Forum Topic

Cycle Lanes

I'm pleased to see the temporary cycle lane on King Street allowing cyclists to go east to west. Can somebody explain though how the lycra clad arses feel it is quicker and more convenient to ignore it and cycle on the pavement?

Carl Wynne ● 2333d65 Comments

Force of habit?

Adrian Irving ● 2333d

The Lycra is too tight and starves their ‘brains‘ of oxygen

Steve Taylor ● 2333d

To avoid motoring derrières mowing them down paradventure?

Bobbie Carnegie ● 2333d

And jump every red light along the way! Even sometimes endangering children using the crossings 😔

Beverly Roberts ● 2333d

i like your style - i walk up there every day, and have yet to see a single cycle  using it. Lets also not forget that by narrowing the road they've now squeezed the other cycle lane making it more dangerous for cyclists going west to east ( well those that dont cycle on the pavement..!)_

Tim Garfoot ● 2332d

"and have yet to see a single cycle  using it"The majority of cyclists don't like to use cycle lanes.

Steve Taylor ● 2332d

Rubbish. Steve's view of the use of cycle lanes is powered by fantasy.I used it a couple of times but it is seriously flawed: 1) it's not actually clear which direction it's supposed to be and on one occasion I saw cyclists in opposite directions coming face to face; 2) it has loading bays in the middle of it which frequently have cars parked in them 3) A couple of days ago someone had moved some of the barriers making it impassable 4) When you come to the end of it you have to cross the motor traffic, a proportion of which is turning right into Studland street.I applaud H&F's ambition however and no doubt problems will get ironed out. The other bit - taking most of the bus lane in the 2 way section - is much better, despite being interrupted by bus stops.

Guy Lambert ● 2332d

'Twas alsways thus on King Street Guy.Being a bit of a computer 'geek' I used to go to the (much missed) Maplins on King Street. You took you life in your hands exiting the shop with the eastbound cyclists who used the pavement rather than risk a 'head-on' with some muppet travelling westbound in the eastbound cycle lane.Only ever saw one 'head-on' and it was not a pretty sight with two guys trying to punch the hell of of each other after the collision!

N V Brooks ● 2332d

I have used a few times and can confirm what you say Guy.Other issues.Coming of the A219 ,Hammersmith Broadway, into King St you find yourself on the other side of the road to the cycle lane and then have to travel some distance before you can get oon to it.People cycle at very different speeds and because their is very little opportunity to overtake faster cyclists will understandable use the road rather defeating the object.For me it has highlighted the importance of very clear signage around areas where a cycle lane crosses a road juntion. Signs are needed on the cycle path and on the road.Todderling  alone on your bike it is all to easy to feel 'safe' and not pay proper attention to potential hazards such as junctions. Markings along the lines you see on A roads when approaching a roundabout are needed.

Adrian Irving ● 2331d

Just to say if the King Street cycle lane is any indication of what we can expect from CS9 then we are in for some grief.

Adrian Irving ● 2331d

"it is seriously flawed: 1) it's not actually clear which direction it's supposed to be and on one occasion I saw cyclists in opposite directions coming face to face"Guy this is precisely what many of us have been saying about CS9 along CHR. The current mock-up, let's call it, on King Street demonstrates the exact width of the two-way cycle lane proposed along CS9. And here you are, an experienced cyclist, saying it is inadequate. Hardly a recipe for success in encouraging less experienced cyclists to take it up as a mode of transit.Adrian is on the money. It is an indicator and should be monitored closely as if a focus group for clues moving forward.On King Street I've seen cyclists on pavement on both sides of the street, cyclists in the road now reduced in width, and no one using the double cycle lane. Indeed people have parked in the cycle lane. To my mind, any infraction should be penalized including cyclists not using space built and dedicated for their safety. If a car drove on the pavement the driver would be held accountable for endangering others. Ditto a cyclist attempting to squeeze between a bus and the curb while the immediately adjacent cycle lane goes unused.

David Lesniak ● 2331d

To my mind, any infraction should be penalized including cyclists not using space built and dedicated for their safety.Unless the road states that cycling is prohibited there is no obligation to use a cycle lane whether your mind fantasies about penalising cyclists or no. However build a cycling lane well and it will be used just as the lanes in Embankment and the much narrower cycle lane on Cable street are used with virtually no cyclists on the road.

Matthew Swain ● 2331d

Bikes can use roads. The end.

Paul Campbell ● 2331d

Is it selfish for cyclists to be on the road when a cycle lane is present? I’m thinking of the Great West Road.  Never could understand why so few seem to use it, so I asked a cyclist alongside me at traffic lights. He said it was quicker on the road.  So he chose speed over safety.  Presumably the same argument for jumping red lights.

Maggie Dodge ● 2331d

Roads were first built for bikes Maggie. They’ve been increasingly clogged up with cars for 40 odd years. Walkers and cyclists are getting them back.

Edward Seaton ● 2331d

"Rubbish. Steve's view of the use of cycle lanes is powered by fantasy."Nonsense - Guy hasn't a clue. Try the A4 from Chiswick to the A30 to Heathrow T4.  The cyclists are just about ALL on the road.  I use the cycle track and am usually the only one!

Steve Taylor ● 2331d

"Bikes can use roads. The end."Totally agree - and they should!  Hence no need to spend taxpayers' money on cycle lanes which are rarely used. Cyclists just need to be responsible and cycle with due diligence as I do.However there are currently hundreds of miles of unused cycle lanes so cyclists should  expect some abuse when they hog the roads and refuse to use the perfectly adequate cycle lanes. Priory Lane into Richmond Park is another good example.  Why am I the only cyclist using the cycle lane when all others hog the roads? Because they claim the cycle lane to 'too bumpy'. Pathetic whimps.

Steve Taylor ● 2331d

'Priory Lane into Richmond Park is another good example'Indeed its an example of a terrible bike lane whereas the cycle lanes build on Embankment, Cable St and Hyde Park are well thought through and are used with almost on cyclist's on the road.

Matthew Swain ● 2331d

"Indeed its an example of a terrible bike lane" So what - stay safe keep off the roads. Stop the whimpish behaviour when so much money has been spent on these lanes around London.Saying that some lanes are 'terrible' is just the spoilt brat syndrome. Get over it. Grow up!

Steve Taylor ● 2331d

The A4 "cycle lane" is abysmal.  I think you are safer on the road, as well as quicker.Cars turning left off the road sometimes don't indicate, so there is a chance of getting hit by a car when crossing the side roads.There is also a chance of pedestrians and dogs in the cycle lane.  They are a lot more unpredictable than cars.  I've cycled more than 30,000 miles in London, and my only trip to A&E was caused by a pedestrian.  Some pedestrians are a complete menace.I've also seen broken glass in the cycle lane, plus it isn't de-iced in winter.

Al Webber ● 2331d

"as well as quicker."That sums it up then. Cyclist jump red lights, weave between cars, ride up the blind side of trucks and buses -- because they want to be 'quicker'.  Its not about health or the environment or exercise - its about me, me, me, I, I, I.....

Steve Taylor ● 2331d

"Some pedestrians are a complete menace."Yes we are especially on pavements where cyclists have no place being.

Loraine Pemberton ● 2331d

I still maintain that given the choice between a cycle lane that is uneven, badly maintained and clogged up with shopping bikes that the commuting cyclist will prefer to use the road, especially since most cyclists will be quicker than the traffic that is restricted to 20mph.And yes, in my experience cycle lanes are dangerous as pedestrians simply step out into them without looking.

Chris Blackwell ● 2331d

"since most cyclists will be quicker than the traffic that is restricted to 20mph."  So more law breaking by the 'me me me' brigade as they exceed the speed limit with no fear of being stopped and fined!

N V Brooks ● 2331d

That's not correct NV. Speed limits only apply to motor vehicles (which is why e-bikes are limited to 15mph in the UK). Anyone exceeding the speed limit under their own steam is not breaking the law.

David Roberts ● 2331d

NV Brooks - the speed limit only applies to powered vehicles and not to bicycles. Anyway it's safer for cyclists to get out in front and ahead of the cars surely?

Chris Blackwell ● 2331d

I cycle the A4 often enough and despite the inadequacies of the cycle lane the overwhelming majority of cyclists use it. Possibly it's different at rush hours because I am rarely using it then.Comparing temporary cycle lanes in Hammersmith put in as a response to an emergency to CW9, built to agreed standards and consulted exhaustively over several years is ridiculous.

Guy Lambert ● 2331d

Guy, you're missing the point. There may not be any direct comparisons but it is far from being ridiculous as it brings home the problems of overtaking, crossing road juntions, and confusion which will be much the same if the structure was thrown up overnight or exhaustively designed over several years.

Adrian Irving ● 2330d

"Bikes can use roads. The end"Per your logic, Paul, no need then to build cycle lanes. Saves all that time and money. Frees up funds to repair Hammersmith Bridge for one thing.Is this where I'd do a mic drop?

David Lesniak ● 2330d

Indeed Guy is missing the point.He's even missing his own point:  "I saw cyclists in opposite directions coming face to face"Exhaustively designed/consulted or thrown up overnight is irrelevant if the dimension provided remains the same. In this case it is a bi-directional lane that is too narrow.So that puts me squarely advocating for a better solution whereas Guy has labelled the provision inadequate in one post and then saying its perfectly fine in another. Could someone please explain the meaning of "ridiculous" to me? Because it would seem Guy's waffling and/or denial would qualify as such.

David Lesniak ● 2330d

"And yes, in my experience cycle lanes are dangerous as pedestrians simply step out into them without looking."There is the often trotted out 'defence' to pavement cycling/not stopping and lights/crossings, that it is not that serious for pedestrians being hit by bikes (citing the v low number of pedestrians killed p.a. by bikes). So how does it make it more dangerous for cyclists on a cycle lane shared with pavement, than being on the road (lots of cyclists killed by cars p.a.). Cycle paths, no matter how badly or well designed (analogy might be bike B-roads (Priory lane) rather than bike motor ways (embankment), it must be safer for cyclists to use them. What it isn't always for cyclists, is as convenient to ride on a bike 'B-road' and that's a different argument.

Rob Reynolds ● 2330d

Cycle paths will enable more people to ride bikes. The end.

Paul Campbell ● 2330d

Nonsense. The King St Lane is barely one cycle width and not built to any standards. CW9 will be built to well-established standards and there will be ample room for cycles to pass each other.

Guy Lambert ● 2330d

Some cycle paths are murder strips. They run alongside parked cars on busy roads and are separated from HGVs by a 10cm wide strip of paint. They channel vulnerable cyclists into a canyon of danger. City of Westminster is busy painting these on their roads at the moment in the hope that Andrew Gilligan will give them a free pass on their obligations. He won’t. Confident adult, mainly male cyclists will ignore these paths and the self-entitled beeping and road rage of ignorant motorists with anger management issues while new cyclists will be scared and put off and mums will definitely not use them to take their kids to school or to the shops so they will get back in their SUVs and fill up the roads and parking spaces so that people who really need to use their cars are stuck in idling traffic and unable to park. Thankfully, for all of us, it is going to be a lot better than that in Chiswick.

Paul Campbell ● 2330d

"and there will be ample room for cycles to pass each other.""Ample room" That's rather subjective, as you eloquently illustrated in the story of the Audi and cyclist.Crossing road junctions? No mention.The more confident some people are of the design the more people should worry and raise concerns.Slapping them down won't work.'

Adrian Irving ● 2330d

GuyDoes that mean cyclists will finally stop using the pavements ? It's somewhat hazardous being a pedestrian with cyclists hurtling past

Loraine Pemberton ● 2330d

How many pedestrians have been seriously injured or killed by cyclists on the footpath in, say, the last five years?

Ken Munn ● 2330d

It is a fine cycle lane if you just want to get from A to B and your prime concern is NOT keeping momentum. It is only unsafe if you don't want to be part of general traffic and slow down at intersections and for occasional pedestrians.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2330d

That's exactly right Steve. And in ignoring basic safety and any consideration to other road users they come up with all sorts of justifications for them doing so, like:- filtering is allowed- it's the drivers of the 2 tonnes of metal who should care about our safety- speed limit does not apply to cyclists-etc...

Alex Shpinkov ● 2330d

"...and there will be ample room for cycles to pass each other."Ample room - is how much? How much room to cyclists need to overtake a slower cyclist? Yesterday cycling along Strand on the Green I was overtaken by a group riding 2 abreast when passing me. The tool all (ALL!!!) the width of the road. Once they completed overtaking me one rider stayed on the wrong side of the road almost until the Kew Bridge!

Alex Shpinkov ● 2330d

Message:You seem very angry Paul.  I agree that not all cycle paths are fit for purpose and they’d be better removed. However, there are also plenty that are segregated from traffic (like Priory lane and the A4). They may not be what the dft see as the next generation and I can see they are less convenient than the likes of the embankment. However, they must be safer than mixing in with HGVs and buses surely. In ideal world and in a new city every road should have a nice fat cycle path on both sides of the road. But London is a quite an old one and it isn’t going to happen. So there needs to be compromises for all road users - motor vehicles and bikes. And part of that is of course improving cycle infrastructure which will be at the expense’ of other road users. Which is fine by me. My only thought is it would be good if cyclists made the best of current infrastructure as it stands rather than picking and choosing. It would add up to more total road space for everyone.

Rob Reynolds ● 2330d

What does this have to do with the question? Are cyclists allowed on the pavement? Are they allowed to jump red lights? Are they supposed to even care about their own safety?You continue to pursue the 'divide between us-and-them' approach instead of trying to educate the fellow cyclists to be considerate and get them become a part of road users.The problem is that you probably don't even understand that there is a problem with how too many cyclists behave with respect to others(((.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2330d

I'm not angry Rob. At least not with you anyway. I am making a different point which is that irresponsible or ill-advised Councils like City of Westminster are still putting in dangerous cycle lanes that are no use to anybody and make ignorant drivers angry when cyclists rightly do not use them and that increases tension on the roads.

Paul Campbell ● 2330d

"They run alongside parked cars on busy roads and are separated from HGVs by a 10cm wide strip of paint."This can be easily solved by cyclists themselves. Just stay behind the moving HGVs! Don't get into any traps. Stay safe! And it will be still safer than sharing the main road with HGVs and other motor vehicles.

Alex Shpinkov ● 2330d

Most cyclists after hitting Pedestrians just cycle off - see thread on cyclist crashing red light, this Forum has many similar reports.Police can do nothing as cyclists who peddle off and the victims cannot provide a bicycle recognition plate. The only thing we get from Police are CAD numbers.In any event the point is Cyclists should NOT be on the pavement!

Loraine Pemberton ● 2330d

Rob - when I said "And yes, in my experience cycle lanes are dangerous as pedestrians simply step out into them without looking" I was thinking more of the danger to the pedestrian than the cyclist.

Chris Blackwell ● 2330d

Fair enough. I think Alex makes a good point too.

Rob Reynolds ● 2330d

Alex, Loraine and others keep going on about cyclists on the pavement as a threat to pedestrian safety. In reality, such a threat is minuscule, and yet is repeatedly used to put down cyclists. Unnecessarily. I wasn't nearly hit by a pavement cyclist a couple of days back. She wasn't wearing lycra, didn't have dropped handlebars, showed no trace of carbon fibre, wasn't wearing a helmet, had a shopping basket on the rear panier, and smiled as she passed me at slow speed. Age, mid-50s (?) if that's not a rude thing to say about a woman.Point? That people do ride on the pavement, probably because they are scared of drivers (who have a track record of killing and seriously injuring pedestrians and cyclists), but these cyclists are not homicidal maniacs and they don't pose a threat to pedestrians.Once again, how many pedestrians have been killed or seriously injured by cyclists on the pavement in the last five year?PS - don't go to any Japanese cities, you'd hate it. They are full of old people cycling on the pavement.As to jumping red lights (which I don't condone), yes it happens. Pedestrians and drivers do it too.

Ken Munn ● 2330d

Chris Blackwell explained:"given the choice between a cycle lane that is uneven..."Nail, hammer, head. Admittedly I ride a bike with narrow 23cm tyres but I find the cycle track along the a4 certainly between Brentford and Hounslow unrideable.Its not even necessary to ride over it, with thesun at a certain angle you can see the undulationsin the surface. Not only is totally unsatsfactoryto ride on but its also profoundly annoying as its clear the surface was never properly rolled asit should have been. Basically some incompetent buffoon has signed off all this shoddy work, the contractor has run all the way to the bank and nobody seems to have noticed anything was wrong ever since the track was laid.michael adams

Michael Adams ● 2330d

Most cyclists after hitting Pedestrians just cycle off - see thread on cyclist crashing red light, this Forum has many similar reports.I hate to point out the obvious Loraine but on that thread you cite above the cyclist neither crashed into the pedestrian nor did he cycle off. He was actually pushed off his bike after he illegally crossed a red light.

Matthew Swain ● 2330d

Yesterday cycling along Strand on the Green I was overtaken by a group riding 2 abreast when passing me. The tool all (ALL!!!) So?  No law states they can't be 2 abreast when overtaking so whats the problem? What do you think its wider 2 abreast cyclists or a big Mercedes GLA?

Matthew Swain ● 2330d

I think that you and Alex are envisaging a different scenario to the one that I am describing. I am talking about new cycle lanes being painted in the door zones of parked cars the length of long busy 30mph roads with no separation from the traffic. I'm not talking about a narrow lane near lights that cyclists use to creep up the inside of HGVs get to the ASL. You must also be imagining adult and very able-bodied cyclists. I am talking about parents with children cycling a km along a road in the door zone of parked cars with HGVs screaming past them at speed leaving several inches of room. They're just not going to do it because it would be filicide. So they will use a car instead adding to congestion and taking up parking spaces at their destination. How is that any good for society?Anyway the government and TfL and most Councils do get the  point that I am making and that is why a lot more road space is going to be allocated to walking and cycling to help as many people as possible to not drive local journeys. Westminger and RBKC are going to have to cave in. The authorities know that there will be a lot of pearl-clutching but they have decided that it's the right thing to do. Hopefully they will make some of the old useless cycle lanes better as well. Alex will need to start his own campaign to stop scary cyclists overtaking him.

Paul Campbell ● 2330d

"I use the cycle track and am usually the only one!"Probably because the other cyclists see you coming and try and avoid you.

Richard Greenhough ● 2330d

The obvious thing is that too many cyclists break the law be it crashing red lights, cycling on pavements or going down one way streets the wrong way and they get away with breaking the law ! Stop trying to justify the indefensible, I like all Pedestrians want to feel safe on the pavements or crossing a road. Atm in Chiswick being a pedestrian takes extreme awareness and caution just walking on the pavement because too many cyclists have a sense of entitlement and use pavements as their right - it's  not !!!

Loraine Pemberton ● 2330d

Stop trying to justify the indefensibleIm not justifying anything,  im just pointing out that your key point from the other thread was incorrect.

Matthew Swain ● 2330d

Thanks for proving my point. You - unfortunately as too many cyclists - just don't care about others and use every excuse to justify it.No wonder so many people - pedestrians, drivers, even other cyclists - are frustrated.1. Please note that when 2 abreast pass the third one - it becomes three abreast.2. Ho much 'ample room' should be provided to accommodate 3 abreast?3. When you walk slowly with a friend and there is somebody behind you walking faster - would you give way? 4. Why are you so antagonistic about Mercedes GLA?

Alex Shpinkov ● 2330d

You said you were cycling along STOG by which presumably you mean Thames road. That is a bidirectional road with space for 2 cars to pass each other so you will have to forgive me for thinking that 2 cyclists passing you is no great shakes.

Matthew Swain ● 2330d

"I cycle the A4 often enough and despite the inadequacies of the cycle lane the overwhelming majority of cyclists use it. Possibly it's different at rush hours because I am rarely using it then."Yes, it is the rush hours when the cyclists using the road instead of the cycle lanes are obstructing traffic and causing accidents. Cyclists should be fined for using a road when a cycle lane is provided.

Steve Taylor ● 2330d

"PS - don't go to any Japanese cities, you'd hate it. They are full of old people cycling on the pavement."I have no problem with Japanese cities. The old people ride sedately and responsibly (as do the Dutch, the Danish, the Chinese and the Germans). It is the UK lycra bums speeding on the pavements who are the problem!

Steve Taylor ● 2330d

"My only thought is it would be good if cyclists made the best of current infrastructure as it stands rather than picking and choosing."Precisely. Spot on. As a responsible cyclist I do exactly that. Unfortunately there are the arrogant 'self-entitled' cycles who refuse to compromise. The me,me,me brigade at it's worst and they give cycling such a bad name with the vast majority of people.

Steve Taylor ● 2330d

"It is the UK lycra bums speeding on the pavements who are the problem!"Fake news. They don't.

Ken Munn ● 2330d

KenReal news. They do !

Loraine Pemberton ● 2330d

Walking along the pavement on Boston Manor Road away from the A4 towards Ealing the other day we were faced with a cyclist riding down the hill towards us looking at his mobile phone completely oblivious to anyone else on the pavement.  There is a cycle lane on the other side of the road.  On another day - despite the arguments that the two way cycle lane on the other side of the road - is not used we passed quite a few cyclists using it both ways. I do find the level shared pedestrian/cycling paved areas a bit unnerving because of the speed of the cyclists.

Philippa Bond ● 2330d

The King St Lane is barely one cycle width and not built to any standardsOkay then, Guy, let's meet down there with a measuring tape and determine just how wide the temporary lane is. It is the entire width of a bus lane in places. And yet CS9 on CHR is set to be 2 meters, correct?

David Lesniak ● 2329d

"I am making a different point which is that irresponsible or ill-advised Councils like City of Westminster are still putting in dangerous cycle lanes that are no use to anybody and make ignorant drivers angry when cyclists rightly do not use them and that increases tension on the roads"Sit down, Paul.I agree with you. This is precisely my point with Guy Lambert criticising in Hammersmith what is planned for CS9 in Chiswick. There is no point spending money on something ill-conceived. This is me advocating for something better.

David Lesniak ● 2329d