Cycling UK Forum

Hi R2!

Yes, the big ones are bullies. But planners can make cycle routes separate from other routes. Why don't they, because it costs too much. So they don't bother.

What we should do is leave cars, buses, pedestrians, cyclists, animals, all on the same system. We would all appreciate each other's problems, and all treat each other with respect.

The Highway Code says that pedestrians have priority at junctions: motor vehicles should give way to pedestrians crossing a minor road when the vehicle is turning into or out of that minor road. Why do cycle routes have to give way at road junctions when pedestrians do not?

Mick F. Cornwall

Mick F wrote:Hi R2!

The Highway Code says that pedestrians have priority at junctions: motor vehicles should give way to pedestrians crossing a minor road when the vehicle is turning into or out of that minor road. Why do cycle routes have to give way at road junctions when pedestrians do not?

Mick F. Cornwall

Firstly the pedestrian must already be crossing the road. There is no right for a pedestrian to expect a motor vehicle to give way if the pedestrian is approaching on the pavement.

Secondly, the dangerous nature of this type of cycle path makes it less likely that motorists are aware of cyclists approaching on the path and thus if they were the ones required to give way, I suspect the collision rate would be even higher on this type of path than it already is.

Jon Snow needs to stop asking for designs which are inherently broken as the "solution".

Segregated cycle paths become litter troughs and muggers paths.

Yes, the pedestrian must already be crossing the road.

But a pedestrian can cross the road at any time, the motorist will run him down with impunity, but there's JUST a possibility that the motorist may be guilty of "driving without do care and attention".

Pedestrians are NEVER actually GUILTY of "walking without due care and attention" in this country.

Cyclists should have the same rights as pedestrians. After all, they both use their legs for propulsion!

Mick F. Cornwall

reohn2 wrote:

Mick F wrote:Define "Cycle Routes"......
Why can't all vehicles share the same road, showing consideration to all.......

Mick F. Cornwall (on his new laptop)

http://store.apple.com/Apple/WebObjects ... lm=MacBook

Because quite simply Mick the bigger ones(ie fourwheelers and more) are bullies.They don't won't to play and we are regarded as 'poor'.

"Prey" more like

I have found no such problems in Lancashire. It's great riding around here.

I'm not really in favour of cycle paths, just safer ways to negotiate my way through busy areas. Cycle paths are rarely maintained to an acceptable level and some are decidedly dangerous in their own right

As a CTC member at no time have I received any information from the CTC that indicates there is a hierarchy of policies that puts the introduction of segregated cycle paths at the bottom of the list.

I was not aware of this and would be interested to know how many other members have received information about the CTC's campaigning policy.
I do not expect to have to find out about the CTC policy from a government website.

Whether we as members are for segregated cycle paths or not - once again it would seem that freedom of speech is not highly regarded - even to the extent of suggesting that articles that show how benificial segregated paths in Germany have been should not be published in the CTC magazine if they dont conform with some hierarchical dictate.

And heaven forbid - a president that might actually have a brain and think for himself.

Why dont you just get a string puppet next time.

Sorry Jac, but who actually elected him? He certainly doesn't speak for me!

Jac wrote:Whats wrong with campaigning for segregated cycle routes?

- it works in Belgium Holland and parts of Germany (there may be other countries but these are those I have experience of) and one such town was recently featured in the CTC magazine.

I much prefer to cycle away from traffic and not to have to fight for a bit of road along with Lorries and aggressive drivers.

Being a German and having lived and commuted there for the best part of 27 years I can tell you that is a myth. Cycle paths are only working if they are:

1. Very well maintained and in a good status of repair.
2. Not anywhere near trees - as the roots will make the above impossible within few years.
3. They need to be in a clean state and any stones, glass and other dirst must be regularly removed - especially when sharing a surface with the raod.
4. They must be routed to allow cycling at reasonable speeds.
5. They must be wide enough to overtake - especially when not sharing a surface with the road.
6. They must be free of potholes
7. They must be inaccessible setup in a way that encourages car users to not use them to cut corners - as cyclists on cycle paths are typically overtaken with less caution than cyclists sharing the same road.

Most cycle paths in the UK are new so 1 and 2 do not apply as bad as in Germany. But believe me I have ignored several bits of cycle path then and despised them even more than 80 year old cobblestones on 10% downhill routes in Eastern Germany in the early 1990s.

Many UK cycle paths are too narrow to overtake slow cyclists - though luckily there are less of those in this country than in Germany. But if you expect me to use them going out on a 30 mile evening trip do not expect me be happily stuck behind some 1 mile a day commuter.

In the wonderfull town of Loughborough the college has build a cyclepath recently there are 90% bends in there every 10 metres. apart from the fact that they are deadly to cycle at 5mph the students never follow these bends on their part of the sidewalk so if I used this I'd constantly run into them. If you think this is an exception, then think of all the cycle paths that follow sharp bends whereever a small road enters a main road in many trowns in this country.

Okay potholes again are not so much an issue here and I trust in the councils to take even less care about them on cyclepaths than on ordinary roads.

I have a few cyclepaths where I get regularly overtaken on the cyclepaths when I use it by cars. If I cycle on the road section rather the cyclepaths drivers will keep more space as they see me as an obstacle on the road and typically drive slower.

Finally and most urgently cleanliness is an issue. cyclepaths in Germany are cleaned between once per day in cities to once per months in most rural areas. So the amount of small stone split and glass is less to the UK by a large factor. I had about 4 really bad punctures in the UK since coming here three of them on cyclepaths and one on a gravel road non on a proper road.

Now why do cycle paths work in Germany:

1. some of them just dont and are ignoredfor one or more of the above reasons. really.
2. You get fined about ten EUR if you cycle on the road where you have a cyclepath.
3. Most are wide enough to overtake slower drivers.
4. They are cleaner than here
5. You acually get fined if you are on a road with one cyclepath on either side if you cycle on the left hand side one - on right hand side traffic

To reach any of my regular routes I have to follow about two miles of worad with cycle paths. It is absolutely inacceptable for me to use them and should I have to I'd

1. Move to a nearby village where the problem does not occur
2. Buy a car as living in a village I'd not like to do all my commuting to work, shopping and any other transport by bike or public transport.

TT - I dont know who elected him

I dont know who wrote the CTC hierarchical policy either.
We are just members

As far as I'm concerned, as President, he should toe the line and not make personal statements in an article where it appears he is speaking for the CTC.
He is already a liability, which is surprising as he should know not to feed the media, being part of it himself. He seems to be on a "self serving" mission at the moment, and as such, is a bit of a loose cannon.

Does a right to ride on the road have to be the polar opposite of cycle paths? My daily commute includes roads and the bristol-bath path - I wouldn't want to lose the choice of either. There is no-stop start nature to this path, whereas the only viable road route includes two huge roundabouts controlled by traffic lights. I'd rather slow down for slower cyclists / pedestrians than mix it with rush hour buses, lorries, and cars if possible. I don't mind riding on the road - I have done most of my life, but given the choice on a daily commute the railway path is less stressful and hopefully means less pollution going into my lungs.

Well said and succintly put aziraphale.

The problem with campaigning for segregated cycle routes, it will be perceived that this is what we want, then we will be forced to use only these. Then local govt will be aware we do not "pay" for these via road "tax" and won't maintain them. They will be full of potholes, rubbish etc as now.
And what will happen to cycle racing, nowhere to train at speed?

I think Jon Snow needs to spend some time with a CTC officer who can not only inform him of CTC policy but ensure he has a better grasp of the issues. He is clearly ignorant about many of them. People writing in this forum seem well aware of the cycle lanes and cycling-is-dangerous debates. Why isn't our President?

It would be great if he posted a few of his views on the forum so we can question and debate with him a bit.

If he continues to write these sort of articles then yes, he should be got rid of.