Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

feature

Why don't cyclists use cycle lanes?

Here's what the law says, and why cyclists might sometimes prefer to give cycle lanes a miss

You hear it all the time, especially on internet forums: cyclists should ride in the cycle lane. You might have had motorists yelling the same thing at you out on the road, or honking their horn (breaking Rule 112 of The Highway Code) and pointing at the cycle lane. What's the truth?

Let's see what The Highway Code has to say (remember that not all of the rules in The Highway Code are legal requirements).

Cycle lanes - 4.jpg

Here's Rule 61 of the revised Highway Code that came into force in January this year: "Cycle Routes and Other Facilities. Cycle lanes are marked by a white line (which may be broken) along the carriageway. Use facilities such as cycle lanes and tracks, advanced stop lines and toucan crossings where they make your journey safer and easier. This will depend on your experience and skills and the situation at the time. While such facilities are provided for reasons of safety, cyclists may exercise their judgement and are not obliged to use them."

That's simple enough, then. Despite what people might claim – and how hard they type USING BLOCK CAPS – The Highway Code makes it clear that cyclists aren't obliged to use cycle lanes. 

Cycle lanes - 6.jpg

Surely, though, it's better all round for cyclists to make use of cycle lanes when they are provided? It helps us cyclists by giving us our own space and it allows motor vehicles to flow more freely, right?

Well, it's not always the best option.

What if the cycle lane is full of debris that could to cause a puncture? Cycle lanes are usually positioned on the far left of the road and the camber means that everything that lands on the main carriageway eventually ends up there... grit, stones, bits that have fallen out of skips, the lot.

We're not saying it's common but we've even seen glass from a road traffic incident being swept from the middle of the carriageway on to the cycle lane and left there, as if that means it has been cleared.

Some cycle lanes are dotted with slippery drain covers because of their positioning and they can be full of obstructions like bins left out to be emptied, temporary road signs and parked cars.

Rule 140 of The Highway Code has been heavily revised in the latest version that took effect in January with the aim of affording greater protection to cyclists.

It says: "Cycle lanes and cycle tracks. Cycle lanes are shown by road markings and signs. You MUST NOT drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a solid white line during its times of operation. Do not drive or park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line unless it is unavoidable. You MUST NOT park in any cycle lane whilst waiting restrictions apply.

"You should give way to any cyclists in a cycle lane, including when they are approaching from behind you – do not cut across them when you are turning or when you are changing lane (see Rule H3). Be prepared to stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists before crossing the cycle lane.

"Cycle tracks are routes for cyclists that are physically protected or located away from motor traffic, other than where they cross side roads. Cycle tracks may be shared with pedestrians.

"You should give way to cyclists approaching or using the cycle track when you are turning into or out of a junction (see Rule H3). Be prepared to stop and wait for a safe gap in the flow of cyclists before crossing the cycle track, which may be used by cyclists travelling in both directions.

"Bear in mind that cyclists are not obliged to use cycle lanes or cycle tracks."

There's a distinction in The Highway Code between 'Must/Must not' instructions which are legal requirements, and 'should/should not' and 'do/do not' rules which are advisory. That means that motorists are only advised not to park in a cycle lane marked by a broken white line (which is most of them).

Cycle lanes - 8.jpg

Even if there's just the occasional parked car, you'll need to leave the cycle lane and perhaps move back into traffic that's travelling at a faster speed. You might feel safer staying out of the cycle lane completely.

Another reason for not using a cycle lane on the left of the road is that it isn't always convenient if you're soon going to turn right or need to be in the right lane. Staying in the cycle lane might leave you needing to cross multiple lanes of traffic.

You might also sometimes find traffic turning left across your path without noticing you. The risk of getting sideswiped is one of the most common objections to using some cycle lanes.

A recent study published in the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention found that, far from protecting cyclists, painted cycle lanes are likely to result in closer passes from motorists. If you've had similar experiences, you're perfectly entitled to skip the cycle lane.

Prince  of Wales Road, Norwich (via Norwich Cycling Campaign).PNG

There's also the fact that some cycle lanes are simply – what's the word? – crap. They're filled with obstacles – street signs, bollards, trees and the like – they're so narrow that it's impossible to overtake, and they end abruptly.

Some cycle routes impede progress by requiring cyclists to give way to side roads frequently and even to dismount at certain junctions. It's far easier and quicker to steer clear of many.

London Cycle Lane Trees

If you use a cycle lane you'll have to rejoin the rest of the traffic at some point. This is usually straightforward enough but sometimes the junction at the far end has been poorly designed so you might want to avoid it by not taking the cycle lane in the first place.

Cycle lanes - 7.jpg

You'll often hear complaints that cyclist don't use "perfectly good cycle paths". The issue is that a cycle path existing and a cycle path being perfectly good are two different things. They're sometimes footways that have been converted by having little blue shared-use signs added, they're full of pedestrians, they're narrow and poorly surfaced, they yield at every junction and they sometimes disappear entirely.

We've only pointed out the negative aspects of cycle lanes here, naturally, because we're explaining why cyclists don't always use them (and, of course, it's always easy to criticise). The truth is that many fulfil a purpose.

If you feel safer in a cycle lane, you think it's better for your purposes, or you reckon that, as a matter of courtesy, using one will help the flow of motor vehicles on the road, then go for it. Riding in a cycle lane is often the most sensible option but, despite what others might insist, it's completely up to you.

Mat has been in cycling media since 1996, on titles including BikeRadar, Total Bike, Total Mountain Bike, What Mountain Bike and Mountain Biking UK, and he has been editor of 220 Triathlon and Cycling Plus. Mat has been road.cc technical editor for over a decade, testing bikes, fettling the latest kit, and trying out the most up-to-the-minute clothing. He has won his category in Ironman UK 70.3 and finished on the podium in both marathons he has run. Mat is a Cambridge graduate who did a post-grad in magazine journalism, and he is a winner of the Cycling Media Award for Specialist Online Writer. Now over 50, he's riding road and gravel bikes most days for fun and fitness rather than training for competitions.

Add new comment

94 comments

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 2 years ago
4 likes

//i2-prod.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/article7034807.ece/ALTERNATES/s810/1_WorstParkedCar.jpg)

Here's an example of a useful Bristol shortcut from Avonvale Rd to Silverthorne Lane (part of my route to the station).

Oh wait, what's that blocking access?

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/photograph-one-bristols-worst-parked-7034882

The police want to talk to the driver about their unorthodox parking methods.

Avatar
anagallis_arvensis | 2 years ago
4 likes

"Some cycle routes impede progress by requiring cyclists to give way to side roads frequently and even to dismount at certain junctions."

Point of order, blue "cyclists dismount" signs are advice you are not "required" to dismount.

Avatar
ktache replied to anagallis_arvensis | 2 years ago
1 like

But, if you don't and then get hit by a motorist not paying attention (I know, like that ever happens...) then getting insurance, especially for injury could be far more problematic.

Avatar
Hirsute | 2 years ago
5 likes

From the sublime to the ridiculous on this old thread. Good to reread crippledbiker's comments and lament his passing. Xena was a real oddity, although he did confess to drug use, so probably explains most of his comments.

Avatar
ktache replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
5 likes

Chapeau to Crippledbiker.

Avatar
RoryLydiate | 2 years ago
0 likes

2 points:

1. I was once advised not to feed trolls.

2. I don't know if any of these contributions are moderated but blatant foul and abusive language, as opposed to comments the moderator disagrees with, is usually a good reason for a contribution to be blocked as it is very unlikely to be helpful to anyone.

Avatar
John Stevenson replied to RoryLydiate | 2 years ago
4 likes

Fair point.

I'm responsible for republishing material like this; In future I'll try and remember to check the comments for fossilized nastiness by long-banned pillocks.

In this particular case I'm quite tempted to just delete everything Xena ever posted. Nothing of value would be lost, except for some quality snark in response.

Avatar
Hirsute replied to John Stevenson | 2 years ago
10 likes

My favourite was when ktache busted him for coming back with a new username by asking about his photo of his bikes in a shed. "You've stolen [user] 's bikes and ... their shed !"

Avatar
John Stevenson replied to Hirsute | 2 years ago
1 like

A classic!

BTW, as the username suggests, Xena was a woman.

Avatar
Jetmans Dad | 3 years ago
8 likes

"A recent study published in the journal Accident Analysis and Prevention(link is external) found that, far from protecting cyclists, painted cycle lanes are likely to result in closer passes from motorists."

This, for me, is one of the fundamental problems with on-road, painted cycle lanes, and you can't even really blame drivers for it. 

When driving in the right hand lane of a two lane carriageway, there is no need to perform any kind of overtaking manoeuvre, or move out in any way, to pass another vehicle being driven in the left hand lane. 

So, when the left hand lane is a cycle lane, rather than a motor vehicle lane, drivers act in the same way because "that is how it works when the vehicles are in their own lanes", resulting in them cruising past the cyclists' elbows far too close. 

And it comes back to the same issue so much of this debate does, which is drivers often don't understand what it is like to be on the road as anything other than the driver of a motor vehicle. 

Avatar
Sriracha | 3 years ago
8 likes

Is this some kind of ironic messaging from Peloton?
https://twitter.com/Cycle_Whamp/status/1346218521601204224?s=20

Avatar
jh2727 replied to Sriracha | 2 years ago
1 like

Old post, I know... but not 'ironic' if the Peloton van is parked - if it's parked then it is 'apt' given that Peloton are famous for their stationary bikes.

Avatar
chrisonabike replied to jh2727 | 2 years ago
0 likes

Probably one of their staff decided to take a bike out for a ride for a change...

Avatar
bike.brain | 4 years ago
2 likes

Advice from the Department for Transport is that you shouldn't be using bike lanes if you cycle at more than 18 mph anyway.
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/consu...

Avatar
mdavidford replied to bike.brain | 4 years ago
7 likes

bike.brain wrote:

Advice from the Department for Transport is that you shouldn't be using bike lanes if you cycle at more than 18 mph anyway.
https://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dft.gov.uk/consu...

That's for shared-use paths, not bike lanes.

Avatar
Rik Mayals unde... | 5 years ago
10 likes

I had a run in with a Stagecoach bus driver recently,

https://road.cc/content/news/265532-near-miss-day-297-bus-driver-cuts-cy...

 

I reported this to the police who viewed the footage and said it wasn't worth pursuing as the driver could argue he was braking for the speed hump, even though he close passed me then swung in and slammed on, nearly taking me out. When I confronted him he kept telling me to use the cycle path.

Last week I had another close pass by another Stagecoach bus driver, who passed me inside a pinch point crossing place in the centre of the road. Again, when I caught up with him and confronted him, he kept telling me to use the cycle path. I am currently awaiting a response from Stagecoach. I think the police should act on this as it was clearly driving without due care, but have lost all faith in Lancashire Police. Even when I have complained to the police standards dept, they have not had the decency to reply.

 

Stagecoach drivers should be trained to ensure they are aware that cyclists do not have to use cycle paths. 

Avatar
spragger replied to Rik Mayals underpants | 2 years ago
0 likes

Good luck with that I have tried Bus Cos and they are not responsive

It's the so called 'professional' drivers that are the most complacent, abusive and dangerous

Watch the postie when delivering with a van in rural locations 

Avatar
ktache | 5 years ago
5 likes

It is always a pleasure to have your insights Crippledbiker.

Avatar
Crippledbiker replied to ktache | 5 years ago
7 likes
ktache wrote:

It is always a pleasure to have your insights Crippledbiker.

Thank you - honestly, a lot of the stuff I say is pointing out the exact same thing. Over and over and over again.

It gets wearisome.

The notion that disabled cyclists might not be able to dismount is hardly extraordinary or revolutionary, given but a moment of thought and remembering that we bloody well exist.

Having said that, most posters here cotton on once it's been pointed out and keep it in mind. Now, if somebody could remind the pillocks who keep designing stuff we can't use, and those who keep trying to ban bikes from places...

Avatar
Mungecrundle replied to Crippledbiker | 5 years ago
4 likes

Crippledbiker wrote:
ktache wrote:

It is always a pleasure to have your insights Crippledbiker.

Thank you - honestly, a lot of the stuff I say is pointing out the exact same thing. Over and over and over again. It gets wearisome. The notion that disabled cyclists might not be able to dismount is hardly extraordinary or revolutionary, given but a moment of thought and remembering that we bloody well exist. Having said that, most posters here cotton on once it's been pointed out and keep it in mind. Now, if somebody could remind the pillocks who keep designing stuff we can't use, and those who keep trying to ban bikes from places...

 

Tsk.. I remember the days when disabled people were grateful for a pat on the head, the offer of a "nice cup of tea" in a loud voice and a guide dog every now and again.

 

 

Avatar
eburtthebike replied to Mungecrundle | 2 years ago
2 likes

Mungecrundle wrote:

Tsk.. I remember the days when disabled people were grateful for a pat on the head, the offer of a "nice cup of tea" in a loud voice and a guide dog every now and again.

The title of the R4 prog summed it up nicely: "Does he take sugar?"

Avatar
Ladywriter replied to eburtthebike | 1 year ago
0 likes

That title is so apt 

 

Avatar
twelvestocks | 5 years ago
13 likes

I don't generally use the ones that are a shared space with pedestrians unless the adjacent road is dangerous to cycle on. This is because it seems the only way to safely share space with pedestrians is to be travelling at their speed, and if I wanted to be travelling at walking pace I'd be walking! 

Avatar
FluffyKittenofT... | 5 years ago
11 likes

Xena,

You have absolutely no idea about what's going on in the world, you're happy to suck up any bullshit American con-artsts (often backed by billionaires) you watch on you tube becuase it must be true.

 

Go learn some actual science, stop being a dupe of people who want to maniuplate you for their own profit.

Avatar
ktache | 5 years ago
5 likes

Any original thoughts or are you just going to parrot things you have been told on youtube?

Avatar
ktache | 5 years ago
10 likes

Xena, Moon landings, any thoughts?

Avatar
CyclingInBeastMode | 5 years ago
7 likes

This bit right here is exactly why the HC needs a total revamp and written by people who actually understand things like priority, safety and hazard perception!

"keep within the lane when practicable. When leaving a cycle lane check before pulling out that it is safe to do so and signal your intention clearly to other road users."

The first bit is utterly irrelevant, it should be something like, ' the lane is a guide only, if you need to ride outside of the marked area for any reason (safety being one), do so, you are not constrained in any way to remain within the cycle lane.'

And, 'When leaving the lane, if you are able to check behind, do so, you have priority and vehicles behind need to ensure it is safe to pass/overtake you. If it is safe for you to take your hand off the bars (do not do this if the weather or road conditions would make this dangerous to you) then signal your intention with an outstretched arm in the direction you wish to move, this can be helpful to other road users but is not necessary.

Motorists behind you who are observing the HC and fulfilling their lawful obligation to ensure you are not going to be harmed and doing their hazard perception will see that the lane is ending and/or that you may wish to navigate to another part of the highway. if you are making a turn then the HC already states that a motorist cannot overtake you if there is a junction, move confidently to the position you wish to hold.'

Except it won't, because it's written for motorists by motorists with little to no understanding of the problems and why they'll reoccur time and again with bad outcomes for the vulnerable person no matter what line/lane or training people on bikes have.

Avatar
hawkinspeter | 5 years ago
2 likes

I'd like to vote for the shared pavement along Coronation Rd in Bristol:

https://bristolcars.blogspot.com/2010/08/coronation-road-cycle-path.html

or, there's an absolute beauty on the A370/M5 roundabout by Weston:

https://www.google.com/maps/@51.3594591,-2.8941526,3a,75y,96.43h,77.04t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKHeN_WKdakzy1T33Ipoqgw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Avatar
fukawitribe replied to hawkinspeter | 5 years ago
1 like

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'd like to vote for the shared pavement along Coronation Rd in Bristol:

https://bristolcars.blogspot.com/2010/08/coronation-road-cycle-path.html

It's pretty crap, but not really like that article makes out,  most folk seem to be able to use and share it just fine. That said, my favourite bit is where the blue signage gets erroneously reversed for one wee section, putting the cycle side furthest from the road - or not...

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to fukawitribe | 5 years ago
2 likes

fukawitribe wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

I'd like to vote for the shared pavement along Coronation Rd in Bristol:

https://bristolcars.blogspot.com/2010/08/coronation-road-cycle-path.html

It's pretty crap, but not really like that article makes out,  most folk seem to be able to use and share it just fine. That said, my favourite bit is where the blue signage gets erroneously reversed for one wee section, putting the cycle side furthest from the road - or not...

It's usable if you're not in a rush and can handle all the tree roots, but yeah, you can't rely on pedestrians keeping to "their" side. Personally, I prefer tangling with the motorised traffic instead.

Pages

Latest Comments