Cycle lanes and paths - the downsides?

[mr_cellophane]

Careful of those. They're often far too close to the parked cars and increase your chances of getting "doored" when someone gets out of their car without realising a cyclist is going past.

Its happened to me twice and is not fun. Spent a good couple of weeks picking stones out of my hands afterwards.

I stay well out from parked cars now, even if the cycle lanes suggest otherwise.

Should have added
Road with Cl next to kerb is full of parked cars, road with CL outside parking "area" never seems to have so many cars parked. But that might just be because I get there later.

 

[Bman]

Sorry, but pedestrians have just as much right to use the cycle path as you do. The cycle path markings merely show where you are allowed to cycle, they don't place any restriction on the pedestrians. 40mph is completely inappropriate for a shared use path- if you want to go that fast then stay on the road. You might want to read this.

What your post illustrates is another bad aspect of that sort of cycle path- they introduce the attitudes of the highway environment into space that was previously solely for pedestrians, with cyclists treating pedestrians in exactly the same way that bullying drivers treat cyclists...

That link doesnt really apply to my post. I was referring to two-way cycletracks. not shared paths. I mention 40mph only as the law states (IIRC) that a two way cycletrack shares the same speed limit as the highway situated parallel to it. I can just about manage 30mph downhill! 40mph is a bit beyond my capabilities. I suggested the marking only as awareness to pedestrians.

To clarify, I’m talking about a layout where, there is a dual carriageway, with a 40mph limit. Parallel to that is a 3-4 meter wide Cycletrack and parallel to that, is a 1.5meter pavement, each separated with a grass verge at least half a meter wide.

My main concern/gripe is that the people you find on these cycletracks, would not think about behaving the same way on the dual carriageway.

 

[jonesy]

That link doesnt really apply to my post. I was referring to two-way cycletracks. not shared paths. I mention 40mph only as the law states (IIRC) that a two way cycletrack shares the same speed limit as the highway situated parallel to it. I can just about manage 30mph downhill! 40mph is a bit beyond my capabilities. I suggested the marking only as awareness to pedestrians.

To clarify, I’m talking about a layout where, there is a dual carriageway, with a 40mph limit. Parallel to that is a 3-4 meter wide Cycletrack and parallel to that, is a 1.5meter pavement, each separated with a grass verge at least half a meter wide.

My main concern/gripe is that the people you find on these cycletracks, would not think about behaving the same way on the dual carriageway.

The link does apply: the cycle path you describe is still separate from the carriageway, so is shared-use with pedestrians, even if there is also a separate pedestrians only path. The speed limit on the road has nothing to do with the shared path next to it. It is perfectly reasonable for pedestrians not to treat the cycle path as a dual carriageway, because it is not part of the dual carriageway.

I'd add that this layout, with verge segregation and separate paths is vastly preferable to a simple shared use pavement, but it doesn't change the legal right of pedestrians to use either path. You'd try to use good design, signs etc to encourage pedestrians to stay off the cycle path, but it isn't a road for cyclists.

 

[Bman]

The link does apply: the cycle path you describe is still separate from the carriageway, so is shared-use with pedestrians, even if there is also a separate pedestrians only path. The speed limit on the road has nothing to do with the shared path next to it. It is perfectly reasonable for pedestrians not to treat the cycle path as a dual carriageway, because it is not part of the dual carriageway.

I'd add that this layout, with verge segregation and separate paths is vastly preferable to a simple shared use pavement, but it doesn't change the legal right of pedestrians to use either path. You'd try to use good design, signs etc to encourage pedestrians to stay off the cycle path, but it isn't a road for cyclists.

I stand corrected.

The Highway Code:
Pavements (including any path along the side of a road) should be used if provided.

No, "Must not" there. So following that. Its perfectly legal for pedestrians to use the 40mph Dual Carrageway too? After all, its not a motorway.

In light of this. I think that is the issue. IMO, if there is a pedestrian pavement, that *must* be used.

 

[Bman]

Luckily, I dont cycle this route!

 

[jonesy]

I stand corrected.



No, "Must not" there. So following that. Its perfectly legal for pedestrians to use the 40mph Dual Carrageway too? After all, its not a motorway.


In light of this. I think that is the issue. IMO, if there is a pedestrian pavement, that *must* be used.

No, that is simply wrong. All that HC quote tells us is that you shouldn't walk in the road (i.e. on the carriageway/ in the vehicle lanes) if a pavement or any path is provided. The cycle path is 'any path' as far as pedestrians are concerned. If pedestrians weren't allowed to walk in them then that's what the HC would say, but it doesn't.

 

[Bman]

The point I was trying to make was, the HC doesnt specifically forbid pedestrians using the road either. It suggests/advises to use "any path along the side of a road" which I agree with you, probably does include a cycletrack if it exists.

However, the absence of a "Must" suggests to me that there is no law preventing pedestrians walking wherever they like (excluding motorways).

So basically. I am either forced to slow down to near walking speed on the cycletracks, or take my chances going 15-20mph on the same road as traffic travelling 40mph.

 

[summerdays]

There is one cycle path that I sometimes use that runs next to the ring road. It has nice stretches inbetween the junctions. One of the problems I find with it is that where paths (across bridges etc) join it, there is lots of high vegetation which means the visibility is extremely limited for both those on the path or joining it.

 

[summerdays]

One of my other main gripes about off road cycle paths is they normally come with a set of matching obstercles (sorry I can't think how to spell it close enough to get the spelling dictionary to suggest that word). Those barriers that have not be designed for cyclists - try getting through one with panniers on your bike, or have a trailer or non standard bike.

I know they are there to serve a purpose but they don't do the job they are meant to do which is let bicycles pass easily and prevent motorbikes.

 

[snorri]

Local authorities seem unwilling to construct cycle facilities to meet the approved design standards, seemingly believing that an inferior facility is better than no facility at all, a false premise I would say.

 

[Bodhbh]

It seems to be the thing to say, but there's no denying it they're less than useless and outright bizzare most of the time.

Not sure if I'm getting the terminology right tho. That's cycle lanes on the road. Some dedicated cycle paths are pretty useful. One here in Watford goes straight thru the pedestrianised high street short cutting the ring road and saving alot of stress (okay so peds always walking on it but that's no biggie at least it estabilishes you have some right to be there). There's also a good 6 mile track you can commute into town on which also makes for an easy ride in the morning if you cba with the traffic - wish they were more of these.

 

[Woz!]

One big problem with the paths is that the planners simply don't have an understanding of the speeds that cycles can travel. In my home town (Bracknell) we have some very good cycle paths some of which take you under dangerous roundabouts or junctions, making them very useful indeed. The problem is that almost without exception they have dangerous blind corners on them so approaching any any speed is risky.

My other main gripe with the 'afterthought' type path is that the cyclist always takes second place to the car. So, through Wokingham they have painted the typical shared path lines on the footpath, which means that any cyclist who uses the path rather than the road will lose right of way at all junctions. From the cyclist's perspective there's no benefit to using these paths as they LOSE rights and can't travel as fast in addition being closer to people reversing out of their drives without looking.

 

[Amanda P]

I find it quite insulting that someone builds a brand-new off-road bike path, and then puts up obstacles at intervals along its length.

These are supposed to deter motorcyclists, but they do a pretty good job of deterring me too - especially if I'm hauling a heavy trailer which won't fit through!

 

[killiekosmos]

There are lots of issues:

(1) Local authorities generally don't consider cycling as a mainstram transport option so they make token gestures (a few cycle stands, a bit of cycle path, a cycle week etc)towards cycling but little in a co-ordinated way to encourage regular cycle use
(2) On-road cycle lanes are OK but do tend to be narrow, poorly maintained, parked on by motorists. In my town they have them on dual carriageways (30mph) outside of parking bays, so you watch for doors hitting you on the left and traffic on the right. When in doubt I don't ride in them.
(3) off -road paths can be very good or very bad. Rural ones around here are good - usually follow old railway lines and have proper surfaces. Used by joggers, dog-walkers, horses etc generally in harmony. The bad ones are in town where its just a bit of shared pavement. This means you are bottom of the heap, having to give way to motorists and peds. A few round here also require 360 degree vision to check for vehicles on all sides. Often just a few yards long too.

 

[PC_Arcade]

Cycle paths in Oxford are generally ok, however there's on in particular (Rose hill, running parallel to the A34) where it seems a car / motorcycle is burnt out at a rate of at least one a week which means there's LOTS of glass, charred metal, springs etc.

Which means LOTS of pu***ures

The deterrent to cars isn't there at all at one end, and the other end is cycle unfriendly as you have to slow dramatically to go past a gate.