Madness in their Method

A while back, Jim from Moneybox Junction pointed me in the direction of this – the Department of Transport’s cycling infrastructure consultation exercise – and I went to have a look because public consultation exercises are generally good for a laugh, if this one was anything to go by. But I was surprised – and pleasantly so – to find that the document was actually full of that rarest of government commodities, sound common sense (as well as some wonderful jargon, which I’m a sucker for. Intergreen interval anyone? Tapping plate? Defining the dynamic envelope?)

This leaves me somewhat confused. If the people in the DoT can come up with such sensible sentiments (bad cycle lanes are worse than no cycle lanes, the best provision for cyclists are quiet roads, roundabouts are lethal to cyclists and should ideally be narrowed, underpasses are a bad idea for pedestrains or cyclists) then who the hell came up with this:


Yes, it’s a cycle lane THROUGH a roundabout. The intrepid cyclist, should he or she ever dare to use it, intending to turn right onto Lambeth Bridge from the Albert Embankment, has to cut across the two lanes of traffic on the roundabout, cycle through the middle and then emerge in precisely the place motorists will be least expecting them in order to cut across two lanes again and rejoin the flow of traffic. OK, so it’s a traffic-light controlled roundabout, and so not quite the killing machine for cyclists that it could be but it’s still mad.

But it’s not that maddest thing about the roundabout in question. The maddest thing about the roundabout in question appeared last week:


Yes, it’s … well, I’m not entirely sure what it is to be honest with you. I almost cycled into the side of a taxi trying to work it out on Friday. My best guess is that, realising just how lethal their little cycle lane is, the council has pre-emptively put up a floral tribute to those who will fall in their attempts to use it. Either that, or Lambeth are a little behindhand on their Tour de France planning, and haven’t quite realised it’s been and gone already.


4 responses to “Madness in their Method

  1. When do councils expect people to look at this? As you pointed out, nearly bang crashing into a taxi, distractions by the roadside (particularly on a roundabout) are a STUPID idea. These road planners, you wonder if they have any commonsense whatsoever. You know, perhaps I am old fashioned but I believe that motorists (and cyclists) should be encouraged to keep their eyes on the road, not distracted by a bunch of flowers arranged into the shape of a pair of cyclists.

  2. Masked Traffic Engineer

    You wouldn’t believe how many times I’ve been out on site with cycle campaigners and they’ve actually ASKED for facilities that go through the centre of a roundabout…

    That’s the problem with cycle campaigners – each and every one wants something different, as they all have a different commute to work/different approach to cycling. It’s not an easy job designing for the LCN+ 😦

  3. No way – they ask for that? Really? That’s bizarre.

    But I’ll bet they’ve never asked for giant floral cycling sculptures … or maybe they did?

    People are strange.

  4. Pingback: From C 2 shining C « Disgruntled Commuter

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s