Sheffield Cycling Inquiry - Please contribute

[philrawson 10]

well theres a massive Cycle lane on the eurpa link road the one with the car people and goes past car crap ,sorry car craft ,

 

And i have been driving up and down this to and from work and im yet to see a Cyclists use it , just a waste of money as they just use the road

[aubreyboyce 10]

I'm glad

 

The fact that you used to cycle but have now stopped because it's too hair raising shows that we really need to rethink cycle provision and road design, ideally providing bike paths which are separated from traffic. If that happened, then there would be fewer situations where anyone (biker or driver) felt the need to shout at someone else on the road :-)

 

And if anyone else wants to follow hicksy3's fine example and email their thoughts to to the SCC Cycling Inquiry even though deadline has passed (I don't know how strict they will be on this) - details are here

 

Lets hope they listen and have a truly good look at the situation. What with the ever increasing amount of people turning to cycling these days, it can only make sense to try and make the modern transport transition more suited to the types of road user.

I cant say I wasnt surprised at some other posters defending cyclists without submission, but these road-rage incident are not only pointless, but also both sided. If this hero of Sheffield cyclists continues his one-man tirade against anyone who brushes within a couple of feet of him, then his actions wont help the cyclists cause one little bit. Its true he received a few close shaves which were either his fault or the motorists fault, but that is what they were, and the buck should stay there, not be spread across the media to apportion full blame to everyone else but himself.

I do so hope that ive tried to get this across as tactfully as possible!;)

[babymonkey 10]

well theres a massive Cycle lane on the eurpa link road the one with the car people and goes past car crap ,sorry car craft ,

 

And i have been driving up and down this to and from work and im yet to see a Cyclists use it , just a waste of money as they just use the road

 

Build safe, convenient and fit for purpose cycle facilities and people will use them = good investment

 

Build poor quality, indirect, disjointed and inconvenient ones which still feel risky to use and people either won't use them, or just won't cycle = waste of money

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2013 at 23:17 ----------

 

Lets hope they listen and have a truly good look at the situation. What with the ever increasing amount of people turning to cycling these days, it can only make sense to try and make the modern transport transition more suited to the types of road user.

I cant say I wasnt surprised at some other posters defending cyclists without submission, but these road-rage incident are not only pointless, but also both sided. If this hero of Sheffield cyclists continues his one-man tirade against anyone who brushes within a couple of feet of him, then his actions wont help the cyclists cause one little bit. Its true he received a few close shaves which were either his fault or the motorists fault, but that is what they were, and the buck should stay there, not be spread across the media to apportion full blame to everyone else but himself.

I do so hope that ive tried to get this across as tactfully as possible!;)

 

Oh, I think so (now you've dropped the bit about colons!)

 

It's genuinely interesting to hear other people's points of view, and all the more valuable when it's done without it resorting to tit for tat. The current situation is not ideal for either party, which I think is something we can both agree on

 

It will be interesting to see the results of this inquiry, which the council will publish much later in the year - and I will put a link on here so people can see them.

[Owethemnowt 10]

Is it called 'consultation'?

 

That's where they ask everybody, listen to no one, bin it all and do what they what calling it a 'consensus.'

 

But we did consult you!

 

Excuse me but I won't be wasting my time telling myself what I think.

[aubreyboyce 10]

I suppose its just what we should expect, however I dont think it could do any harm having a consultation, even if it means our views are merely looked at, as opposed to being acted on.

Thats democracy.

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2013 at 23:45 ----------

 

Build safe, convenient and fit for purpose cycle facilities and people will use them = good investment

 

Build poor quality, indirect, disjointed and inconvenient ones which still feel risky to use and people either won't use them, or just won't cycle = waste of money

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2013 at 23:17 ----------

 

 

Oh, I think so (now you've dropped the bit about colons!)

 

It's genuinely interesting to hear other people's points of view, and all the more valuable when it's done without it resorting to tit for tat. The current situation is not ideal for either party, which I think is something we can both agree on

 

It will be interesting to see the results of this inquiry, which the council will publish much later in the year - and I will put a link on here so people can see them.

 

I secretly thought the use of "colon" as a synopsis was the best bit!!

[babymonkey 10]

I can well understand why you would by cynical Owethemnowt. However it's much harder to argue your views have been ignored if you've not actually expressed them.

 

At least this way I'll have a leg left to stand on if my views aren't given decent consideration:)

[sheff71 10]

Build safe, convenient and fit for purpose cycle facilities and people will use them = good investment

 

Build poor quality, indirect, disjointed and inconvenient ones which still feel risky to use and people either won't use them, or just won't cycle = waste of money

 

---------- Post added 05-10-2013 at 23:17 ----------

 

 

Oh, I think so (now you've dropped the bit about colons!)

 

It's genuinely interesting to hear other people's points of view, and all the more valuable when it's done without it resorting to tit for tat. The current situation is not ideal for either party, which I think is something we can both agree on

 

It will be interesting to see the results of this inquiry, which the council will publish much later in the year - and I will put a link on here so people can see them.

 

Where do you propose these new roads should be - and what about the increase in traffic you'd cause if you're pushing cars from that road so you can make it into a cycle only road? Also, how are you thinking they should fund these changes, at a time of savage cutbacks?

 

They could replace some of the current cycle lanes and widen the roads, as it seems a lot of cyclists don't think the cycle lanes are either a) well maintained b) properly designed c) full of obstacles...

 

Out of interest, are the council doing a similar survey for drivers, and how to improve driving conditions in the city - surely it's best to get all sides of the story before making anymore rash decisions on road 'improvements'... after making such a mess with some of the cycle lanes and roads generally, would you trust them to make a better fist of it next time?

[kckc 10]

Good idea by the council but what I find annoying is that the council invest money in these cycle lanes for cyclists not to use them. A very good example of this is a long where the airport was. Cyclists have a full path to themselves but there are a number if cyclists that insist daily cycling on the road, this is not only dangerous to the car driver and cyclist but makes it hard for genuine cyclist who us the correctly to get road conditions improved. I personally think a cyclist not using the lanes designed for the should get s £60 fine which could then be used to improve cycle lanes. Within a week you get enough funding to do a good few miles

 

well theres a massive Cycle lane on the eurpa link road the one with the car people and goes past car crap ,sorry car craft ,

And i have been driving up and down this to and from work and im yet to see a Cyclists use it , just a waste of money as they just use the road

 

Haddy and philrawson...it may seem unreasonable that cyclists don't use this path and cycle on the road instead, but I can explain why. I should point out that I would always prefer to cycle away from cars, but sometimes paths can be more dangerous.

 

1) There are several side roads (e.g. near Menzies and Outokumpu) where the cycle path forces the cyclist to go left and then cross 2 roads, where they are more at risk of being hit by cars that also turn left (usually without indicating, assuming the cyclist can see them round the blind bend). Cars don't expect to see cyclists crossing those stretches of road, and zoom round them pretty fast. If the cyclist had stayed on the road, they would remain visible to cars and not have to try and look behind them to see round a blind bend if a car might be heading for them.

 

2) The trees planted at the side of the cycle path have created a big problem with their root systems lifting up the surface in chunky ridges that are difficult to cycle over.

 

3) As Cyclone said, the cycle path is not gritted in winter, but the road is.

 

4) People often jog on the cycle path side by side, whilst walking several dogs, leaving no space for a cyclist to pass.

 

5) Cyclists have every right to use the road, and in this case, it is actually safer, quicker, and a lot less bumpy! If there were more dropped kerb access points, perhaps cyclists could avoid the left side turns by going on the road for a short distance, then rejoin the path straight after, but it would still leave them with a slower and much bumpier ride.

[sheff71 10]

Haddy and philrawson...it may seem unreasonable that cyclists don't use this path and cycle on the road instead, but I can explain why. I should point out that I would always prefer to cycle away from cars, but sometimes paths can be more dangerous.

 

1) There are several side roads (e.g. near Menzies and Outokumpu) where the cycle path forces the cyclist to go left and then cross 2 roads, where they are more at risk of being hit by cars that also turn left (usually without indicating, assuming the cyclist can see them round the blind bend). Cars don't expect to see cyclists crossing those stretches of road, and zoom round them pretty fast. If the cyclist had stayed on the road, they would remain visible to cars and not have to try and look behind them to see round a blind bend if a car might be heading for them.

 

2) The trees planted at the side of the cycle path have created a big problem with their root systems lifting up the surface in chunky ridges that are difficult to cycle over.

 

3) As Cyclone said, the cycle path is not gritted in winter, but the road is.

 

4) People often jog on the cycle path side by side, whilst walking several dogs, leaving no space for a cyclist to pass.

 

5) Cyclists have every right to use the road, and in this case, it is actually safer, quicker, and a lot less bumpy! If there were more dropped kerb access points, perhaps cyclists could avoid the left side turns by going on the road for a short distance, then rejoin the path straight after, but it would still leave them with a slower and much bumpier ride.

 

It shouldn't matter about it being a slower ride though, just the safety aspect - if cyclists have to be inconvenienced a little to provide them with a safer route, surely that's better.

 

I's only like motorists have had to adjust to the various changes over the years to force them away from the city centre and onto the ring road where possible, even though it is less direct, slower and more inconvenient for most... as for bumpy roads, it's hardly like most of the roads in Sheffield are of good quality even for cars!

 

Have to say though, i'd hate to be a cyclist trying to get across Meadowhead Roundabout at the moment, it's hairy enough as a driver with the roadworks!

[JFKvsNixon 11]

It shouldn't matter about it being a slower ride though, just the safety aspect - if cyclists have to be inconvenienced a little to provide them with a safer route, surely that's better.

 

But it is not safer, infact it is more dangerous. We need to be in the situation where all road users can use the road safely together.

 

I's only like motorists have had to adjust to the various changes over the years to force them away from the city centre and onto the ring road where possible, even though it is less direct, slower and more inconvenient for most... as for bumpy roads, it's hardly like most of the roads in Sheffield are of good quality even for cars!

 

If you think about it what you want is more cyclists on the road, if more people use their bike for their commute then there is less cars on the road, reducing congestion and making it easier and quicker for the car drivers.

 

If you are going to encourage people to use their bike for their commute you have to make it easier and safer for them to use the road network.

[sheff71 10]

But it is not safer, infact it is more dangerous. We need to be in the situation where all road users can use the road safely together.

 

 

 

If you think about it what you want is more cyclists on the road, if more people use their bike for their commute then there is less cars on the road, reducing congestion and making it easier and quicker for the car drivers.

 

If you are going to encourage people to use their bike for their commute you have to make it easier and safer for them to use the road network.

 

Or the cyclists (and some drivers) could get on buses so they're fuller, and less cyclists and car drivers on the road...?

 

The main comment was more that it shouldn't matter if a change of route means it takes a cyclist a little longer to get to their destination, if it is a clear and safer route... I do accept though that the way some of the routes are currently in Sheffield, there probably aren't that many that are in good condition.

 

It is frustrating though when part of a road has been removed/narrowed for a cycle lane, and then the cyclists don't use it (for whatever reason) - it would've been better to leave as they were, but improve the quality of the road, and keep it clean and clear near the pavement (to encourage cyclists to that side where safe).

Edited October 6, 2013 by sheff71

[JFKvsNixon 11]

Or the cyclists (and some drivers) could get on buses so they're fuller, and less cyclists and car drivers on the road...?

 

Fuller buses during rush hour? Have you thought this through?

 

---------- Post added 06-10-2013 at 18:59 ----------

 

The main comment was more that it shouldn't matter if a change of route means it takes a cyclist a little longer to get to their destination, if it is a clear and safer route... I do accept though that the way some of the routes are currently in Sheffield, there probably aren't that many that are in good condition.

 

It is frustrating though when part of a road has been removed/narrowed for a cycle lane, and then the cyclists don't use it (for whatever reason) - it would've been better to leave as they were, but improve the quality of the road, and keep it clean and clear near the pavement (to encourage cyclists to that side where safe).

 

It is not safe for a cyclist to ride near the kerb, which cycle lanes force you to do. Also cycle lanes often do not give enough clearance between traffic and the bike so they encourage traffic to drive too close to the cyclist.

Edited October 7, 2013 by JFKvsNixon
Thanks adamf