Closed roads/traffic free lanes

slowbike

Riding around this weekend one thing cross my mind ...

Much of our routes were on country lanes - chosen to get a quieter & traffic free route. But these routes are also used by quite a number of vehicles seemingly as shortcuts or even just for the same reason as we were there - to see the countryside....

I don't mind sharing the road with motorised transport - well, most of them - but you do get the few unpleasant ones who think they know the highway code or believe they need to overtake the cyclist(s) now even if there isn't sufficient room....

Anyway - my thoughts wandered over to the Channel Islands - Alderney was wonderful cycling - funnily enough because there really isn't much traffic around ...
Guernsey was a mixed bag - it's quite a high concentration of people on a small island and loads of roads - most of the drivers were amicable enough, but you did get the feeling you were holding them up ... then there were the Green Lanes - either motorised traffic is banned completely or it is limited - and the road is used primarily for walkers, horse riders and cyclists ...

Perhaps we should look at introducing some Green Lanes on the mainland - roads where vehicles are banned unless they have business along that stretch, speed limits are low and motorists expectations are changed.

Oh - one more thing - horns need to be removed from cars - they're not needed.

cougie

Don't think you'll get very far with that but its a nice dream.

markhewitt1978

I've often thought the same thing myself. That motor traffic should perhaps be restricted to A & B roads only, and unclassified roads closed to motor traffic 'except for access', meaning taking the shortest route from the classified road to the destination. Probably unworkable of course, and having motor traffic sweep the roads can be useful for cycling.

slowbike

I know it's a pipe dream ... and Mark - yes, that'll be nice ...

However, I guess it could have a negative effect too - some drivers will believe that horse riders, cyclists and walkers should ONLY be on the closed roads and not allowed on the A/B roads ... such is the mentality of some that they cannot grasp the concept of sharing.

Pross

Thing is those country lanes are often the only way that some people can access their homes. Also, as soon as you take vehicular traffic out of the equation the local authority would see it as a reason to no longer worry about surfacing the road and it would be left to fall apart (it's happened on some lanes around me even when they do still provide a vehicle access to a couple of properties).

rolf_f

markhewitt1978 wrote:

I've often thought the same thing myself. That motor traffic should perhaps be restricted to A & B roads only, and unclassified roads closed to motor traffic 'except for access', meaning taking the shortest route from the classified road to the destination. Probably unworkable of course, and having motor traffic sweep the roads can be useful for cycling.

Lol - that would make much of the countryside inaccessible. Until all the minor roads got reclassified as B roads which is what would happen.

And the roads would certainly be a mess without cars cleaning them for us.

slowbike

Pross wrote:

Thing is those country lanes are often the only way that some people can access their homes. Also, as soon as you take vehicular traffic out of the equation the local authority would see it as a reason to no longer worry about surfacing the road and it would be left to fall apart (it's happened on some lanes around me even when they do still provide a vehicle access to a couple of properties).

Duh - that was the "except for access" ... quite a common occurrence where we have roads that are width restricted ...

Around here I don't think the LA worry much about resurfacing - anyway, with one reasonable surface to start with, lack of motorised traffic would mean that surface lasts much longer.

Rolf has a point about the lack of road "cleaning" - not something I'd worry too much about if out for a leisurely ride ...

As for making the countryside inaccessible - that's not right - it's still accessible - just not by motorised transport ... perhaps there could be blue badge exceptions for those unable to get themselves there.

chris_bass

might hit rural pubs and shops too, if there is no passing traffic at all then they wouldn't get any extra trade

slowbike

Chris Bass wrote:

might hit rural pubs and shops too, if there is no passing traffic at all then they wouldn't get any extra trade

I guess it depends on your area - around here (south) most lanes don't seem to go anywhere in particular and there are a few varieties of B roads - from seemingly major trunk routes to meandering roads that serve as a shortcut for those in the know and for farm traffic to move about.

Pross

Slowbike wrote:

Pross wrote:

Thing is those country lanes are often the only way that some people can access their homes. Also, as soon as you take vehicular traffic out of the equation the local authority would see it as a reason to no longer worry about surfacing the road and it would be left to fall apart (it's happened on some lanes around me even when they do still provide a vehicle access to a couple of properties).

Duh - that was the "except for access" ... quite a common occurrence where we have roads that are width restricted ...

Around here I don't think the LA worry much about resurfacing - anyway, with one reasonable surface to start with, lack of motorised traffic would mean that surface lasts much longer.

Rolf has a point about the lack of road "cleaning" - not something I'd worry too much about if out for a leisurely ride ...

As for making the countryside inaccessible - that's not right - it's still accessible - just not by motorised transport ... perhaps there could be blue badge exceptions for those unable to get themselves there.

It's practically impossible to enforce any restriction as soon as you put in 'except for access'. We have a 7.5t weight limit on the road behind my house 'except for access' but there are regular HGVs going past to the nearby industrial estates or delivering to the local Spar. The cops are not going to stop them all and ask for proof of where they are going and in the middle of nowhere with light vehicles it is even less likely to happen. Besides, why should people be stopped from a leisurely drive in the country just for us to ride our bikes on the public highway without anyone else around? That's the sort of selfish attitude we are so quick to condemn motorists for. If everyone just politely tolerated each other and didn't get stressed out about sharing the space with others the world would be a better place without having to segregate everyone.

slowbike

Except for Access - hmm - yes, I can see why some ppl ignore it ... and they're probably the same sorts of drivers who don't give two hoots about other road users ...

Pross wrote:

Besides, why should people be stopped from a leisurely drive in the country just for us to ride our bikes on the public highway without anyone else around? That's the sort of selfish attitude we are so quick to condemn motorists for. If everyone just politely tolerated each other and didn't get stressed out about sharing the space with others the world would be a better place without having to segregate everyone.

I did say it was idle thought ... best to get the idea bashed to pieces on here

As for selfish attitude - yes and no - yes it is selfish to want peace and quiet, but if that benefits the majority it isn't so selfish is it?
The problem is that "everyone" doesn't politely tolerate each other and in the world of cycling it's usually the car drivers who try and bully the cyclists into conforming to their view ...
In 7 miles return trip from the coffee shop on sunday we had
1 tractor drive at us - arbitrary as to who should've given way first
2 cars hoot as we rode 2abreast down an unclassified road - despite the fact the was plenty of room and opportunity to overtake.
1 car hoot as we were indicating to turn right at a T junction in a residential road - we weren't even stopped. He said it was a mistake, but I think that's just because he was worried I was about to punch him (I wasn't - I do verbal, not physical)
Ok - we had a good number of drivers that did pass us sensibly and equally we did go single file where it was appropriate - but those 4 that did try and bully us could be the reason that less confident people don't ride.

Pross

Try moving somewhere nicer

simona75

Round my way we have a few roads designated as "quiet lanes" where drivers are encouraged/reminded to share the roads with cyclists/walkers/horse riders. I think its something promoted by the CPRE and was taken from what they do on the Channel Islands.

Its nothing more than a few subtle signs and there is no statutory change in rights of way but I have noticed that attitudes seem to be a bit more giving on these lanes than others. The council also seem to resurface these to a better standard than the others (real asphalt as opposed to surface dressing)

Initialised

Slowbike wrote:

Perhaps we should look at introducing some Green Lanes on the mainland - roads where vehicles are banned unless they have business along that stretch, speed limits are low and motorists expectations are changed.

We do have these, Cycleways (mostly railways that got Beechinged), Public Bridleways and restricted access roads (red circle, motorbike and car usually except for access).

Sustrans have a map showing lots of them: http://www.sustrans.org.uk/ncn/map plenty of these routes will have stretches where you might want to get off and carry a road bike but they are mostly hardpack or tarmac.

For more detailed info on bridleways and roads I use OSMaps on my phone, often it'll show you roads/paths you wouldn't otherwise find.

North of the (Scottish) border the right to roam is now in force meaning your can ride pretty much anywhere without having to worry if it's 'just' a foot path. While I can't advocate treating English and Welsh footpaths like this who is going to call the cops if you're not a tw4t, slow down and get out of the way of walkers and dog users? Most of the time who is going to even see you? Oh, you ran over someone's dog, foot, child and it's on your Strava, and that's your real name and you don't have a privacy zone set up so they can trace your address?

StillGoing

One of the daftest ideas I've read on here. The road infrastructure was built for everyone if adopted by the local authority. What gives cyclists any preference over motorised transport in rural areas? The fact that sections from cycling and motorised transport can't fathom out a way to use the road network in a mutually satisfactory and beneficial way doesn't mean one section should have exclusive use. Yes there are dickheads in cars and on motorcycles, but there are dickheads on pushbikes and horseback and walking dogs. Deny access to motorised transport and pretty soon the highways department will stop mainaining the road, farmers will stop clipping their Hawthorn edges allowing them to grow over the road, no one will be clearing up all the sheep, cow, or pig crap let alone the mud off of tractor wheels, fly tipping would get worse with no need for roads policing on rural roads and the chances of you being found in the event you've had a bad off would be diminished with no passing motorists. So no thanks, give me mutual use of rural roads thank you.

slowbike

simona75 wrote:

Round my way we have a few roads designated as "quiet lanes" where drivers are encouraged/reminded to share the roads with cyclists/walkers/horse riders. I think its something promoted by the CPRE and was taken from what they do on the Channel Islands.

Its nothing more than a few subtle signs and there is no statutory change in rights of way but I have noticed that attitudes seem to be a bit more giving on these lanes than others. The council also seem to resurface these to a better standard than the others (real asphalt as opposed to surface dressing)

Hmm - that's interesting - where abouts is this?

slowbike

philthy3 wrote:

One of the daftest ideas I've read on here.
whaffle whaffle whaffle

Well - your whaffle is based on your opinion which is no more valid than mine - yet we have some instances where this sort of thing has been implemented and seems to be working ...

Personally I try and base my opinion on fact - but don't let that stop you ...

markhewitt1978

Slowbike wrote:

simona75 wrote:

Round my way we have a few roads designated as "quiet lanes" where drivers are encouraged/reminded to share the roads with cyclists/walkers/horse riders. I think its something promoted by the CPRE and was taken from what they do on the Channel Islands.

Its nothing more than a few subtle signs and there is no statutory change in rights of way but I have noticed that attitudes seem to be a bit more giving on these lanes than others. The council also seem to resurface these to a better standard than the others (real asphalt as opposed to surface dressing)

Hmm - that's interesting - where abouts is this?

Like this one http://goo.gl/maps/5tE1E thing is in this case, it's not particularly different from surrounding roads, except for regular signs as shown in the picture, and every few hundred metres next to the sign there is a set of unpainted rumble strips, which make it hellish to ride on, so I tend to avoid it.

simona75

Slowbike wrote:

simona75 wrote:

Round my way we have a few roads designated as "quiet lanes" where drivers are encouraged/reminded to share the roads with cyclists/walkers/horse riders. I think its something promoted by the CPRE and was taken from what they do on the Channel Islands.

Its nothing more than a few subtle signs and there is no statutory change in rights of way but I have noticed that attitudes seem to be a bit more giving on these lanes than others. The council also seem to resurface these to a better standard than the others (real asphalt as opposed to surface dressing)

Hmm - that's interesting - where abouts is this?

The ones I've seen are around Buckleberry in West Berkshire. This is quite a well to do area so I imagine it's been done for the horses rather than cyclists....,

StillGoing

Slowbike wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

One of the daftest ideas I've read on here.
whaffle whaffle whaffle

Well - your whaffle is based on your opinion which is no more valid than mine - yet we have some instances where this sort of thing has been implemented and seems to be working ...

Personally I try and base my opinion on fact - but don't let that stop you ...

Come on the post did explain why. It isn't an attack on you, but I do think it is a daft idea. You still have some way to go though before you're ready for government.

slowbike

philthy3 wrote:

Slowbike wrote:

philthy3 wrote:

One of the daftest ideas I've read on here.
whaffle whaffle whaffle

Well - your whaffle is based on your opinion which is no more valid than mine - yet we have some instances where this sort of thing has been implemented and seems to be working ...

Personally I try and base my opinion on fact - but don't let that stop you ...

Come on the post did explain why. It isn't an attack on you, but I do think it is a daft idea. You still have some way to go though before you're ready for government.

your explanation was based on conjecture ... inadmissible in court ...

btw - you wouldn't want me in government ... I'd have everyone shot ...

StillGoing

Gets my vote.