This in a nutshell

folk who design them find the standards that should be used to difficult to fit in without taking road space – so we get half arsed useless things

My job used to involve looking at active travel improvements. The standards required are very clear, apply them and there is funding galore available Our HA would rather just do half arsed tinkering with existing crap than build to the right standard and get the money, because it affects precious car driving and parking space and our local councillors were of that opinion too.

Edit:not all.HA road engineers are of that opinion, but they’re fighting against dinosaurs who don’t care about the easy access to funding for it, they just see cars cars cars , despite official road hierarchy being that pedestrian and cyclists are at the top for years.

Just shown on BBC breakfast, the new changes to the Highway Code coming in effect on 29th January. I have read some of it and I have been aware that changes were in process.

No wonder drivers don’t know the rules, there simply isn’t enough media coverage of content like this!

+1000 nr us they’ve put in wands segregating part of the road on one side for cyclists, so now that part of the road is inaccessible for road sweepers & is consequently full of leaves which is treacherous especially when frozen

I think this applies to the whole ‘lifecycle’. A really wide cycle lane would be “expensive and unnecessary and take space away from (parked) cars” so it’s designed to be narrower than it should be. Because it’s narrow you can’t use normal road building equipment to lay it, the tarmac has to be hand poured and flattened, rather than using a big steamroller to get it perfectly smooth, which turns out to be more expensive than making it wider and therefore machine laid. So to fit the budget it doesn’t go quite as far as it should.

On day 1 it’s lumpy and narrow and ends before it should, which means not as many people use it as hoped. So it gets covered in sticks, leaves, moss, gravel, etc. But because it’s narrow you can’t fit a road sweeper/gritter, even a mini one, down it. So the debris gets worse and the few people using it get sick of crashing and puncturing and return to the road or the pavement.

So the next time someone is pushing the council to build a cycle lane, the council look at the last one they built and decide that if they’ve really got to do it they’re only going to make it narrow because look, nobody uses the things so there’s no point making it really wide. And the cycle begins again.

That’s a very accurate sounding (and depressing) summary bails

I’ve no problem with you riding where you want to, but understand the risks.

Every so often I see folk cycling down a bypass (single carriageway) near me (Melrose bypass if anyone knows it), it’s got a perfectly decent shared path near to it and IMO it’s crackers to cycle down a fast road when there’s a far safer alternative that is probably only a minute or two slower.

The horsebox driver though – he needs to be asked the same question as I asked a colleague when they complained about been held up by a cyclist.

“Does that mean that anyone slower than you should move over?”

And when they answered “yes”, my response was “well, if you ever see me in your mirrors, move over”.

+1000 nr us they’ve put in wands segregating part of the road on one side for cyclists, so now that part of the road is inaccessible for road sweepers & is consequently full of leaves which is treacherous especially when frozen

Large stretches of Great Western Road in Glasgow are now like this. The annoying thing is there was an easy better solution. Make those sections 24/7 bus lanes. Buses are infrequent enough that sharing a lane isn’t an issue. The bus tyres sweep the dross to the gutter. They don’t need those stupid sticky out ramps at bus stops in the coned off bike lanes they installed.

I had the same the other day. I took my still super new summer racer for a spin in Richmond Park in the sun. I was heading home via a local cafe and needed to ride c100m alongside a cycle path along the river.

I was gunning this ride (for me), pushing the ave watts up so wasnt slouching. I hate cycle paths,bumpy lumpy, pedestrians wandering in front of you etc, but I would normally use them as they are there, especially when the road is narrow because of said path.

So on my 100m alongside the path I was shouted at by the driver to ‘use the effin cycle path’… Why do people think its okay to moan at cyclists. I will stick to my night rides in the hills in future 😉

BFW – given you were gunning it I’m assuming you were doing over the legal limit for most of LBRUT as well (20mph pretty much everywhere).

Dogs are the main problem with shared paths. Many entitled owners believe their dog should be off the lead and have right of way.

Dogs

cyclists are the main problem with shared paths

Change one word and your quote is identical to the never-ending argument on our area’s ‘nextdoor’ message boards regarding extensive shared paths around the local AONB.

Being a dog-owner and a cyclist I miraculously (in the real world) seem to have less problems from both. In fact in 15 years of walking my dog and riding on the same paths (not at the same times) I only remember two problems from thoughtless MTBers and none from dogs. It could just as easily have been the other way around, luck of the draw etc.

Dogs are the main problem with shared paths. Many entitled owners believe their dog should be off the lead and have right of way.

Ongoing debate with my sister.

She lets her dogs off in the park and ive told her they should always be on the lead,and under control, she disagrees. It’s been an on going debate between us. She is adamant they can get let off but should only need to be under control

I tell her that in every park there’s a noticeboard where it tells you this(and so there is)

The other week i get a text from her with a pic of a notice about dogs being under control This what you mean” she asks. It’s not an official notice, looks to have been placed there by a park user, all coloured in and stuff

No sis, the main gate notice board.

My sister, not one to lose an argument flagged up the notice she’d seen in a hoity-toity manner,even to the point of sending the pic. Its the nature of her household, theres 2 lawyers and an economics student on his final year, the other nephew who has his law degree also has an economics degree and the bil holds a high position in law, so arguments are commonplace, long and rather shouty

Now I’ve directed her to the official notice board she’s been silent on the subject 😆 😆  no doubt she’s read it, and rather than lose face is now ignoring the subject.

I really need to bring it up, but when i do I’ll be getting a totally dismissive answer  along the lines of its not that important 😆

Change one word and your quote is identical to the never-ending argument on our area’s ‘nextdoor’ message boards.

There are many many paths near me that cyclists can’t use and just the one shared path (the TPT). The problem is that many walkers and dog owners don’t want to modify their behaviour one bit when using the TPT. That includes throwing sticks and balls around for dogs to chase like the TPT was their private park.

The problem with shared use paths is entitled idiots of all sorts

I didn’t meet an entitled dog walker today – they were all Ok but I did meet entitled cyclists and entitled joggers

The cyclists were a big group and being totally out of order with their entitlement

@tjagain – what is an entitled cyclist in your view?

There are many many paths near me that cyclists can’t use and just the one shared path (the TPT). The problem is that many walkers and dog owners don’t want to modify their behaviour one bit when using the TPT

Gotcha, I mistakenly thought you were generalising beyond one specific path. Well, we have many shared paths so I’ll modify your original ‘dogs/dog-owners are the problem’ anecdote with yr updated ‘many walkers’ anecdote, and also to my anecdote/s for a more rounded view 😎

what is an entitled cyclist in your view?

This lot were the same as others have complained about – refusing to share the space.  I was riding the other way.  There was around 30 of them taking the entire width and not looking where they were going but chatting ( those towards the back of the group).  I shouted to them to alert them to me and my pal heading towards them.  Got a mouthful of abuse and almost forced off the edge.  Utter prats.  Saw the same group again later on – same behaviour but this time on a road.  Just being entitled dickheads – I ride defensively – this lot were not riding defensively – they were riding in a totally entitled manner

I have actually been forced off a canal towpath by a group chainganging down an effing canal towpath.  Came past me as we came to a bridge and basically forced me into the bridge buttress so they could get past.

Entitled idiots exist in all pastimes.

Horse box drivers are in my experience awful anyway.
Either in a car or on a bike.
On the road bike, big wide road, long straight, nothing coming the other way
Horse box gets halfway past and pulls in forcing me off the road. I have other stories but CBA.
As for cycle paths, Reading is hilarious.
Wrong direction for 500m, constantly swapping sides of the road or vanish entirely, just paint a bit on a narrow foot path. Divert it off the road, onto a path full of street furniture then have to stop at a junction.
Full of trees and give way every 100m.

My personal favourite is Shepard’s house Hill on the A4, where for no reason I can work out ‘Cyclists Must Dismount’.
I’d like to see similar stating ‘Drivers Must get out and push’.
As seen at roadworks also, which I’ve never ever kicked over, honest

I think this applies to the whole ‘lifecycle’. A really wide cycle lane would be “expensive and unnecessary and take space away from (parked) cars” so it’s designed to be narrower than it should be. Because it’s narrow you can’t use normal road building equipment to lay it, the tarmac has to be hand poured and flattened, rather than using a big steamroller to get it perfectly smooth, which turns out to be more expensive than making it wider and therefore machine laid. So to fit the budget it doesn’t go quite as far as it should.

On day 1 it’s lumpy and narrow and ends before it should, which means not as many people use it as hoped. So it gets covered in sticks, leaves, moss, gravel, etc. But because it’s narrow you can’t fit a road sweeper/gritter, even a mini one, down it. So the debris gets worse and the few people using it get sick of crashing and puncturing and return to the road or the pavement.

So the next time someone is pushing the council to build a cycle lane, the council look at the last one they built and decide that if they’ve really got to do it they’re only going to make it narrow because look, nobody uses the things so there’s no point making it really wide. And the cycle begins again.

@bails (and @longdog too) – I wondered this on a Twitter thread the other day. Some cyclist had posted a pic of a new cycle lane on his regular route that was terrible, it put cyclists into the door zone, into the middle of the road and then just evaporated 50m before the next junction. Total waste of time, effort and money.

I really can’t tell if this is all some sort of cunning ploy by councils to keep getting and spending active travel funds but never actually inconveniencing the All Powerful Motorist or if they are actually too incompetent to do anything properly.

My views tend towards the latter but occasionally you encounter infrastructure that really does look like it was built with malicious intent.

‘Cyclists Must Dismount’.

These signs have no legal standing.  I have been tempted to start removing them and make a collection of them.  They are used when whoever planned the road haven’t got the imagination to make a useable cycleway so put a “cyclist dismount” sign instead.

Horse box drivers are in my experience awful anyway.

High chance really seeing most will be driven by horse riders.

what is an entitled cyclist in your view?

The type that thinks they’re doing an Olympic TT race, every day they’re out. Close passes to other cyclists, j hooks, bombing along at top speed all the time. They ride on the outside of a cycle lane between the lane and the road.

They ride on the outside of a cycle lane between the lane and the road.

thats sometimes appropriate defensive riding – I do it quite often but some of the marked cyclways around me are narrower than my bars.  1m from the kerb at all times is where I ride.  Cycleways should be 1.5 m wide

They ride on the outside of a cycle lane between the lane and the road.

That’s my trike. One wheel in the lane and one wheel out. Too bad. As my driving instructor taught me, “you can’t do anything about the people behind you”. It’s also really not suited to cycle lane furniture, a bit like the tandem.

One presumes there were no horses in the lorry. Such nervous animals, apparently.

Entitled idiots exist in all pastimes.

Cyclists got the best traffic free route near us closed off 🙄 tarmac route through a private estate – owner now closes the automatic gate halfway along since June after first lock down, in reaction to entitled cyclists.

Large stretches of Great Western Road in Glasgow are now like this. The annoying thing is there was an easy better solution. Make those sections 24/7 bus lanes. Buses are infrequent enough that sharing a lane isn’t an issue. The bus tyres sweep the dross to the gutter. They don’t need those stupid sticky out ramps at bus stops in the coned off bike lanes they installed.

Not sure what end you’re talking about but when I lived there the lanes were as you describe.

****.

That.

“sharing” a lane with taxis and buses was nothing short of suicidal, in the short stretches between parked cars at any rate. This was between St George’s Cross and Byres Road. Far better routes to take, let them have it.

Good post balls,

I had presumed that they were using egg shaped steamrollers but it turns out they weren’t using any steamrollers at all!

Apparently Manchester city council is commited to spending one and a half sunaks (one and a half million in old money) on cycling infrastructure. Even Arlene Foster and the DUP would struggle to waste that much money.

And I think calling these things cycle lanes is overly optimistic, they should be called cycle ditches.

What I also notice is that some cyclists while riding in the dark are wearing dark clothing making it hard for drivers to see.

In Bristol, on the A420 out of the city, they don’t bother with lights, as well as wearing dark clothing. Fortunately, I don’t go into Bristol very often, mostly for gigs these days, but it’s always, or nearly always dark after kicking-out time, which is when the feral cyclists emerge.

It’s obvious they should make their use compulsory, with stiff fines for cyclists who dont use them.

Given so many are against free choice for whatever reason.

Well the reason here is cyclists get killed or injured because they ride in traffic. Clearly the two aren’t compatible. Cycle lanes have been thoughtfully provided.

Cycle lanes have been thoughtfully provided.

I assume sarcasm.

😆  😆 yeah it is a bit of a piecemeal joke to be sure. But they’re getting there.

Problem is the roads were never built with this type of thing in mind. Too narrow to accommodate everyone in every form of transportation.

Problem is the roads were never built with this type of thing in mind. Too narrow to accommodate everyone in every form of transportation.

simply not so.  Look to the netherlands.  the fact is that cars are a very inefficient use of road space.  Get people out of cars and onto bikes or buses and lo an behold – loads of space

This is the same number of people in different forms of transport

Cycle infrastructure in the UK is at best a mixed bunch of great to poorly designed and dangerous. I’m sure there’s been a few threads before on it (probably rivals tyre threads for numbers).

The ones where I live were a total waste of money as they purely segregated bits of road by using a kind of kerb with short posts sticking out. They seem to be scattered about with no overall plan and with no other change to the road layout to accommodate an additional cycle lane. They also collect general road detritus but you can’t fit a road sweeper in the lane even if you wanted to.

There’s a cycling group near me who meet on the fricking cycle lane every tuesday morning (although a no show the other cold foggy morning the wusses) while I’m trying to get to work so I have to hop up the kerb to avoid them on my crappy old road bike. Bloody cyclists! There’s a bloody great layby a few metres away down the farm-road-that-used-to-be-a-proper-road which is part of a cycle route.

Some crackers here.

https://road.cc/content/feature/why-dont-cyclists-use-cycle-lanes-267164

Well the reason here is cyclists get killed or injured because they ride in traffic.

That only makes sense if you’re doing a direct parody/sendup of an ignorant (probably Daily Express-fondling) twunt who quite literally believes that people riding bicycles aren’t also traffic, in addition to some palm-rubbing victim-blaming.

re infrastructure)

But they’re getting there.

Nope. We’re really not. I’ve said it before that Holland’s wonderful cycling infrastructure will be mostly underwater via global warming by the time we even approach anything like what they achieved decades ago.

There isn’t even an NCN route (Route 46 under development) from my local to city to the nearest other city (28 miles by car). In order to avoid the ‘worst’ A and B road sections I’d end up doing more like 60 miles each way (will I ‘eck!) and much of it on obscure loops, bridleways and boggy tracks/private estate roads which may or may not be permissible. I’ve tried a few times to tie it all together via Google Earth, but it’s nigh on impossible with the imagery sat images currently available. I used to do half of it via main roads back in 2006. No more. 16 years later and there is nothing on the horizon. Another 16 years and I’ll be 70.

I’ll be retired and/or dead by the time I feel that I can commute that distance safely by bike. The reason I chose to discontinue cycle-commuting was because other (motorised) traffic don’t all see fit to consider me also as traffic, letalone as a person with a right to be there/be safe from their vehicle.

One of the arguments i hear about moving to single lane(Admittedly these are from tabloid comments) is that it ups congestion. And to be fair traffic wont move as freely as with twin lane roads. And also to be fair in congested roads emergency services can’t get through as freely.

This of course being blamed directly on cyclists and causing more conflict and more negative attitudes towards them.

Unfortunately the UK isnt really a public transport kind of a place, but until that is resolved there simply isnt room.

One of the arguments i hear about moving to single lane(Admittedly these are from tabloid comments) is that it ups congestion.

‘Moving to single-lane’? You mean like a one-way system for vehicular traffic?

Where (and by whom) is this being proposed?

‘Moving to single-lane’? You mean like a one-way system for vehicular traffic?

I assume its a reference to when a road is narrowed to expand the cycle path?

One thing I like about the shared paths round here is the lack of consistency about which side is the cycle vs ped path. I would have thought it would make sense to have it the same but it just randomly changes sometimes on the same stretch of road. Very odd.
Aside from that the paths round here are actually surprisingly good with the limitation they are mostly shared although they do still have a few random sections I assume to hit a target (bit near my house is about 10m long)

One of the arguments i hear about moving to single lane(Admittedly these are from tabloid comments) is that it ups congestion. And to be fair traffic wont move as freely as with twin lane roads. And also to be fair in congested roads emergency services can’t get through as freely.

I hear lots of things, but are they actually proven by facts rather than vocal gut feelings. I can think of places where the traffic actually flows better after removing the potential for one lane to get stuck behind a delivery lorry / bus / ambulance etc. I can also think of some places that I might be even more inclined to avoid in the car – assuming I’m not unique that actually means less traffic = better flow! I don’t really believe the emergency service angle – yes there will be idiot drivers who do stupid things and hold them up, but unless they are seeing real evidence of consistent delays I think its more likely an easy thing to use as a proxy for “i don’t like bike lanes”. To be fair, there are a few emergency service drivers who could do with some training on how best to use their lights / siren so as not to invoke the dopey-driver-panic and make their job worse.

This of course being blamed directly on cyclists and causing more conflict and more negative attitudes towards them.

Is it? Or are the same “anti-cyclist” people just finding a different thing to get angry about. I can’t say I’ve encountered any who I thought “you were very understanding of bikes on roads until this recent infrastructure change”.

Unfortunately the UK isnt really a public transport kind of a place, but until that is resolved there simply isnt room.

Probably correct. The big bold move is to ban the problem vehicles: cars, especially single-occupancy cars.

One thing I like about the shared paths round here is the lack of consistency about which side is the cycle vs ped path. I would have thought it would make sense to have it the same but it just randomly changes sometimes on the same stretch of road. Very odd.

I haven’t noticed that – is it something to so with street furniture or not having cyclists riding past doors that people might emerge from?