainly go some way to help. Why didn't I already know these off road cycle paths existed? Why aren't there huge bright signs on the roadside letting vehicle users know that there is an alternative. If I saw more cyclists using the off road paths, I'd feel a lot less threatened. There are also a number of places on my route that I often take a wrong turn, such as by the Ackers, because the 'cycle path' is really just a maze of footpaths. At the moment I feel I have to choose between risking my safety cycling on the roads and risking it cycling on some really lonely off road paths which are hidden from view, including along stretches of the canal, overgrown parkland and the back of industrial estates. How is it that I can sometimes cycle on a recommended cycle route for 30 mins without seeing a single other cyclist?
It's all very well for experienced cyclists to tell me that it's perfectly safe to cycle on the road, but my *perception* is that it is not, and it will be the same for many, many other potential cyclists.
I think that any new roads built should have separate cycle lanes built alongside them, and we should look at incorporating separate cycle lanes alongside existing roads. Wherever the pavement/concrete verge is over X feet wide, we should automatically dedicate part of it for use by cyclists, this shouldn't cost too much, just a white line painted along it.
All Comments
As for cycle parking - how about a requirement of all car parks in the city centre to have free, covered and secure cycle parking?
Study after study shows the best way to make cycling safer is simply to have more cyclists. I imagine the best way to encourage more cycling in the city centre is make cycle access to city centre easier. One easy way would be to improve the surface of the canal towpaths. I suspect that would have a bigger impact than a few metres of cyclepath along Colmore Row.
The interesting thing here is that cycle parking is part of the overall parking plan. I suspect that cars will dominate the discussion on that one. Far better to have a separate overall cycling plan.
In addition to the contraflow on Hurst St, the contraflow near the High St (opposite Boots) is nonsensical and dangerous. Pedestrians fail to look and buses do not give enough room. Perhaps, in some circumstances where the pavements are wider, we could look at drawing new cycling lanes.
Is there a cycling lobby in the city who can be asked to double-check any proposed cycle routes? By getting cyclists involved in the planning process we might avoid a few blunders.
We should be wary of having cycle parking issues separated out into the city parking strategy as suggested above - it would be given scant attention I would guess. Actually there is already a city cycling strategy which the Big City Plan doesn't seem to reference. The links on the council website don't work for me so I haven't read it but Friends of the Earth do a summary of it. As the BCP deals just with the centre a city-wide cycling strategy should be welcomed since one of the barriers to bike use is the difficulty of tackling the major road arteries which don't have cycle paths.
Our potential to be a cycling city is a bit stuffed in the short-term anyway as the extra government funding for an exemplar cycle city went to Bristol.
There's Pushbikes, who are Birmingham based. Their constitutions suggests that this is the sort of thing they are interested in. Perhaps they are already involved?
The cycle map is really useful and I have found a mainly off-road way of getting from home to work, but the existing cycle paths go through some really deserted areas which I find quite threatening. Better signposting would certainly go some way to help. Why didn't I already know these off road cycle paths existed? Why aren't there huge bright signs on the roadside letting vehicle users know that there is an alternative. If I saw more cyclists using the off road paths, I'd feel a lot less threatened. There are also a number of places on my route that I often take a wrong turn, such as by the Ackers, because the 'cycle path' is really just a maze of footpaths. At the moment I feel I have to choose between risking my safety cycling on the roads and risking it cycling on some really lonely off road paths which are hidden from view, including along stretches of the canal, overgrown parkland and the back of industrial estates. How is it that I can sometimes cycle on a recommended cycle route for 30 mins without seeing a single other cyclist?
It's all very well for experienced cyclists to tell me that it's perfectly safe to cycle on the road, but my *perception* is that it is not, and it will be the same for many, many other potential cyclists.
I think that any new roads built should have separate cycle lanes built alongside them, and we should look at incorporating separate cycle lanes alongside existing roads. Wherever the pavement/concrete verge is over X feet wide, we should automatically dedicate part of it for use by cyclists, this shouldn't cost too much, just a white line painted along it.