Cycling UK Forum

Well we all know about the real farcilities that blot our road and cycle network.

So it is somewhat of a mystery why Warrington Cycle Campaign have decided to discredit the movement by posting a hoax one.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/pete.meg/w ... er2010.htm

I regularly cycle this rather useful bit of cycle lane (and there arent many) the cycle route does not, is not meant to and to the best of my knowledge was never meant to go through that "tunnel" which isnt a tunnel.
It does in fact turn left and run parallel to the main road until its end where it rejoins the road to Gowerton.

It is a bit sad when they make Farcilities up, especially as there is no shortage of real ones.

It don't know that area at all but I know that picture is a few years old now. Could it be that the situation has changed since the photo was taken?

People submit photos on-line for the 'farcility of the month'. I suppose that the person who selected the photo didn't know the area?

Maybe they were trying to get the point across that the sign should be pointing left?

Could be,

That would also bring the campaign into disrepute, making a big deal about something as petty as that.
I must admit I have never noticed the sign, when you cycle there it is rather obvious that you follow the cycle track rather than ride into the concrete wall.

Photos can be 'shopped' and street furniture can be tampered with, but AFAIK no-one has yet hacked into Google maps. These beauties are absolutely 100% genuine I assure you, and I know that road well.

On the other hand, I agree, set against the many idiocies, there are some 'good' examples - the planners have got to get it right some of the time! I have often used this one (to the left of image), north of Brighton (when I don't fancy tackling the rigours of Ditchling Beacon.... ). It keeps me off a fast and busy D/C, and it's smooth, straight, and reasonably clean, and not much used by pedestrians.

Judge each cycle path/lane on its merits.

661-Pete wrote:On the other hand, I agree, set against the many idiocies, there are some 'good' examples - the planners have got to get it right some of the time! I have often used this one (to the left of image), north of Brighton (when I don't fancy tackling the rigours of Ditchling Beacon.... ). It keeps me off a fast and busy D/C, and it's smooth, straight, and reasonably clean, and not much used by pedestrians.

That's the A23, one of Sussex's 'stealth' motorways. Ever tried cycling south (against the traffic flow on the adjacent north bound carriageway) on the narrow (with brambles, when I tried it) path at night? If that's 'good' then I'm a dutchman (or something)

I don't have a phot but I know of a path on the 'Hadrian's' route out of Newcastle where if you go off route you go down ~150 metres of 'cycle path' only to meet a bricked up railway arch. There is a marker where the actual route diverges from the natural line taking you to the blocked railway arch, but it is not at all clear which is the true path when you encounter the marker post for the first time. My guess is 50% of first time riders on the route end up going down the cul-de-sac (i certainly did). There are tyre marks on the ground to prove it. It is still a good route out of Newcastle and well used it would seem.

squeaker wrote:

661-Pete wrote:On the other hand, I agree, set against the many idiocies, there are some 'good' examples - the planners have got to get it right some of the time! I have often used this one (to the left of image), north of Brighton (when I don't fancy tackling the rigours of Ditchling Beacon.... ). It keeps me off a fast and busy D/C, and it's smooth, straight, and reasonably clean, and not much used by pedestrians.

That's the A23, one of Sussex's 'stealth' motorways. Ever tried cycling south (against the traffic flow on the adjacent north bound carriageway) on the narrow (with brambles, when I tried it) path at night? If that's 'good' then I'm a dutchman (or something)

Zullen we moeten akkoord gaan verschillen.*

I suppose you can't please everyone all the time. I agree, further north (area around Bolney etc.) the cycle path is poor quality and often overgrown; but I'm talking about the stretch between Patcham and Pyecombe (where I would turn off onto the A273). I used to cycle the A23 regularly in the 1980s, before it was dualled or had any sort of cycle path: in those days it was just a 4-lanes single-carriageway with very fast traffic, and it was nightmarish especially after dark. Believe me: I was really pleased with the improvement! I used it southbound as well (there's an easy way of getting onto it through Pyecombe village).

But as I said....

*we''ll have to agree to differ then!

That website has lost its way for a while now. If you find the location on Google, you can usually figure out what was intended. Some of them are genuinely daft, but often the daftness is exaggerated.

I don't think crap-spotting gets us anywhere. Trying to find reasonable stuff in tricky locations (which could be applied to other people's tricky situations) is more useful. You might believe that 99% of cycle provision is crap and the best approach is to remove 100%. But that's not going to get us very far. If there's any point to cycle campaigning at all, we need to talk up good stuff.

661-Pete wrote: I agree, further north (area around Bolney etc.) the cycle path is poor quality and often overgrown

That's the section I'd tried - so we do agree
As far as fast dual carriageways are concerned (e.g. the Sussex stealth motorways - A23, A24, A27) logic(?) would suggest separated shared use paths on both sides of the road to a good standard with safe junctions. AFAIK, that is not the case

Isn't this really a bit like anyone who campaigns for a cause, or a journalist who didn't let a carefully nuanced appraisal get in the way of a good story? It's one thing to be whiter than white making sure all your info is 100% spot on and properly appraised and completely undistorted, and sometimes that is the only position it is safe to take. But, as climate scientists opposing the denialists, and people opposing creationists, have discovered, a bit of hyperbole and exaggeration and saying the obvious even when it isn't quite correct on careful appraisal, all go a long way towards getting publicity and support for your cause, even when you are spouting total rubbish. The environmental movement has never been shy of a bit of exaggeration, distortion, or taking shortcuts with the science, and they manage frequently to keep the high moral position.

I think cyclists inherently have the high moral position and can afford to push the boundaries a bit in their campaigns. They can survive having a few of the pictures exposed as "dressed up", the overall argument remains well made.

squeaker wrote:

661-Pete wrote: I agree, further north (area around Bolney etc.) the cycle path is poor quality and often overgrown

That's the section I'd tried - so we do agree
As far as fast dual carriageways are concerned (e.g. the Sussex stealth motorways - A23, A24, A27) logic(?) would suggest separated shared use paths on both sides of the road to a good standard with safe junctions. AFAIK, that is not the case

It would be perfect to have cycle paths on boths sides of the road, but alas! That ain't going to happen most of the time. This is not the Netherlands! I think in the case of the southern stretch of A23, the priority was to leave as much width as possible for the 'most important' users (i.e. cars ). And there's the 'Pylons' - not actually electricity pylons but two historic ornamental stone pillars which mark the entrance into Brighton. As listed buildings they couldn't be moved, and one of them stands slap-bang in the middle of the route any east-side (i.e. southbound) cycle path would have taken....

As I've occasionally heard hard-luck stories from cyclists who were totally flummoxed as to how to get onto the cycle path from the A273, I attach a suggested route here. The right turn into Pyecombe village can be tricky in peak hours.

661-Pete wrote:The right turn into Pyecombe village can be tricky in peak hours.

And the climb up Clayton Hill's not much fun either

squeaker wrote:And the climb up Clayton Hill's not much fun either

Have you tried going up Ditchling Beacon in the morning peak hours? It may be an iconic cyclists' favourite at quieter times (e.g. the Friday night nocturnal crowd, or the annual BHF-fest for which they close the roads), but it turns into a notorious rat-run in the morning rush. I used to go that way when I was a lot younger and fitter, but I'd recommend avoiding it now - even for the young and fit. Much the same can be said for the Devil's Dyke route via Poynings and Saddlescombe.

Sadly, there are no good road cycling routes into Brighton from the north, not on weekday mornings. Off-roaders can try Streat Bostal and bridle paths.