New cycleway opens in Yorkshire – but council's cycling champion“disappointed” by "irresponsible" cyclists who chose to ride on road instead

Tech Noir wrote:

If I spent millions on building a new fast food take away and, when it opened, I saw everyone continuing to go the McDonalds next door, I would suspect that there was some sort of problem with my take-away offering.

If I spent billions on building a new railway line and, when it opened, I saw everyone continuing to old railway line next to it, I would suspect that there was some sort of problem with my railway line.

If I spent billions on building a new motorway and, when it opened, I saw everyone continuing to old road next to it, I would suspect that there was some sort of problem with my motorway.

If I spent millions on building a cycle track and, when it opened, I saw two people continuing to use the adjacent carriageway, ... fill in the rest yourselves....

I would make excuses to deflect blame rather than admit to wasting public funds to build something that was inadequate.

Tech Noir wrote:

If I spent millions on building a new fast food take away and, when it opened, I saw everyone continuing to go the McDonalds next door, I would suspect that there was some sort of problem with my take-away offering.

If I spent billions on building a new railway line and, when it opened, I saw everyone continuing to old railway line next to it, I would suspect that there was some sort of problem with my railway line.

If I spent billions on building a new motorway and, when it opened, I saw everyone continuing to old road next to it, I would suspect that there was some sort of problem with my motorway.

If I spent millions on building a cycle track and, when it opened, I saw two people continuing to use the adjacent carriageway, ... fill in the rest yourselves....

I would make excuses to deflect blame rather than admit to wasting public funds to build something that was inadequate.

essexian wrote:

I've just looked at the photos on the local papers site and I can see why I would not be using it apart from for social rides with kids etc.... call that a path! It looks hardly 2m wide so less than the suggested standard of 3m meaning there would be no room to overtake slower riders/people who have stopped for some strange reason or other and the like.  If you are going to build cycle routes etc at least make them as good, or indeed better than the road if you want everyone to use them. If not, keep the money and put it into policing the roads to make sure that everyone sticks within the law so roads are safer for everyone. This path looks just like a box ticking exercise to me. 

Yes, I couldn't agree more

There are a number of major problems with the design of this new cycleway which is no doubt why the bike riders were pictured on the road. If the new route was any good, then they would have been using it! I used to live in Bradford, so I feel I can comment in more detail.

Firstly, as others have mentioned is the width. I measured the earlier Bradford (Church Bank) section of bi-directional cycle-way at 2.8m. Although without measuring to confirm the new (Valley Road) section, I would agree with the other comments that it looks narrower, possibly down to as little as 2m to 2.5m? Then, there is the issue of the 90degree kerb edging stones. I emailed ‘City Connect’ (the organisation behind the scheme) to ask why? They emailed back to say ‘someone had tripped over’ the 45degree chamfered ones on the earlier Leeds to Bfd. section, so they decided on use right angled ones. This however, goes against all the current thinking and best practice. 90degree kerbs reduce the usable width and represent an unnecessary hazard for pedals. This gives users the feeling of cycling in a culvert or a trench.

https://therantyhighwayman.blogspot.com/2017/01/kerb-your-enthusiasm-stepped-cycle.html

http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2008/12/danger-of-parallel-kerbs.html To quote David Hembrow; "Parallel kerbs can be quite dangerous for cyclists. A slight lapse of concentration and you can be off your bike, and possibly injured badly enough to end up in hospital. Like so many things, this doesn't have to be the case. The kerbs in Assen (Netherlands) for example, are "forgiving" shallow angled ones. These kerbs make it possible to cross from the cycle path to the pedestrian path without falling from your bike. They reduce the risk of injury due to a lapse of concentration."

Another issue is the route switches from one side of the road to the other when it approaches the inner ring road. Why didn’t the designers keep it on the same side? This can in turn make the cycleway unappealing for those travelling in a different direction to the other side of the road to which the cycleway is located. Combine this with restrictive kerbs, tight turns and extra time needed then many commuter cyclists will often choose the quicker option. As Essexian said above; "If you are going to build cycle routes etc at least make them as good, or indeed better than the road if you want everyone to use them."

Finally, there is the use of the colour green. Because there are no national standards, each council / constructing body are using different coloured surfacing. Manchester opted for orange and Cambridge red. Birmingham used blue and had the foresight to use chamfered kerbs and rounded edging stones making the whole thing more user friendly.

A large part of the new route in Bradford runs through an industrial area  and everything should have been done to make it an exemplar piece of design, what we have got instead is a rather clunky cycleway which is already starting to look tatty. I am sure it will get used but, it could have been so much better.

jumbo469 wrote:

Saj mate, are pedestrians irresponsible if they cross the road without using the crossings put there for them?

The avg councillor probably thinks just that, be as any fuly kno pedestrian crossings are there (to make life easier) for motorists not pedestrians.

Steel wrote:

Councillor Taj Salam saying cyclists can't use the road when there is a cycle route nearby, is like the councillor being told to drive on A or B roads when he wants to use the motorway. We all have the choice to use whatever road available, cyclist or motorist.

I'd suggest it's the other way round, Saj should only have been able to get from his house to the opening by motorway, if the motorway doesn't go directly between the 2 then he shouldn't travel, bloody irresposible of him!