Which was which?
Non-cyclists views on cycle paths/lanes
- Thread starter GrasB
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
Richard Mann
Well-Known Member
- Location
- Oxford
The study by John Parkin and Ciaran Meyers rather confirmed my view: identifiable differences (closer passes with a cycle lane) at higher speeds, nothing significant observable at 30mph (too much variation for other reasons).
Pete's report identifed closer passes with a cycle lane, but omitted to mention the closer passes were on the higher speed section of the road.
There was talk of CTC sponsoring some more research, but I haven't heard anything further.
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372275, member: 45"]Shame. If you did visit you'd see how wonderful it is for being traffic-free.[/quote]
It isn't traffic free, it is full of buses and cyclists. I know what a town centre is like which has had this done, and you still can't walk onto the road without looking in both directions for one or the other for fear of one or the other running into or over you.
It isn't traffic free, it is full of buses and cyclists. I know what a town centre is like which has had this done, and you still can't walk onto the road without looking in both directions for one or the other for fear of one or the other running into or over you.
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372280, member: 45"]And when you're done, have a proper think about this boldy bit.
As for your last sentence, many of us excel on the roads in the midst of these facilities. If we can, you can.[/quote]
Every time a vehicle passes you, there is a measurable risk that you might either end up getting pushed into the verge or run over by it....why would you want to double that risk with the same vehicle by playing cat and mouse with it over and over ?
As for your last sentence, many of us excel on the roads in the midst of these facilities. If we can, you can.[/quote]
Every time a vehicle passes you, there is a measurable risk that you might either end up getting pushed into the verge or run over by it....why would you want to double that risk with the same vehicle by playing cat and mouse with it over and over ?
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372546, member: 45"]So a town centre with some bikes and buses is worse to walk around than a centre with some bikes and buses and a load of cars?
Think again.[/quote]
Absolutely...your card is marked if you get run over by a bus, and if you are visually impaired person who can't move that quickly, you risk stepping into the path of a rapidly moving cyclist who may not appreciate that you can't see or hear them coming..
Think again.[/quote]
Absolutely...your card is marked if you get run over by a bus, and if you are visually impaired person who can't move that quickly, you risk stepping into the path of a rapidly moving cyclist who may not appreciate that you can't see or hear them coming..
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372554, member: 45"]No, you've not thought. Instead you've changed the perspective from driver to cyclist.
Try again. And then have a go at the new bold above.
I'm wondering whether you even realise what's ingrained in your mindset.[/quote]
Hey, I'm back commuting by motorcycle for the summer now (unless it snows) as well as taking the cycle out when I get the time. I like all other 2 wheelers are vulnerable to large vehicles overtaking or cutting across my path on junctions.
You need to appreciate that most drivers when in a 30 limit want to do this..this is the reality of the roads and driver mentality. Cyclists and motorcyclists are very much in the minority on the roads, and more than 95% of the miles done in the UK are under motor power....get over it
Try again. And then have a go at the new bold above.
I'm wondering whether you even realise what's ingrained in your mindset.[/quote]
Hey, I'm back commuting by motorcycle for the summer now (unless it snows) as well as taking the cycle out when I get the time. I like all other 2 wheelers are vulnerable to large vehicles overtaking or cutting across my path on junctions.
You need to appreciate that most drivers when in a 30 limit want to do this..this is the reality of the roads and driver mentality. Cyclists and motorcyclists are very much in the minority on the roads, and more than 95% of the miles done in the UK are under motor power....get over it
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372572, member: 45"]Then you're still bonkers after all these years....[/quote]
So you know nobody who is frail, with poor hearing and vision who might feel unsafe in a shared space environment like the centre of Oxford, where they might put themselves in mortal danger by using the road surfaces which are still available for buses and fast moving cyclists ?
Let's not kid ourselves, there are plenty of cyclists who don't back off to sensible speeds when passing pedestrians on cycle paths...what makes you think that Oxford is any different to where you or I live ?
So you know nobody who is frail, with poor hearing and vision who might feel unsafe in a shared space environment like the centre of Oxford, where they might put themselves in mortal danger by using the road surfaces which are still available for buses and fast moving cyclists ?
Let's not kid ourselves, there are plenty of cyclists who don't back off to sensible speeds when passing pedestrians on cycle paths...what makes you think that Oxford is any different to where you or I live ?
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372582, member: 45"]"Motorists who have to pass the same riders over and over again."
Think about it. They don't. If they're passing them again and again then there's no point as it's not getting them anywhere. So it's unnecessary, and they're choosing to bring unnecessary risk.
"which encourages them to take needless risks"
No it doesn't. See above. Every action on the road is completely under the driver's direction.
"playing cat and mouse with"
It's not a game.
It doesn't need to get any more complicated than what's written here. Unfortunately, you're about to make it so....[/quote]
So rather that stay with the traffic when the lights are red or the traffic has slowed you want to force your way to the front on every junctions because some fool in the council has decided it would be a good idea to paint ASL's there ?....mad!!!
Think about it. They don't. If they're passing them again and again then there's no point as it's not getting them anywhere. So it's unnecessary, and they're choosing to bring unnecessary risk.
"which encourages them to take needless risks"
No it doesn't. See above. Every action on the road is completely under the driver's direction.
"playing cat and mouse with"
It's not a game.
It doesn't need to get any more complicated than what's written here. Unfortunately, you're about to make it so....[/quote]
So rather that stay with the traffic when the lights are red or the traffic has slowed you want to force your way to the front on every junctions because some fool in the council has decided it would be a good idea to paint ASL's there ?....mad!!!
Linford
Guest
[QUOTE 2372586, member: 45"]So you're also now saying that's just the way it is, we create the problem, drivers are mental and we've just got to get over it.
If you link what you're saying here with the language you're using, and the agenda suggested by your nonsensical moaning about cars being banned from town centres, it starts to get a bit uncomfortable.[/quote]
I know you are happy to use the pavements to cycle where you think it is safe for you to do so...we have done this before..you are hardly in a position to criticise the mindset of others.
I ride defensively...that means treating every other vehicle user like they are idiots, and looking to take me out. That is why I'm still riding a motorbike 30 years year in, year out after taking my test.
If you link what you're saying here with the language you're using, and the agenda suggested by your nonsensical moaning about cars being banned from town centres, it starts to get a bit uncomfortable.[/quote]
I know you are happy to use the pavements to cycle where you think it is safe for you to do so...we have done this before..you are hardly in a position to criticise the mindset of others.
I ride defensively...that means treating every other vehicle user like they are idiots, and looking to take me out. That is why I'm still riding a motorbike 30 years year in, year out after taking my test.
deptfordmarmoset
Full time tea drinker
- Location
- Armonmy Way
And yet, good drivers soon learn the senselessness of pointless passes just to get 2 seconds earlier at the traffic queue. Indignant drivers don't learn this but 99% of their stress comes from the sheer weight of traffic.
atomheartfather
New Member
[QUOTE 2372979, member: 45"]In my town (don't tell linf where it is) there's more of the wide pavement that is shared use than isn't (all in a fair few places). The signage is dotted around randomly but it doesn't tell you where any of it begins or ends. If you join a wide pavement at some points you could ride for a while before you see a sign.
And the ambiguity continues because with shared use there are no white lines. So pedestrians don't know what is and what isn't either. And it really doesn't matter. It's not a problem because no-one complains on either side. People just continue to get around. There is one small section on private land which is a regular on the letters page with the odd complaint (usually by those who don't appreciate that the great system we have makes the roads better for them) but that's officially shared anyway. The council are happy with the way things are because it's accepted and the community is pretty much self-regulating. And it means that, amongst other scenarios, parents can cycle with their children to work alongside toddlers on walking bikes.
In Birmingham, the signed shared use in places contradicts that marks on maps. And no-one is bothered.
The fact that it's ambiguous shows that it's not a problem for anyone apart from internet cycle warriors and a few blokes with hairy nostrils. It's about attitude rather than physical problems.[/quote]
In my town (try and guess) there have been cycle paths for years and years, and they're becoming clapped out and badly in need of attention. What's more they were built decades ago when fewer people cycled. For some strange reason, today loads of cyclists use them, so they're really not wide enough.
About 15 years ago, the first cycle warriors appeared (they didn't use the internet then), demanding that an obscure law that forced cyclists to use these crappy cycle paths was scrapped. They succeeded. But strangely, 95% of cyclists carried on using the crappy cycle paths. The cycle warriors declared that these cyclists were just "ignorant" of the law, and if they only knew, they would cycle on the nice smooth road. What's more, they started citing studies that suggested that the road was "objectively safer" than any cycle path. Cyclists simply needed "educating" and they would realise the error of their ways.
Well it all came to a head last year when a long road was being dug up to replace the mains sewer under it. The now internet cycle warriors thought this was a great chance to get rid of the stupid old cycle path altogether. They persuaded the council to do so, got a sign put up at each end of the road saying "cycle street", and replacing the cycle path with a big, smooth, wide, pavement. It will interesting to see how our "ignorant" cyclists react.
And the ambiguity continues because with shared use there are no white lines. So pedestrians don't know what is and what isn't either. And it really doesn't matter. It's not a problem because no-one complains on either side. People just continue to get around. There is one small section on private land which is a regular on the letters page with the odd complaint (usually by those who don't appreciate that the great system we have makes the roads better for them) but that's officially shared anyway. The council are happy with the way things are because it's accepted and the community is pretty much self-regulating. And it means that, amongst other scenarios, parents can cycle with their children to work alongside toddlers on walking bikes.
In Birmingham, the signed shared use in places contradicts that marks on maps. And no-one is bothered.
The fact that it's ambiguous shows that it's not a problem for anyone apart from internet cycle warriors and a few blokes with hairy nostrils. It's about attitude rather than physical problems.[/quote]
In my town (try and guess) there have been cycle paths for years and years, and they're becoming clapped out and badly in need of attention. What's more they were built decades ago when fewer people cycled. For some strange reason, today loads of cyclists use them, so they're really not wide enough.
About 15 years ago, the first cycle warriors appeared (they didn't use the internet then), demanding that an obscure law that forced cyclists to use these crappy cycle paths was scrapped. They succeeded. But strangely, 95% of cyclists carried on using the crappy cycle paths. The cycle warriors declared that these cyclists were just "ignorant" of the law, and if they only knew, they would cycle on the nice smooth road. What's more, they started citing studies that suggested that the road was "objectively safer" than any cycle path. Cyclists simply needed "educating" and they would realise the error of their ways.
Well it all came to a head last year when a long road was being dug up to replace the mains sewer under it. The now internet cycle warriors thought this was a great chance to get rid of the stupid old cycle path altogether. They persuaded the council to do so, got a sign put up at each end of the road saying "cycle street", and replacing the cycle path with a big, smooth, wide, pavement. It will interesting to see how our "ignorant" cyclists react.
wiggydiggy
Guru
Which road is this? Has motorised traffic being banned from the street and its now cycling only? Or is it all shared?
atomheartfather
New Member
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Humb...d=l2zI1OwSuRwbAZRQ4S1uEw&cbp=12,89.53,,0,4.73
The road will be shared. Also in a 30kph zone.
The concept of a "cycle street" is an interesting one, but the rules vary from country to country. Apparently Belgium have just changed theirs, making it illegal for motorised traffic to overtake cyclists. Here, there is no such law at present. But safety obviously also depends on how much traffic there is. At present this street has around 8,000 cyclists and 8,000 motorists per day.
