Cyclists

[finisterre]

and they should stay in them

 

[219]

They need to be separated from other lanes by more than a painted line : a raised kerb would keep other traffic away and stop people parking on it .

 

[markjay]

...It ought to be mandatory to use cycle lanes where they are provided .

Yes... but how will it be enfrced? Cameras? that won't help as they have no registration marks... Perhaps mad chases of cyclists by police cars? Cyclists are realisticly immune to any type of enforcement, and this is not likely to change. The best that can be done is 'suggest' that they should use cycling lanes where provided, and hope that (some) would.

 

[bluevenetian]

Cyclists clogging up the roads? holding up faster means of transport? Not in London they're not!!!

One thing I've noticed, and this may just be me getting all paranoid....but when I'm cycling I really do get a sense that car drivers feel they are superior - just because they think they can afford a car, compared to "impoversished" cyclists....

 

[Charles Morgan]

The problem is Derek that in London (and I suspect other cities that have ancient road plans) most roads are narrow, congested with parked cars and pavements are cluttered with massive amounts of street furniture. Short of turning a lot of roads into pedestrian/cycling roads only, drivers and cyclists just have to co-exist. Given the average speed of motor traffic is now at 12 mph and falling, driving anywhere is a great exercise in frustration and much of that is taken out on those who seem to be holding things up, mostly with no good reason.

 

[stevieb15]

Steve

As much as looking at the Highway Code for cyclists, you must also adhere to the main principle of driving with due care and attention.

Many cyclists will ride two abreast to make themselves more noticable to other road users - mainly to stop them being mowed down from behind.

Live and let live IMO

Unfortunately that is generally not the case, at least in rural Staffordshire and West Sussex.
Cyclists ride two abreast so they can chat to each other and because they can and the cars can go to hell!
IMHO the responsible cyclist is more rare than the responsible dog owner.
As an aside, why do cyclists dress up in their favourite cycling teams lycra, it's as silly as me dressing up in a Bristol City kit when I go for a kick about down the park

 

[219]

Yes... but how will it be enfrced? Cameras? that won't help as they have no registration marks... Perhaps mad chases of cyclists by police cars? Cyclists are realisticly immune to any type of enforcement, and this is not likely to change. The best that can be done is 'suggest' that they should use cycling lanes where provided, and hope that (some) would.

Well , in the event of a cyclist being hit by a car because he was on the road when he should have been on the path - it would be evident he had broken the law . If cyclists riding on the road where a path was available found themselves automatically liable for the ( entirely avoidable ) damage to the other vehicle , the impact on their pockets would also be incentive to comply with the rules .

There are now cops on bikes and small motorcycles who are going after cyclists for disregarding traffic lights etc - so enforcement is possible .

 

[219]

car drivers feel they are superior - just because they think they can afford a car, compared to "impoversished" cyclists....

A lot of bikes cost more than I paid for all three of my cars put together !

 

[blue gnome123]

To the bike nerd (me!) you see plenty of people riding round my area on £5-7K bikes.

So when you see some cyclists don't look down at them since they probably have cars, pay plenty of income taxes (in-directly and directy for the orads) etc... I'm cycling tonight and one of the guys I'm riding with is the MD of a FT100 company. The days of cycling being the "poor man's" / "can't afford a car" man's sport are well over.

Also when you see a cyclist on the road don't let the red mist descend but please just think in their shoes for a moment, you are going to be delayed for a matter of seconds and pass them by with a good margin.

 

[Palfrem]

Cyclists have a tendancy to perspire rather too freely for my liking.

 

[219]

...when you see a cyclist on the road...... you are going to be delayed for a matter of seconds and pass them by with a good margin.

I agree that OUGHT to be the case , but I think the OP's point is that , in some cases , certain cyclists have no consideration for other road users and occupy the full width of one side of a road , holding up a queue of traffic behind , when they could very easily adopt single file formation , as advised in The Highway Code , and allow everyone to pass safely .

This complaint is not so far removed from that of inconsiderate tractor drivers who will drive for miles , oblivious of the queue behind - few of them seem to be aware that it is mandatory to pull over and allow following traffic to pass if there are six or more vehicles behind - some constabularies do prosecute for this but , sadly , only a few .

 

[blue gnome123]

I still do and have done a huge amount of cycling and I completely see the point of riding a single pace line and encourage this where appropriate. However my points is that the delay caused to motorists, usually a couple of mere seconds, is disproportionate to the sometimes fury you see from motorists. Just show a little consideration please.

 

[trapperjohn]

^Spot on Pontoneer.

Two cyclists riding side by side yapping about their day holding up shed loads of cars on a B Road does not do the cyclist cause any good whatsoever.

If I wanted to get home that slow I would go on a bloody bike myself.

 

[219]

I still do and have done a huge amount of cycling and I completely see the point of riding a single pace line and encourage this where appropriate. However my points is that the delay caused to motorists, usually a couple of mere seconds, is disproportionate to the sometimes fury you see from motorists. Just show a little consideration please.

Many of us on here ( myself included ) cycle as well as driving other vehicles .

From a driver's perspective , the ones I am commenting on are usually found on country roads and will hold up other traffic for considerable lengths of time where overtaking opportunities are limited and only one car may get past at a time , leaving others still fuming behind . Those are certainly the circumstances Steve complained about in his original post at the start of this thread .

 

[MOCAŠ]

They need to be separated from other lanes by more than a painted line : a raised kerb would keep other traffic away and stop people parking on it .

Like this? Admittedly, this one's only really segregated because it's a contraflow, but it does make sense where there's space (and funds) to do it. However, the reason raised kerbs are not more prevalent is that they are usually only viable for short stetches, where there is no requirement for car parking, bus stops or vehicular access to premises.

Placing cycle lanes within the roadspace is always going to be a compromise, particularly at junctions where sometime the only available solution is to place the cycle lane between a left-hand filter lane and the one for traffic going straight ahead. A few cyclists in have met their maker trying to out-manoeuvre trucks and buses as they transition from the kerb-side lane to the middle-of-the-road one. And I truly pity any cyclist who tries to negotiate one of the larger gyratory systems. Hyde Park Corner used to be nigthmare for them, until the option of cycling across rather than around it was introduced.

Sadly, there is also something of a "cycle lanes are for wimps" attitude amongst some of the more gung-ho cyclists. I know of a few suburban areas where local authorities have gone to great expense to install substantial lengths of cycle lane that is compleletly separated from the roadway, sometimes by grass verges or by using part of an extra-wide pavement. However, because these lanes are often an attractive option for less confindent cyclists, others who are looking to press on end up getting impatient with their path being blocked by 'dawdlers' and resort to using the roads.

 

[219]

To the bike nerd (me!) you see plenty of people riding round my area on £5-7K bikes.

So when you see some cyclists don't look down at them since they probably have cars, pay plenty of income taxes (in-directly and directy for the orads) etc... I'm cycling tonight and one of the guys I'm riding with is the MD of a FT100 company. The days of cycling being the "poor man's" / "can't afford a car" man's sport are well over.

The fact that so many of them (cyclists) are so well off , and it is a hobby rather than an essential means of transport , only adds fuel to the argument that they should pay directly towards their use of the highway , and for facilities provided for them .

 

[blue gnome123]

Owning a classic car is a hobby. Perhaps classic car owners should be paying full car tax too?

BTW all my cycling friends have cars and hence pay road tax? Which I beleive doesn't actually pay for the upkeep of roads anyway?

 

[trapperjohn]

So should cyclists pay for the upkeep of cycle lanes. I think so.

 

[MOCAŠ]

BTW all my cycling friends have cars and hence pay road tax? Which I beleive doesn't actually pay for the upkeep of roads anyway?

See posts 43 and 44 on this thread. It doesn't pay for the upkeep of the roads, which is why it isn't called road tax. (It used to, in the dim, distant past, but I suspect that was before anyone on this forum was driving).

It's called vehicle excise duty (VED) and is charged in relation to the car's emissions or engine capacity. Low-emission vehicles and those registered before 1 Jan 1973 (I think) are zero-rated to reflect the relatively low impact they have on the environment (in the latter case, due to the comparatively low numbers and mileage covered).

EDIT: from a previous debate...

For anyone who still thinks that car tax revenue is ring-fenced for road improvements, it isn't – since 1937 it has just gone to the government's general coffers, and the Road Fund itself was abolished in 1955.

 

[MOCAŠ]

So should cyclists pay for the upkeep of cycle lanes. I think so.

Again, see post 43.