trsleigh said:
I think Tubbs illustrates a problem we have in trying to get rid of cycle lanes. To beginners, or infrequent cyclists, they can seem a wonderful safety measure, & really re-assuring the council is doing something for cyclists and to be used for your own safety. It takes a while & a fair few miles to come to realise thaat they are, maybe counterintuitively, a regressive step for cyclist safety.
I wish they could all be painted out now.
Aye, that is a problem. I can certainly understand why new cyclists or non-cyclists could think that they are helpful and useful. In fact I am sure that more cycle lanes do encourage more cyclists. This in itself is great. However, the downside to this is that it teaches those new cyclists poor road skills (i.e. it is ok to cycle 1 foot away from parked cars etc).
I really think it is time that councils are forced to face up to their responsibilities in this regard. Should a cyclist get injured whilst using a cycle lane that has been poorly designed, the councils should be held responsible for some of the compensation.
In fact, has this ever happened? Has a council ever been found negligent in its design of a cycle lane, or indeed in it's design of a road?
What would the legal situation be if a cyclist was doored in a lane that encouraged them to cycle close to parked cars?