Cycle paths, who uses them?

FSR_XC

From what I see of cycle paths / lanes they always seem to be very short, up & down kerbs, narrow and full of pedestrians.

If they are on the road side (as opposed to what used to be pavement), they are full of puncture enhancing grit cleared from the road by passing traffic.

What I've never seen yet is one that a cycling can travel comfortably on at a speed above 10mph.

Surely it is easier just to use the road?

Parkey

Cycle tracks? In my experience they get plenty of use by those out emptying their dogs in the mornings and evenings.

Lagavulin

Those near to me fall into two categories. They're either reclaimed from part of the pavement with a white dividing line or reclaimed from the road.

Of the former, one in particular is actually quite a good surface and pretty decent when it's quiet. However, on a weekend pedestrians just walk through it (despite the kerb-side lane being frequently and clearly marked as a bike lane) upto 6 abreast depending on its (and their) width, and, come Monday morning, there are always newly smashed bottles for one to discover.

Of those reclaimed from the road carriageways, these roughly extent about as far from the kerb as the widest drain cover and disappear where there are island crossings (installing island crossings is my local councils new hobby/habbit/means of spending money they dont want to give back to the treasury) and are full of the crap.
These are the worst kind in my experience as they give motorists (particularly white van drivers) the impression that we should or are even required to use them.

When on my road bikes, apart from a section on the King George Road and Newcastle Road, I refuse to use them and will alter my route to avoid them where possible.

meagain

A few quite reasonable ones around here - some 3-4 miles with next to nil pedestrians. Some less than ideal, but where alternative is sharing space at "traffic calming" road narrowing with a 44 tonner, they'll do for me!

Swannie

Bristol-Bath cycleway is excellent on non-weekends. Only the occasional dog walkers to avoid, slower cyclists and runners. About 6-7pm it can be very quiet and pleasant for a hard ride for 6-7 miles, turn round, ride it again

SmellTheGlove

The last 500m or so of my commute is over a very well laid out (dedicated for two wheels, tho' peds do use it) stretch that forms part of the London cycle network. Takes me around a busy lights-controlled RAB - it would be frankly pointless for me to use any other route but I'm just fortunate that it goes exactly where I want it and I can keep speed up over it. What amazes me is that despite being properly engineered hardly any bugger uses it, which illustrates that there is next to no thought given to these facilities (but in a good way in this case...) It narrows down under the railway bridge but I have yet to encounter any oncoming after six months' use. What becomes of the route beyond my stretch I have never bothered to investigate.

That said, most cycle lane provision in London is utter w@nk - I believe roads developed because they go where people want to travel, and big surprise, that includes cyclists. My general verdict is - a waste of paint.

redddraggon

Most of my riding now is the country side so I don't even see any cycle lanes, just quiet(ish) roads.

When I commuted in Warrington last year, I spent the first 3months using a cycle lane, but drivers had a habit pulling into it without looking - I had to bang on more than a few car windows and a few wing mirrors were nearly broken off (accidently I might add). It's safe to say I altered my route to avoid cycle lanes completely from then on.

There's no point have cycle lanes if cars are allowed to pull into them.

cougie

I'd never bother with the silly ones that are just lines painted on the pavement.

On the Wirral the A41 dual carriageway has got a little bike lane down most of it now - just on the road - so thats where I'd ride anyway - thats fine.

The Sustrans routes on old railway lines are great though - I use that for going to Wales now and its much better than the busy roads.

ricadus

Swannie wrote:

Bristol-Bath cycleway is excellent on non-weekends. Only the occasional dog walkers to avoid, slower cyclists and runners.

And us roller skiers. 8)

vermooten

Yeah use the road, it's much easier.

scapaslow

Cougie wrote

The Sustrans routes on old railway lines are great though - I use that for going to Wales now and its much better than the busy roads

.

I went on some sustrans cycle paths last weekend from Glasgow to Kilmacolm - all well surfaced. However, the early sections from Glasgow to Paisley were difficult to follow and gave us a tour of glass covered swing parks complete with obstacles that forced you off the bike to squeeze through.

The upside was an old railway line from Paisley to Kilmacolm. Absolutely fantastic. Me and my bro cruised along this around 30/35 kmph and met little in the way of dogs/owners etc...

There is also an excellent old railway line from Alloa to Dunfermline on which you can get up serious speed.

I find in general though that the chances of getting punctures through glass/thorns are much higher than the road. But, they are great for taking the kids on.

So, swings and roundabouts........

Red Rock

Although well intended I believe cycle lanes are a complete waste of time and money. I won't cycle on shared pavements and the ones painted on the road just mean I have to cycle further out in the road to avoid all the crap. Sadly, where there are dedicated and well made cycle lanes they tend to be littered with broken glass, so again I ride in the road.

Red Rock

Rob Sallnow

I use and generally love old railway paths...in fact I rode the Camel Trail today (my bike is covered in white dust to prove it) but don't do shared pavements.

The local council have spent about a month converting a kerbed grass verge in to a shared use pavement just up the road....if it ran from a housing estate to a school I would understand and welcome it.....but no, it runs from a bus stop to a small business park full of car dealers....even though there is a disused country lane that runs parallel with the road seperated by a row of trees.....they must have money to burn.

hammerite

I agree with those about the Sustrans routes. We have one locally which I use, which is about 6 miles long with only one road crossing.

I used to use the redways around Milton Keynes but nearly came a cropper a few times due to school kids walking 10 abreast across the path on their way to school, dog walkers with those 20ft long dog leads, or them being glass strewn. I now use the road, much safer :shock:

pieinthesky

Cycle lanes, why they are rubbish:

They are used by cars for parking and sometimes even for overtaking.
Used for storage of dog doo and broken glass.
They disappear when the road gets narrow (which is where you need them).
Often surfaced with a special red tarmac which slows you down and rapidly grates your flesh if you fall off.
On the road you have right of way, on a cycle path you give way to everyone and everything, everywhere.
The shared pavement type roughly halves your average speed.
Poorly maintained.

And I could easily go on.

They are designed by Motorists (certainly no one who has ever ridden a bike) to get cyclists out of their way.

Rob Sallnow

pieinthesky wrote:

Cycle lanes, why they are rubbish:

They are used by cars for parking and sometimes even for overtaking.
Used for storage of dog doo and broken glass.
They disappear when the road gets narrow (which is where you need them).
Often surfaced with a special red tarmac which slows you down and rapidly grates your flesh if you fall off.
On the road you have right of way, on a cycle path you give way to everyone and everything, everywhere.
The shared pavement type roughly halves your average speed.
Poorly maintained.

And I could easily go on.

They are designed by Motorists (certainly no one who has ever ridden a bike) to get cyclists out of their way.

In winter shared use paths don't get gritted and in autumn they are covered in leaves or chestnut cases or acorns

FSR_XC

pieinthesky wrote:

Cycle lanes, why they are rubbish:

On the road you have right of way, on a cycle path you give way to everyone and everything, everywhere.
The shared pavement type roughly halves your average speed.


They are designed by Motorists (certainly no one who has ever ridden a bike) to get cyclists out of their way.

I must totally agree with these points.

The average motorist doesn't seem to understand that a cyclist might actually be travelling above 10mph - certainly many that pass me don't

If we are going to see cycle lanes following the road network, lets see them designed properly so they can be used by a cyclist and lets see them maintained (swept) to ensure continual use!

I lived in Germany a few years back. There the majority of cycle lanes are clearly marked, well maintained and were they do cross a minor junction motorists actually have to give way to both cyclists and pedestrians crossing the minor road.

Denny69

Up in the north east (well Stockton anyway!) we have a pretty good collection of cycle paths, most are rideable as they're new and people tend to give way to you if they see you coming. There is, however, the few that are a bit on the "naughty" side to ride on. Glass and other debris litters them so I tend not to use those ones all that often.

Don't get me wrong though....a quick call and it's sorted within a few days.

FSR_XC

I honestly believe we need cycle paths / lanes, but feel they are designed more to keep kids & slower riders on there Halfrauds MTBs / Commuters safe rather than seperating riders from traffic.

Then again, what do I know? I live in the countryside. A lot of lanes aren't wide enough for 2 cars!

pneumatic

One important difference between "cycle" paths and roads is who you have to share them with.

Road users have a code to follow and rely on each other to behave predictably. It doesn't always work perfectly but it helps.

Path users have no such code and operate by making judgments. A pedestrian does not think it always necessary to signal their intentions, because they have a maximum speed of about 4mph, a stopping distance of less than three feet and an outstandingly nimble turning circle. A dog has the same features built in but without the judgment.

A dog on a 20 foot bungie attached to a pedestrian wearing an ipod can be a scarier encounter on a path than a truck would be on a road.

I know this because I once bisected such an obstacle. The dog was neatly reeled in by my front wheel (claws scraping along the tarmac), I made my feelings plain through the medium of Anglo-Saxon and the owner told me I should have rung my bell.

The road is often a safer place for us.

daniel_b

We have a load of cycle lanes near us, some are fair cop, and some are total rubbish.

The most dangerous/laughable setup I have seen is coming up to a fairly major roundabout.

Green cycle lane on the left, green cycle lane stays all the way up to the roundabout, and then directs you to stay in the far left hand lane, as there is a green cycle lane that goes around the whole roundabout on the the extreme edge, with giveway lines before every exit.

The 'idea' (If I can use that word) that you stay in your cycle lane, and check for exiting vehicles, and give way to them as they exit across your bows.

I think I have seen one cyclist use it, but the majority of people ignore it, and tackle the roundabout as any road user should do.

Very weird.

Dan

passout

Cycle lanes by the edge of the road are useful on my commute - most motorists avoid it and parking isn't a big issue. However whenever the road narrows eg humpback bridge the lane vanishes! They are of some use on the A6 where I cycle alot though.

Specific cycle lanes are covered in dog muck and populated by shouty teenagers in my experience. Unpleasanr generally.