Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Majority of Bristol-Bath Railway Path users "frustrated" with each other

Research reveals extent of ill-feeling on flagship shared route

The extent of ill-feeling between users of the Bristol and Path Railway Path, an off-highway route shared by cyclists and pedestrians, has been revealed in academic research presented at the Royal Geographical Society in London – with more than a third of users surveyed keeping their frustration to themselves.

Hannah Delaney, a PhD candidate at the University of the West of England in Bristol, surveyed 600 users of the path and found that 52.3 per cent of users said that they had experienced frustration as a result of other people using the route on the day they were questioned.

Of those respondents, three in four – 76.6 per cent – said that they kept their feelings to themselves and did not confront the other users.

Speaking at an international conference at the Royal Geographical Society’s Kensington headquarters, hosted in partnership with the Institute of British Geographers, Ms Delaney said: “Government guidelines for shared-use paths are based on research that focuses on the observable conflicts that take place and thus the consensus is that conflict between users is rare.

“However, this research shows that when shared path relations are examined in more detail there are a great deal of frustrations bubbling beneath the surface.

“The survey highlights the difficulty of designing facilities for a mix of mode users. The majority of cyclists would like more information and guidance provided to all users on how to share the path, whereas some pedestrians would prefer to be separated from cyclists. There was also a feeling that some cyclists need to slow down.”

While cyclists were more likely to experience frustration as a result of other people using the path, they were also the most common cause of complaint among those surveyed, but fewer than four in ten respondents — 37.9 per cent – said that they would enjoy their journeys more if people on foot and on bike were physically segregated.

Ms Delaney plans to continue her research by conducting in-depth interviews with users of the path, as well as videoing their journeys, to better understand the sources of frustration for both cyclists and pedestrians.

Earlier this year, the sustainable transport charity Sustrans, which manages the path, said it was “not the place for reckless speed cycling” after a 9-year-old boy suffered a broken collarbone after being hit by a cyclist on the shared-use route.

Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.

Add new comment

53 comments

Avatar
Matt eaton | 10 years ago
0 likes

The B2B is so sucessful as it links two cities that are close enough to commute between by bike and have enough of a bike culture that the route is well used. There are, however, points that, in my view, really let it down.

The first is the way in which it has been marketed. Labelling it as a 'path' doesn't really give an acurate impression of what it is for. I associate paths with ambling along on foot, maybe with the dog, and not really having to concern myself very much with my surroundings. I'd prefer that it was labelled as a 'road' or 'highway'. Perhaps the name 'cycle road' or 'human highway' would be appropriote. We need to be clear that exists primarily as a piece of transport infrastrucure and is likely to be used as such. It's also marketed as 'traffic-free' which is a term that I dislike. Let's be accurate and change that to 'motor-traffic-free'. Walkers and runners should expect to encounter cycle traffic. When considering the language currently used to describe the 'path' it's unsurprising that walkers are found wandering all over the place, dogs are allowed to run loose and runners are plugged into their headphones and oblivious to those around them. These are all reasonable behaviours on a 'traffic-free path'.

On the subject of speed, there is a balance to be struck. I wouldn't condone the behaviour of the Strava-heads but there is also a requirement for infrastucture such as this to be able to carry users at a reasonable speed in order that journey times are acceptable. To me, an acceptable commute time wouldn't exceed about an hour so anyone commuting between Bath and Bristol would need to average speeds that would put them in line for some critisism from certain quarters. Assuming that the powers that be want to encourage active travel (which I don't think they do) it's vital to make infrastructure like this work at at least 15+ mph.

The B2B is good but it could be great if Sustrans and the local authorities started to treat it as a real piece of transport infrastrucure rather than a leisure facility.

Avatar
Giles Pargiter | 10 years ago
0 likes

Interesting series of comments. I think true to say that, really it is a backhanded revelation that the cycle path is so succesful that it now needs a "lane widening scheme".

I do not know this particular cycle path, but I think this is not altogether uncommon on others as well. For one thing, I think that as this is a "public highway" the highway code needs to be enforced - amongst cyclists as well as pedestrians. Perhaps signs at all the entry points mentioning that this applies might be a start.
Also, as others have implied, these routes are an extension of the cycle network we already have - they are pretty useless for actually getting anywhere - but good for diddling along with children e.t.c. I think their is no good reason to not accept that cyclists can easily be cruising along at in excess of 15Mph plus - if I wanted to walk, I would.
Problem is that if we are really to be taken seriously it needs to be acknowledged that we already have a superb cycle network; problem is it is cluttered up by dangerous machines that are far to freely allowed the PRIVILEDGE of using it (unlike us cyclists, pedestrians and horses - who have a right to be there).

Accordingly I personally think that all our highways that create problems for either cyclists, pedestrians or horses, should now have a lane closed and devoted to those who use them by right.
The PRIVILEDGED users can then sort out their own problems and should not be allowed to occupy them (the "highways") unless they can undertake and deliver a "no harm" mode of operating - in proven practice, promises are not good enough.

Avatar
BirdOnnaBike | 10 years ago
0 likes

I think we do need some clear, established protocol. I use Sustrans 65 most days and various issues (especially but not exclusively with pedestrians) come up and you have to react in a split second (and I am a sedate, middle aged leisure cyclist on a hybrid, not got a road bike and not trying to beat a Strava time).

If pedestrians knew which side they are meant to be on, and off-lead dogs were not allowed, younger children more adequately supervised... Life would be easier for everyone.

Last week, for example, in a single 20 mile ride, I had a few things happen. A runner, wearing an iPod, running fast and bang n the centre of the track at its narrowest point. I have a loud Pashley ding-dong bell - you can hear that thing from space. Usually it even manages to break through to people with iPods... Rang it several times, no reaction. He continued bang in the centre of the track. No way could I get round him. This went on for several minutes til mercifully he hit a bridge across the river when I could get past.

Same ride: some people with about five Westies, all offlead, all exciteable and bombing around.

Same ride: two cyclists riding abreast - a man on a more decent bike, who looked like a cyclist and a very wobbly, unsure woman on a rusty, wobbly mountain bike he's presumably found at the back of the shed and forced her onto to show her The Benefits Of Cycling. He's riding protectively alongside her as if she is very, very valuable. No problem - I slow down. As I approach them from behind and ring my bell, they look round, clock I'm there, the woman wobbles a bit more and I assume the man will move to the left, behind or in front of her but no - he stays protectively next to her at a point too narrow for 3 bikes. At the last minute he veers to the right, forcing me to ride between them (so exposing the woman to an even more dangerous situation, as he was so determined to stay abreast of her, whatever the consequences). I was forced to ride between them which I then had to pick up speed to do so I could get past her fast as she was so unconfident. I taught one of my kids to ride on the path but picked wide points and would never have forced a faster cyclist to go between me and the learner. Some people really have no brains.

Once in York, there is a clearly demarcated shared cyclist/pedestrian part of the path with, as a slight clue, big pics of pedestrians painted on the wider side, and bikes on the narrower. Countless, countless pedestrians walking happily slap bang down the centre of the bike lane (I helpfully pointed out the metre tall picture of a bike to one, as I passed. Keeping my face neutral and friendly). I think that happened maybe 5 times in about a mile of track.

I think Sustrans should develop their Highway Code and post it at various points at the start/end of tracks and midway. After a while on a track you recognise the regulars, and the regular pedestrians on 65 seem to be sensible, in the right place, and will exchange a friendly hello quite often as we pass... I generally have had more problems with serious runners running centrally at narrow points, than I have had with casual walkers, too - just an observation.

Have also seen more than once in the past week - people out cycling with 3 or 4 year olds, who look very wobbly and unsure indeed and letting them bomb, totally out of control, down hills on any side of the track - having to stop and lose momentum cos I'm coming up the said hill. And also, a woman sitting texting at one of the BMX bits, totally oblivious to child, whilst her 3 year old wandered across the path of cyclists - some adults, some older teenagers trying to do their thing on the little hills.

The other thing to factor in is horse-riders. As a cyclist I'd like some guidelines. Do I ring my bell when approaching a horse that is in front? Will that scare it?

We need clear guidelines to make these tracks safe and fun for everyone.

Avatar
mrmo replied to BirdOnnaBike | 10 years ago
0 likes
BirdOnnaBike wrote:

The other thing to factor in is horse-riders. As a cyclist I'd like some guidelines. Do I ring my bell when approaching a horse that is in front? Will that scare it?

Nothing mechanical around horses is the only sensible approach, if you are coming up behind a horse use your voice to alert the rider, simply ask the rider if it is ok to pass and do so wide and slow. Horses are incredibly "stupid" animals anything can and will spook them, and quiet fast moving bikes are very likely to cause an issue.

Avatar
farrell replied to mrmo | 10 years ago
0 likes
mrmo wrote:

Nothing mechanical around horses is the only sensible approach

I wholeheartedly disagree:
http://www.orangefarmhardware.com.au/image/cache/Tenderisers-700x700.jpg
http://www.buycatering.com/catalogue/images/Fimar_No22_Mincer.jpg

Avatar
Aileen | 10 years ago
0 likes

I use this path daily to commute & frequently as part of a weekend BathCC club rides. The vast majority of cyclists, runners & walkers (including school children) realise it is a shared facility & show mutual respect. A bell or polite 'on your right' is effective 99% of the time. Many walkers even have the insight to carry a torch & wear reflective clothing when using the path after dark. My only gripe is with dog walkers who allow their dog off the lead or worse, use an extending lead.
The cycle path is fantastic facility & the envy of those who have to share their ride route with cars.  1

Avatar
cavasta | 10 years ago
0 likes

Why the use of the word 'hate' in this page's URL? (http://road.cc/content/news/129039-majority-bristol-bath-railway-path-us...)
Using the Brief add-on for Firefox (a news feed manager add-on), the headline appears as 'Majority of Bristol-Bath Railway Path users hate each other'.
The Daily Mail would be proud of you.

Avatar
garysw | 10 years ago
0 likes

It sounds like a fantastic facility somewhat ruined for some by the cyclists who have no concern for other people using it and Barabus has the answer

‘I ride the path Bath to Bristol at 5am every week day and it's lovely as it's just me and a few other fairly fast moving commuters. I then return at 4pm and it's a busy multi use path and you go slower and try and respect the other users'.

Also I bet many of the reckless and unthinking cyclists don’t respect the fact that on shared paths bells are essential

I do wonder why road.cc sponsored by Evans decided to report this small peice of research this way when it could have been used so positively as a reminder to look out for others on shared paths by using bells, cutting speeds and being friendly to other users?

PS we have a great 10 miles circular of off-road shared path in Nottingham alongside the canal and river - it is severely restricted in width under bridges but it still works so long as cyclists respect every pedestrian has an equal right to use the paths - some of us don't always remember this

Avatar
brooksby replied to garysw | 10 years ago
0 likes
garysw wrote:

Also I bet many of the reckless and unthinking cyclists don’t respect the fact that on shared paths bells are essential

Have you tried ringing a bell at pedestrians lately? Assuming they aren't plugged into an ipod and actually hear the bell, you get roughly the same reaction as if you'd shouted "Oi, you, out of the f-ing way!" at them. Anger, distaste, and a random jump to one side or the other.

I still do it, mind, but with no expectation that it will actually have any effect...

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to brooksby | 10 years ago
0 likes
brooksby wrote:
garysw wrote:

Also I bet many of the reckless and unthinking cyclists don’t respect the fact that on shared paths bells are essential

Have you tried ringing a bell at pedestrians lately? Assuming they aren't plugged into an ipod and actually hear the bell, you get roughly the same reaction as if you'd shouted "Oi, you, out of the f-ing way!" at them. Anger, distaste, and a random jump to one side or the other.

I still do it, mind, but with no expectation that it will actually have any effect...

This accords with my experience, about 50% of the time.

Pedestrians should wear a sign on their back to signify whether they are of the 'bells are rude and aggressive' persuasion or the 'why didn't you ring your bell' school.

Shared paths are generally a bad idea, in my opinion, at least for routes that involve actually going somewhere (maybe its OK sharing in a place that is more of a destination, like a town square or a shopping precinct).

Avatar
Clarkozy | 10 years ago
0 likes

It's such a shame to hear such disquiet and continued tribalism after all the hard work and charitable giving, in money as well as time, by willing volunteers to make this brilliant cycle path a reality. Why can't people collaborate? Do we really need signs? It's simple: as it is a shared use path - keep left, cyclists slow down for pedestrians and use the bell, particularly if there are children (who can often be a little unpredictable with their growing world experience), parents hold hands of small children, pedestrians beware and walk in single file in narrow areas or when you see an oncoming cycle to ease space and flow. NB It may be of course, that there is confusion between pedestrians walking on the left with a shared use path (as a part of the flow) and the general rule of walking on the other side of the road into oncoming traffic.  16

Avatar
brooksby replied to Clarkozy | 10 years ago
0 likes
Clarkozy wrote:

It's such a shame to hear such disquiet and continued tribalism after all the hard work and charitable giving, in money as well as time, by willing volunteers to make this brilliant cycle path a reality. Why can't people collaborate? Do we really need signs? It's simple: ...

Unfortunately, its not simple. Its a great walk, so people walk. Majority of people don't cycle, so think its a footpath which cyclists are allowed to cycle on (so, don't think about issues like long leads, pavement/lane discipline, loose dogs, loose children). Majority of cyclists on there think its a cycle path that pedestrians happen to be allowed to walk on (as opposed to all the other cycle lands where people walk/drive on them anyway  3 ).

The local paper (The Post) (not known for its tolerance of anyone on two wheels) is currently working very hard on driving a big fat wedge between all the Railway Path users - lots of clickbait "debates" and editorials - so I hope they don't get their hands on this "research".

Avatar
Al__S | 10 years ago
0 likes

Ask Dutch people whether they're frustrated with other people whilst cycling. I bet they are. Especially at commuting times when it's busy. We all hate humanity.

Avatar
BertYardbrush | 10 years ago
0 likes

All shared paths are the same.Monsal Trail in Derbyshire is awful at weekends. Loose dogs in the tunnels. It's like an anarchic motorway.
These routes need some basic rules, they are highways and should have a code or at least an accepted etiquette.

Avatar
BigAl68 | 10 years ago
0 likes

Anway as the weather gets colder and the daylight shorter the path will once again return to a far less congested thoroughfare. I do think there are plenty of places where the path could be widened which would help with issues with walkers and cyclists. There could be some signage which would help advising walkers which side to walk as opposed to the current free for all that leads to most of the confusion and probable ire on both sides. I see BANES council added some painted signage on the canal path to stop conflicts under one of the bridges and I think also at the two tunnels.

Basically as far as I can see the path is a victim of its own success as previous posts have stated but I wouldn't want it anyother way. The increase in traffic this summer was far higher than I can remember over the past few years and maybe that is the combined efffect of a good summer and more people taking up cycling both of which are a good thing. And if the strava boys want to set records on the path or use it as part of their training then I suggest they get up earlier as they will find it empty especially on a weekend morning and then they can get a coffee at Warmley waiting rooms on their way home.

Avatar
antigee | 10 years ago
0 likes

shared use paths that have high volume of use shouldn't be held up as problems but successes - sadly where user conflict occurs it is then being used as an excuse for not providing better facilities - contrast this with problem roads with high traffic volumes where the outcome will be investment in the road sometimes simply to protect drivers from the dangers they create by their own impatience

as a half cynical aside would be interesting to establish what proportion of those complaining about cyclists on shared paths drive to use the facility and are possibly simply extending their road hatred of cyclists to those they meet on shared paths  4

Avatar
BigglesMeister replied to antigee | 10 years ago
0 likes
antigee wrote:

shared use paths that have high volume of use shouldn't be held up as problems but successes - sadly where user conflict occurs it is then being used as an excuse for not providing better facilities - contrast this with problem roads with high traffic volumes where the outcome will be investment in the road sometimes simply to protect drivers from the dangers they create by their own impatience

as a half cynical aside would be interesting to establish what proportion of those complaining about cyclists on shared paths drive to use the facility and are possibly simply extending their road hatred of cyclists to those they meet on shared paths  4

I agree, living in Canterbury we have a similar (but smaller) problem on a cycle path along the river. Between the park and ride and the town centre there are armies of walkers, 3 abreast, with pushchairs and unleashed dogs etc who quite often point out that "this is a footpath and not for bikes"!!!!!!

Pedestrians are motorists without cars.

I'm sure these pedestrians would behave very differently on country lanes when faced with the threat of being mowed down by a fellow motorist travelling at 60mph.

Avatar
Initialised | 10 years ago
0 likes

If bikes aren't allowed on motorways why are pedestrians allowed on cycleways?

Avatar
CYvonne | 10 years ago
0 likes

The conflicts on the Bristol Bath cycle/ railway path demonstrate the need for segregated cycle paths. Shared use paths are fine for leisure routes but are not acceptable as real commuter routes.

There's nothing wrong with wanting to travel by bike at 15+ mph without having to share with cars/busses/lorries.

Avatar
jacknorell replied to CYvonne | 10 years ago
0 likes
CYvonne wrote:

There's nothing wrong with wanting to travel by bike at 15+ mph without having to share with cars/busses/lorries.

+1

Avatar
Dnnnnnn replied to jacknorell | 10 years ago
0 likes
jacknorell wrote:
CYvonne wrote:

There's nothing wrong with wanting to travel by bike at 15+ mph without having to share with cars/busses/lorries.

+1

It's not the wanting, it's the doing in environments where it's inconsiderate. There's nothing wrong with *wanting* to amble at 3mph without having to share with cyclists (or cars, etc.) But we can't always have what we want, and quite rightly so when it would be at the expense of others.

Avatar
JeevesBath replied to jacknorell | 10 years ago
0 likes
jacknorell wrote:
CYvonne wrote:

There's nothing wrong with wanting to travel by bike at 15+ mph without having to share with cars/busses/lorries.

+1

Wanting something is fine, expecting everyone else to accomodate it less so. As a colleague of mine pointed out, conflict arises when resources become scarce - everyone wants their own bit of space, but there isn't enough to go around. Hence we have to find a way to make better use of the space we do have, which means that ALL users might have to consider their own behaviour not just that of others.

Avatar
mrmo replied to JeevesBath | 10 years ago
0 likes
JeevesBath wrote:

Wanting something is fine, expecting everyone else to accomodate it less so. As a colleague of mine pointed out, conflict arises when resources become scarce - everyone wants their own bit of space, but there isn't enough to go around. Hence we have to find a way to make better use of the space we do have, which means that ALL users might have to consider their own behaviour not just that of others.

Which is all well and good, but where do bikes fit in? Motorways are for fast vehicles.Roads, have been coopted by cars, trucks, buses, and pavements are for pedestrians, if they aren't blocked by parked cars, trucks and buses. Shared use paths are all to often really pavements where cyclists are tolerated as long as they don't travel faster than a fast walking pace.

If you want people to get out of cars then the infrastructure needs to be there to enable it, and that means having routes that benefit the mode of transport.

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... replied to JeevesBath | 10 years ago
0 likes
JeevesBath wrote:
jacknorell wrote:
CYvonne wrote:

There's nothing wrong with wanting to travel by bike at 15+ mph without having to share with cars/busses/lorries.

+1

Wanting something is fine, expecting everyone else to accomodate it less so. As a colleague of mine pointed out, conflict arises when resources become scarce - everyone wants their own bit of space, but there isn't enough to go around. Hence we have to find a way to make better use of the space we do have, which means that ALL users might have to consider their own behaviour not just that of others.

Well, rather obviously, one way to "make better use of the space we have" is to dedicate more of it for use of space-efficient vehicles like bikes, in preference to cars which tend to use extravagant and wasteful amounts of that space, no?

I mean, seriously, how on Earth can you make that point and fail to notice that some (drivers) want rather more space per head than others, what with cars being rather large (and getting larger every year)?

Avatar
Goldfever4 | 10 years ago
0 likes

Some cyclists ride too fast, scaring peds

Some cyclists make questionable overtaking decisions

Some pedestrians create chicanes by walking in the same direction but on the other side of the path from another pedestrian

Some dog owners remove the lead and let their dog run around everywhere

All are true and all are stupid and unnecessary. Many users need to use their heads a bit more and consider the 'shared' aspect of the path. Some need to develop patience. Others need to take their dogs to a park!!!

Avatar
AnalogueAndy | 10 years ago
0 likes
Quote:

the Railway Path..a crime-ridden rubbish-strewn gutter, used mainly as a wheeled Cresta Run by slavering Strava fanatics

That's the one  4

Today was a Classic case in point, last day of the school holidays, lots of young kids enjoying a day time ride, then come 'rush hour' they're joined by the Wacky Racers (wannabe speed freaks who should come-and-have-a-go-(at Odd Down)-if-they-think-they'  11 re-fast-enough.

It's not the 'Cycle Path' it's the Railway Path, the first - the one that led to the creation of Sustrans. It's a Shared Use Path, it's absolutely fantastic that it's now so heavily used and it's really not that hard to ride sensibly and get along with everyone (even dog walkers)  11

Avatar
jazzdude | 10 years ago
0 likes

So is it saying that cyclist hate pedestrians and vice versa or that all users hate all other users regardless of which mode? I can understand cyclists being frustrated by pedestrians because they don't stay on the correct side. Maybe some cyclists don't either but in my experience pedestrians tend to walk side by side occupying the full width and don't bother to move over until you've almost hit them when they scowl at you. My main issue is that the paths are shared and not separately dedicated. It's a Heath Robinson approach by the local authorities who don't have the funds to build proper cycle roads and we have accepted it just like everything else in rip-off britain.

Avatar
sonyjim | 10 years ago
0 likes

What's worse than all of this is that at the end of the bath end of the cycle way the cyclists have priority over the cars and the number of near misses I experience every day is amazing. Make the CYCLISTS give way and make the pathway a bit safer. Some of the cyclists just rocket out of the gate and go straight out in front of the cars and don't give them a chance.being a cyclist for more than 40 years I can why Sustrans have done this but it is wrong and somebody is going to get hurt soon

Avatar
truffy replied to sonyjim | 10 years ago
0 likes
sonyjim wrote:

Make the CYCLISTS give way soon

It takes a brave man to voice opinions like that here.

sonyjim wrote:

somebody is going to get hurt soon

And no doubt the anti-motorist nazis here will have something to say about /that/!

Avatar
mrmo replied to sonyjim | 10 years ago
0 likes
sonyjim wrote:

What's worse than all of this is that at the end of the bath end of the cycle way the cyclists have priority over the cars and the number of near misses I experience every day is amazing. Make the CYCLISTS give way and make the pathway a bit safer.

I don't now the end so there may be a real issue,

Why should the motorists have priority over cyclists? Surely the drivers should be paying attention. i assume the markings are clear and the drivers know they should give way??

Pages

Latest Comments