Cycle Lanes - use thereof etc
Discussion
I'm probably going to get abused for even asking this but seeing the current story about Richmond Park made me wonder
Why is it not alright to ask the question of why cyclists do not use cycle lanes
Why do cyclists not use cycle lanes
This is not about whether Cudd was right or wrong or any of the other oft repeated failings of motorists and/or the system, just these two narrow questions
Why is it not alright to ask the question of why cyclists do not use cycle lanes
Why do cyclists not use cycle lanes
This is not about whether Cudd was right or wrong or any of the other oft repeated failings of motorists and/or the system, just these two narrow questions
I don't (always) use cycle lanes for the same reasons as many other cyclists - they're not well mantained, often badly designed and likely to hold you up.
In the example video that you're referring to, you can see that using the cycle lane means that you'd have to check over your shoulder at every single junction, as cars have priority if they're turning in. If anything's turning then you'd have to stop.
Imagine having a choice of two roads, one which you drive along without stopping and one which you had to slow down and check if was safe every 200 yards. Which would you prefer to drive on?
I don't know that road well enough, but you probably also have to give way to pedestrians at every pinch point, and you have to be careful of people reversing out of their drives too.
In fact, i was knocked off my bike going up the cycle lane running up beside Park Lane the other day because a pedestrian just stepped into it without looking, thinking or giving a s
t. I swerved to avoid him, clipped a lampost and went over the bars.
On the other side of Hyde Park, there's a new cycle lane and it's brilliant. So I use it. It's on the road, so it's away from pedestrians, it's separated from the road by a kerb, and it's wide enough for at least 4 bikes comortably, so you don't have t owait to overtake slower cyclists. However, the previous one was shared with pedestrians and too narrow to be two-way, despite actually being two way. It was dangerous and meandering, so I didn't use it.
As to your first question, it's almost a non-question in a way. Only someone that doesn't understand the law would ask the question in the first place, because the most simplistic answer is 'because I don't have to'.
If that argument was applied to cars, it would mean that you'd have to use a motorway every time you went anywhere, just because someone decided they were going to build one exclusviely for motor vehicles - even if it didn't go where you wanted it to.
Finally, legally, cyclists aren't obligated to use cycle lanes just because they're provided. There is, however, a law stating the use of mobile phones while driving.
There is only one person in the wrong in that video, and that's the driver.
In the example video that you're referring to, you can see that using the cycle lane means that you'd have to check over your shoulder at every single junction, as cars have priority if they're turning in. If anything's turning then you'd have to stop.
Imagine having a choice of two roads, one which you drive along without stopping and one which you had to slow down and check if was safe every 200 yards. Which would you prefer to drive on?
I don't know that road well enough, but you probably also have to give way to pedestrians at every pinch point, and you have to be careful of people reversing out of their drives too.
In fact, i was knocked off my bike going up the cycle lane running up beside Park Lane the other day because a pedestrian just stepped into it without looking, thinking or giving a s
t. I swerved to avoid him, clipped a lampost and went over the bars.On the other side of Hyde Park, there's a new cycle lane and it's brilliant. So I use it. It's on the road, so it's away from pedestrians, it's separated from the road by a kerb, and it's wide enough for at least 4 bikes comortably, so you don't have t owait to overtake slower cyclists. However, the previous one was shared with pedestrians and too narrow to be two-way, despite actually being two way. It was dangerous and meandering, so I didn't use it.
As to your first question, it's almost a non-question in a way. Only someone that doesn't understand the law would ask the question in the first place, because the most simplistic answer is 'because I don't have to'.
If that argument was applied to cars, it would mean that you'd have to use a motorway every time you went anywhere, just because someone decided they were going to build one exclusviely for motor vehicles - even if it didn't go where you wanted it to.
Finally, legally, cyclists aren't obligated to use cycle lanes just because they're provided. There is, however, a law stating the use of mobile phones while driving.
There is only one person in the wrong in that video, and that's the driver.
Edited by Kell on Monday 19th September 14:39
Edited by Kell on Monday 19th September 14:44
My reason for not using cycle lanes is same as above, they stop and start at random places turfing you back into traffic, have helpful signs telling you to "dismount here to cross" and generally take longer and more effort than if you were cycling on the road. Having to stop and start on a bike is a real pain.
My favourite cycle path is the one that used to be an old railway line that runs along the side of Lake Annecy. It's a proper two lane cycle route, with space to accommodate people going fast and slow.
Best of all, when the path crosses roads, the bikes have priority and the cars have to give way.
My favourite cycle path is the one that used to be an old railway line that runs along the side of Lake Annecy. It's a proper two lane cycle route, with space to accommodate people going fast and slow.
Best of all, when the path crosses roads, the bikes have priority and the cars have to give way.
I don't 'always' use cycle lanes because
mostly where I live they are shared pedestrian usage - pedestrians do not look for bikes on a shared use pavement, neither do dogs. They meander across the path swerving for no apparent reason. These also promote the opinion it is acceptable to cycle on any pavement - it's not!
In the dark the bollards aren't lit that are randomly placed everywhere
People pull out of driveways across them without looking - I don't want to be bounced into the middle of the road.
They are not designed for bikes going faster than approx. 5mph. Defeats the object of being on a bike...
The new one from Kingston to Surbiton is on the wrong side of the road - you would have to stop, cross the road to get to it, travel approx. 200metres down it, stop again, cross back over the road then continue on the road again. And they have narrowed the road to do this outside the church where everyone parks making it dangerous for cars and bikes. Waste of my taxes...
mostly where I live they are shared pedestrian usage - pedestrians do not look for bikes on a shared use pavement, neither do dogs. They meander across the path swerving for no apparent reason. These also promote the opinion it is acceptable to cycle on any pavement - it's not!
In the dark the bollards aren't lit that are randomly placed everywhere
People pull out of driveways across them without looking - I don't want to be bounced into the middle of the road.
They are not designed for bikes going faster than approx. 5mph. Defeats the object of being on a bike...
The new one from Kingston to Surbiton is on the wrong side of the road - you would have to stop, cross the road to get to it, travel approx. 200metres down it, stop again, cross back over the road then continue on the road again. And they have narrowed the road to do this outside the church where everyone parks making it dangerous for cars and bikes. Waste of my taxes...
I use cycle lanes wherever I can, if only to avoid the attentions of drivers like the one in that clip.
But as above, they are often not fit for purpose. Many older cycle lanes where I live and ride (mostly SE/SW and Central London) were thrown down in a hurry by councils whose only thought was to meet their quota of cycle lanes. They are often so dangerous and ill-thought out as to be unusable, and so being little used are also ill-maintained. By comparison roads are generally reasonably well designed and in OK condition.
What I do like and use a lot are the cycle routes however - these avoid the worst traffic by using back roads, and often take you via interesting places you might not see otherwise - the back way round Wandsworth one way system being a favourite. Over the Wandle Creek (complete with rusting barge hulk exposed at low tide) and along the riverside to Putney, instead of round the fume-choked gyratory. What's not to like?
But as above, they are often not fit for purpose. Many older cycle lanes where I live and ride (mostly SE/SW and Central London) were thrown down in a hurry by councils whose only thought was to meet their quota of cycle lanes. They are often so dangerous and ill-thought out as to be unusable, and so being little used are also ill-maintained. By comparison roads are generally reasonably well designed and in OK condition.
What I do like and use a lot are the cycle routes however - these avoid the worst traffic by using back roads, and often take you via interesting places you might not see otherwise - the back way round Wandsworth one way system being a favourite. Over the Wandle Creek (complete with rusting barge hulk exposed at low tide) and along the riverside to Putney, instead of round the fume-choked gyratory. What's not to like?
Wonderful example on Priory Lane (where the video was taken), outside the Priory itself:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4618644,-0.25049...
It's shared pedestrian & cycleway. As it's only on one side of the road, cyclists in both directions need to share a space no more than 3 feet wide. As the kerb curves round, the cyclist travelling right to left actually needs to go further into the oncoming cycle lane to avoid the kerb. And then there's the markings. With a car exiting and cyclists using the cycleway, who needs to give way to who? How about if a car is turning in - as a cyclist do you slow and shoulder check to check no-one is about to do that?
There's a mini-roundabout just down from there too:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4623841,-0.25015...
..which again is a nightmare of give-way markings. As a cyclist on the cycleway, I'm not sure who I should be giving way to - traffic heading in the same direction and turning left? Traffic emerging from my left? Do I just wait until there's no cars using it to proceed?
Or you could of course just ride on the road, as you're legally allowed to, and avoid all this ambiguity entirely.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4618644,-0.25049...
It's shared pedestrian & cycleway. As it's only on one side of the road, cyclists in both directions need to share a space no more than 3 feet wide. As the kerb curves round, the cyclist travelling right to left actually needs to go further into the oncoming cycle lane to avoid the kerb. And then there's the markings. With a car exiting and cyclists using the cycleway, who needs to give way to who? How about if a car is turning in - as a cyclist do you slow and shoulder check to check no-one is about to do that?
There's a mini-roundabout just down from there too:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4623841,-0.25015...
..which again is a nightmare of give-way markings. As a cyclist on the cycleway, I'm not sure who I should be giving way to - traffic heading in the same direction and turning left? Traffic emerging from my left? Do I just wait until there's no cars using it to proceed?
Or you could of course just ride on the road, as you're legally allowed to, and avoid all this ambiguity entirely.
Examples of when I might use a cycle lane
"Cyclists", those lycra-clad, red light-ignoring, tax-avoiding nuisances of the road, are not really the targeted demographic for most of what passes for cycle lanes in ths country and are, more or less, happy mixing it with other traffic.
People who simply want to go somewhere by bike need safe passage more than anything else, something which the prioritisation of vehicular traffic over time has rendered almost impossible in many places. Properly specified and maintained cycle infrastructure provides this safe passage.
If I was able to have a 3-5 mile bimble to work via decent cycle lanes I wouldn't dream of doing it on the road.
At the same time, if I'm going out on a 50 mile ride on a Sunday there's almost zero chance of me using one as it would not be suitable for my speeds nor fair on the more leisurely users, the people travelling by bike.
Unfortunately this country has a lot of "cyclists" and not very many people who travel by bike. Proper cycle infrastructure changes this.
- If I was cycling slowly, say an average of 12mph or less
- If I'm cycling with my family
- Where the cycle lane is well maintained and fit for purpose
- When the lane surface is poorer than the road
- Where the lane is narrow and dangerous for the numbers of users
- When the lane is punctuated by turnings/crossings every 50-100m
- When any significant speed is likely to introduce risk with slower cyclists/pedestrians
- When I'm riding in a group
"Cyclists", those lycra-clad, red light-ignoring, tax-avoiding nuisances of the road, are not really the targeted demographic for most of what passes for cycle lanes in ths country and are, more or less, happy mixing it with other traffic.
People who simply want to go somewhere by bike need safe passage more than anything else, something which the prioritisation of vehicular traffic over time has rendered almost impossible in many places. Properly specified and maintained cycle infrastructure provides this safe passage.
If I was able to have a 3-5 mile bimble to work via decent cycle lanes I wouldn't dream of doing it on the road.
At the same time, if I'm going out on a 50 mile ride on a Sunday there's almost zero chance of me using one as it would not be suitable for my speeds nor fair on the more leisurely users, the people travelling by bike.
Unfortunately this country has a lot of "cyclists" and not very many people who travel by bike. Proper cycle infrastructure changes this.
okgo said:
Where is the thread OP refers to?
Was searching for the clip thread as well...I use this cycle lane going up Constitution Hill, Poole - it is wider than the lane left for cars!
I don't use most of the other cycle lanes near me because they are on the pavement.
sjg said:
Wonderful example on Priory Lane (where the video was taken), outside the Priory itself:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4618644,-0.25049...
It's shared pedestrian & cycleway. As it's only on one side of the road, cyclists in both directions need to share a space no more than 3 feet wide. As the kerb curves round, the cyclist travelling right to left actually needs to go further into the oncoming cycle lane to avoid the kerb. And then there's the markings. With a car exiting and cyclists using the cycleway, who needs to give way to who? How about if a car is turning in - as a cyclist do you slow and shoulder check to check no-one is about to do that?
There's a mini-roundabout just down from there too:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4623841,-0.25015...
..which again is a nightmare of give-way markings. As a cyclist on the cycleway, I'm not sure who I should be giving way to - traffic heading in the same direction and turning left? Traffic emerging from my left? Do I just wait until there's no cars using it to proceed?
Or you could of course just ride on the road, as you're legally allowed to, and avoid all this ambiguity entirely.
Had to smile to myself, swing left on the second clip, and we have a cyclists who doesn't use cycle lanes either. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4618644,-0.25049...
It's shared pedestrian & cycleway. As it's only on one side of the road, cyclists in both directions need to share a space no more than 3 feet wide. As the kerb curves round, the cyclist travelling right to left actually needs to go further into the oncoming cycle lane to avoid the kerb. And then there's the markings. With a car exiting and cyclists using the cycleway, who needs to give way to who? How about if a car is turning in - as a cyclist do you slow and shoulder check to check no-one is about to do that?
There's a mini-roundabout just down from there too:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4623841,-0.25015...
..which again is a nightmare of give-way markings. As a cyclist on the cycleway, I'm not sure who I should be giving way to - traffic heading in the same direction and turning left? Traffic emerging from my left? Do I just wait until there's no cars using it to proceed?
Or you could of course just ride on the road, as you're legally allowed to, and avoid all this ambiguity entirely.
I know the cycle lane in question, I chose not to ride on it every single day the for the last 5 years.
Happy to give OP a list of reasons why, but looks like its been done well above. There are more reasons of course that are not mentioned, such as the fact to get on to it coming from Roehampton lights, you have to cross traffic, then to get back off it to carry on into Richmond Park you have to cross the traffic again.
To be perfectly honest, the only reason it is there is because there is a school at the Roehampton gate, and I suppose they didn't want kids cycling on the road.
Happy to give OP a list of reasons why, but looks like its been done well above. There are more reasons of course that are not mentioned, such as the fact to get on to it coming from Roehampton lights, you have to cross traffic, then to get back off it to carry on into Richmond Park you have to cross the traffic again.
To be perfectly honest, the only reason it is there is because there is a school at the Roehampton gate, and I suppose they didn't want kids cycling on the road.
Exactly as everyone has said - I cycle along there every day and the cycle lane is pointless unless you're at jogging pace.
Cycle lanes only work if the access / egress is practical and you don't have to give way every 50 yards - the new Westminster to Tower bridge one is great, the new kingston to surbiton one is looking worryingly useless and its not even finished yet - and its made the road very narrow, there are going to be a lot of very angry people getting stuck behind bikes there.
Cycle lanes only work if the access / egress is practical and you don't have to give way every 50 yards - the new Westminster to Tower bridge one is great, the new kingston to surbiton one is looking worryingly useless and its not even finished yet - and its made the road very narrow, there are going to be a lot of very angry people getting stuck behind bikes there.
Here's the video in question.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-over-dri...
Is this the same cycle path that the cycling coffee shop owner got all heated about a while back?
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-over-dri...
Is this the same cycle path that the cycling coffee shop owner got all heated about a while back?
esuuv said:
Exactly as everyone has said - I cycle along there every day and the cycle lane is pointless unless you're at jogging pace.
Cycle lanes only work if the access / egress is practical and you don't have to give way every 50 yards - the new Westminster to Tower bridge one is great, the new kingston to surbiton one is looking worryingly useless and its not even finished yet - and its made the road very narrow, there are going to be a lot of very angry people getting stuck behind bikes there.
Yes, that one is total sCycle lanes only work if the access / egress is practical and you don't have to give way every 50 yards - the new Westminster to Tower bridge one is great, the new kingston to surbiton one is looking worryingly useless and its not even finished yet - and its made the road very narrow, there are going to be a lot of very angry people getting stuck behind bikes there.
te. It was perfectly fine before, no idea why they have changed it.Kell said:
Here's the video in question.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-over-dri...
Is this the same cycle path that the cycling coffee shop owner got all heated about a while back?
Yes. Though he was getting annoyed at someone heading towards RP (which would involve two road crossings as I say above).http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-over-dri...
Is this the same cycle path that the cycling coffee shop owner got all heated about a while back?
Totally unrelated to the subject but more to do with the video, what is that annoying effect of blurring the left and right thirds of the video all about?
It only seems to have been a 'thing' since the last 12/18 months in your social media type videos but it really gets on my tits for reasons I can't explain
It only seems to have been a 'thing' since the last 12/18 months in your social media type videos but it really gets on my tits for reasons I can't explain
Kell said:
Here's the video in question.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-over-dri...
Is this the same cycle path that the cycling coffee shop owner got all heated about a while back?
So this thttp://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/row-over-dri...
Is this the same cycle path that the cycling coffee shop owner got all heated about a while back?
t was filming on his phone whilst driving eh ?Isn't that 6 points these days ?
What a grade a Schmuck .
Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff