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?

Speaking as a cyclist combined cycle and walk lanes are absolute turd. I am forever having to dodge between moronic pedestrians who choose to walk two or three abreast or change direction without looking for bikes, yet they still look at me like it is my fault if we nearly have a coming together.

In a toss up between a road and a combined pathway the road wins every time.

As an addition to the above comment. If you are a motorist please do not get angry if you see a cyclist not riding right up against the side of the road. More often than not it is filled with debris that has been swept to the side after an accident or manhole covers and drains that are not flush with the road surface.

Please try to do some of your own cycling before you judge how we ride. You will then gain a sense of perspective.

@SkiingIsHeaven @Sometimesonly me three. 'Why aren't you on the cycle path'. Well, it's going the wrong way, it involves crossing junctions I don't need to cross making it more dangerous for me and it spills you back onto the main road just when things get really hairy anyway. I don't point at flyovers and ask drivers why they aren't up there on the motorway, I just presume the road they're on is the one they need to be on.

JellyBabiesFan
I agree with you. Cyclists, like other road users, are allowed to use the road, not just the strip in the gutter that some motorists wish we used so they don't have to bother doing a safe and appropriate overtake.

I always ride with appropriate space between me and the edge of the road. If an aggressive or unpleasant driver tries to pull a dodgy overtake or is generally being an arse, I want to have space to move in that sort of situation. I certainly don't want to have no room and be at the mercy of idiots who can't follow the highway code because they're too busy huffing and puffing about other, totally legal, road users.

Agreed. I never ride right on the edge of the road. It leaves no room for manoeuvre if there are potholes, manhole covers, cars pulling out. If you have never ridden a bike you might not realise it. Similarly my husband used to complain about people pushing prams in our road - when I had kids I understood. The camber is too steep to push a pram or wheelchair.

I use on in the morning, the road has tram tracks but I have to be aware of pedestrians, dogs on extended leads etc and accept the give way lines joining roads. But I use the road when I can. Part of a route I use has a cycle lane separated by bollards from the traffic but the locals use it as a parking area forcing me to potentially damage their cars or forcing me out into the road. I use a cycle lane or shared path when I have to or feel it's safer and adjust my speed accordingly in the same way a driver should adjust their driving to the conditions on the road.

Shared use paths are TERRIBLE. I detest walking on them (have to keep getting out of the way of bikes). I loathe riding on them (have to keep slowing down/stopping/worrying about kids and dogs). Worse still if I have children w me, either on foot or on bikes.

For a cycle path to work for all users it needs to be as wide as a traffic lane, so that you can have a couple cycling side by side, and space for a faster cyclist to overtake. If cyclists can't overtake safely on a cycle path, then they will always use the road instead.

I’m not keen on shared pavement / cycle paths at all. I think cyclists should be on the road, or on a cycle path that is separate to the pavement.

In Brighton sea front the cycle path is down the middle of the pavement, and the cyclists ride mercilessly down there. There will inevitably be pedestrians who don’t realise what the set up is - children, old people who don’t expect this etc - and there have been awful accidents.

Rather this than cyclists biking on the pavements, I hate this! It's a FOOT path twats

Cycle paths and sometimes lanes are scattered with cars and debris that will cause punctures i.e. stuff thrown out of car windows. Cheers for that.

What make more sense is to give it over to bikists to determine what is safest for them and not rely on car drivers to decide. Car drivers kill us.

I'm in a very anti car London borough who openly say they want to drive out cars and their genius solution for cycle lanes is that the road has pavement, then a separate cycle lane, then residents parking bays then the road you actually drive down, so four parallel lanes effectively.

I'm sure this looked good on paper but it is desperately dangerous for people getting out of the parked cars, especially if older, with dogs, or small children. You have a choice of standing in the (much narrower) road trying to get passengers who need help out or in the cycle lane. I tend to opt for the road as at least I can hear the traffic. The cyclists come tearing along and give no shits that you are clearly, for example, struggling to get a toddler out of the back seat or lifting out a sick dog. I've had several near misses where as I straighten up whilst lifting an animal out on a trip to the vets, a cyclist literally brushes me as they zip past at top speed.

I'm not sure what the solution is to cycle lanes but this isn't it. There have been a lot of complaints about how dangerous this layout is but the council give no fucks and apparently there is no requirement to risk assess.

Random - are you saying you are more at risk from bike riders, than you are car drivers?

Just be nice to more vulnerable road users, simple

It's quite a bit more complicated than that.

It really isn't

No, it really is.

Most cycle lanes in the UK are not fit for purpose - they tend to give way at every side road, are often full of parked cars and other obstructions such as signs, they are short so not worth going on for a few hundred metres, the surfaces are generally poor, they are not swept, they are too narrow, they are shared with pedestrians, dogs etc.
Unfortunately, many cycle lanes increase the danger to cyclists at the same time as slowing them down.
There are a few good ones but the vast majority are a complete waste of time and money. Obviously no one is willing to spend money on design or maintenance, and nor are they willing to take any road space away from cars. So you get a crap result. If the same money was spent on cycle lanes as on new roads things would be very different.
If you really want to know, have a go on it yourself - it will probably be pretty obvious why cyclists aren't using it.

S'true.

-------

I'm not sure what the solution is to cycle lanes but this isn't it. There have been a lot of complaints about how dangerous this layout is but the council give no fucks and apparently there is no requirement to risk assess.

The problem is quite clearly bad design. Do you also expect motorists to stop to let you get your toddler out if the car safely? Or is it fine for them to carry on by while cyclists are expected to wait for you to get out safely?
Bear in mind that if you get hit by a car you will be dead and the driver will be fine. If you get hit by a cyclist the chances are you will both be fine but if not, they are equally at risk of injury as you. So obviously the cyclist is more highly motivated to avoid a collision (as well as the laws of physics meaning they are ten times lighter so ten times less damaging if they hit you).
So saying that car drivers are either safer or more careful is simply not true

It's the same here op. I cycle and drive, when on my bike I use the cycle paths but it's not safe to go more than 10mph on them due to pedestrians, debris, and poor surface. I have a huge hill (1:4 up then down) between me and work, unfortunately at least twice a week I'm delayed by many minutes by unfit mamil types who should have taken the long flat way around (which the bike path follows) you can't overtake due to bends

Junctions are the most dangerous part of cycling - poor quality cycle paths can be more dangerous than the road because all they've done is add some paint to the footpath or roadway but not actually addressed the junctions in any way. Taking primary position on the main carriageway is often the safest thing to do especially at a junction or roundabout (and is entirely legal and exactly what a bike instructor would tell you to do).

In a congested city, a bike is quicker than a car over a short to medium distance trip so they really aren't the cause of slowing you down. In more rural areas, I doubt you are stuck behind a cyclist for longer than a few minutes. Tractors, caravans etc could all do the same thing. It doesn't really make a big difference to your life does it? It just annoys you for some irrational reason.

There are a bunch of psychological studies on irrational dislike of cyclists:
www.inverse.com/article/54442-cycling-psychological-roots-of-road-rage

www.bbc.com/future/article/20130212-why-you-really-hate-cyclists

So you probably think you are making some really cutting point by asking this question but actually you are just a bog standard irrational idiot (who is unfortunately allowed to control a heavy metal object at high speed)

RandomLemonVerbena
It sounds like bad design, but I don't understand why the hatred for cyclists not making way for you getting out a car?
Surely you get out of a car next to a cycle lane the same way you would a car parked in a bay next to the road?
You wouldn't expect the motorised traffic to stop and make way for you getting a toddler out the car if your bay was to the side of the road, so why the anger towards cyclists for not making way for you?
I 100% support you challenging the poor design, but there's a weird running trend on this thread that wherever cyclists are, they shouldn't be/they ought to be making way for anyone and everyone else in any circumstances and are wrong if they don't.

Cycle lanes work when they are wide, well signed and along side very busy roads like the DC into Hull or the Embankment coming out of Plymouth.
But ultimately, all a cycle lane does is postpone the point at which the cyclist comes into contact with car drivers.

The solution?
that car drivers stop killing cyclists by driving better and the only way to do that is deterrent sentences - Prison, 10 year bans.

As that isn't going to happen, all cyclists can do is use helmet cams and keep reporting near misses.

Cyclists could also help themselves and promote better relations by moving out the way of traffic when safe to do so (you d be amazed at the number of friendly waves and toots i get when i do so) and avoid the very busiest of roads, again if possible.
Personally i wouldn't cycle on a dual carriage way.

there's a weird running trend on this thread that wherever cyclists are, they shouldn't be/they ought to be making way for anyone and everyone else

I think because driving is seen as important transport that are getting you to places, while bikes are some frivolous hobby you’re inflicting on Proper Road Users.

So, person in car has to slow down for 20 seconds to safely pass a person on bike - unreasonable cyclist, slowing down the traffic! But person on bike has to stop at every single side road to let every single car out because the cycle path does - well that’s only good and right, those people in cars have places to go!

Of course in reality the person on a bike could be going to work, while the person in a car could be off for a wander round the shops to kill a few hours.