Poll: Poll pls: In the presence of a dedicated cycle lane, should cyclists be allowed to use the roads?

[hornetstinger]

No its for Bicycles.

Tell that to the people on the cycle path I'd slam into at 25mph.

 

[grudas]

Oh how opinions would change if all were told to ride a bicycle for a week to work in a busy city. Segregated lanes in London are used so much by cyclists that it is proving everyone that it is the way to do cycle lanes. Paint on the road or shared paths will never work and IMO just increase the danger for cyclists and pedestrians.

 

[Minstadave]

Tell that to the people on the cycle path I'd slam into at 25mph.

Limit cyclists to 5mph and only to cycle paths, job jobbed. No risk to pedestrians, no cyclists slowing down the roads because they are too pro to be slowed down or cross junctions.

The "elite cyclist" mentality is odd - I do 25mph I couldn't possibly use a cycle path, I'll just use the road and slow down all the cars - but they're not entitled to complain about it.

 

[hornetstinger]

hahaha.

Or set a minimum speed limit for pedastrians. 20mph.

 

[SexyGreyFox]

Limit cyclists to 5mph and only to cycle paths, job jobbed. No risk to pedestrians, no cyclists slowing down the roads because they are too pro to be slowed down or cross junctions.

The "elite cyclist" mentality is odd - I do 25mph I couldn't possibly use a cycle path, I'll just use the road and slow down all the cars - but they're not entitled to complain about it.

I go out driving most days and I can honestly say the only people who slow me down are other motorists. You must live in a very strange place. It is one of the reasons I started cycling because motorists slow me down.
I'm going out now and I'll bet my guitar collection that not one cyclist bothers me where the rest of the road will be full of crap motorists.

 

[Jamauk]

I think in the presence of a cycle lane, if safe the cyclist should have to use it, but who determines if it's safe or not so that would be impossible to enforce. I also think that cyclists need more rules against them, just basic safety things - made to wear a helmet, perhaps a high vis jacket, lights for when it's dark, etc. I've lost count of the number of times I've seen cyclists when its dark with no lights, its just bloody dangerous. Another I encountered a couple of weeks ago was one who was swerving all over the place, and the reason for it was he didn't have his hands on the handlebars and when I got past I noticed it was because he was presumably texting someone on his phone.

The problem from a police point of view though is that because there is no registration on bikes, or licence for cyclists it's completely unenforceable, so whilst the police may stop them and tell them off, AFAIK that's all they can do.

 

[Kuros]

Problem is so many roads are knackered, both for cars and roads.

I've seen so many cycle lanes with potholes bigger than an actual bike tyre, yet they don't get maintained as it comes out of a different budget, one would think.

 

[RoboCod]

Limit cyclists to 5mph and only to cycle paths, job jobbed. No risk to pedestrians, no cyclists slowing down the roads because they are too pro to be slowed down or cross junctions.

The "elite cyclist" mentality is odd - I do 25mph I couldn't possibly use a cycle path, I'll just use the road and slow down all the cars - but they're not entitled to complain about it.

Limit cars to 20mph everywhere.

 

[Conscript]

The "elite cyclist" mentality is odd - I do 25mph I couldn't possibly use a cycle path, I'll just use the road and slow down all the cars - but they're not entitled to complain about it.

It's no more odd than your self entitled motorist mentality, where you act like the roads are there purely for the benefit of motorised traffic - "I'm capable of doing 50mph but I couldn't possibly be expected to share the roads with slower vehicles nor to put up with the minor delay I incur while passing them."

Such an attitude was taught to me to be unacceptable whilst learning to drive. If I couldn't accept the fact that part of the privilege of having a driving licence was sharing the roads with slower vehicles, then I shouldn't have applied for one. Yes, slower traffic is annoying, but I find it baffling that instead of just dealing with it like an adult, so many people get so riled up and offended at cyclists using "their" roads.

 

[RoboCod]

I never hear such disdain for horse riders. Imagine posting on here bleating that they shouldn't be in the road holding people up.

 

[Arthur Hucksake]

I never hear such disdain for horse riders. Imagine posting on here bleating that they shouldn't be in the road holding people up.

Horse riders can keep their upper class yuppie hobby to fields and tracks. Most of the time they are either killing foxes or getting in the way.

Speed up when driving past them beeping the horn to make sure they startle and throw the jockey onto the ground. lol

 

[kiteloopy]

Another I encountered a couple of weeks ago was one who was swerving all over the place, and the reason for it was he didn't have his hands on the handlebars and when I got past I noticed it was because he was presumably texting someone on his phone.

....and thats the problem. There are many types of cyclist.

The dude on a knackered mountain bike sending a text message does not does not have the same needs as me on a roadie.

For the record, im happy for a few rules to be put into play. For example, in Belgium, cyclists have to have lights at night or they get fined.

 

[kiteloopy]

In Derby and especially in Notts there have been schemes to build dedicated cycle paths, for safety and traffic benefit.
Why bother if cyclists ignore them? It should be a condition that where the formal cycle zones exist, they should be utilised..
If thew's a problem with the paths themselves, it needs to be raised because we are spending a huge wad on them for no benefit if so

And thats another problem. If the council's worked in conjunction with their local cycle clubs or even British Cycling, I bet they would get some pretty good feedback about what works well and what doesnt. Seems made to just ignore them/us.

If the schemes you mentioned are not being used, sounds like they are just a quota for political flag waving.

 

[Jamauk]

....and thats the problem. There are many types of cyclist.

The dude on a knackered mountain bike sending a text message does not does not have the same needs as me on a roadie.

For the record, im happy for a few rules to be put into play. For example, in Belgium, cyclists have to have lights at night or they get fined.

I understand that fully, and appreciate that not all people driving cars are using their mobile phones, as with anything it's a minority that give something a bad name. The majority of cyclists aren't a nuisance. I really do think imposing fines similar to that of Belgium would be good, however it does seem in recent years particularly like the government has wanted to keep cyclists as a protected species through fear of them putting people off giving up their cars to ride a bike.

 

[FishFluff]

I think most people would agree that's a pretty shonky cycle lane. Makes you wonder why they even bothered to mark it?

To keep people like you happy probably.

 

[Phil99]

I understand that fully, and appreciate that not all people driving cars are using their mobile phones, as with anything it's a minority that give something a bad name. The majority of cyclists aren't a nuisance. I really do think imposing fines similar to that of Belgium would be good, however it does seem in recent years particularly like the government has wanted to keep cyclists as a protected species through fear of them putting people off giving up their cars to ride a bike.

Cyclists can already be fined for no lights at night (Highway code rule #60). In that case the problem is lack of policing rather than lack of rules (a familiar story in terms of many offences committed on the roads).

As others have mentioned already, it seems to be that in a lot of cases cycle infrastructure is just a box ticking exercise that councils can use to say they're doing something.

The common issue with cycle infrastructure is fragmentation. Paths often start/end at odd places, randomly spit you back on to the road, give priority to side roads (the main road doesn't have to give way for side roads, so why have a cycle path running along the same route that has to?), or only exist on one side of the road (so you have to cross the road frequently). In these cases it's an easy decision to use the road instead of the cycle path.

It seems to be a bit of a vicious circle. Half-arsed infrastructure still costs a lot of money but ends up being barely used, which makes people (rightly) resent the money spent on it, which makes it harder to secure money for well thought out cycle infrastructure that would be used.

 

[Phil99]

Problem is so many roads are knackered, both for cars and roads.

I've seen so many cycle lanes with potholes bigger than an actual bike tyre, yet they don't get maintained as it comes out of a different budget, one would think.

On my commute to work there's a shared pavement/cycle lane that runs along an A road. I use it because the alternative is riding on quite a dangerous road, but the condition of the path is appalling. I've raised it with the council but they have no plans to do anything to it until the village I live in is expanded...in 2025 or so (~6k houses are planned to be built, which will really stretch all forms of transport infrastructure).

On the flip side, if I report a pot hole on the road it's generally fixed within a week.

 

[Infidelus]

Nothing like traffic lights unless traffic lights are 1 street apart.
Try again.

I don't need to try again just because you totally misread my comment.

You don't get it. If I'm bombing along at a fair old speed, it is impractical to stop every few hundred metres where the path meets a road. The route I use is a long main road with dozens of little side roads coming off it. On a fast bike, it's more practical to be on the road and I'm less of a hazard to the pedestrians using the same bit of tarmac as the cycle path. It's really only for kids and people who plod about on slow bikes.

I do get it. I do ride a bike quite regularly and I'm no slouch. The point is (and the title of the thread) that if there's a dedicated cycle path, cyclists should have to use it unless it's in such disrepair that it's more dangerous to do so.

 

[hornetstinger]

I don't need to try again just because you totally misread my comment.



I do get it. I do ride a bike quite regularly and I'm no slouch. The point is (and the title of the thread) that if there's a dedicated cycle path, cyclists should have to use it unless it's in such disrepair that it's more dangerous to do so.

Why would I use a cycle lane for 100 yards if I'm cycling 10 miles? Just stay on the road and don't have to weave on and off the useless cycles lanes, avoiding dogs and children.

 

[Orionaut]

I never hear such disdain for horse riders. Imagine posting on here bleating that they shouldn't be in the road holding people up.

Horse riders, for the most part, go to a great deal of effort to minimise the amount of delay/inconvenience that they cause other road users.

Despite coming across Horse riders on many occasions round where I drive and work. I have never, ever, had to grind up a hill or along an extended section of single track road behind a Horse rider trotting along in the middle of the road making it impossible to pass.

Ever!

If Cyclists behaved more like horse riders, there really wouldn't be an issue.