AIBU to expect cyclists to use the cycle lane?

[Riddlemedee]

I am lucky to live in a lovely seaside town. There is a very busy 50mph costal road in and out. It is single lane. There is a substantial wide , well maintained, recently renovated cycle/walk path along the whole route. But some (not all) cyclists still use the road. This is dangerous, causes huge traffic backlogs and the more impatient (stupid) drivers take risks when overtaking the cyclists. I can’t see a reason why they would still use the road, any ideas anyone?

Why are cycle paths always covered in broken glass? It's almost like people bear cyclist a grudge

I'm sure some of it is deliberate, but it does go to illustrate just how much rubbish motorists chuck out of their windows.

yes. MAMILS rule!

also YABU to expect:

• runners not running in the middle of the road/in cycle lane
• drivers indicating
• people not taking up 2 spaces when parking near school during school run
• parents holding their kids' hands for safety
• pedestrians who step onto road displaying great agility not to slow down immediately to speed of a fatigued sloth
• dickheads, wankers, tossers, selfish cunts

ahhh, all better

Yabu - cycle lanes are usually rubbish, they don’t join up, cars park in them, they have drains and debris in them, they pass alongside rows of parked cars which might open their doors, etc. Cyclists are perfectly within their rights to cycle in any position on the road.

Yes they do have a right to be on the road, however I’m trying to understand why the beautiful, wide, well maintained cycle lane isn’t being used. That is all.

Most cycle lanes, especially one's that are not on the road are useless. If there are side roads then people joining from or turning into the side roads don't tend to observe the cycle lane stop line and you are also constantly anticipating whether someone will stop or not. If you want to go fast at all then this can be super stressful.

If I'm pootling I go in a cycle lane, if I'm riding 20+ mph then I go on the road which is better designed to accommodate such speed

@underhisi. I am a slow fair weather cyclists these days so I haven’t used this particular cycle lane as it’s too long between stretches for me.

What everyone has said makes sense to me though. I wonder if the faster cyclists are worried about other slower users. The council are asking for feedback on two new cycle routes in the area it would be a shame if they spend all the money and then it’s not suitable for all cyclists.

If it’s a shared path it’s probably fine for families to pootle along at slow speeds, avoiding strolling pedestrians and off lead dogs, but not safe for commuting at speed.

There’s a new ‘cycle path’ near me. Over about half a mile it’s a mix of:

• shared pavement with pedestrians
• proper segregated cycle path on the road
• path on the road marked out with paint, full of parked cars.

So if you were using it you’d be constantly stop-starting, weaving in and out of the traffic, and putting yourself in more danger than you would on the road. So nobody uses it. Cue much grumbling among locals when anybody suggests any cycle infrastructure anywhere, now, because “they’ve got a perfectly good cycle path there and nobody even uses it!” Yeah because it’s useless.

Access is sometimes a problem too. Some paths, if you miss the ‘in’ then you can’t safely access the cycle path.

Because it’s not a cycle lane. It’s a pavement that someone decided should be allowed to also have people cycling on it. If the powers that be actually understood cycling they’d invest in proper infrastructure rather than shoehorning it onto existing, inadequate infrastructure.

Shared cycle/pedestrian cycle lanes are fine if you pootle along at 10mph, but when you can reach speeds of 20+mph the road is better suited.

If it's a shared path, it's only suitable for cycling at sub-10mph else it's not safe for pedestrians.

Also, what looks to drivers to be a fab cycle path, may not actually be good for cycling.

Eg near us, is a lovely wide, on pavement shared route running alongside a busy road. However, there are LOTS of drop kerbs, making it v unpleasant to cycle along. Plus a huge number of the house holders drive in to their garden, meaning they have to reverse out.

You've only got to be hit once by a reversing car who physically can't see you before you decide that on road is safer for you.

I get that it's rubbish for everyone, that's why we all need to press for transport networks that work for all users, not sub standard offerings that don't meet needs.

For me as a cyclist, the main reason why I might not use a cycle path is that cars are parked on it...why or why is this allowed?? It's dangerous trying to weave in and out of parked cars. It's safer to just keep on the road.

Once when I was on a cycle path, a car stopped a few metres up the road and a passenger got out, it was too late for me to stop and I hit the opening car door and went flying on to the pavement. Had I used the road instead, this wouldn't have happened to me.

There is similar near me, a new cycle path along a stretch of coastal road.

I only ever use it when I'm pootling along at a leisurely pace on my hybrid bike with DS.

When I'm on my road bike I'm training and on that particular long flat section of road I'm usually doing something like 30mph.

Do you really want me whizzing past pedestrians/dog walkers/kids on bikes/scooters at those speeds?

Another issue I've frequently come across as a cyclist is that the access on/off segregated paths is often totally inadequate. For example, they are often so poorly signed that you've missed the entrance before you know it's there and are then trapped on the road, unable to cross whatever barrier is segregating it. Or the exit points where you have to rejoin the carriageway are so badly designed that they're more dangerous than just using the road. Or entrances/exits to the cycle path don't actually exist at the points I want to join/leave. It's maddening!

YANBU - there is a very long, well maintained cycle path on my route to work and invariably there are a bunch of twits slowing down rush hour traffic refusing to use it.

NO it's not shared
YES it's well maintained
YES it's two-way

OP it completely depends on the quality of the cycle lane. Some are painted lines on the road and are utterly useless. Most (if all) in the UK don't give you obvious priority at side roads so you have to keep stopping. Changing the Highway Code to be clearer on that would be a big improvement.

However, it is annoying when you have a well surfaced separate cycle path and the MAMILs still don't use it.

this looks like a lovely brilliant new cycle lane to you, but the people actually cycling aren’t using it. Is it more likely that they have some mendacious wish to slow down the almighty traffic? Or is it more likely the cycle lane isn’t as great as it looks to someone who isn’t using it

There is one near me which really is brilliant because I both cycle and run along it and it isn't very busy so it isn't like you have to keep slowing down for toddlers etc. I actually think it is the mendacious wish of the MAMIL to slow down the traffic in that instance but, as said above, so many cycle paths are rubbish.

The other issue with the painted lines is that they are inconsistent with giving cyclists enough clearance because they are not wide enough for you to give them enough clearance.

I narrowly avoided an accident because someone was allowing their dog to walk in the cycle lane on a really long leash. I agree that a lot of cycle lanes are not fit for purpose and dual use lanes are bad for cyclists AND pedestrians.

In addition to what others have said about the quality of the cycle path and the right that cyclists have to use a road, I find it odd to question which legal route cyclists are taking.

Would you question motorists about which road they took to get to their destination?

Access can be an issue too. On the one I mentioned, there is a very high kerb so the charitable view on the MAMILs is that they can't get over the kerb if they can't get onto it at the beginning.

Cars parked on them too - yes another box ticked (ditto for pavements but don't get me started on that again!)

@SpikeDearheart the ones on the new coastal cycle path near me are gravel! Lovely tarmac cycle path with gravel entries/exits across the grass that divides the cycle path from the road

Would you question motorists about which road they took to get to their destination

I absolutely wonder why some lorries and vans use narrow lanes when they're using them as through routes, yes.

@datacolour I hope you were alright and that they were fined at least! Similar thing happened here and a young lad died. Some people just don't understand that for cycle lanes to work cars must keep out.

I think I know where you are OP and I believe there have been many petitions from cyclists to get rid of that cycle lane as it’s dangerous due to the pedestrians.

@NewPapaGuinea

Because it’s not a cycle lane. It’s a pavement that someone decided should be allowed to also have people cycling on it. If the powers that be actually understood cycling they’d invest in proper infrastructure rather than shoehorning it onto existing, inadequate infrastructure.

Shared cycle/pedestrian cycle lanes are fine if you pootle along at 10mph, but when you can reach speeds of 20+mph the road is better suited.

Local Authorities are wonderful at writing policies in support of cycling etc. They are shit at actually providing anything useful.

NO it's not shared
YES it's well maintained
YES it's two-way

Have you used it?

Could be a few reasons. Do walkers go in the cycling section? Is the cycling section covered in grit and glass?

A lot of serious cyclists think cycle lanes and shared footpaths are beneath them