Shared pavement cycle paths

Zog The Undeniable <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<40cf5cd1.0@entanet>...

Quoted message said:

Just zis Guy said:

Shared use paths are a work of Stan and should be
Shunned.

[Snipped Swindon example]

Quoted message said:

All the rest are [censored] ;-)

They are certainly often badly designed, but despite this I
do sometimes use them. My previous commute involved cycling
into Abingdon along the 60 mph A-road from Culham direction.
From the Culham science centre towards Abingdon is a shared
path which is far more pleasant than the road; it's mostly
separated from the road by a grass verge and has few
pedestrians on it (though plenty of other cyclists). It also
dodges a regular traffic queue of right-turning motorists
outside a school entrance and avoids a set of traffic
lights. The real design flaw, though, is that it ends,
suddenly, at a driveway about half a mile from the edge of
Abingdon. Here the road is making a long sweeping bend with
high heges and trees making for truly awful visibility. In
addition, there is a side road opposite which is angled so
that motorists visibility pulling out of it is reduced. So
to keep within the law and join the road you have to cross
the road at probably the very most dangerous point. 95% of
cyclists going that way don't bother and just keep going on
the pavement into the town centre.

I did use the road a few times, but got too irritated with
dodging the traffic queues and being shouted at; invariably
by Tappins coach drivers who, frustrated that other
motorists dared be in their way suggested that I should use
the cycle path that their hard-earned council tax had
provided. The shared path proved more peaceful.

- Richard

Colin McKenzie said:

There's a road (Hanger Lane, if you know it), where I use
the shared path uphill northbound, because riding on-road
would mean a few hundred motor vehicles slowed to 10mph
behind me - there's no room to overtake. But I only join
the pavement after the last junction before the hill, and
if I keep getting held up getting back onto the road
before the junction at the top I'm going to start staying
on the road.

I find that particular path dangerous having encountered
cyclists thundering downhill in the opposite direction on
the wrong side.

--
Dave...

Get a bicycle. You will not regret it. If you live. -
Mark Twain

in message <[email hidden]>, Adam H

(') said:

Simon Brooke said:

The road is almost always safer (read the research),
usually faster, usually fewer pedestrians to dodge,
usually less sharp debris leading to fewer punctures. In
my experience 'shared use' paths are just not suitable
for cycling.

If you have the links to the research that would be
a start.

<sigh>

Alright, here are some places to start:

<URL:http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/riskfactors.htm>
://www.toronto.ca/transportation/publications/bicycle_motor-
vehicle/index.htm>
<URL:http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/infra/infra.html>

Essentially you are up to six times as likely to be killed
cycling on cyclepaths as cycling on the road. A road side
path on which cyclists ride in the direction opposite to
the adjacent road lane is most dangerous of all but even
the safest cycle lane is more dangerous than the road.
Most accidents happen at junctions and drivers are
concentrating on other road traffic, not on traffic coming
off cycle paths.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

;; Semper in faecibus sumus, sole
profundum variat.

Adam H said:

My experience of the shared use paths that you can find
here in NW london (Mill Hill/Edgware to Golders Green) is
that they are much preferable to the road. 90% of my 6
mile route to work would consist of 2-3 lane 50mph roads
if I chose not to use the cycle paths or back roads.

Aproximately 4 miles of my commute consists of single lane
(each way that is) 60 mph country road and a further 2 miles
of 2 lane 70 mph standard dual carriageway. I have no real
problems in using these roads because everything is
travelling in the same direction. Problems occur when you
are crossing the path of motor vehicles eg roundabouts,
junctions, lane changing and so on. The only thing that
stops me from using the almost motorway standard A3 as a
route to work is the extra 4 miles needed to do it and the
awful stench of diesel. It is otherwise a remarkably flat
and speedy route. (Except for the roundabout at the junction
with the M25 at Wisley)

Terry Duckmanton.

Simon Brooke said:

<URL:http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/riskfactors.htm>

://www.toronto.ca/transportation/publications/bicycle_motor-
vehicle /index.htm>

Quoted message said:

<URL:http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/infra/infra.html>

and <url:http://www.eirbyte.com/gcc/info/index.html> for
some quality polemic.
--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:56:45 +0100, Adam H
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

If you have the links to the research that would be
a start.

Start here: <url:http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/infr-
a/infra.html>

So how did Franklin respond to your emails about his bogus
summary of the Helsinki report?

It appears to me that you are promoting the circulation of
figures you know to wrong?

Frank X said:

So how did Franklin respond to your emails about his bogus
summary of the Helsinki report?

By being in the middle of doing something else, thanks
to Fat Eric.

--
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. chapmancentral.co.ukchapmancentral.co.ukOpen ↗

in message <[email hidden]>, Frank X

(') said:

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]>
wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 19:56:45 +0100, Adam H
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

If you have the links to the research that would be
a start.

Start here: <url:http://www.lesberries.co.uk/cycling/inf-
ra/infra.html>

So how did Franklin respond to your emails about his bogus
summary of the Helsinki report?

We've been through this at length. One number - one - in
Franklin's summary is arguable. The rest is inarguable.

--
[email hidden] (Simon Brooke)
jasmine.org.uk~simonOpen ↗

Due to financial constraints, the light at the end
of the tunnel has been switched off.

Frank X said:

So how did Franklin respond to your emails about his bogus
summary of the Helsinki report?

It appears to me that you are promoting the circulation of
figures you know to wrong?

Yawn

Tony