Using cycle paths

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by reohn2 »

Mistik-ka wrote:Last year Mrs. M-k and I did our first tandem tour in England — five weeks from Oxford to Carlisle and back. Having rambled over much of the country on foot in past years we were prepared for the weather … but not for the tandem-proof barriers on the designated cycle paths, especially on National Cycle Routes. These were, without a doubt, the worst part of an otherwise splendid trip; I thought it appalling that Sustrans hasn't at least posted a warning about them for poor ignorant foreigners such as us.

We're planning another tandem expedition for next spring. This time we are carefully laying out a route that avoids cycle paths — especially along canal towpaths — where there is no easily accessible on-road alternative. We shed too many tears, disseminated too much profanity, and acquired too many bruises and scrapes lifting a heavy tandem over and around the "tandem traps" last time. The cycle paths could be a wonderful draw for tourist dollars … but for us they discourage cycle touring more than they encourage it :? .

I agree there's much improvement needed to the Great :roll: Britain cycling experience,the stupidity of cyclepath planners know's no bounds I'm afraid :?
You have my sympathies.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Bicycler »

Motorcycle barriers are overrated for their purpose and a nuisance to all kinds of legitimate path users. They are usually installed to prevent a problem which doesn't exist and usually not implemented well enough to prevent local youths who know the area from accessing the route on their bikes anyway.
ukdodger
Posts: 2992
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 5:32pm
Location: Sunny Surrey

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by ukdodger »

Bicycler wrote:Motorcycle barriers are overrated for their purpose and a nuisance to all kinds of legitimate path users. They are usually installed to prevent a problem which doesn't exist and usually not implemented well enough to prevent local youths who know the area from accessing the route on their bikes anyway.


But better than nothing.
User avatar
Tigerbiten
Posts: 2503
Joined: 29 Jun 2009, 6:49am

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Tigerbiten »

ukdodger wrote:
Bicycler wrote:Motorcycle barriers are overrated for their purpose and a nuisance to all kinds of legitimate path users. They are usually installed to prevent a problem which doesn't exist and usually not implemented well enough to prevent local youths who know the area from accessing the route on their bikes anyway.


But better than nothing.

Sorry .........

But nothing is better than the barriers if you have a non-standard bike.
Bicycler
Posts: 3400
Joined: 4 Dec 2013, 3:33pm

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Bicycler »

But better than nothing.


Well, no, not really. I don't think so anyway. Nothing would at least let all legitimate users make use of the path. I can't say I've noticed a particular prevalence of motorbikes on the innumerable paths and trails without them. What I do see is the problems I and others have with the things. To their credit Sustrans and the CTC hate the ruddy things and try to get them removed where possible.

I have some sympathy where they are introduced to combat a known problem, but they seem to be routinely placed on new paths to counter residents prophecies of doom; a genuine obstruction to a hypothetical problem. In places where there is a problem with motorcycles I can't help but think that there must be better design solutions which don't exclude some cyclists and people with disabilities.

As with all cycle infrastructure we need only look at the continent where these things don't appear to be necessary. Certainly I've rarely had problems with such obstructions on my trips. The way in which visiting cyclists always complain about them indicates that they are not something which cause such a problem at home. Why should our cycle paths require more restrictive barriers than elsewhere?
Last edited by Bicycler on 23 Nov 2014, 10:29pm, edited 1 time in total.
ukdodger
Posts: 2992
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 5:32pm
Location: Sunny Surrey

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by ukdodger »

Tigerbiten wrote:
ukdodger wrote:
Bicycler wrote:Motorcycle barriers are overrated for their purpose and a nuisance to all kinds of legitimate path users. They are usually installed to prevent a problem which doesn't exist and usually not implemented well enough to prevent local youths who know the area from accessing the route on their bikes anyway.


But better than nothing.

Sorry .........

But nothing is better than the barriers if you have a non-standard bike.


But then you'd also have scramble bikes ridden by yobbos giving you even worse problems.
ukdodger
Posts: 2992
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 5:32pm
Location: Sunny Surrey

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by ukdodger »

Bicycler wrote:
But better than nothing.


Well, no, not really. I don't think so anyway. Nothing would at least let all legitimate users make use of the path. I can't say I've noticed a particular prevalence of motorbikes on the innumerable paths and trails without them. What I do see is the problems I and others have with the things. To their credit Sustrans and the CTC hate the ruddy things and try to get them removed where possible.

I have some sympathy where they are introduced to combat a known problem, but they seem to be routinely placed on new paths to counter residents prophecies of doom; a genuine obstruction to a hypothetical problem. In places where there is a problem with motorcycles I can't help but think that there must be better design solutions which don't exclude some cyclists and people with disabilities.

As with all cycle infrastructure we need only look at the continent where these things don't appear to be necessary. Certainly I've rarely had problems with such obstructions on my trips. The way in which visiting cyclists always complain about them indicates that they are not something which cause such a problem at home. Why should our cycle paths require more restrictive barriers than elsewhere?


Possibly because there are certain places where the problem with M/C's is worse.
User avatar
Tigerbiten
Posts: 2503
Joined: 29 Jun 2009, 6:49am

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Tigerbiten »

ukdodger wrote:But then you'd also have scramble bikes ridden by yobbos giving you even worse problems.

How can these -> https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ie=UTF8& ... 1,,0,-0.14 stop a scrambler ........... :?

I know I can ride on the grass to bypass this set but why should I.
Most/all of the cycle/shared path around Wellingborough have these type of blockages at the start and finish of them and I cannot use most of them even if I wanted to.
Northampton tends to be slightly better, but I cannot get onto the Brampton Valley Way in Northampton due to an unpassable barrier, I need to go a few miles up the road to get on it and I still have to get off the trike to pass a barrier.
ukdodger
Posts: 2992
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 5:32pm
Location: Sunny Surrey

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by ukdodger »

Tigerbiten wrote:
ukdodger wrote:But then you'd also have scramble bikes ridden by yobbos giving you even worse problems.

How can these -> https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?ie=UTF8& ... 1,,0,-0.14 stop a scrambler ........... :?

I know I can ride on the grass to bypass this set but why should I.
Most/all of the cycle/shared path around Wellingborough have these type of blockages at the start and finish of them and I cannot use most of them even if I wanted to.
Northampton tends to be slightly better, but I cannot get onto the Brampton Valley Way in Northampton due to an unpassable barrier, I need to go a few miles up the road to get on it and I still have to get off the trike to pass a barrier.


That's not like any M/C barrier I've ever seen. It wouldnt stop anything. Most arent like that.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by 661-Pete »

It's not happened to me yet, but then there are relatively few cycle paths in our area and I don't often go on the roads which have them. Last week, out shopping, my wife and I found our normal route to the supermarket was being resurfaced and impassable, so we took a different road which does have a shared-use pavement. No-one complained - but in fact the cycle path signs are rather small and inconspicuous.
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Mick F »

reohn2 wrote:It mustn't be as clear as the google 'picture' paints it :?
Try this then.
https://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=callin ... .8,,1,6.26
Google Streetview tends to flatten out hills, plus the camera is mounted high up off the road.

Satellite image:
Crossing point on far left, Central Motors on far right.
Screen shot 2014-11-24 at 07.51.36.png
I reckon that if Central Motors wasn't there and they wanted to put a filling station there, they wouldn't get planning permission due to the road being unsuitable.
Mick F. Cornwall
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by mjr »

Bicycler wrote:Motorcycle barriers are overrated for their purpose and a nuisance to all kinds of legitimate path users. They are usually installed to prevent a problem which doesn't exist and usually not implemented well enough to prevent local youths who know the area from accessing the route on their bikes anyway.

No barriers exist which allow cycle access but prevent motorcycle access. The handlebar height ones must block most mountain and hybrid bikes if they are going to block motorcycles, because mountain and hybrid bikes basically use motorcycle handlebars (600mm wide, 22.2mm diameter). The ground-level ones must block tricycles, trailers, cargo bikes and anything with a low bottom bracket if they are going to be narrow enough to block motorcycle tyres. The slalom ones must block tagalongs, tandems, trailers and cargo bikes if they are going to be tight enough to block scrambling motorbikes.

I feel that most barriers are installed because of councillor or officer bigotry and cycle-hatred rather than in response to problems. This is shown by installation like Bicycler describes, where there is no reported abuse by motorcycles, where it's possible to access the route by motorcycle avoiding the barrier (like the slalom example above) and where the barriers are installed at junctions to distract riders at a crucial point and cause injury, rather than in the middle of the long sections where motorcyclists would surely speed along and actually be a nuisance.

Credit to my colleagues at KLWNBUG and the responsive officers at Norfolk County Council - we're starting to get these crash hazards removed officially at last http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2014/09/11/gre ... portunity/ - I understand that in the past, some local riders had taken to cutting them off at ground level and patching the surface. We've also had some tracks re-widened with them being dug out by a mini-digger and surface patched after badly-cut-then-decomposed-then-acted-as-a-weed-bed encroachment. It is possible to get these problems fixed if riders persist in chasing them up.

There is still a minor "GET ON THE PATH" problem, despite the "Share The Road" junk coming out of NCC Road Safety, but it's completely independent of whether there's even a cycle path or track, let alone whether the path is up to standard. One motorist actually felt incensed enough to write to the local newspaper a while ago complaining about riders not using the cycle path over one of the river bridges - but none of the bridges have cycle paths (although I'd very much like one of them to, because it would allow the choice of avoiding two right turns both on restricted-visibility 30mph corners).

I'd like to see highway authorities required to have to choose: meet the recommended widths and curves and so on in the guidelines, or use a different "substandard cycleway" marking to highlight the dangers to rides and to illustrate to non-cyclists just how much of everyone's taxes have been wasted building rubbish or allowing once-decent stuff to decay into rubbish.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
ukdodger
Posts: 2992
Joined: 18 Aug 2007, 5:32pm
Location: Sunny Surrey

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by ukdodger »

mjr wrote:
Bicycler wrote:Motorcycle barriers are overrated for their purpose and a nuisance to all kinds of legitimate path users. They are usually installed to prevent a problem which doesn't exist and usually not implemented well enough to prevent local youths who know the area from accessing the route on their bikes anyway.

No barriers exist which allow cycle access but prevent motorcycle access. The handlebar height ones must block most mountain and hybrid bikes if they are going to block motorcycles, because mountain and hybrid bikes basically use motorcycle handlebars (600mm wide, 22.2mm diameter). The ground-level ones must block tricycles, trailers, cargo bikes and anything with a low bottom bracket if they are going to be narrow enough to block motorcycle tyres. The slalom ones must block tagalongs, tandems, trailers and cargo bikes if they are going to be tight enough to block scrambling motorbikes.

I feel that most barriers are installed because of councillor or officer bigotry and cycle-hatred rather than in response to problems. This is shown by installation like Bicycler describes, where there is no reported abuse by motorcycles, where it's possible to access the route by motorcycle avoiding the barrier (like the slalom example above) and where the barriers are installed at junctions to distract riders at a crucial point and cause injury, rather than in the middle of the long sections where motorcyclists would surely speed along and actually be a nuisance.

Credit to my colleagues at KLWNBUG and the responsive officers at Norfolk County Council - we're starting to get these crash hazards removed officially at last http://www.klwnbug.co.uk/2014/09/11/gre ... portunity/ - I understand that in the past, some local riders had taken to cutting them off at ground level and patching the surface. We've also had some tracks re-widened with them being dug out by a mini-digger and surface patched after badly-cut-then-decomposed-then-acted-as-a-weed-bed encroachment. It is possible to get these problems fixed if riders persist in chasing them up.

There is still a minor "GET ON THE PATH" problem, despite the "Share The Road" junk coming out of NCC Road Safety, but it's completely independent of whether there's even a cycle path or track, let alone whether the path is up to standard. One motorist actually felt incensed enough to write to the local newspaper a while ago complaining about riders not using the cycle path over one of the river bridges - but none of the bridges have cycle paths (although I'd very much like one of them to, because it would allow the choice of avoiding two right turns both on restricted-visibility 30mph corners).

I'd like to see highway authorities required to have to choose: meet the recommended widths and curves and so on in the guidelines, or use a different "substandard cycleway" marking to highlight the dangers to rides and to illustrate to non-cyclists just how much of everyone's taxes have been wasted building rubbish or allowing once-decent stuff to decay into rubbish.


They dont? I've seen those that do. To get a cycle through you have to lift the front wheel. Sure you could lift a M/C front wheel but only with a lot of effort and then you have to get the rest through a narrow opening and even if you did how many time would you want to bother. The Whitstable to Newcastle C2C has several of them. I think they're an honest attempt to confine paths to walkers and cyclists. More power to them.
Elizabeth_S
Posts: 254
Joined: 27 May 2013, 3:18pm
Location: somewhere

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Elizabeth_S »

There is a narrow 40 mph road around here that is busy, so they put a cycle path on the pavement, but with no changes to the pavement, it is unsurfaced and narrow in places, too narrow. Anyhow there is a narrow access (it is unsurfaced I think, but looks firm) to a field or a structure part way down the 'cycle path' from the road and there is a 10 inch drop, maybe more, vertical drop, to the access from the kerb. This isn't signed on the cycle path (there isn't room) so anyone who doesn't know it is there, and it isn't obvious, will just fall off the edge. I would cycle on the road.
Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: Using cycle paths

Post by Mark1978 »

As said above the barriers are installed just because the belief is that's what you need to do for off road paths. No evidence of them being required or anything like that.

This is my favourite example of stupid unncessary barriers http://goo.gl/maps/GX60G

That's used on the Great North Bike Ride, and the barriers are so inconvenient that people try to go around them and down the curb instead. I was crossing there this year and one of the riders tried that and fell off their bike.

In contrast this former railway route http://goo.gl/maps/KIFeP last year was tarmacced and the barrier removed entirely. Much much better and I've never encountered any issues, apart from with dogs obv. ;)
Post Reply