Cycle paths or road??

[JamesM]

The trouble with cycle paths is that in urban areas they generally sit nicely between peoples houses and the road.

Invariably people leaving their houses are concentrating on the traffic on the road, not whats coming along the cycle path.

Some chump pulls out of his drive straight into me... Weeeeeeeeeeee!

Drive side crank arm bent underneath the bottom bracket shell, fractured ribs.

Since that day I have always, and will continue to cycle on the road whether there is a cycle path or not.

Cyclists have as much right to be on the roads as cars and if I slow some drivers down occasionally, deal with it.

That's why I don't use one of the cycle paths on my commute, cars pulling out from driveways over the path without looking and then stopping at the road. They made the road narrower to put that path in too. I had a guy in a van shout at me once that I should be on the cycle path, 2 seconds later a car pulled out of a driveway. Had I have been on the cycle path I'd have hit it. That said though I wouldn't have if I had been doing 10mph, but that just empahsises my previous point.

 

[David B]

I completely agree that successfully encouraging cyclists to use cycle facilities is all about the quality of the product. It's achingly apparent to most cyclists that so many are just awful when you actually try to use them. Many 'shared use paths' are also completely inadequate for the needs of cyclists and as cyclists we can choose to use them and choose not to use them.

It's perhaps worth noting that the CTC successfully challenged a revision to the Highway Code a few years ago which implied that cyclists should use cycle lanes/paths wherever they are provided as an alternative to the road.
The original wording was maintained to ensure that the choice was still clearly optional. This was an important bit of work from the CTC which largely went unnoticed but could have had serious legal implications for cyclists had the proposed revision not been challenged.

But when was it we surrendered our roads to cars?
Because cars have become so dominant I suppose it's natural for it to breed such arrogance amongst so many drivers. (I should add I also drive regularly and see the perception of roads from the perspective of a driver, cyclist and pedestrian.)
Roads are so clearly designed to favour car use over all other road users, despite other road users having equal if not, at least historically, more right to be there.

I saddens me that people openly get so angry when they lose a few seconds of their time driving behind a cyclist who has as much right to be on the road as any motorist, no matter how important the car driver's journey.

Just to say, completely agree with your posting.

The fact that such vitriol is directed towards commuters especially, ie people who are using their bikes for a functional journey by going to work, is even more depressing.

Indeed and what many miss, is that in many of these cases, cyclists ARE traffic.

Many drivers have become so conditioned into minor rule infringements themselves, like 50mph in a 40 mph zone and do so without blinking at the consequences. At yet the same rule breakers are incensed when a cyclist breaks the rules.

But that is I suppose deviating from the original point of this thread.

The question was about whether you use your cycle path, and not whether you think everyone else should.
There have been some very measured responses and some not so measured.
It's only a no-brainer question if you choose not to think about it...

The damage, here - and there is true damage - is in the burgeoning view, that because there may be a cycle path around, that cyclists should no longer be using the road - it's this that is fostering ignorance, intolerance, belligerence and encouraging the increasing attitude that cyclists shouldn't be on the road, and are merely getting in the way of traffic.

All missing the point that in many cases, they ARE bloody traffic, and have a RIGHT to be using the road, instead of some limited, oft-abused privilege that in many cases is seemingly taken for granted (and perhaps should be removed for some people driving around in big metal cages, that forget their place in all of this) or misunderstood as being more important than other road users' RIGHTS.

And yes, I read the arguments about safety and pragmatism - and taken in isolation, fair thinking on an individual basis. But accepted as a generalism, just gets conceded and swept under the bandwagon that cyclists should simply be anywhere else but in the way of motorists.

Like you I'm a motorist too - in fact, truth be told, I drive far more miles than I cycle. And I long for the days before paths like this were created, because then, cycles, cars and other traffic HAD to cohabitate on the road. Cycle paths are never going to be comprehensive, so at times cyclists are always going to have to share some of the same space as motorists - but the problem with modern attitudes means that as such they face the likelihood of being increasingly marginalised.

Good post there. I simply don't get the "second class road user" attitude towards cyclists. Time was when horse riders fared somewhat better, though worryingly I have heard rumblings from the equine contingent that they too are increasingly on the receiving end of Toad of Toad Hall-style inconsiderate behaviour from certain types of motorist

David

 

[Drencrom]

Time was when horse riders fared somewhat better, though worryingly I have heard rumblings from the equine contingent that they too are increasingly on the receiving end of Toad of Toad Hall-style inconsiderate behaviour from certain types of motorist

There are numpties in all walks.

I commute past a couple of stables, and often I find that horse riders and stable workers are some of the worst for tailgating and passing too close to cyclists and pedestrians on narrow lanes. Mabe it's snobbery, maybe it's ignorance.

 

[highlandsflyer]

No, I just think horses see us as other horses in some kind of race.

 

[jamabikes]

if everyone wasn't always in such a rush to get every where and do everything then we wouldn't have a problem.

i use cycle paths all the time even if they are slower or take longer because its easier. that way i get to concentrate on the scenery or the people around me. i try to say hello to most people on my commute.

i have never and will never understand why ordinary people rush to get to work. i enjoy my jobs but i enjoy not doing them more. if it takes and extra ten minutes to get to work because of delays then alls the better as far as i'm concerned.

 

[lumos2000]

it depends who you work for, my last employer alowes 6 lates a year and they use a clock in system if your late by even a minuite your docked 15 min and have a disaplinary. there is a bottle neck and a lifting bridge just befour the work gates. at 7.55 in the morning its crazy cycles, bikes and cars all fighting for room and well over 2000 people work there. :roll:

 

[jamabikes]

it depends who you work for, my last employer alowes 6 lates a year and they use a clock in system if your late by even a minuite your docked 15 min and have a disaplinary. there is a bottle neck and a lifting bridge just befour the work gates. at 7.55 in the morning its crazy cycles, bikes and cars all fighting for room and well over 2000 people work there. :roll:

leave earlier then, that way you can enjoy your ride and surely if you have a good reason for being late they cant discipline you? you would be amazed at how many "punctures" i get on the way to work

 

[We_are_Stevo]

Car versus cyclists? Only one outcome...

 

[lumos2000]

it depends who you work for, my last employer alowes 6 lates a year and they use a clock in system if your late by even a minuite your docked 15 min and have a disaplinary. there is a bottle neck and a lifting bridge just befour the work gates. at 7.55 in the morning its crazy cycles, bikes and cars all fighting for room and well over 2000 people work there. :roll:

leave earlier then, that way you can enjoy your ride and surely if you have a good reason for being late they cant discipline you? you would be amazed at how many "punctures" i get on the way to work

you would be suprised, apperantly there is no good reason late is late. your not alowed to be onsite without clocking in for insurance purposes and once youve clocked in then you should be working or your wasting time. glad i don't work there any more. the company would reather spend 30 min in a meeting over 1 min lateness than let somone make up the time after work. bloddy middle management justifying their jobs :roll:

 

[Drencrom]

No, I just think horses see us as other horses in some kind of race.

Sorry, to clarify - when the riders and stable workers leave the stables in their cars, they drive like numpties.