Why Don't Cyclists Use Cycle Lanes....

[Deleted User]

...with such magnificent facilities as this?

dzug1

Well yes but even where there is a good cycle lane unobstructed and with a smooth surface some cyclists still won't use them. There's one near me built a year or so at the cost of weeks of disruption and I don't know how many hundreds of K - and still the lycra brigade insist on using the road.


If you knocked one off I wonder if you could claim contributory negligence?

Billy-no-Money

I used to think much the same as you dzug1 until out of financial necessity I started cycling to work. I now realise that they're disjointed, poorly maintained, poorly signposted, often blocked by cars / signs / bus shelters, unusable at much above walking pace, full of dog walkers who think they have no responsibility to control their mutt etc etc.

The link posted by the OP is NOT an isolated instance - there are situations like this in most towns. Thing is - how many posters will actually look at the link - or just type away completely missing the ironic point?

peter_the_piper

""I now realise that they're disjointed, poorly maintained, poorly signposted, often blocked by cars / signs / bus shelters, unusable at much above walking pace, full of dog walkers who think they have no responsibility to control their mutt etc etc.""
Sounds a bit like the roads round here as well.:rotfl:

GwylimT

As someone who cycles to and from work everyday (about an hour each way), most of my journey does have cycle lanes, some on the pavement some on the road, since being at this job since February I haven't been able to use the cycle lanes as they are always occupied by parked vehicles.

The cycle lanes are fantastic around here, but unfortunately you are unable to use them, its a real shame.

dzug1

Billy-no-Money wrote: »

I used to think much the same as you dzug1 until out of financial necessity I started cycling to work. I now realise that they're disjointed, poorly maintained, poorly signposted, often blocked by cars / signs / bus shelters, unusable at much above walking pace, full of dog walkers who think they have no responsibility to control their mutt etc etc.

The link posted by the OP is NOT an isolated instance - there are situations like this in most towns. Thing is - how many posters will actually look at the link - or just type away completely missing the ironic point?

My point is that even where there is a GOOD cycle way with none of the all too common disadvantages you describe, some cyclists won't use it

cubegame

I've never found a cycle lane that I would deem safe to use at above 20mph. I will make an assumption therefore that any lane will be useless and will save my time and stick to the road.

alexanderalexander

dzug1 wrote: »

Well yes but even where there is a good cycle lane unobstructed and with a smooth surface some cyclists still won't use them. There's one near me built a year or so at the cost of weeks of disruption and I don't know how many hundreds of K - and still the lycra brigade insist on using the road.


If you knocked one off I wonder if you could claim contributory negligence?

I would suggest it's a speed thing -- cycle lanes are often not really wide enough to allow cyclists to overtake each other comfortably and safely, and thus the faster cyclists will often prefer to stick to the road. Also some off-road cycle lanes require cyclists to take ridiculous detours from their route.

In answer to your question, I doubt there's any case law on it but I suspect not -- in the UK cyclists are not obliged to use the cycle lane.

Marco_Panettone

dzug1 wrote: »

My point is that even where there is a GOOD cycle way with none of the all too common disadvantages you describe, some cyclists won't use it

Why are you (a non-cyclist, I presume?) classing a particular bit of paint as a good cycle lane? What, in your mind, makes it 'good'?


You need to look at where it starts (is it obvious from far enough away to get onto safely at a reasonable speed in all conditions?), where it ends (does it come to a random halt, or spit riders back out into traffic without warning?) and how often users have to 'give way' to motor vehicles. What's the surface like? Is it a shared path with pedestrians? Does it actually go anywhere? Is using it a better option for the rider than remaining on the road?


If it is a painted lane it is not GOOD. If paint created safe space for people we wouldn't have kerbed pavements.

yangptangkipperbang

Whilst raising a bit of a smile (through gritted teeth !!!), the sheer waste of money is what infuriates me most about these things.

The same moronic councillors who approve these idiocies are the same ones who cut social services/schools/libraries/etc, etc and blame anyone who happens to be passing for the "cuts" in local government spending.

brat

I ride a road bike. Usually on the road. If a cycle path is safe enough to take my speed, then I use it. If not, I don't.