Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
User avatar
gaz
Posts: 14165
Joined: 9 Mar 2007, 12:09pm
Location: Kent, lorry park of England

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby gaz » 23 Jul 2016, 9:57pm

Tangled Metal wrote:These paths with cyclists on one.side of a line and pedestrians on the other are really just mixed use paths. Nobody will convince me to the contrary.

+1

Those segregated by a five foot verge aren't any better: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.43512 ... 312!8i6656

If there is a path, pedestrians will use it regardless of any signs or markings. No big deal, so long as you're aware of them, slow down and be prepared to stop.
There'll be tarmac over, the white cliffs of Dover ...

Tangled Metal
Posts: 7667
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Tangled Metal » 23 Jul 2016, 10:08pm

gaz wrote:If there is a path, pedestrians will use it regardless of any signs or markings. No big deal, so long as you're aware of them, slow down and be prepared to stop.

My partner disagrees about it not being a problem. She has a view that better provision should be provided for cyclists. Basically cycle routes only for cycling, away from other users. Basically away from roads and footpaths such that pedestrians and motorised vehicles would not use them. She doesn't understand why that couldn't happen in our country.

BakfietsUK
Posts: 220
Joined: 4 Jul 2015, 10:35am

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby BakfietsUK » 24 Jul 2016, 10:16am

The picture Gaz linked to is very interesting. As a regular pedestrian (and cyclist) I would much rather walk further from the road and in this picture the cycle segregated path looks far more attractive to walk along. Put in the extra dimension of people with pushchairs, special needs and the prevalence of pavement parking, the cycle route for many pedestrians would be a no brainer. Just swap the cycle and footway and I reckon the problem would diminish. I think I would advocate reducing the width of the road in this picture in favour of cycles and pedestrians.

Seeing some of these posts show how pedestrians on shared use seem to have a certain distain or possibly belligerence to cyclists. I have an observation that may enlighten the debate. As I have negotiated shared use as a walker and a cyclist, I feel I have a rounded attitude to the behaviour of both parties, as it were. I see many cyclists acting aggressively toward walkers. On one walk down a particularly popular route I would estimate about 6 groups of cyclists travelling at speed straight toward me as if to intimidate me to stand in the adjacent hedge. These people were families with kids, men and women cycling together. Not only that, some were abusive and the whole experience left me very intimidated and frustrated. I thought for a long while what would motivate these people to behave in this way and I still can't fathom it. All I know, for sure is that this behaviour is unacceptable and the impact, possibly reflected in these posts is somewhat understandable.

In my view, along with what I have already posted here, if we are going to have to stick with shared use, the relationship between cyclists and other forms of transport needs to improve. In my opinion, we (cyclists) are in real danger of being hated by pedestrians and motorists. Whether rational or not the collective reasoning behind this suggested phenomenon is partly based on our own (cyclists) behaviour. If some cyclists go around abusing others, we will never get any respect, well not the type of respect that matters anyway.

MikeF
Posts: 3992
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby MikeF » 24 Jul 2016, 4:22pm

Mick F wrote:I was dinging away like a good-un once, and the walkers took no notice.
As I passed, they jumped out of their skins, and one said, "I wondered what the ringing noise was!"

You couldn't make it up! :lol:
Yes, you do get 'em at times. One of my best ones was "I thought it was a microwave!" In an area surrounded by fields?! :roll: :lol: And I too have also had "I wondered what the ringing noise was!" I'm too old to get het up about it (athough I may "tut" to myself!).

My bell(s) usually gives good warning 90% of the time, both for me (to detect a reaction) and other users to respond (or not). A few people are deaf, so that's a fact to be aware of.

Bells (even a single ping) are surprisingly audible, and seem to heard at some distance. Anyone remember bells on emergency vehicles and police cars? I still think they were better than the modern non directional sirens used now.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master

MikeF
Posts: 3992
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby MikeF » 24 Jul 2016, 4:48pm

BakfietsUK wrote:If some cyclists go around abusing others, we will never get any respect, well not the type of respect that matters anyway.

It's always worth remembering many of those pedestrians on shared routes are car drivers and some may be HGV drivers. Treat them as you would expect to be treated. :wink:
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master

jgurney
Posts: 1100
Joined: 10 May 2009, 8:34am

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby jgurney » 24 Jul 2016, 5:10pm

Tangled Metal wrote:These paths with cyclists on one.side of a line and pedestrians on the other are really just mixed use paths. Nobody will convince me to the contrary.


So do you also consider those roads with pedestrians on one side of a kerb and vehicles on the other to be really just mixed use roads, and walk, cycle or drive using the whole width of them?

User avatar
Tinnishill
Posts: 166
Joined: 15 Sep 2013, 9:58am

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Tinnishill » 24 Jul 2016, 8:41pm

Try a Mr Toad style parp-parp rubber bulb horn from a kids bike. It works for me; it usually raise a smile and it's a bit less aggressive than a full on pressurised air horn. I spent years cycle commuting into and out off the local airport and noticed that pedestrians off flights from high cycling rate destinations reacted to the bell but Brits generally didn't. The funniest one was a pair of armed cops who both jumped about a foot when they suddenly realised that I was right behind them and dinging away.
Agitate, educate, organise.

Tangled Metal
Posts: 7667
Joined: 13 Feb 2015, 8:32pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Tangled Metal » 25 Jul 2016, 8:26am

jgurney wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:These paths with cyclists on one.side of a line and pedestrians on the other are really just mixed use paths. Nobody will convince me to the contrary.


So do you also consider those roads with pedestrians on one side of a kerb and vehicles on the other to be really just mixed use roads, and walk, cycle or drive using the whole width of them?

I think the raised kerbstone kind of makes that example different to one where both sides of the narrow strip of white paint has the same level and surface.

Plus the kerb effectively marks a difference without signs to indicate which mode of transport goes where. The white line alone does not offer this difference and you're relying on infrequent signage to show which side you should be on.

In answer to your question I will say that I am very strict with my behaviour on bikes, foot or car. I always walk on the pedestrian side of the line where they exist as soon as I've seen the markings or signs indicating this. I always try to drive outside of those cycle path lines which IMHO aren't really cycle paths because in many cases they're just lines in the carriageway without the width for real separation to occur. I also do not cycle on pedestrian only doorways unless under the accepted mitigation of personal safety as a cyclist. One example of this It's a stretch of narrow main road into my local city that has cars parked on the side I'm riding on and space for two buses to pass each other with inches spare. In that case I take my bike onto the narrow pavement footway that is often partially blocked by parked cars over the kerb. If a pedestrian is using it I walk my bike.

It is my firm belief that I cannot be.sure that I can have any positive influence on other highway or path users despite trying through positive interaction. I may have that effect occasionally but cannot be sure of it. So I will continue to think more about my actions. Am I doing the right thing? It is in the end the only thing we can influence, our own behaviour. Get that right in sufficient mass perhaps other modes of transport may accept us more and with better.behaviour themselves.

As for not being positively.responded to with your bike bell, don't sweat it just be positive yourself, it's the best you can do and the tide may change one day.

Bmblbzzz
Posts: 3847
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Bmblbzzz » 25 Jul 2016, 9:14am

The busier parts of the Bristol-Bath Railway Path have a central white line -- but it's to separate directions of cycle traffic not wheels from feet. It works pretty well at this.

On shared paths that are converted pavements (footways), pedestrians retain the legal right to use the whole width of the path, cyclists are permitted to use the indicated side. On other paths, like converted railways or the example in Gaz's link, the legal situation might be different, but the appearance and habits are the same.

User avatar
squeaker
Posts: 3764
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 11:43pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby squeaker » 25 Jul 2016, 9:23am

Bmblbzzz wrote:On shared paths that are converted pavements (footways), pedestrians retain the legal right to use the whole width of the path, ...
and, in the vast majority of cases, the whole width of the adjacent road.
"42"

User avatar
squeaker
Posts: 3764
Joined: 12 Jan 2007, 11:43pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby squeaker » 25 Jul 2016, 9:26am

Tangled Metal wrote:
jgurney wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:These paths with cyclists on one.side of a line and pedestrians on the other are really just mixed use paths. Nobody will convince me to the contrary.


So do you also consider those roads with pedestrians on one side of a kerb and vehicles on the other to be really just mixed use roads, and walk, cycle or drive using the whole width of them?

I think the raised kerbstone kind of makes that example different to one where both sides of the narrow strip of white paint has the same level and surface.

Plus the kerb effectively marks a difference without signs to indicate which mode of transport goes where. The white line alone does not offer this difference and you're relying on infrequent signage to show which side you should be on.
Quite: grade separation helps a lot :)
"42"

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 16726
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby mjr » 25 Jul 2016, 11:48am

BakfietsUK wrote:The picture Gaz linked to is very interesting. As a regular pedestrian (and cyclist) I would much rather walk further from the road and in this picture the cycle segregated path looks far more attractive to walk along. Put in the extra dimension of people with pushchairs, special needs and the prevalence of pavement parking, the cycle route for many pedestrians would be a no brainer. Just swap the cycle and footway and I reckon the problem would diminish.

If you just swap them, it makes the geometry of the junction lethal rubbish for cycling (yes, I know there are plenty of over-the-shoulder road-mouth crossings by cycle tracks but they are dangerous rubbish) so I hope any attempt would fail safety checks. The best answer would be to rebuild the junction as part of this:

I think I would advocate reducing the width of the road in this picture in favour of cycles and pedestrians.


...but we're not there yet.

I agree with gaz - people in this country will walk everywhere and anywhere. Then there's things like pushchairs, prams, wheelchairs, mobility scooters and so on which are just easier on a designed-for-wheeling route. Personally, I don't mind them being there as long as they're not deliberately obstructive, but that does mean we do need to build cycle tracks wide enough to cope with it... and that probably often means no distinct footway unless there's really such high usage that walkers need a refuge.

On one walk down a particularly popular route I would estimate about 6 groups of cyclists travelling at speed straight toward me as if to intimidate me to stand in the adjacent hedge. These people were families with kids, men and women cycling together. Not only that, some were abusive and the whole experience left me very intimidated and frustrated. I thought for a long while what would motivate these people to behave in this way and I still can't fathom it. All I know, for sure is that this behaviour is unacceptable and the impact, possibly reflected in these posts is somewhat understandable.

I suspect it may be a misguided reaction to similar abuse towards them from other road users.

BakfietsUK wrote:In my view, along with what I have already posted here, if we are going to have to stick with shared use, the relationship between cyclists and other forms of transport needs to improve. In my opinion, we (cyclists) are in real danger of being hated by pedestrians and motorists. Whether rational or not the collective reasoning behind this suggested phenomenon is partly based on our own (cyclists) behaviour. If some cyclists go around abusing others, we will never get any respect, well not the type of respect that matters anyway.

Sorry but I think that view's a great example of the self-loathing of many UK cyclists and a real hindrance. There will always be some cyclists who go around abusing others, but there are some motorists who go around abusing others and yet motorists don't get vilified and keep on getting the vast majority of transport budgets. We must reject the persistent evil idea that cyclists in this country should all keep being punished because some cyclists misbehave.

While watching the Tour de France, I was struck by how rapidly how much of France seems to be building decent-looking cycle tracks alongside major routes (especially visible on the helicopter shots), even in completely rural areas where surely 3m width is more for maintenance and emergency access than capacity, and rehabilitating their town centres for walking and cycling with either infrastructure or 30kph limits. Riding there earlier this year, I found there was almost no hostility towards cyclists from either motorists or walkers: mostly they stay off painted lanes in shared spaces and a gentle bell gets a friendly wave. I know it's not everywhere yet, but is the UK being left behind even by our nearest neighbour? Can we get their relaxed approach to cycling here and if so, how?

(edited to add accidentally-deleted reply to the earlier parts)
Last edited by mjr on 25 Jul 2016, 12:00pm, edited 1 time in total.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Annoying Twit
Posts: 962
Joined: 1 Feb 2016, 8:19am
Location: Leicester

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby Annoying Twit » 25 Jul 2016, 11:51am

Bez wrote:I just ride as if everyone were deaf and/or blind. Seems to work.


Quoted for truth!

[responding to earlier posts]

I often use the 'passing on your right' thing, and nearly all the time the responses I get from pedestrians are positive.

One of my bikes has a Lion Bellworks bell on it. It has a loud, clear, sound. I find people respond to that much better than a normal bike bell, even if they're wearing headphones.

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 18065
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby [XAP]Bob » 25 Jul 2016, 3:35pm

I've had a few groups jump out of the way when they really didn't need to when saying 'passing on the right'
I try to prefix and suffix it with "you're fine"
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

BakfietsUK
Posts: 220
Joined: 4 Jul 2015, 10:35am

Re: Shared use paths - Bells ringing ignored...

Postby BakfietsUK » 25 Jul 2016, 9:48pm

Quite how mjr reckons observations of other cyclists' behaviour is "self loathing" mjr would maybe like to explain. Maybe some cyclists are just realistic. To call this self loathing is a flawed (in my case) generalisation. Actually I take great pride in my role in saving the planet. I just don't expect others to automatically understand, or want to understand my point of view.

In many European cities I have seen thousands of cyclists on really well designed facilities. Their behaviour was in my experience impeccable. In this country I see a very different story. However hard it is to swallow, respect is earned and maybe mjr, your observations in France are a sign of mutual respect that appears intrinsic, but has maybe come to be, over many many years.

If we act like hooligans on bikes, we won't be respected, we'll be hated. Maybe we don't actually have the respect we truly deserve, but unfortunately the world can be unfair. As a minority, cyclists will have to work much harder to gain the same kind of respect from motorists say, that they appear to give each other. The problem in my view is that we (cyclists) are a minority. It is perhaps nauseatingly paradoxical that our relative scarcity makes us more visible and perhaps more prone to prejudice. Given the volume of cyclists I have seen in Europe, any bad behaviour perhaps just falls into what could be called the "noise". If anyone is interested (mjr) perhaps they may like to do some research on "Minority Stress" and extrapolate their findings to cyclists.

I would love to hear some of your more eloquent comments about that mjr.

If we don't respect pedestrians, then how can we expect them to respect us if they then encounter us when they happen to be driving.

Sincerely, mjr, I find your observations both thought provoking and welcome. Thanks for energising the debate.