If a cyclist, do you use dedicated cycle paths?

[Wuffle]

I find it ironic that cyclists are unwilling to use shared footpaths and cycle paths because it will slow them down and yet are quite happy to do just that to vehicles on a road
btw The highway code does recommend using cycle paths where provided, it also remind those road users with a slower "vehicle" to move over and let other faster users by

Ultimately the infrastructure in this country needs a serious overhaul particularly if Princess Nut Nut continues to make Boris Green

 

[Puppetfinger]

Whilst there is an element of being slowed down, I would still argue infrastructure is the problem, as has been said on this thread, our cycle ways are often poorly designed and maintained, and can often end of causing greater risk all round.

Until we make serious efforts to sort infrastructure, we will be a long way behind some of our continental neighbours.

 

[The Ham]

I find it ironic that cyclists are unwilling to use shared footpaths and cycle paths because it will slow them down and yet are quite happy to do just that to vehicles on a road
btw The highway code does recommend using cycle paths where provided, it also remind those road users with a slower "vehicle" to move over and let other faster users by

Ultimately the infrastructure in this country needs a serious overhaul particularly if Princess Nut Nut continues to make Boris Green

Unless there's a lot of cyclists other vehicles are likely to be slowed down by cyclists fairly rarely along a mile section of road and then rarely much less than 1/2 (assuming a 30mph limit), conversely a cyclist could need to slow down or even need to come to a complete stop 10 times over the same distance.

Whilst the highway code recommends using cycle infrastructure, that's not a requirement, and so it's up to the choice of the individual.

As to slower vehicle letting others past, again it's a recommendation. It also doesn't say that it has to happen as soon as there's a faster vehicle behind them. Most of the time cars do manage to overtake the cyclist and so the cyclist doesn't have chance to pull over where it is safe to do so.

 

[TheGrandWazoo]

I find it ironic that cyclists are unwilling to use shared footpaths and cycle paths because it will slow them down and yet are quite happy to do just that to vehicles on a road
btw The highway code does recommend using cycle paths where provided, it also remind those road users with a slower "vehicle" to move over and let other faster users by

Ultimately the infrastructure in this country needs a serious overhaul particularly if Princess Nut Nut continues to make Boris Green

Those are, of course, uniform and sweeping generalisms.

Most cyclists are happy to use shared footpaths/cycle paths and aren't worried if they get slowed down. I think you're mixing up the lycra clad "roadies" on a Sunday morning with the vast majority of cyclists.

Also, as has been said, cycling infrastructure is extremely variable. Design is haphazard as is maintenance. If you're a person with a £5k or more road bike, you're certainly unlikely to ride on uneven surfaces for fear of breaking spokes and the like. If you've got a £300 mountain bike, then riding down a canal towpath is going to be fine. However, not many people are keen on slaloming round street furniture on shared footpaths or riding in the gutter irrespective of the bike involved.

As ever, it's a much more nuanced subject than black/white or good/evil.

 

[Wuffle]

Those are, of course, uniform and sweeping generalisms.



As ever, it's a much more nuanced subject than black/white or good/evil.

The point is we all deal in generalisations rather than specifics and sadly many peoples perception of cyclists is of the "clubs" clad in fluorescent lycra taking up the road space a juggernaut usually occupies with a queue of vehicles behind them
Of course you get the singletons or much smaller groups who also do themselves no favours - my favourite was the one who went to overtake a queue of stationary traffic quite oblivious to the van at the front indicatating to turn right into a road who almost took him out

As I pointed out the infrastructure of the country needs a complete overhaul which as a sometime cyclist and driver I would welcome

 

[Bikeman78]

Unless there's a lot of cyclists other vehicles are likely to be slowed down by cyclists fairly rarely along a mile section of road and then rarely much less than 1/2 (assuming a 30mph limit), conversely a cyclist could need to slow down or even need to come to a complete stop 10 times over the same distance.

Whilst the highway code recommends using cycle infrastructure, that's not a requirement, and so it's up to the choice of the individual.

As to slower vehicle letting others past, again it's a recommendation. It also doesn't say that it has to happen as soon as there's a faster vehicle behind them. Most of the time cars do manage to overtake the cyclist and so the cyclist doesn't have chance to pull over where it is safe to do so.

If I drive in Cardiff, it's rare to catch up with a cyclist and if I do it's only a matter of seconds before I can overtake safely. Parked vehicles and traffic lights cause far more delay. As such I have limited sympathy in urban areas with the argument that bicycles are delaying motor vehicles. The biggest delay is other motor vehicles and infrastructure set up to control their movements.

I agree that it's different on an A road out in the country but even there, delays caused by cyclists are rare in my experience.

 

[telstarbox]

Even on an A road you don't have the absolute right to travel at the speed limit. I'll try to facilitate overtaking when cycling (e.g. I'll pull in if it's a long stretch of single track road) but ultimately my priority is safety not the speed of the car behind.

 

[Bikeman78]

In Cardiff they have been putting in a new east to west cycle lane through the city centre. Many sections are former bus lanes. Recently the former lane two has been converted to a bus lane leaving just one lane for other vehicles. It's already causing traffic jams. Also there seems to be confusion as to whether the bus lane is applicable with some drivers happily driving along it and then trying to turn left into a side road which is now no entry except for buses! At the next side road I nearly got caught out by a vehicle turning left across my path from lane three. I wasn't expecting a vehicle that far over to turn left but of course they have no choice because lane two is now the bus lane. This leaves a huge blind spot for vehicles intending to turn left. Hopefully they will mark out a left turn lane in the bus lane as happens at other junctions.

 

[miami]

Same answer to "If a motorist, do you use dedicated motorways?"

I use cycle paths if they are going where I'm going and are better for me than the alternative

I use motorways if they are going where I'm going and are better for me than the alternative

Unlike most motorways, most cycle paths in my experience are awful, especially ones that run alongside a road, as they'll stop every 10 seconds to give way to all important motorists.

I used to ride along one in hyde park. On the whole it was good, but there was a point in the middle where it had a "cyclists dismount" sign.

I've never seen a motorway, or indeed any other road, have signs stopping car drivers, forcing them to get out and push their vehicle.

 

[adamedwards]

The design maximum speed of a cycle path is 18 mph, so road cyclists keep off them as going faster.

The good news is the new LTN 1/20 rules which came out in July 2020 and demand higher standards. The problem then is funding this. Most councils now only build cycle paths if either they get govt funding or development contributions. There are exceptions of course. So where I live in Hertfordshire, ok routes to some places, none to others and indifferent maintenance n
ot helping either. Which is all a shame.

 

[JamesT]

The design maximum speed of a cycle path is 18 mph, so road cyclists keep off them as going faster.

The good news is the new LTN 1/20 rules which came out in July 2020 and demand higher standards. The problem then is funding this. Most councils now only build cycle paths if either they get govt funding or development contributions. There are exceptions of course. So where I live in Hertfordshire, ok routes to some places, none to others and indifferent maintenance not helping either. Which is all a shame.

I’m not confident that the publication of new standards will help that much. Oxford(shire) has spent years implementing substandard cycle facilities, despite the local cycling groups pointing out how they don’t meet the standards of the time. Though often the trick pulled is to leave publishing plans till very late and then say it’s not possible to make changes so you’re then stuck.

 

[adamedwards]

The difference now is we have a new standard to hold council's to, which did not exist before. It will of course take time to get the change known about and adhered to, but that's incremental progress. I've just see a photo of a new cycle path under construction which we won in Herts by using an objection to a Side Roads Order. So use every rule you can!

 

[antharro]

My local council has implemented two different types of cycle lane. Both involve narrowing the main carriageway. One raises the pavement, puts the bike lane at a slightly lower level, then the main carriageway at a lower level still, with a sloped kerbs so cyclists wanting to turn right across the carriageway can do so. The other type involves having the usual pavement on one side of the road, then the main carriageway, then a double-width, bidirectional bike lane (slightly raised), then a usual width pavement.

I am very much in favour of the former type, where there's a pavement and cycle lane on both sides of the road. It seems to be a natural evolution of the existing bike lanes. I used to cycle the same roads these lanes are going on, and I can see the advantage. But as a motorist, I do find the road narrowing to be somewhat annoying, especially as it removes the flexibility to get around broken down vehicles and buses at stops - especially now the bus stops have all been filled in!

I don't think the double-width lane layout is at all practical. It is great for segregating cyclists away from the main carriageway, but likely it's a real pain in the backside for the cyclists. First they need to deal with other cyclists riding towards them in a narrow space. Then, if they need to cross both lanes of the carriageway to get to a side road, that could involve crossing the other side of the bike lane first, then both lanes of the carriageway.

On one stretch of road with this layout, the double-width bike lane switches from one side of the road to the other. Cyclists are expected to dismount, cross the road at a designated crossing, then resume cycling on the other side. I am sure that for some cyclists, they will do this. Especially family groups where speed is not a priority. However I wouldn't be surprised if accidents involving faster cyclists who prefer to cycle on the road go up in this area - I can see cyclists preferring to stay in the main carriageway, then drivers overtaking them. And as the carriageway is so much narrower than it used to be, they will not have as much space to do so. It will only be a matter of time before a motorist tries to overtake a cyclist and screws it up, hitting the cyclist.

As a motorist though, I know it will annoy the hell out of me when I end up following a cyclist down a narrowed main road doing 15mph when there's an empty cycle lane RIGHT THERE!

 

[Dr_Paul]

This has happened in Coombe Lane, near Raynes Park but has to be interrupted every few yards to allow for driveways.

I've been on this one a few times. Not only are there the driveways, there is a very awkward junction where Coombe Lane meets West Barnes Lane, at which the bike lane disappears into a pedestrian crossing. If you're travelling eastwards, the bike lane ends at a bus stop outside the railway station, on the wrong side of the road, with nowhere for a bike to go except to dismount amidst people waiting for and boarding a bus. If I'm going eastwards, I tend to stay on the road, as this avoids crossing the traffic at each end and the afore-mentioned junction.

On Kew Road in Richmond, there are coned-off bike lanes, with fixed cones every 20 feet or so. They are new so they're still clear of the usual detritus that accumulates in gutters: we'll have to see whether they get swept clean. They are quite narrow, so faster cyclists would have to go into the roadway to overtake slower ones, as with the bike lanes that are marked just with a white line.

 

[PeterY]

I'm an "it depends" cyclist. Sometimes cycle paths are complete waste of space and other times they are brilliant. In Watford on some of the wider roads, the council have painted green strips for cyclists but in reality they are used for parking. I don't ride fast, so I'm quite happy on the canal towpaths, disused railways, country lanes and good cycle paths .

 

[MotCO]

On Kew Road in Richmond, there are coned-off bike lanes, with fixed cones every 20 feet or so. They are new so they're still clear of the usual detritus that accumulates in gutters: we'll have to see whether they get swept clean. They are quite narrow, so faster cyclists would have to go into the roadway to overtake slower ones, as with the bike lanes that are marked just with a white line.

This is similar to the A21 on the way in to Tunbridge Wells. However, many of the cones have been hit, missing or are broken, so are worst than useless.