kingbling":3gvwo9wt said:
So why do councils build them ? they can't really be value for money. People may say if it save's a life but if a rider is killed on that stretch adjacent to the cycle path where does that leave the equation. Neil I do understand what you're saying and its a valid point
I don't know its a minefield isn't it
they build them because they had/have to.
But many are pretty poor and cars of course park on them, making them pointless or they jump you out into 90 degree bends, in tight junctions or the back of parked cars or ...
The shared paths are a better idea, as poor as they are for cyclist to use. they are not intended for fast commuters, but people plodding along and just more than walking pace. It is basically a 'cyclist can ride on the path' we've made it a fraction wider to allow that.
It's a shame councils don't sweep and clean cyclists tracks/lanes like they do the roads or cut the hedges back or think that cyclist mind going up and down driveways constantly. Image if roads had the constant drops that driveways cause, or had lamppost and signs placed in them
It should be remembered;
Pedestrian can walk on roads, cycle tracks/lane and paths
Cyclist can ride on cycle lanes/tracks and roads. They have to give way to pedestrians on the join use lanes.
Each has a right to do that.
Cars have to have a
license to ride on the road, it is not a right.