UKC

About 5 miles of my journey to and from work is along a pretty unpleasant B road. Lots of standing water, no verge only a vertical bank about 18 inches high. Narrow, lots of S bends, no lighting or cats eyes, used by busses, quarry trucks and HGVs that don't hang around.

This year, at not inconsiderable cost, they put in a cyclepath. It runs pretty much parallel to the road, physically separated by banking or fences when needed. It undulates by maybe a couple of metres here and there, it might be a couple of hundred metres further over the full 5 miles. It's rural, there's no gangs of feral yoofs, broken glass or razorwire strung at head height etc. There's not even much dogshit near the town.

I can understand if you're a keen club cyclist and need the road to get the speed and hit those strava segments, I could understand it if it was a comedy cyclepath that was 6 feet long or went 5 miles around a field before emerging 100 yards up the road. But it's a very nice, safe direct route. I know, I've cycled on it.

So why in God's name do I see people on MTBs bimbling along 2 abreast on the road with no lights; or people with kids in carriers or cycling behind them, using the road instead of the cyclepath?

I'm baffled.

In reply to Ridge:

Sorry, can't think Cyclepath without checking on here http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/wcc/facility-of-the-month/

In reply to woolsack:

Natural selection?

In reply to Ridge:

Why don't you ask them?

One I do use is the one on the A591 between Ings and Windermere. It's a much better surface than the main carriageway.

ALC

In reply to a lakeland climber: Depends on the path, many are a menace or infested with Cyclists Dismount signs (yes I know, advisory). The good ones are a joy however.

In reply to Ridge:

offhand.
difficult to get on and off where people want to.
Not really aware of it.
Shit in winter since it wont be gritted.

In reply to Ridge:

There's quite a good one between Kingussie and Newtonmore that I use occasionally. I tend to avoid it in the dark at this time of year though. I doubt it gets gritted and it has a couple of really sharp right angle bends on it where it bridges over a ditch or burn. Great for a slide if covered in ice or rotten leaves.

In reply to Ridge:

Because on a cyclepath there's no chance of them recording an angry motorist on their Go-Pro.

In reply to Tom Valentine:


Idiot.

Anyway to answer the OP, I think the fact that you've got people mentioning a specific cyclepath as 'a good one that they'd use' speaks for itself really. Some are good but many many cycle paths lead the cyclist into a vulnerable position, reinforce the attitude that cyclists should be in the gutter, and allow the more ignorant road users to believe that ample provision has been made for cyclists.

I would have posted CFOTM but I was beaten to it. Funny but also pretty disturbing

In reply to Trevers:
Cycle path or sense of humour by-pass?

Moving on -


I found a cycle path yesterday that I will actually use - the one from the Dower House to Fishponds in Bristol. Brilliant - it's even got a mini-Box Hill at the top.

There are only two other segregated paths that I use, and one of those is only viable in one direction.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Bang on.

In reply to awwritetroops:


He does a bit!

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I think your're right, the attitude problem is part of it. I suspect that even given a perfectly smooth, straight, wide, separated and maintained bike lane with continuous right of way, there would be some cyclists who would still use the road.

In reply to dissonance:

"Shit in winter since it wont be gritted."

That is a massive problem, e.g. in Milton Keynes particularly where the Redway network goes from being rather nice to pretty useless.

Time gritting of cycle paths was funded? Pavements too, if it snows you end up having to walk down the middle of the road or buy microspikes.

Neil

In reply to Ridge:

I see the same thing every morning on the A374 (Embankment Road) which is dual carriageway and one of the very busy arterial routes into Plymouth. Alongside the dual carriageway is a wide cycle/pedestrian lane (with a good surface) separated from the main road with, for the most part, a grass verge. Nevertheless, every day there are several cyclists on the main road amidst the trucks, cars and buses. I just don't understand it. Its not as though the cycle lane is busy with either bikes or pedestrians.
Confused.

N

In reply to Ridge:

A couple of years ago I went to a council meeting about a similar situation, cycle path had been laid at a cost of thousands but cyclists were still using the road. It was pointed out at the meeting that the cycle path had several poorly or un-lit underpasses, one where a woman had been dragged off her bike and raped. The path also locked the user onto a route that meant doubling back half its length if you wanted to go into the town centre or out to the housing estate. The final thing was that there was nothing in any literature, maps or promotions to say where the cycle path went or how to get on or off it. You had to actually stumble across one end of it and explore it for yourself, lots of people had seen the middle sections but didn't know how to use it. I don't know where the path in the OP is but there can be many reasons why people don't use cycle paths. As someone pointed out in the meeting, there is a motorway between Nottingham and Sheffield so why don't we force all motorists travelling between the cities to use that, same considerations apply to cyclists.

In reply to cousin nick:

It might depend what it does when it comes to roundabouts and side roads. Unless the traffic is scarily fast and busy, I'd rather be in the flow of it than constantly having to stop at junctions with poor visibility and cross like a pedestrian. Some of the places where cycle paths cross junctions are lethal.

I don't know the road you are talking about so no idea whether that is relevant to it.

In reply to malky_c:

Spot on - it's one of the significnat disincentives for me and creates more hazards than it avoids

In reply to Ridge:

Having to give way to traffic coming in from minor side roads is a major deterrent to cycle path use. The classic near me is the section between Windermere and Ambleside where the cyclists are enjoined to give way to vehicles coming out of private drives going into the big houses along the lake shore.

In reply to Ridge:

If it is as good as you suggest then I guess the only reason would be that people are unaware of it. Personally I'd always avoid a main road if possible, but far too often cyclepaths are inconvenient, disjointed or traps for the unwary.

And a 5 mile continuous cycle path - where is this utopia ?

In reply to nniff:


Same for me. the one alongside the A89 from Broxburn to Bathgate has a plethora of give way lines at every single driveway, and the main junctions and roundabouts are a nightmare.

In reply to dissonance:





is it even close to freezing?

In reply to Ridge:

On my way to work there is a stretch of lovely cycle path that I don't use, preferring to stick on the busy road. It's on a hill, on the opposite side of the road to the side I come in on. In order to get to it, I have to stop, wait for the traffic, cross, restart cycling on the steepest bit of the hill. It then runs out before I need to cross back over, in front of a roundabout, so I am left with the choice of having to cross back over at that point, then getting around the roundabout and on my way, or of carrying on cycling on the footpath.

If I stay on the road, I can use my momentum to get me up part of the hill and don't have to wait for the traffic as I don't have to cross the road. Much faster and easier.

In reply to Ridge: I use the deeside cycle path In Aberdeen to get out of central aberdeen and its horrendus traffic, very good cycle path gets me out of the Aberdeen traffic where I can Join the road with a more civilsed level of traffic, however its is very dangerous when the frost comes in and is very busy with dog walkers in the summer.
however their are other cycle paths nearer home in North wales that I dont use because the problems of getting on and off into the flow of traffic. Having said that there are some good cycle paths for taking the kids on but not really part of the "transport" network.

In reply to IainRUK:

Most (not all) cycle paths are built as 'box ticking' exercises by local councils so they can reach government targets and be able to say 'We have built X miles of cyclepaths at a cost of £xxxx.

Occasionally there are good ones but the majority are basically unusable to the point where I won't even think about using any of them as it's nearly always quicker and safer to stay on the road.

There will be the odd exception but you'll only know that if it's on a route you use frequently.

Good Chris Boardman Video here

youtube.com/watch?v=Xyd_KGUh10g&

In reply to tlm:
"On my way to work there is a stretch of lovely cycle path that I don't use, preferring to stick on the busy road. It's on a hill, on the opposite side of the road to the side I come in on. In order to get to it, I have to stop, wait for the traffic, cross, restart cycling on the steepest bit of the hill. It then runs out before I need to cross back over, in front of a roundabout, so I am left with the choice of having to cross back over at that point, then getting around the roundabout and on my way, or of carrying on cycling on the footpath."

And that's typical awful design. If it were Holland there would be traffic lights to give you a free run onto it, and cyclists would have priority at every side road. Buses and other public transport first, bikes and pedestrians second, cars and other private vehicles last.

If we want to encourage cycling, we have to do it right. Old Mrs Jones is not going to take up cycling if she has to share the road with aggressive traffic. And we won't win this one if the only people who cycle are fit and confident 20-40ish year olds, as seems to be the case in London at least.

Neil

And for that matter people will not switch from the car to the bus if the bus sits in the same queue as the cars, the bus lane having ended way back. In Holland or Germany, the objective for that would be that the bus has a clear run from suburb to town regardless of other traffic, and stops only when it wishes to. If the bus is coming, everything else waits.

We just get it wrong here. Time after time.

In reply to Neil Williams:



Don't worry. I'm an old lady and I was overtaken the other day by a 73 year old! I knew he was 73 because he took the time to tell me so as he over took me. "I'm 73, you know!".

I could only gasp and wheeze, red faced in response....

In reply to dissonance:


It's not just grit - cars are surprisingly good at sweeping crap out of the roads, to everyone's benefit.

They've put a green strip down a road on my commute in to work, and the main effect is that cars now avoid it and so large quantities of leaf matter are accumulating across the designated cycle part. Everybody looses.

There's little to no point in creating commuter cycle lans without a specific budget and team to maintain them. It's different with the off-road recreational cycleways I suppose.

In reply to wintertree:
"There's little to no point in creating commuter cycle lans without a specific budget and team to maintain them."

This is always an issue for Milton Keynes Council as they have an extensive network of them, but no extra budget because they have no legal status as highways or somesuch. They do maintain them the best they can, but sometimes on a very low budget, which doesn't stretch to e.g. gritting them in winter (and really needs to).

A(nother) change in the law needed before there's any chance of a change of mindset.

Neil

In reply to IainRUK:


the point is if you cant use something for a good proportion of the year you get into the habit of the alternative and even when it is suitable dont use it.

Many cycle paths are the favoured habitat of the Puncture Fairy.

In reply to Fat Bumbly2:

This is true. And as well as supernatural activity of a fairy-related nature, these cycle paths have loose cinder surfaces, and/ or lots of hard bumpy edges.

In reply to yesbutnobutyesbut:



Yeah, when I'm cycling on the road rather than using a cycle path that's normally the reason. If I don't know the area then I'm making a judgement of where to ride starting from the fact that most cycle paths are rubbish, so I'll only use one if the road feels particularly nasty.

In reply to Neil Williams:
Hah! Cycle paths in MK! Don't get me started.

Oh all right, I've started already: they are full of discarded shopping trolleys, broken glass, winos on the Buckie, random nutters, and dog poo.

Also, they have comedy signage. Either it's been defaced with true dedication, in a way that makes the signage illegible. Or the sign says "Bloxton" (where?) on one arm and "Floxton" (where?) on the other arm. Always with no distances marked either.

Now quite possibly japey schoolkids have amusingly reversed the sign anyway, but even if they haven't it makes no difference unless you know whether you want to head for Bloxton or for Floxton, which, let's face it, you don't.

And another thing about MK cyclepaths: you usually can't get onto them in the first place. So you're toiling up some godawful dual with three HGVs standing on their noses on your tail, with a cyclepath only 10 feet away, but those feet are all of them vertical. Or there is a briar patch worthy of Mordor in between you and it. And it's guaranteed that if you do get onto it somehow, either it will instantly end at a bus stop, or you will be confronted with another Floxton/ Bloxton choice.

and.... breathe

In reply to Tim Chappell:

I use cyclepaths quite a lot, when I find them. When I don't use them it's generally because of one or more of the following reasons:

1. Because I know the cyclepath will mess with the enjoyable flow* that I'm seeking out on my ride (basically a more zen and mellow version of point 2, below);
2. Borne of a reluctance / refusal to give up the right of way at every bl**dy side junction (basically a grumpier version of point 1, above);
3. Because the cyclepath is designated as shared use (i.e. shared with pedestrians) but is too narrow / too poorly signed to reduce the chance of conflict with pedestrians (sometimes I can't be doing with getting my ear bent and whether this happens seems to be unrelated to how slowly I pass and how friendly I am);
4. Because I've found that stretch to be covered in glass / gravel / other nasties in the past;
5. Because the path doesn't go where I want.

*flow for me is absolutely not about speed (glaciers move faster than my usual riding speed): it's about momentum.

So in common with a lot of other folks, it seems to mostly boil down to poor design.

In reply to Ridge:

It's your subjective perception that the road is unpleasant. Maybe it is, if you are driving a car. Maybe they don't perceive it as unpleasant. Maybe it isn't, if riding a bike, at certain times. Maybe they joined the road from a bridleway part way along the stretch and they can't easily get to the cycle track as it's separated by a vertical bank or fence. Maybe they didn't have lights because it was daytime. Maybe like others their experiences of cycle tracks is that the majority are shit, so they chose the road as in all probability it'd be a better choice. Maybe they just prefer roads, like some drivers prefer motorways and A roads to B roads. It doesn't matter, what their reasoning, they have a right to be there.

In reply to awwritetroops:

Bang on?

What preconceptions do you have about cyclists which make you think it's bang on?

I cycle a lot, and I'd use the cycle path in the OP.

I've even been known to give way to cars to let them cross my path while cycling up hill when it's cost me some time and effort.

I like car drivers, I see them as people, and I like people. So there.

Merry Christmas by the way, as I'm sure you're not a twit. ()