# Cycle Lanes aren't compulsory



## oldgreyandslow (29 Jul 2015)

Are they?

I have lost count while riding through Farnborough past the airfield, on the road, the number of times some dick in a car has pulled alongside and shouted at me to "use the (insert your chosen expletive) cycle path."

I don't because it.s slower, makes going straight over at one roundabout a challenge, and there's plenty of room on the road for traffic to get safely by.

It annoys me, I sometimes respond with a well chosen burst of swearing if they've been particularly abusive with their initial comment.

Why do motorists seem to think we MUST use cycle paths?


----------



## ianrauk (29 Jul 2015)

Because they are imbeciles. I bet they think that cyclists don't have insurance or pay road tax either.


----------



## w00hoo_kent (29 Jul 2015)

No, cycle paths aren't mandatory. You can sleep easy. My general response is 'go use a motorway'. But thankfully I don't get it shouted often.

Worst was on my first 100 where I was down on Romney Marsh and the roads were empty, the cycle path was gravel and some lads in a hot hatch kept buzzing me shouting for me to 'use the f'in cycle path'. Unfortunately pointing out all the reasons I wasn't took more time than they ever gave me so I had to fall back on 'waving' them off.


----------



## mustang1 (29 Jul 2015)

Why don't you use the fing cycle path?

Because I'm too sexy and you know it.


----------



## MisterStan (29 Jul 2015)

w00hoo_kent said:


> No, cycle paths aren't mandatory.


Some are, but in a different way to that the OP describes - a bugbear of mine when i'm actually using one and a car drives into it!


----------



## TreeHuggery (29 Jul 2015)

if they're compulsory then they need to come and grit them in the winter


----------



## mjr (29 Jul 2015)

oldgreyandslow said:


> Why do motorists seem to think we MUST use cycle paths?


Those are the motorists that passed a driving test by fluking it, rather than by knowing the Highway Code, else they'd know both that cycle paths aren't compulsory (rule 61) and that you shouldn't abuse other road users for what you think is a mistake (rule 147).

I've frequently been told to use the f'in cycle path where there is none and I was once told I should dismount to use a Toucan crossing... but I'm outclassed by a friend who was stopped by the police and threatened with a fixed penalty notice for riding on a cycle path  but they did back down when they realised he had been involved with checking the legal status of it


----------



## MisterStan (29 Jul 2015)

mjray said:


> I've frequently been told to use the f'in cycle path where there is none


I love it when this happens.


----------



## mjr (29 Jul 2015)

MisterStan said:


> I love it when this happens.


Oh we had one nobber write to a local paper a year or so ago to complain about cyclists not using the cycle path over the cut bridge aka free bridge between South Lynn and West Lynn. I'd really love one so people who ride on the cycle paths on each side of the bridge could avoid making two right turns across traffic (including HGVs serving Norbert Dentressangle) at sharp bends, but there isn't a cycle path on that bridge yet!

Aaaand there was a car crash last year which blocked half the carriageway and all the adjacent cycleway, so I was riding on the carriageway for a bit. One nobber in a 4x4 honked himself silly and started gesticulating rudely at me to get on the cycle path... right in front of the traffic police dealing with the crash.  Some people should have their licences revoked for gross stupidity, eh?


----------



## Racing roadkill (29 Jul 2015)

oldgreyandslow said:


> Are they?
> 
> I have lost count while riding through Farnborough past the airfield, on the road, the number of times some dick in a car has pulled alongside and shouted at me to "use the (insert your chosen expletive) cycle path."
> 
> ...


same old same old, I wonder why they don't notice the dog shyte, broken glass, and vans, that seem to be all over most cycle lanes. The last tool in a car that gave me grief for not using that particular cycle path, tried to swerve into me, but failed to notice the police motorcycle behind him.


----------



## mrbikerboy73 (29 Jul 2015)

If it's safer and/or quicker to use it I will, if not I won't. Anyone that doesn't cycle probably can't grasp that simple concept.


----------



## Profpointy (29 Jul 2015)

mrbikerboy73 said:


> If it's safer and/or quicker to use it I will, if not I won't. Anyone that doesn't cycle probably can't grasp that simple concept.



mmm, that's 99.999% of cycle lanes ruled out. No wonder drivers get cross if we insist on ridiculously strict criteria like that. 

You'll be riding 2 abreast holding up traffic whilst coming from nowhere like a bat out of hell recklessly overtaking cars and riding on the pavement, quite apart from not payin' any 'effin road tax and wobblin' about all over the place wearing lycra and running over and killing someone's granny twice


----------



## Drago (29 Jul 2015)

Just tell them to f*** off.


----------



## mjr (29 Jul 2015)

mrbikerboy73 said:


> If it's safer and/or quicker to use it I will, if not I won't. Anyone that doesn't cycle probably can't grasp that simple concept.


Apart from the shortcuts, they're almost all slower than the carriageway that gets polished smooth by loads of heavy vehicles daily. I use them if it's more fun. Isn't that what cycling's about? If I wanted to get everywhere quick, I'd strap an engine to myself and have less fun.


----------



## Bianchi boy (29 Jul 2015)

oldgreyandslow said:


> Are they?
> 
> I have lost count while riding through Farnborough past the airfield, on the road, the number of times some dick in a car has pulled alongside and shouted at me to "use the (insert your chosen expletive) cycle path."
> 
> ...


Same here, get this comment about twice a week, sad really, do they not teach them anything relating to cyclists on the highway during driving lessons?


----------



## ufkacbln (2 Aug 2015)

Reading up about something else and came across this quote


1935


> (Cyclists are) “the chartered libertines of the road” because “they are not taxed, they are not registered, they are not numbered and…they are not even obliged to ride on the tracks which are specially provided for them.”


----------



## PeteXXX (2 Aug 2015)

A couple of mates and I were told to use the road by a plonker and his lady friend as they were on BSO 's when we were on a cycle path on our 'decent' bikes....


----------



## Dan B (2 Aug 2015)

Bianchi boy said:


> Same here, get this comment about twice a week, sad really, do they not teach them anything relating to cyclists on the highway during driving lessons?


Given that the first thing most drivers do after passing their test is forget everything they ever learned in lessons, we could probably put the meaning of life and the nuclear launch codes in the syllabus and it'd make no difference to anyone


----------



## Tim Hall (2 Aug 2015)

mustang1 said:


> Why don't you use the fing cycle path?
> 
> Because I'm too sexy and you know it.


(Tucks that response away for future use)


----------



## ClichéGuevara (2 Aug 2015)

I've posted it before, but I still chuckle at the look on the guys face after he'd slowed down to shout 'you should be in the cycle lane' at me. His chubby chops rattled around his face when I said, 'not half as much as you should fatty'.

I know you're not supposed to laugh at your own jokes, but his blustering reaction was quality.


----------



## steveindenmark (2 Aug 2015)

We dont have to ride on cycle paths

We dont have to wear helmets

We dont have to ride in single file

We dont have to wear viz vests

We dont have to insure our bikes

We dont have to have road tax.........and neither do they.

Cyclists should make this into a business card and just hand it to people who want to start any or all the arguements.


----------



## TreeHuggery (2 Aug 2015)

ClichéGuevara said:


> I've posted it before, but I still chuckle at the look on the guys face after he'd slowed down to shout 'you should be in the cycle lane' at me. His chubby chops rattled around his face when I said, 'not half as much as you should fatty'.
> 
> I know you're not supposed to laugh at your own jokes, but his blustering reaction was quality.


Quality .....gonna steal that one;-)


----------



## TreeHuggery (2 Aug 2015)

We tend to use the response
"if all us cyclists were in cars, it would take you even longer to get where you're going"


----------



## dr snuggles (29 Aug 2015)

"Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this one, I have viewed the footage (excellent by the way) and our driver should have hung back for a couple of seconds and given you more space at the time (he will be shown the footage on his return to work) however an issue has been raised as to the location of the incident as i believe this section of Scotswood Road does have a dedicated "Cycle Path" heading towards the city center as it is one of the busiest road's heading into Newcastle?

It doesn't make our drivers actions justified and considerations must be given for all road users at the time, we are trying to ensure that we can avoid all cyclist related incidents and the more information we can have from yourself and other's who enjoy using there bikes (GNE do actually have a "Bike to Work" scheme which is extremely popular with a lot of staff) the better and hopefully the safer the roads will be for everyone"


This was the answer I received after reporting a stupidly close and very fast pass by a bus (deliberate in my opinion).
I wasn't happy and let him know this, but must admit it started making me feel like I was actually doing something wrong by using the road in the first place!


----------



## snorri (29 Aug 2015)

dr snuggles said:


> from yourself and other's who enjoy using there bikes


I wonder if he/she fits the phrase "yourself and others who enjoy using their cars" into responses to car drivers who have complained about bus driver behaviour?

Slightly off topic but that response reminded me of a guy I saw in a bus yesterday, the warm weather resulted in the display of some revolting sights including a tattoo reading "The World is Your's."


----------



## jonny jeez (29 Aug 2015)

Just ignore them and carry on enjoying your life.

J


----------



## puffinbilly (29 Aug 2015)

I regularly travel the Scotswood Road @dr snuggles (seem to recognise you from your picture) and know it well - it's the only piece of road that I've nearly been wiped out by a tank (years ago in the eighties) - _had to shout at him what do you think you're doing, driving a tank? _It's a real mish-mash of cycle paths with some on the roadway alongside shared paths with dedicated cycle paths and then others running along the old rail line above the road.
I've had comments from peds and motorists alike - having to point out to them I'm legal it's a signed shared path or the road is available to everyone.

Pretty sure know the company that you refer to - I used to work for their corporate side - disappointing that they don't know the difference between their and there and that the computer is set to US rather than UK English - re center rather than centre.


----------



## subaqua (29 Aug 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> We dont have to ride on cycle paths
> 
> We dont have to wear helmets
> 
> ...




did traffic droid hack an account


----------



## sidevalve (29 Aug 2015)

No cycle lanes are not compulsory but by the same token you can't really complain when a car uses or parks in them - free choice does go both ways. Having cake and eating it comes to mind.


----------



## snorri (29 Aug 2015)

sidevalve said:


> No cycle lanes are not compulsory but by the same token you can't really complain when a car uses or parks in them - free choice does go both ways. Having cake and eating it comes to mind.


I was going to explain, but won't bother, I'm sure you're well aware of the weakness in your argument.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (29 Aug 2015)

sidevalve said:


> No cycle lanes are not compulsory but by the same token you can't really complain when a car uses or parks in them - free choice does go both ways. Having cake and eating it comes to mind.


We have bus stops in cycle lanes: only allowed to ride on them when nobody waits for the bus


----------



## Sharky (30 Aug 2015)

I agree with all the comments on this thread, but there are two cycle paths that I have come across, that are worth a mention. The one on the Rainford bypass on Merseyside and a newly built one on the West Malling bypass.

Both I would gladly use.


----------



## Accy cyclist (30 Aug 2015)

If any of you had been on that A road i found myself on yesterday you'd have hugged the kerb,never mind leave the cycle lane,believe me! I even had to swerve past a rusty brake pad, but when wagons and swaying car trailers are passing at 70mph you don't mess with the "you should be in the effin cycle lane" twonkers!


----------



## ClichéGuevara (30 Aug 2015)

I haven't had it thrown back at me yet, but I know if roles were reversed, a question I would ask someone like me, arguing I don't use bike lanes full of potholes and raised obstacles is, isn't it a bit hypocritical when you're on a mountain bike heading for a day on the trail?

I guess the answer is, I'm expecting obstacles on the trail as they're designed that way, and they won't tip me under a car.


----------



## w00hoo_kent (31 Aug 2015)

Sharky said:


> I agree with all the comments on this thread, but there are two cycle paths that I have come across, that are worth a mention. The one on the Rainford bypass on Merseyside and a newly built one on the West Malling bypass.
> 
> Both I would gladly use.


West Malling is good, I've used it a few times. It'd be great if it didn't meander off after the Kings Hill roundabout though as that's the tight bit and still NSL.


----------



## Profpointy (1 Sep 2015)

PeteXXX said:


> A couple of mates and I were told to use the road by a plonker and his lady friend as they were on BSO 's when we were on a cycle path on our 'decent' bikes....



they seem to have a fair point though


----------



## Hip Priest (1 Sep 2015)

I've only been told to get in the cycle lane once, in Liverpool (going past Speke retail park, if you're local). The 'lane' in question is actually a painted bit of pavement, and I was zipping along at circa 25mph. I gave him the thumbs up.


----------



## e-rider (2 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> Apart from the shortcuts, they're almost all slower than the carriageway that gets polished smooth by loads of heavy vehicles daily. I use them if it's more fun. Isn't that what cycling's about? If I wanted to get everywhere quick, I'd strap an engine to myself and have less fun.


if a cycle path is 'usable' and 'safe' I will use it instead of the road even if it's slower - however, most paths are not usable or safe so I don't use them very often.


----------



## mcshroom (2 Sep 2015)

Silliest one I can remember was a rather pink faced man winding his window down beside me, pointing and shouting "cycle path". My response was to point forwards and shout back "road" while smiling. He got even pinker after that.

there was also the bin lorry passenger in Workington who hung out of the window to tell me to get in the cycle lane, and bashed his gesticulating hand on the back of the trailer that was parked blocking the cycle lane I wasn't riding in


----------



## Drago (2 Sep 2015)

ClichéGuevara said:


> I haven't had it thrown back at me yet, but I know if roles were reversed, a question I would ask someone like me, arguing I don't use bike lanes full of potholes and raised obstacles is, isn't it a bit hypocritical when you're on a mountain bike heading for a day on the trail?
> 
> I guess the answer is, I'm expecting obstacles on the trail as they're designed that way, and they won't tip me under a car.



My answer would be "f*** off!" Haters will hate, not worth wasting your life trying to get them to see sense.


----------



## Arjimlad (3 Sep 2015)

I took the cycle path route north up the A38 and under the M5 yesterday evening. It involves crossing 2 motorway sliproads one of which has traffic lights to stop the cars, the other one hasn't and you are taking your life in your hands. Also it is bumpy and rubbish. The council have erected a "temporary cycle path" with boards on scaffolding, covered in brambles and stinging nettles.

To head in the right direction north of the M5, you need to dismount and cross a dual carriageway because the cycle lane comes to an end. There was a car parked up on the cycle lane having overheated in heavy traffic too. I will be staying on the road in future.


----------



## Arjimlad (3 Sep 2015)

So my response to anyone who says get on the cycle path will be, "but it's shoot" .


----------



## mjr (3 Sep 2015)

Arjimlad said:


> So my response to anyone who says get on the cycle path will be, "but it's shoot" .


Please mark it on www.FixMyStreet.com - it might not do any good, but at least it publicises their negligence in case stuff happens.


----------



## voyager (3 Sep 2015)

Cycle tracks on the road are not wide enough for a trike unless you enjoy having one wheel an inch away  from the pavement in the gutter ......
nobody listens  , even my local MP doesn't want to know 

regards ..............................


----------



## mjr (3 Sep 2015)

Is your trike wide or cycle tracks much narrower than the recommended 3m?


----------



## buggi (3 Sep 2015)

dr snuggles said:


> "Sorry for the delay in getting back to you on this one, I have viewed the footage (excellent by the way) and our driver should have hung back for a couple of seconds and given you more space at the time (he will be shown the footage on his return to work) however an issue has been raised as to the location of the incident as i believe this section of Scotswood Road does have a dedicated "Cycle Path" heading towards the city center as it is one of the busiest road's heading into Newcastle?
> 
> It doesn't make our drivers actions justified and considerations must be given for all road users at the time, we are trying to ensure that we can avoid all cyclist related incidents and the more information we can have from yourself and other's who enjoy using there bikes (GNE do actually have a "Bike to Work" scheme which is extremely popular with a lot of staff) the better and hopefully the safer the roads will be for everyone"
> 
> ...


In cases like this, where companies point out the cycle path, it is worth reminding them that more cyclists get killed or seriously injured in cycle infrastructure (either on or off the road) than when they are just riding on the road. Statistics show it is safer for a cyclist to be on the road than on a dedicated cycle path and that is why we are not obliged to use them. And like they say... It doesn't excuse poor behaviour.


----------



## buggi (3 Sep 2015)

I ignore them completely. I ride as if they are not there. I don't allow them to dictate where I should be. If I happen to be in one bcoz its where I want to ride, so be it, but I choose not to "see them".


----------



## voyager (3 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> Is your trike wide or cycle tracks much narrower than the recommended 3m?



Does my bum look big in this ? 

Seriously the trike is less than 36" wide and the cycle lane is under a meter wide on the side of the road and I resent running a wheel through bits of broken glass and holes / uneven tarmac that seems to be the norm at the edge of a road ...........


----------



## mjr (4 Sep 2015)

buggi said:


> Statistics show it is safer for a cyclist to be on the road than on a dedicated cycle path and that is why we are not obliged to use them. And like they say... It doesn't excuse poor behaviour.


Would those statistics be the oft-abused 20-year-old Lund University study that's not online anywhere?

But I agree, it doesn't excuse criminally-bad driving and it's a really damning indictment that many cycle paths aren't even good enough that people prefer to ride on them instead of mixing with drivers like that!



voyager said:


> Seriously the trike is less than 36" wide and the cycle lane is under a meter wide on the side of the road and I resent running a wheel through bits of broken glass and holes / uneven tarmac that seems to be the norm at the edge of a road ...........


Yuck! I'd report both the inadequate width and the maintenance defects, just in case they cause a less wise rider to crash


----------



## ClichéGuevara (5 Sep 2015)

I reckon there should be a campaign to create dedicated car lanes so the rest of us can get on with using our roads safely.

The suggestion alone could just help some drivers to think about and perhaps realise a few of the reasons the current design of most cycle lanes don't work.

A colleague who is a leisure cyclist was saying he thought cycle lanes were a good idea, and wouldn't ride on some main roads, until I challenged him to get to various places using the cycle lanes and he raised how slow he'd have to go and how much clipping and unclipping was involved.


----------



## mjr (5 Sep 2015)

ClichéGuevara said:


> I reckon there should be a campaign to create dedicated car lanes so the rest of us can get on with using our roads safely.
> 
> The suggestion alone could just help some drivers to think about and perhaps realise a few of the reasons the current design of most cycle lanes don't work.


Isn't that part of why CTC of the 1930s campaigned against cycleways and supported motorways? They thought the ordinary streets would become places for cycling, rather than an early demonstration that building more space for motoring leads to more motoring.

If you try to point out the flaw with the idea that cyclists should be limited to cycleways by suggesting that motorists should be limited to motorways, then most will completely fail to empathise, in my experience. If anyone's got a working way to do it, please post it.


----------



## markharry66 (11 Sep 2015)

Was on the Thames Costal Path (not my choice of name) hardly worth the effort by the time they put all the gates in I spent more time getting of the bike than actually riding. My own personal experience of cycle paths complete waste of time just for weekend cyclist that like to poodle.

Coming home a few nights back after week of idiots and nobbers. I was rolling down the hill to a set of traffic lights near a super market. There is a cycle lane not that you could ever use it due to people parking or sitting in the que for the lights. Old granny gets on the horn to inform me I should get in the lane, as I was slowing her que up (it was a red light) I tapped on the window and just informed her I have a right to be on the road but whats the point.


----------



## Pope (11 Sep 2015)

There's one road where I ride that has a cycle lane, New Hey Road in Huddersfield. 

I always use it, there doesn't seem to be any reason not to, in fact it acts as an invisible barrier between me and motorists. There are roundabouts on the road but the cycle lane ends about 50 yards before them. I've yet to see any dirt or glass in one which would make me leave a cycle lane. The only time I do is to go past parked cars in the cycle lane.


----------



## mjr (11 Sep 2015)

markharry66 said:


> Was on the Thames Costal Path...


Say no more. I've ridden a couple of bits of it and they've been rubbish. It's an example of how to botch a cycle path.



Pope said:


> but the cycle lane ends about 50 yards before them.


That's really annoying too. There's usually space to route it around the roundabout properly (I think it's called an annular track) but even when they do that, they usually botch the crossing angles, as in the TRL experiment pictured in http://road.cc/content/news/82246-t...atory-unveil-dutch-style-roundabout-and-other


----------



## summerdays (11 Sep 2015)

Arjimlad said:


> I took the cycle path route north up the A38 and under the M5 yesterday evening. It involves crossing 2 motorway sliproads one of which has traffic lights to stop the cars, the other one hasn't and you are taking your life in your hands. Also it is bumpy and rubbish. The council have erected a "temporary cycle path" with boards on scaffolding, covered in brambles and stinging nettles.
> 
> To head in the right direction north of the M5, you need to dismount and cross a dual carriageway because the cycle lane comes to an end. There was a car parked up on the cycle lane having overheated in heavy traffic too. I will be staying on the road in future.


Only just seen this, I went to a cycle meeting on that night and that area was discussed, looks like they are getting lights on the slip road, though not why it was taking so long to finish that area with the temporary boards. I've only ever headed north on the other side when you can at least chop and change between the road and path, but not much good for anyone wanting a proper cycle path option totally.


----------



## Pope (11 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> Say no more. I've ridden a couple of bits of it and they've been rubbish. It's an example of how to botch a cycle path.
> 
> 
> That's really annoying too. There's usually space to route it around the roundabout properly (I think it's called an annular track) but even when they do that, they usually botch the crossing angles, as in the TRL experiment pictured in http://road.cc/content/news/82246-t...atory-unveil-dutch-style-roundabout-and-other



I don't think it's annoying. If there is a cycle lane there but I need to turn right at the roundabout, I can't possibly be in the right hand lane and the cycle lane simultaneously.


----------



## mjr (11 Sep 2015)

Pope said:


> I don't think it's annoying. If there is a cycle lane there but I need to turn right at the roundabout, I can't possibly be in the right hand lane and the cycle lane simultaneously.


We retain the option to use other lanes too, but a good annular track leaves the option open of making a jug-handle turn (sometimes called a Copenhagen turn) if motorists prevent one moving out into the right hand lane or a simple right turn onto the cycle track crossing when the roundabout is gridlocked, both of which I think are preferable to the current Highway Code solution of riding all the way around in the left lane, which is horribly hazardous when crossing other exits.


----------



## summerdays (11 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> We retain the option to use other lanes too, but a good annular track leaves the option open of making a jug-handle turn (sometimes called a Copenhagen turn) if motorists prevent one moving out into the right hand lane or a simple right turn onto the cycle track crossing when the roundabout is gridlocked, both of which I think are preferable to the current Highway Code solution of riding all the way around in the left lane, which is horribly hazardous when crossing other exits.


The Highway Code doesn't say you have to stay in the left hand lane, it says cyclists may stay in it, though I would definitely not recommend it.


----------



## mjr (11 Sep 2015)

summerdays said:


> The Highway Code doesn't say you have to stay in the left hand lane, it says cyclists may stay in it, though I would definitely not recommend it.



View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Liqzr_mKmdI


----------



## GuyBoden (28 Sep 2015)

*The Highway Code*

*Rules for cyclists (59 to 82) *

*61*
*Cycle Routes and Other Facilities.* Use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time it is unsafe to do so. Use of these facilities is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

Link: https://www.gov.uk/rules-for-cyclists-59-to-82/overview-59-to-71

Sorry, I'm just brushing up on the latest Highway code, so thought this might be useful.


----------



## summerdays (28 Sep 2015)

GuyBoden said:


> *The Highway Code*
> 
> *Rules for cyclists (59 to 82) *
> 
> ...


And quite often it isn't safer so it's OK not to use it, it's up to each person to assess their skills and each layout/traffic conditions to make that decision. That said I've used some of those on my way in this morning.


----------



## benb (28 Sep 2015)

GuyBoden said:


> *The Highway Code*
> 
> *Rules for cyclists (59 to 82) *
> 
> ...



Yes, and it clearly says "Use of these facilities is not compulsory"


----------



## Dan B (28 Sep 2015)

http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/highwaycode/ and http://www.camcycle.org.uk/campaigning/issues/highwaycode/2006.html has some interesting historical information about why that rule is worded the way it is. "Evidence" played no part in it.


----------



## Arjimlad (28 Sep 2015)

I got told to get on the cycle path the other day, but there isn't one there !!

And many of them are congested or require a lot of stopping and waiting. One near Filton makes you wait for the substantial traffic exiting McDonalds, which has a certain irony..


----------



## Pat "5mph" (28 Sep 2015)

Fast cyclists can be a hazard on shared paths


----------



## Dan B (28 Sep 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> Fast cyclists can be a hazard on shared paths


Fast roller skaters doubly so. When do skaters get their own segregated infrastructure?


----------



## mjr (28 Sep 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> Fast cyclists can be a hazard on shared paths


Only if the shared path is too narrow 



Dan B said:


> Fast roller skaters doubly so. When do skaters get their own segregated infrastructure?


And what about those electric-assisted kick-scooters that suddenly seem all the rage? They're a menace, I tell you!


----------



## summerdays (28 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> Only if the shared path is too narrow
> 
> 
> And what about those electric-assisted kick-scooters that suddenly seem all the rage? They're a menace, I tell you!


No if the cyclist is going too fast he is a hazard, whether the path is narrow or not. If a path is shared then there other people around so whether they are on foot or another bike you can travel at a speed in which you are unable to react quick enough.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (28 Sep 2015)

summerdays said:


> No if the cyclist is going too fast he is a hazard,


This.
I did not want to sound inflammatory, but @summerdays said it first 
Yes, fast cyclists on shared paths can be a hazard to anything moving.
I have also learned to keep an eye on Next Bikes, our version of the Boris Bikes.
Some are really wobbly!


----------



## winjim (28 Sep 2015)

Arjimlad said:


> I got told to get on the cycle path the other day, but there isn't one there !!
> 
> And many of them are congested or require a lot of stopping and waiting. One near Filton makes you wait for the substantial traffic exiting McDonalds, which has a certain irony..


Irony you say?



Take a look at @craftybikegirl's Tweet: https://twitter.com/craftybikegirl/status/646677378140348416?s=09


----------



## Tin Pot (28 Sep 2015)

Arjimlad said:


> I got told to get on the cycle path the other day, but there isn't one there !!
> 
> And many of them are congested or require a lot of stopping and waiting. One near Filton makes you wait for the substantial traffic exiting McDonalds, which has a certain irony..



It's almost as though outraged drivers haven't thought their position through before mouthing off.


----------



## mjr (28 Sep 2015)

summerdays said:


> No if the cyclist is going too fast he is a hazard, whether the path is narrow or not. If a path is shared then there other people around so whether they are on foot or another bike you can travel at a speed in which you are unable to react quick enough.


OK OK, you _can_ travel at such a speed if you're a nit and don't slow down if you need to pass close to someone, but if the path is wide enough, a fast cyclist _can_ pass someone at full gas without being a hazard. For example, if someone's cycling near one edge of the 10m-wide tarmac section of NCR1, their speed shouldn't bother a solitary person walking along the other side, should it?

I realise this is all a bit hair-splitty but I get a bit sick of the "cycle tracks are only for slow pootling" brigade. If we build them properly, including being big enough for the volume of traffic, they need not be, although of course congestion is possible, the same as any road.


----------



## Tin Pot (28 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> OK OK, you _can_ travel at such a speed if you're a nit and don't slow down if you need to pass close to someone, but if the path is wide enough, a fast cyclist _can_ pass someone at full gas without being a hazard. For example, if someone's cycling near one edge of the 10m-wide tarmac section of NCR1, their speed shouldn't bother anyone walking along the other side, should it?
> 
> I realise this is all a bit hair-splitty but I get a bit sick of the "cycle tracks are only for slow pootling" brigade. If we build them properly, including being big enough for the volume of traffic, they need not be, although of course congestion is possible, the same as any road.



Agreed.


----------



## summerdays (28 Sep 2015)

mjray said:


> OK OK, you _can_ travel at such a speed if you're a nit and don't slow down if you need to pass close to someone, but if the path is wide enough, a fast cyclist _can_ pass someone at full gas without being a hazard. For example, if someone's cycling near one edge of the 10m-wide tarmac section of NCR1, their speed shouldn't bother a solitary person walking along the other side, should it?
> 
> I realise this is all a bit hair-splitty but I get a bit sick of the "cycle tracks are only for slow pootling" brigade. If we build them properly, including being big enough for the volume of traffic, they need not be, although of course congestion is possible, the same as any road.


Problem is 10m wide isn't exactly common. My experience is that some parts I use are congested in the morning rush hour, and idiots don't adjust their speed to suit the conditions.


----------



## Dan B (28 Sep 2015)

summerdays said:


> Problem is 10m wide isn't exactly common. My experience is that some parts I use are congested in the morning rush hour, and idiots don't adjust their speed to suit the conditions.


My experience is that 10m wide is so uncommon as to be bordering on the hypothetical. 

Contractors round here (Waltham Forest "Mini Holland" scheme) are still building cycle tracks less than 1m wide in places. The council are, thankfully, making them go back and do it again, but I think that says all you need to know about the general attitude of road builders towards cycle provision


----------



## mjr (28 Sep 2015)

Dan B said:


> My experience is that 10m wide is so uncommon as to be bordering on the hypothetical.


But it SHOULDN'T be. There are plenty of places where this is appropriate, like on the approaches to Lynn town centre:
View attachment 93352


I'm glad they've sent back contractors who built metre wide crap. I think the only people to get away with that in West Norfolk was the Highways Agency, which tells you how good the Blair government was for cycling!


----------



## Nigelnaturist (28 Sep 2015)

Most roads round here barley touch 10m wide, one road from here to Wakefield has a cycle lane for most of the journey, which in my mind is a complete waste of tax payers money, as bikes tend to keep to the left as should all vehicles apart from to avoid parked vehicles and other hazards or when turning right and road position for safety, it only serves to reinforce in many motorists heads bikes should use cycle lanes
Talking of position road safety I was going down a slight incline tonight approaching 30mph when a car that had bee about to over take had to slow for the up coming traffic Island, he or she would most likely have tried squeezing through as they overtook me, you can guess my road position.
I take no s*** of anyone throwing abuse at me for my road position unless I am wrong, which isn't very often but has been known to happen in a strange place once or twice.


----------



## winjim (29 Sep 2015)

Surely 10m is about the width of a dual carriageway, including the central reservation. Are we sure it's not 10ft we're talking about?


----------



## youngoldbloke (29 Sep 2015)

One of the most dangerous roads I use is a wide 2 lane road, with a cycle lane painted both sides EXCEPT at the pinch points caused by central islands with keep left bollards. The cycle lanes END some yards before the pinch point and restart some yards past. I often wonder what cyclists are supposed to do - the expectation seems to be that they get should get off the road at the pinch point as there is no longer a lane provided for them!
The danger is caused by motorists trying to sqeeze past at the pinch points. Of course I take primary through the pinch points - to the obvious annoyance of some drivers. The cycle lanes are completely unnecessary, as the lanes are wide enough for bikes and cars to pass safely - except at the pinchpoints, this is where a bike lane would be useful maybe. Total waste of money and paint.


----------



## mjr (29 Sep 2015)

User said:


> I'd like to find an example of a single formal cycle facility in the UK which is 10m wide... even the nice shared use at his in Cambridge aren't that wide.
> 
> (And pedestrianised precincts don't count).


OK, how are you defining "formal cycle facility" and "pedestrianised precinct" to exclude the section of NCR1 in my attachment above?

And @winjim, 10m might be one direction of a small dual carriageway but most are much wider than that.

Around King's Lynn, we've a few stretches of 10m (mostly park routes - I'll take the tape measure to it today), quite a bit of 4m (again, away from major roads), the standard minimum is 3m (although they will stick posts and cabinets in it lately, which is irritating) and there's some metre wide crap by the Highways Agency's A47 junction.


----------



## winjim (29 Sep 2015)

My estimation of 10m may have been slightly out. For context, a motorway lane width is 3.65m, so 10m is just under the width of a standard three lane motorway carriageway, not including hard shoulder .


----------



## Nigelnaturist (29 Sep 2015)

We have chicanes with a slender cycle lane to the left of some not all around here, I don't use them either as some have parked cars at the entrance/exit full of debris as they never get wet, and where a slight gap would be useful i.e. anti-speed ramps some have them and some don't, what cycling infrastructure there is certainly hasn't been thought out by any cyclist.


----------



## mjr (29 Sep 2015)

User said:


> Is that a formal cycle path? Is it 10m wide?


Yes, it's a formal cycle path, as I understand the term - it's been part of NCR1 as long as I can remember and there are signs pointing along it - but when I took the measure to it on the way to market this morning, the pictured section is only 9m wide!  The gap to the bases of the trees is wider than I remember, so I think we may have lost half a metre each side during the park restoration project about a decade ago. I wanted to get back to work so I didn't measure the other wide sections to see if they've also shrunk similarly, but I will when I find time.


----------



## Innes (3 Oct 2015)

Just thought I'd throw this one in, wasn't going to bit here goes....... There I am heading to St Andrews on the cycle path, I have to whole track to myself until two cyclists heading towards me come into view, riding 2 abreast, I presumed they would slip into single file while we pass, both parties keeping left...... How mistaken was I!! I actually had to stop on the grass to let them pass. I can only assume this was because they were on expensive roadies wearing similarly expensive damn lycra. Clearly, if you don't ride the right bike or wear the correct gear you have no right to ride out in public.


----------



## summerdays (3 Oct 2015)

Innes said:


> Just thought I'd throw this one in, wasn't going to bit here goes....... There I am heading to St Andrews on the cycle path, I have to whole track to myself until two cyclists heading towards me come into view, riding 2 abreast, I presumed they would slip into single file while we pass, both parties keeping left...... How mistaken was I!! I actually had to stop on the grass to let them pass. I can only assume this was because they were on expensive roadies wearing similarly expensive damn lycra. Clearly, if you don't ride the right bike or wear the correct gear you have no right to ride out in public.


It's up to you.... I'd have stopped on the path if I felt like it. Then they could ride onto the grass. In reality I'd probably move to the side, I even do it on pavements when walking and then think, you shouldn't be actually riding here so why should I give way to you.


----------



## Innes (3 Oct 2015)

summerdays said:


> It's up to you.... I'd have stopped on the path if I felt like it. Then they could ride onto the grass. In reality I'd probably move to the side, I even do it on pavements when walking and then think, you shouldn't be actually riding here so why should I give way to you.


Oh, I wasn't walking, I was cycling. I suppose I'm now a victim of the bellend cycling elite lol ;-)


----------



## Nigelnaturist (4 Oct 2015)

Innes said:


> Oh, I wasn't walking, I was cycling. I suppose I'm now a victim of the bellend cycling elite lol ;-)


Do what I do when cars think they have priority over me with the chicane on their side, ride right at the buggers, usually because they are on my side of the road, and I can be a right nasty b sometimes.


----------



## Drago (4 Oct 2015)

I can see slight flaw with that course of action...


----------



## Nigelnaturist (4 Oct 2015)

Whats that.


----------



## Drago (4 Oct 2015)

If you lose the game of chicken then you'll be finishing your journey on a stretcher or in a coffin.


----------



## Nigelnaturist (4 Oct 2015)

Funny that, just been talking about dying elsewhere, I ain't bothered to be honest, however whilst I may be taking the priority on my side there is still plenty of room on the left.


----------



## Drago (4 Oct 2015)

I take priority when in the road, but not at the expense of risking my life over it. I still got unfinished business with Doritos to eat, Guinness to drink, and women to lurrvvvvv before I go off to meet my maker.


----------



## winjim (4 Oct 2015)

Drago said:


> I take priority when in the road, but not at the expense of risking my life over it. I still got unfinished business with Doritos to eat, Guinness to drink, and women to lurrvvvvv before I go off to meet my maker.


Don't worry, I'll take care of that for you.


----------



## Simontm (13 Oct 2015)

This is one of my favourite roads for a combination of pinch points and cycle lanes 
Especially coming this way at this point. 



The pic doesn't actually portray the cracked rise of the bike lane. Coming the other way are drivers off the A3 and are meant to give priority to oncoming traffic. As I have found in a car, let alone the bike, this is not necessarily the case. 
Here is also the only time I've had a row with a driver. Van driver drove straight through the gate when I was just entering, his view...

"I should be in the /£;£?./?£ bike lane."
!


----------



## winjim (13 Oct 2015)

Simontm said:


> This is one of my favourite roads for a combination of pinch points and cycle lanes
> Especially coming this way at this point.
> View attachment 106764
> 
> ...


What a thing of beauty. I see they've thoughtfully put a drain there to catch the runoff from the raised section of the cycle lane.


----------

