malcolmw wrote:
I wonder if any of our keen cyclists can comment on this.
I was reading the other day that the accident rate for cyclists using properly separated cycle paths (not just white lines on a carriageway) is higher than for cyclists using the road with all the other traffic. Is this really correct? If so, it puts into question the campaigns to provide separate dedicated cycle lanes.
Some cycle paths are some of the most dangerous places for a cyclist to be.
Thankfully a recent proposed change to the hc to say cyclists must use a path if available was muted to 'may find it safer to' after pressure from stakeholder groups.
At their worst they are lethal. Take one near me, solid white line separates the cycle lane from the main carriageway. However, the cycle lane runs right down the side of parked cars, giving the cyclist the option of riding along in the dooring zone, or riding out in the carriageway, putting themselves at the mercy of some drivers who think they should be in the cycle lane, who will often let said cyclist know they are offended by them riding out in the road by close passing them to scare them back to the cycle lane, in the dooring zone. Far better there to not have a cycle lane at all.
Look up 'bow roundabout', a lethal piece of infrastructure.
Many physically separated cycle paths along main roads will make cyclists cross the side roads by having to look back to ensure a vehicle is not turning across them, one small error and the cyclist is down and at worst over the bonnet of a car.
Check out Warrington cycle campaign's 'facility of the month' for some fantastic examples of cycle paths gone wrong.
So I can well believe that riding along in traffic can be safer than attempting to navigate some of the frankly outright dangerous pieces of track put down by local councils by way of spending their allocated monies on cycling infrastructure.