Police officer: cycle path too risky to use with family

It's laughable that these pricks are actually paid to come up with these "solutions".

My commute is c. 1h 10m each way. If I used the cycling infrastructure that is available to me I think it would easily take me 2h and therefore absolutely impractical. And that doesn't take in to account the fact that the surfaces are so knackered/filthy etc. I would undoubtadly get more punctures and damage to my bike. Some of them would be uncomfortable to ride on a hardtail mountain bike...

Why aren't these very basic things taken in to account when designing this stuff?

Why aren't road sweeping requirements a consideration? I rode along a cyclepath Northbound on The Parkway (A312 I think), just NE of Heathrow last week. It was covered in so much crap that it was actually dangerous to ride with slick road tyres. And that's not too mention the glass etc. covering some of the underpasses that followed between there and the Hillingdon Cycle Circuit.

I have recently cycled twice from central London to Tunbridge Wells, taking slightly different routes each time.

With some limited exceptions, the cycling infrastructure is just a dangerous shambles.

The worst, yet most common, solution is the strip-of-green-paint cycle lane at the edge of existing roads.

In my view this is nearly always more dangerous than not having the cycle lane there at all for 3 main reasons:

-  it is in the gutter, so if you cycle in the lane you are necessarily cycling over gratings, manhole covers etc

- motorists assume that because there is a separate lane it is save to overtake without pulling out at all

- if you do try to cycle in a sensible location on the road-  usually just outside the cycle lane- you get increased aggression from motorists because you are not using the lane than you would if it was not there at all.

In a couple of places where there are wide pavements the cycle lane is on the pavement.  But of course, you then have to give way at every single sidestreet, and are at risk of people pulling out of the drives.  And, the lane is regularly impeded by street signs etc, including at one point a bus shelter which covers the entire lane.

There are a number of stretches where signed routes follow quite imaginative quiet back streets-  but many of them have large speed bumps.  And frequently, you have to go up or down kerbs.

It is pretty dispiriting that so much time and money has been spent on measures that, frankly, make things worse.  Surely it shouldn't be beyond the wit of the authorities to include people who will acutally be using the infrastructure in the planning stages?

Sean Walsh, south west cycling champion for Highways England, said: “We are currently looking at undertaking work at the roundabout under junction 16, and we have been working with local partners in South Gloucestershire and the South Gloucestershire Cycle Forum."

Double bolox.

They have never been to the SGlos cycle forum, have never consulted with them or even bothered to inform them of what they plan to do.

"Sean Walsh, south west cycling champion for Highways England, said: “Safety is the top priority for Highways England and we work closely with vulnerable road user groups, including cyclists, pedestrians and motorcyclists, to ensure that we accommodate their needs."

Bolox. 

What he should have said, being accurate, would be "Driver safety is the top priority for Highways England and we work closely with drivers' groups, whilst completely ignoring vulnerable road user groups, totally excluding pedestrians and cyclists, to ensure that we don't accommodate their needs."

Tell you what Sean, get in touch and come for a ride with me around this roundabout, like the Chief Inspector did, then issue a press release admitting that you've made it more dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists.

We have a similar situation in my town: a few years ago a child was driven off a narrow road by a lorry. This road is extensively used by cyclists, horse riders and pedestrians and lacks a pavement. When the parents reported the incident to the local police, they were advised by the police not to let their child ride on the streets.  In theory the police should be reporting problems with poor/missing infrastructure or incorrect speed limits, or need for traffic calming, etc. to the Council and getting this addressed. However they seem to advise cyclists to avoid using the roads. Something wrong here?

as usual, the cycle 'lane' is fine except when it encounters any form of junction, then it is crap...

also, it is on the wrong side of the road for most of the properties along that road... great for bypassing the junction, but nothing proposed to get across the road safely for access to/egress from any property...

I use that path quite regularly going northbound as the Aztec West roundabout just south of that is not good in a car, let alone on a bike. Southbound I always use the road and would love to see what the Ch Inspector would say about the countless times I have been squirted and had abuse shouted at me because I'm not using the cyclepath. I'm pretty sure I know what response I would get if I reported each case to the police. 

It's certainly not the only cycle path that crosses a motorway slip road – e.g. M6 J29, where the A6 crosses. I gave it a try recently but agree with the comments above that it's safer to use the road.
And this is one of the big worries about the growth in cycling infrastructure – all too often it's poorly planned and all to often it's piecemeal. I can't tell you offhand how many places there are on the A6 north of Preston where the bike lane just disappears at a pinch point – exactly where you actually might benefit from having one. Must be at least a dozen. And then the ignorant minority of motorists moan when you don't use substandard bike lanes.

I ride up there fairly frequently. I have used that path, both coming from Aztec West heading towards Almondsbury and coming from further down the A38. As a path, it's ok. It probably is wide enough for the use it gets, ie very little (mind you, I've not used it at rush hour). Crossing the first (entry) slip road is dodgy for the reasons stated. The exit slip has lights.  But before that there is badly designed access to the path. After the roundabout (ie north of it, in Almondsbury) I'm not really sure what happens to the path – I guess it continues on the pavement. Heading south, into Bristol, I've never used it because, well, it's on the wrong side of the road, there's no way of getting to it. 

All in all, if you're not already a confident cyclist on busy roads, you've no way of getting over that junction other than making a dash and hoping. Which is okay, because no one uses it. Now why is that? 

I work near here. I've got to be honest and say as a cyclist I never knew the cycle lane was there because I've always just taken the lane on the roundabout. And I certainly don't plan on changing, the road is fine here as long as the cyclist is in a primary position.

More worryingly, I've never realised the cycle lane was there as a motorist, and I've used the junction dozens of times. Being honest there have been occasions where 've probably been going too quickly to be able to stop if there was someone crossing the slip road there.

It should be a prerequisite that any wannabe councillor should have to cycle for six months on every cycle lane/road in the constituency they intend to stand for. Maybe then cyclists would be shown a bit more consideration.

I ride that route occasionally and never use the cyclepath,  it's much safer to use the road, wait and the lights and go when they turn green,  rather than play chicken with the traffic joining the motorway.   

I saw this on Twitter earlier and yep, it looks awful.

I think the problem is neatly summed up at:

“met national guidance” followed by  “not designed for family cycling”

Highways England again... They seem completely hopeless at cycling.

Their "cycle strategy" document is all of 4 pages long and mostly useless

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycling-strategy

Contrast with the Dft document, at 48 pages long, which is actually quite good.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/draft-cycling-and-walking-in...

“I’m an experienced cyclist and personally I’d use the road, it seems safer for me to use the road than it does to use the cycle routes designed for cycles.”

That's my exact view on a lot of cycle paths that I've seen. Motorists get all upset if they see you not using the cycle infrastructure but they fail to see how it's not fit for purpose.

The best bit is from the linked BBC article, where the council spokesperson says ""Our records show that there isn't a problem with accidents involving cyclists at this location,"

Oh well, no one has been killed yet. Must be ok.