Cyclists should use cycle lanes where they exist

[TychosNose]

Apologies if this sounds like I'm cyclist bashing. I don't mean to.

A road a regularly drive down has a completely separate cycle path which is along the footpath, separated from the road by a grass verge, but every single day I have to hover behind cyclists who insist on riding along the road rather than on the cycle lane (I'm driving a car obv.)

I have no idea why they do this. It's safer for them on the cycle lane surely?

It would also be faster because there are traffic lights on the road but not on the cycle lane (unless they jump the red light ... ).

Aibu to suggest they should be fined for using the road when there is a perfectly adequate, dedicated, safe, probably expensive cycle path?

Because I can cycle closer to road speeds than pedestrian ones. It is better that I am separated from unpredictable toddler, child on those bastard Heelys and dogs on an extendable lead, than a car has to slow down to 25mph for a few yards, then go round me. I am also a driver and a dog walker.

Why do you think they are using the road instead of the cycle path?

my experience is that separated cycle paths like this are often (not always) poorly paved and maintained and sometimes covered in glass and other unpleasant/dangerous stuff. If that's the case here, then the cycle path is not really safe or navigable, at least not at a reasonable speed, so there is no real alternative but to cycle in the road.

The cycle lanes are invariable where the broken glass and puddles collect.

The closer a cyclist rides to the kerb, the more likely they are to be shoved further into the kerb.

And what's it got to do with anyone else where I ride anyway?

Also a driver.

and by hover I assume you mean slow down slightly, momentarily, perhaps slowing you down for a few seconds, as opposed to actual 'hovering' (though some of these 4x4s you get nowadays are quite impressive)

Cycle paths aren't always very good - it's sometimes just the council paying lip service to 'green' issues - they can say that they have x amount of cycle paths in the borough, without actually maintaining them or putting them in logical places.

DH cycles very fast and is generally commuting. The condition and population of the cycle lanes often make them impassable. He is safer on the road and so are other pedestrians without him there. You'll just have to share.

But most cyclists are not doing 25mph, more like 10-15. And this is a 40 mph limit road. So do you think you're more important? Your journey should be disrupted by unpredictable toddlers, but mine should by cyclists?

If the cycle lane is safer I will use it,if it is one of the ones that is actually more dangerous I wont. I will make my own risk assessment.

Separate cycle paths are usually full of broken glass etc. They are sometimes filled up with very slow users - children, parents with tagalongs or child carriers of some sort. Road-speed cyclists (and many commuter cyclists ride at 20+ mph when congestion permits) are better off using roads.

The highway code recognises that cycles are actually vehicles - they're supposed to be on the roads.

probably expensive cycle path?

sometimes the cycle paths are just a bit of paint on the side of the road or the pavement, with a few stencilled cycles.

Have a cycle down it some day soon and see if you can work out why.
It could be any number of reasons - poor repair, a tendency to abandon you at awkward crossings, a tree in the middle (seriously, our new local cycle lane had this for months), broken glass, the hell that is Other People...

Ok I take your point about unsuitable cycle paths. That's fair enough. But as far as I can see (from my car) the cycle path looks fine. Except that it's next to pedestrians so that's the only reason I can think of for cyclists not using it but normally it's totally clear in the morning commute.

I genuinely don't get it.

ooops X-posted with almost everyone

My experience of cycle lanes as part of the footpath is that none of the pedestrians take any notice of the cycle lane making navigating them dangerous for cyclists and pedestrians. So is cyclist is trying to get to somewhere quickly then they are better off on the road

I can't cycle very well because I suffer from arthritis in my feet. Maybe I'll walk down with my very unpredictable toddler!

But most cyclists are not doing 25mph, more like 10-15. And this is a 40 mph limit road. So do you think you're more important? Your journey should be disrupted by unpredictable toddlers, but mine should by cyclists?

My journey to work is sometimes delayed by tractors and cows. You don't have a particular right to travel at a particular speed because you are in a car. I also live in a very popular area for leisure cycling. The time I am delayed by cyclists is nothing compared to the time I am delayed by heavy traffic, even when it isn't peak holiday season. You might as well argue that other cars should get off the road because they are slowing you down.

I'm in a rural area, so there aren't many cycle paths, but the one I have the choice of using is awful - theres lots of side roads down there, so you have to keep stopping and starting (unlike the road), it doesn't get swept so theres lots of gravel and stuff on there. It also ends at a point that makes rejoining the road really hard. And if you wanted to turn right at some point it would be impossible

YANBU. I have seen this. We have a particularly smooth and well maintained cycle path, which I have used as a cyclist.The path is also not very busy with pedestrians because it is not a road which is heavily populated with shops, schools or anything like that. It is along a 60 mph road, which is very busy. I have no idea why anyone would want to use the road instead but they do. I would certainly feel unsafe on the road.

Some cyclists are very annoying and selfish and some are very sensible (like car drivers)

No road user should be holding up other road users of something can reasonably be done to prevent it.

Rule 61
Cycle Routes and Other Facilities. Use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time it is unsafe to do so. Use of these facilities is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

Rule 63
Cycle Lanes. These are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway (see Rule 140). When using a cycle lane, keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users. Use of cycle lanes is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.

Here you are, OP - straight from the Highway Code.

So the cyclists are basically thinking " I don't want to be slowed down by pedestrians, so I'll use the road. Screw the car drivers, they can just wait I'm more important "

Buy merry the cars don't have another route, the cyclists do.

You're being a bit ridiculous OP. If everyone cycling on the roads took to a car instead, you'd be even more held up.

They are probably thinking 'I don't want to knock down a toddler / child on scooter/ elderly person' in this shared use path as they wander out with no warning, so I'll put myself at more risk to protect them

I feel your pain op. It's the same set up down the local main road. Immaculate cycle path but cyclists use the road because they don't want to be slowed down by the odd slower cyclists. Or pedestrian.

I would rather they turn the cycle paths into bridleways.