Sustrans: Racers not welcome on shared use paths

I put it down to too much mixed traffic on the paths which is ultimately down to over dense housing. One answer to over capacity is to contruct more paths.  

This issue isn't just about motorists / cyclists and cyclists / pedestrians. It's society in general. There are many people today who are oblivious to anyone around them. They're in their own little world, and focus only on themselves and what they want / need.
You see in behavior every day that there are people who do not care about anything outside their own little bubble. This then transfers to drivers, cyclists and pedestrians when they are making their journeys. It's by no means everyone - I do cycle past pedestrians & dog owners who will move over on the path for me, and drivers who will give me space on the road. The ones who don't do this are the ones who are not aware of the needs of anyone else they interact with as they are only concerned about themselves.

People need to learn to look out for each other again.

The biggest problem I find is where pedestrianized areas suddenly get a cycle lane added... You would not believe the amount of tutting, sucking of teeth you get in London in particular. I always ride carefully on shared use paths (a dad of 2 & dog owner) but I still get accused of being selfish & intimidating when I ride with zero risk of harm/shock to others (Wandsworth & Wimbledon are particularly bad Bottom line is that there are just those unwilling to share. That said we can all do our bit politely informing wayward cyclists & shot nosed pedestrians. It does get better over time when everyone beds in...

There are few of these long distance shared use paths around that I can think of, but the biggest one around the South Gloucestershire area is route 4, which uses a reallocated railway bed for it's path, this path has been threatened to be returned to public transport use by the local authorities a number of times, given it's location and direct route, and it's often promoted as a fast and convenient way to travel from the suburbs of Bristol and the South Gloucestershire area into the Cities of Bristol and Bath. Taxpayers money is currently being spent to extend access to the cycle path out to Yate, with the view of providing a safe route (primarily for cyclists - bearing in mind pedestrians already have a wealth of safe routes, although I wouldn't deny them access to any route - people will go where they want to go, they won't go where they don't want to go)to and from East Bristol, Bristol and Bath using this route. Given the routes previous value as a railway bed, and potential value as a public transport route, it seems Local Authorities are providing this to be used by all cyclists, fast ones, slow ones, commuters, there are businesses appearing and taking advantage of the passing trade, cycle shops and cafés welcome cyclists using these routes. I can understand the concern about speed of cyclists on these routes, but telling people they're not welcome is the wrong message and certainly is not the message given out by the local authority.

Finally this: Owning and operating a bicycle is something of a luxury to many people, having somewhere to keep a bicyle is also a luxury, having a choice of bicycle is even more such a luxury, a lot of people may choose one bike and stick with it, be that a road bike, moutain bike, shopping bike, folding bike, e-bike or touring bike, demonising any of them is not the way forward.

Considering the vast amount of pedestrian use only areas, aka pavements and footpaths, it seems strange to try and remove cyclists from cycle useable infrastructure.

It is challenging to try and provide infrastructure for a wide range of users, I don't think the solution is to restrict usage.

And demonising cyclists really is un-acceptable. Its not a problem with people on road bikes, its a problem with people who have no courtesy or respect for others, they can be on a road bike, a 29er, a foldable bike. They might even be a pedestrian, a horse rider, a person with a scooter, a dog walker, a group of drunken people.

The fact that they have decided to brand an entire group of people as dangerous individuals is despicable and dishonest.

Above all it makes no sense, what is the point of their national cycle network, a long distance cycle network that covers the whole of the UK. When you can't cycle fast enough to get anywhere in a reasonable length of time?

Sustrans as a charity have really lost their way.

Riding like an idiot on a shared use path is simply stupid but I have to say that the pedestrians who walk in cycle lanes are just as bad. Where I live in Southsea we have a cycle lane along the seafront which actually runs in parallel with a pedestrianised promenade. Even so you still get idiots who walk in the cycle lane.

I guess it was too much to expect for people to say that those guidelines are fair and sensible and should hardly be worth saying for anyone with a modicum of common sense.

The issue if dedicated v shared paths is another debate entirely.

There were a couple of Sustrans people with a big banner reading "Do You Want more paths like this?" at the end of the Cambridge Guided busway shared-use path at the railway stationrecently- they'd previously been down at the south end of the narrowe "Genome" path. This time I stopped to tell them that no, I'd rather have wider segregated paths, that the shared use is a nasty compromise and too narrow.

Trouble on my commute is that NOT using it means going further on hostile roads with, if I'm I'm lucky, a white line painted far too close to the kerb for comfort. Some Sustrans routes are conveniantly more direct- and thus attractive to long distance "racing" commuters.

In the Netherlands, the cycle routes are usually the direct way between two points, and the motor traffic is obliged to take the longer way.

In the UK, the direct routes are on road, and the Sustrans paths are anything but direct.

That doesn't excuse bad cycling on shared paths, of course. But it does explain a bit of the hostility towards Sustrans from people on here, who will tend to be cycling longer distances and want to get there more quickly.

Both roads and shared paths vary, different speeds are appropriate depending on location, time of day, surface, width etc etc. I regularly commute 25m e/w. Sometimes on 70mph dual carraigeway, urban rds, single track country lanes, urban shared paths & shared paths where there's no entry / exit for long stretches.
I'm often at 20+mph on a shared paths when it's not busy, it's straight, wide, I can seen/be seen etc.
I think the 'campaign' which is based on responsibility is entirely appropriate -there is a growing number of irresponsible cyclists generally - not just on shared paths. Road bikes can be very quick and are dangerous if not ridden responsibly.
The Code of conduct is sound and is basic common sense and courtesy. I can still commute fast and not contravene any part of the code.

Just follow the code.

If you really want to stretch your legs with not much chance that you'll have to slow down for others, then that's going to put you on a main road!
I think Sustrans do an absolutely fantastic job at providing safe travel networks which CAN be used by fast and slow alike.

Just follow the code.

It’s quite simple really.

@STATO: Agreed, except for the phrase "people wanting to actually get somewhere". I actually get somewhere on my bike (I sold the car and travel everywhere by bike, bus and train now), I just do it less quickly than you... and I'd wager that my cycling speed is closer to the average than yours.

Some number crunching:
Holland has 35,000 km of segregated cycleways.

The Sustrans cycle-network consists of around 20,000 km, but more than 70% of that is on road.

Given the UK population is around 60M and Holland's is around 16M, that means per person, Holland has more than

---------------------------------------
- 20 times the amount of cycleways.
---------------------------------------

... and the vast majority of the Sustrans network is SHARED, whilst in Holland most of it is segregated from pedestrians.

The real story is how piss-poor the UK is for cycle-infrastructure. Yes it's wrong to be using Strava on some of these paths, or go too quickly around pedestrians, but we have very few real cycleways here in the UK and the vast majority put you in contention with dog-walkers and children.

We desperately need to get our act together in the UK and replicate the real cycleways that they have in Holland. However, if we are just gonna build more narrow, shared routes that lead to contention then what's the point

The code for cyclists is fine, mostly repeats of the highway code. The presentation is rubbish and where are the equivalent codes calling for walkers to behave, for cars not to park blocking the bleeding paths and for animals (dogs and cattle) to be kept under control on the routes? Sustrans seem to be losing the plot and attacking the growing number of people riding bikes who don't believe in Sustrans: first are the road bikes - what next? An attack on goods bikes, saying you've no place using their paths if you are making deliveries?

I'd like the government to invest in routes generally capable of supporting 18mph unladen and wide enough for overtaking, because that would also mean I could use them to carry my shopping home at 10mph without it all being bounced around like crazy, trying to fall off my bike or being strapped down so tight it gets crushed or bruised to hell.

In terms of riding a bike, there are many different people making many different types of journey. I was going to list some examples but there are just too many. Even breaking down into groups such as leisure cyclists, commuters, etc doesn't work as these are extremely diverse.

A leisure cyclist could be someone on a road bike doing a sportive, or a dad on a shopping bike taking his toddler to the park. A commuter could be someone riding a single-speed 20 miles into central London, or someone riding a mountain bike one mile to school/college/University. I am/have been all of these cyclists. In the week I am one, at the weekend I am another. Today I am this one, tomorrow I am another one.

I think part of the problem is that the term 'cyclist' is being used as a massive generalisation. A cyclist is not a cyclist is not a cyclist. The term 'cyclist' encompasses a huge variety of people; the term 'cycling' encompasses a huge variety of activities. All have different needs and different requirements.

There is no one solution to making cycling 'better', but at least Sustrans are trying in one important area. They really care about off-road infrastructure and they see it as a major part of their job to campaign for it. Good on them and I say keep it up.

It's a tiny bit like the old class sketch, isn't it?

Cleese (motorist): I terrorize him (looks down), because I am in a car.
Barker (cyclist): I am afraid of him (looks up), because he is in a car, but I terrorize him (looks down), because I am on a bike.
Corbett (pedestrian): I am afraid.

If we want respect from motorists, we should show respect to pedestrians. Be kind to those less speedy than yourself.

Sustrans was developed for the "delivery of ambitious but achievable cycling, walking and sustainable travel change."

Given that footpaths are very well catered for across the country and that safe cycling routes are under invested and underdeveloped. Maybe they should give a more balanced view of the issues and tackle both sides rather than tackle one part of the issue. By giving one path user priority Sustrans is making a rod for its own back and increasing the potential for conflict and the idea of "shared" should mean equal standing for all path users.

However I agreed with both statements, cyclists do need to be aware and respectful of pedestrians by managing their speed and giving the pedestrians a wide berth, but that is far from the whole story.

Pedestrians need to have a level of respect and awareness too, which currently they are totally lacking.

They should not:

Dogs should always be on leads
Dogs should not be allowed on long or extendible leads.
Pedestrians should keep to the side of the path
Pedestrians should not walk in groups across the whole path
Pedestrians should not listen to music that will make them unable to hear other path users.