Mate got hit by car, mrs not keen on me cycling anymore...

[mjr]

I don't agree with the "painted lines" bit. Boundaries are a part of society and written in the rule of law. Without lines talk of bike lanes is codswallop.

I think the argument is that kerbs or posts are needed, for various reasons including that they are a bigger deterrent to motorists and a bigger deterrent to the sort of councils that paint gutter lanes.

 

[confusedcyclist]

Separation doesn't eliminate the risk of crashes, it just gives a false sense of security and encourages inattentiveness. Anyone riding a bike should be exercising extreme caution all the time there is anyone/anything in the vicinity that you could have a coming together with. Doesn't matter if it's a motor vehicle, a pedestrian, a dog, another cyclist or something like an overhanging branch or a bit of bush sticking out into the path you are on. If you come into contact with any of them, they can have you off the bike and dump you straight on the ground.

The point of segregation isn't to eliminate absolutely all accidents. We can't eliminate extreme accidents such as HGV drivers having a heart attack at the wheel, shunting cars that subsequently serve or roll into you, incinerating you whilst the fuel tanks explode. Rather, the point of separation is to eliminate the more mundane everyday dangers that contribute to 98% of our population not riding bikes for transport, such as basic and avoidable conflicts like unsafe overtakes, motorists pulling in/out of junctions without considering cyclists in the roadway. If inattentive motorist don't have to evade cyclists sharing the roads because that conflict simply doesn't exist, then the insidious & risky behaviours of motorists becomes largely moot. No one is suggesting we shouldn't try, but if we come to the realisation we can't stop 100% of our motorists taking risks or being distracted by asking nicely, or threatening them with fines and enforcement, then we need infrastructure that minimises that risk. Places that adopt well designed segregated cycling and walking infra don't have increased modal shares for nothing.

Your concern about infrastructure encouraging inattentiveness might be misplaced. Humans are subconscious risk calculators. It's what we do, instinctively and without thinking. Admittedly, some people are better at this than others, sadly inattentiveness is just another part of being an imperfect and fallible human being. Even if humans quantitatively reduce their internalised risk assessments when riding on segregated infrastructure, it's more likely than not going to be the result of successfully mitigating their risk of harm, so why should that be a reason not to adopt safer infrastructure?

Force me to share a path with an inattentive cyclists or pedestrian any day over sharing the road with inattentive motorists wielding >2 tonne steel machines, the risks of conflict that arises between the two are not and never have been comparable.

 

[classic33]

I think the argument is that kerbs or posts are needed, for various reasons including that they are a bigger deterrent to motorists and a bigger deterrent to the sort of councils that paint gutter lanes.

Posts just give you something extra to avoid, narrowing the lane.

Segregated cycle lanes can be seen as just another hoop to have to jump through in order to alay someone else's fears for your safety.

 

[Johnno260]

Some of the most pointless local to me is in T Wells, it's a share ped/cycle path, you have to stop for every drive way, and people just walk all over making in dangerous.

You then get screamed at by motorists for using the road when it's actually safer, and the traffic on that road is usually moving at a crawl anyway, I have had people in a car move closer to the curb to block or pinch me.

 

[mjr]

Posts just give you something extra to avoid, narrowing the lane.

If that matters, then the lane is too narrow anyway.

Segregated cycle lanes can be seen as just another hoop to have to jump through in order to alay someone else's fears for your safety.

If it involves jumping through hoops or any other kind of obstacle, then it's a crap design and should be fixed. There should be no need to compel, encourage or harass people into using them because they should be obviously better than riding among heavy vehicles.

Some of the most pointless local to me is in T Wells, it's a share ped/cycle path, you have to stop for every drive way, and people just walk all over making in dangerous.

Now, I'm sure it's crap, but stop for every drive way, really? I don't believe the Transport Minister would sign off on so many stop lines (and they do have to) and it's surprising if even a pretty crap local government authorised and built a cycleway where every driveway junction was that blind.

You then get screamed at by motorists for using the road when it's actually safer, and the traffic on that road is usually moving at a crawl anyway, I have had people in a car move closer to the curb to block or pinch me.

Motorists do all that shoot anyway. They're upset to be moving at a crawl instead of the lie of carefree fast-flowing travel sold by car adverts. I've been shouted at to get on the cycle path where there isn't one. I've even had drivers shout at me to get on the road when I've been using a kerbed cycleway, possibly because they found the kerb between us too much of a deterrent to driving at me... so many are just angry. I wouldn't be surprised if the ragers didn't even know which side of the road the cycleway was.

 

[Drago]

We don't need white lines. We don't need kerbs or bollards. What we need is for all road users to treat each other with respect, and for anyone who does not do so to be ruthlessly and permanently removed from behind the wheel.

 

[confusedcyclist]

Yes, but in the real world where we don't live in a tyrannical CCTV surveillance state, or one with unlimited resources for road policing a great many are getting away with murder. We don't live in a small scale community where everyone knows everyone, I guess I don't need to remind you some don't care much for fellow countrymen. We might rely on self control in a small community where there would be real repercussions within the community for mistreating your kin on our roads. (Ideally with hangings and quarterings, or if we are feeling more civilised, exiled from the tribe with the likely consequence of starvation or being preyed upon by larger mammals). In our larger more anonymous society, even with number plates, we can't realistically expect everyone to follow all the rules all the time, so we need to improve on elemetns of all of the above, and a sensible approach to infrastructure can be part of that tool kit to keep us safe and encourage more people out onto bikes. If we expect people to mix with motors driven by idiots, then we can realistically expect an intolerable number of deaths and injury and very low modal shares, as we see today. I don't doubt the numbers would be far worse if 98% of us hadn't been frightened off our bikes on our roads and into cars, buses or trains. The idiots won't disappear no matter how hard we wish them to, invariably many will still get behind the wheel even with revoked licenses (I would personally reserve the ritual hangings for them folk.)

 

[matticus]

... and a sensible approach to infrastructure can be part of that tool kit to keep us safe and encourage more people out onto bikes

Agreed. But the devil is in the detail; it would be remiss to ignore either
changes to culture (either through education, or enforcement), or
the more subtle physical changes e.g. LTNs aren't separated infrastructure, but can make a huge improvement for bu99er-all spend
(and junction improvements, which I can't put into a few short words :P )

 

[HMS_Dave]

Australian police are armed but about 2 police officers are killed a year. Way more cyclists are killed each year by other road users so in my mind, arm the cyclist and swing the balance!

 

[confusedcyclist]

Agreed. But the devil is in the detail; it would be remiss to ignore either
changes to culture (either through education, or enforcement), or
the more subtle physical changes e.g. LTNs aren't separated infrastructure, but can make a huge improvement for bu99er-all spend
(and junction improvements, which I can't put into a few short words :P )

Indeed. We desperately need a decentralised, bottom up, systems thinking approach to organising transport, food and work, rather than that worn out 20th century, centralised, motor-centric, command and control design. That would be one hell of a culture change. LTNs are definitely part of the picture.

 

[Johnno260]

Now, I'm sure it's crap, but stop for every drive way, really? I don't believe the Transport Minister would sign off on so many stop lines (and they do have to) and it's surprising if even a pretty crap local government authorised and built a cycleway where every driveway junction was that blind

You have several side roads that join and a private road, there are also 3 maybe 4 driveways to residential home and some other private roads/businesses but each one has a drop curb so it’s constant start stop it’s horrible poor design.

 

[Drago]

Australian police are armed but about 2 police officers are killed a year. Way more cyclists are killed each year by other road users so in my mind, arm the cyclist and swing the balance!

You got my vote. Dillon Aero M134 for me please.

 

[classic33]

If that matters, then the lane is too narrow anyway.

If it involves jumping through hoops or any other kind of obstacle, then it's a crap design and should be fixed. There should be no need to compel, encourage or harass people into using them because they should be obviously better than riding among heavy vehicles.

Another hoop(seperate facilities required), your own definition, along with possible helmet and Hi-Vis use to be jumped through in order to alay someone else's fears for your safety in carrying on cycling after an accident.

I just hope @ishaqmir, the OP, has returned to cycling/been able to continue cycling since he posted this, 13th January 2020. Over a year ago now.

 

[Cycling_Samurai]

Some of the most pointless local to me is in T Wells, it's a share ped/cycle path, you have to stop for every drive way, and people just walk all over making in dangerous.

You then get screamed at by motorists for using the road when it's actually safer, and the traffic on that road is usually moving at a crawl anyway, I have had people in a car move closer to the curb to block or pinch me.

Exactly. Pedestrian traffic and bike do not mix. I've witnessed many a car pinch the side even when the signs say share the road.

 

[al78]

Reminds me of what my old physics teacher said. If lightening never strikes twice, then lightening conductors would not be very effective after the first strike.

https://www.reconnectwithnature.org...-buster-lightning-can-strike-same-place-twice