Video: Cyclist times himself on new Bristol cycle path - and finds it's WAY quicker sticking to the road

the problem is that most drivers have never even tried to cycle, so when they see is pedalling along in the road beside that hateful shared path siugn they get ragey. Mostly thats because they're retarded. But even some quite smart decent people i know still tell me they hate cyclists who dont use cycle paths. It is funny, in parkstone, theres a cycle lane and ped walking zone, but the council guy painted a cycle lane THROUGH and up over the tree. Im not making that up. Ive got it on this pc somewhere, video of it. I always said, if you drove a car and found someone had planted giant redwoods smack bang in the middle, and elderly ladies and children were wandering about willy nilly in the road, would you still feel comfortable going at 30 mph or even faster? Because i certainly dont. Even on our newest one, duneats road its called, yes school kids can now cycle up the pavement to school, but still i dont feel safe at even ten mph on it, let alone 30 like id be doing on that road. The junctions are give way ones, so any cars turning in or coming out HAVE to stop and give way to cyclists, but they dont, they just pull out. I think i might apply to be a councillor, seriously. I could make bike lanes that work for everyone. 

Going to repost this, Just have to add Cyclists to the Pedestrians bit.

Thing is, if a cycle route/shared path offers an advantage to me I will use it.

If they were to build motorways like they build cycle routes, so few would ever drive on them.

Cheers David, there are a lot of deleted comments on that piece.

https://www.bournemouthecho.co.uk/news/16610340.watch-silly-cycle-lanes-captured-on-camera-as-cyclists-calls-for-better-system/         seems its just as badly planned and money wasting in other counties as it is down here.  I got beeped at and told off by a bus driver for not using it, quote'' the council spent millions on this and you dont use it, you dont even pay tax!''    the irony being, i do... probably more than him. The fact i had also just filtered past 600 cars in a traffic jam, easing the road congestion to keep his route on time, seemed to elude him. 

If you want shite, come to Lancashire. LCC are currently putting the finishing touches to a cross borough link road at Walton Park. I say putting the finishing touches, their take on a cycle path is always the same. Change the use of a footpath. Here, they are putting an extra couple of feet onto the footpath. It goes from the new bridge on one side of the road, and a little further on, it stops then continues on the other side of the road. So a cyclist must stop, cross the road then continue on their journey. Oh, I almost forgot, the new feature also comes with LCCs favourite addition to cyclepaths, lamposts in the middle! Although they do helpfully paint a little white line around the lamposts. Then the cyclists won't use it as it's quicker, and better to use the road, then the motorists will shout at the cyclists who don't use the path to get on the shite cyclepath. 

Similar issues when leaving Guildford on the A 281 towards Shalford (approx 1.5 miles).  To move from the road to the shared cycle/pedestrian lane on the opposite side of the road requires the use of a pedestrian crossing.  From pressing the crosssing button it takes longer for the lights to change from red to green "walking man" than it takes to ride to Shalford.  Motorists on the main road are given prolonged priority over cyclists/pedestrians.................When will councils ever learn?

The comments stand for most if not all shared-space type infrastructure, and is the core of my complaints to my wife when she grumbles about why cyclists are on the road instead of "the cycle path" on my commute route.

It is often way more convenient to stay on the road (if your nerves are up to it) because then you don't have to slow right down for Every.   Single.    Side-road.    that's been laid out to make it easy for cars to go into and out of at speed.

And have to keep an eye out at Every.     Single.     High-wall-surrounded.    Driveway    (which the owner of will come out onto the cycle path in order that they can see onto the road, without considering whether there might be someone coming along the cyclepath that they have to cross to get onto the road).

What this says is, "We have an obligation to install cycle paths, but we don't want to upset the voters/motorists/deniers so it mustn't impede the flow of cars."

As per a lot of dutch infra, increases the conflict points massively, people keep ignoring the fact that nearly a third of all Dutch cyclist deaths are at exactly the same conflict points as shown here and on much less dense traffic motor roads.

I've used Dutch cycle infra in Utrecht, and it's brilliant. What's more, 30-odd% of journeys are by bike there, compared with 2% here. They're getting it right and we're getting it wrong. It's totally wrong and counter-productive to criticise the Dutch.

If the solution is for us all to ride on the roads - most people just won't do it. Families with kids won't do it. You've got to give them segregated routes that are safe AND convenient.

Does he not know that speeded up footage must use a Yakety Sax soundtrack?!?

I can't take his complaints seriously until he reedits the video.

I am pretty tired of all the 'dutch' routes popping up in Manchester. In other words around the back of a bus stop. These routes do seemed aimed at forcing cyclist off the road and into pedestrian space and hoping there will be no conflict with pedestrians (which there is.) Every junction means giving way to traffic or risk getting left-hooked, that a good bike lane on the road doesn't do or shouldn't do anyway. I have had a bus tailgating me in the rain and when I called him out at the next lights he just lazily pointed at the adjacent mixed use bike lane that I wasn't using because it was dark, wet and full of people. We can do better right Sir Chris?

As per a lot of dutch infra, increases the conflict points massively, people keep ignoring the fact that nearly a third of all Dutch cyclist deaths are at exactly the same conflict points as shown here and on much less dense traffic motor roads.

This is why segregated infra in this country except piddle away a lot of money whilst slowing people on bikes down and pose more of a threat of harm, thus younger kids/older folk plus families won't use it for short journeys as it's safer/easier and quicker by car, for someone even going at a moderate pace this infra is just hateful.

be careful what you wish for!

i did something similar in bournemouth, our council spent millions sticking nice pictures of pedestrian and cycle symbols on a pavement, and a few traffic lights. Takes 45 seconds by road on bicycle at 25 mph average, or 4 minutes using the pavement/ shared path.  I can actually cycle faster down this road than people can drive it. If you use the shared path, youre going to end up killing a pedestrian. 30 mph bicycle versus 2 mph elderly person... hmmm. Brilliant planning, that is. Totally worth millions:/    i hate that bloody shared path sign.   

I'm well-used to subpar cycling infrastructure, but even I'm genuinely gobsmacked that this is the standard of new cycling infrastructure in 2019.

It's beyond shit.

Yeah, the whole area outside of Temple Meads station is a complete mess for pedestrians/cyclists. I usually go through there from west to east (the video is going from south to north) so I miss out the worst bits, but if you want to get somewhere quickly (in Bristol), then stick to the roads.

I think we should bring back the rickety fly-over.

I'm not sure that speed (rather than safety) is or should be the main aim of segregated infra, but that is a bit ridiculous. There is some recently added segregated infra at a junction on my commute which makes the journey through that junction noticeably slower for me (what was a roundabout is now potentially up to 4 stops at segregated traffic lights), but it is at least a well worked scheme which seems to have encouraged more users, and I use it on principle. This scheme just looks crap.