Cycling : Another way of looking at it !

[The PNP]

I have twice been to Ainsdale Village today - each time spending up to an hour over the length of Station Road. I do not recall having seen one bike in that time. The excessive pandering over the provision of better cycling facilities in our town is a scandalous waste of money that could be better spent in so many ways that would genuinely help people.

No bikes about, yet many have a bike/s in their shed or garage - but keep choosing the car, even for all their short trips. Perhaps if you'd asked people why, the answer might have proved revealing.....Which is, that they chose to drive because of fear of riding in traffic. The best way to eliminate that fear, is to provide safe segregated cycle infrastructure for them to use.

[said]

I have twice been to Ainsdale Village today - each time spending up to an hour over the length of Station Road. I do not recall having seen one bike in that time. The excessive pandering over the provision of better cycling facilities in our town is a scandalous waste of money that could be better spent in so many ways that would genuinely help people.

Then you will be pleased to read the latest report in the Echo. According to statistics recently taken, in Southport we have over 400 cyclists along Chapel Street EVERY DAY?? The ghost street, Talbot Street gets 80 cyclists EVERY DAY?? Where they get these figures I really don't know. Then the report goes on to say that even more visitors will be coming to a greener Southport due to the £37 million being spent on it - now that will be interesting since the money is being spent on a Conference Centre - will those attending be arriving on a bike?

[local]

It is a mystery why so few people use bikes for short distances in this warmer weather.

They aren't using the cycle lanes and you can often be the only one using them.

I suppose laziness is an issue and the rampant thefts.

[said]

It is a mystery why so few people use bikes for short distances in this warmer weather.

They aren't using the cycle lanes and you can often be the only one using them.

I suppose laziness is an issue and the rampant thefts.

When you go out for a cycle ride other than for commuting to work, then it is for leisure. The places a cyclist goes to are not urban unless there is something to specifically go for. I travel miles on my bike, but you will seldom see me in any town on it.

[justbecause]

We drove along the A584 last night towards Lytham. There was a section of road with a solid white line indicating that it was a cycle lane. We approached three cyclists, riding THREE abreast, one in the designated cycle lane, the other two straddling the rest of the road. They where only riding at around 10mph, and I patiently waited for a safe opportunity to pass them. Eventually, and not wanting to overtake too closely, I gave a very brief toot on the horn, (my car is electric, and they may well not have heard me behind them), and was greeted with all three of them giving me the “v” sign.
I am a firm believer that the roads are for us all to use, but it is incidents like this one that often stirs up hatred of cyclists.

[The PNP]

We drove along the A584 last night towards Lytham. There was a section of road with a solid white line indicating that it was a cycle lane. We approached three cyclists, riding THREE abreast

As for the ''v' sign, at least you knew they'd heard you and were aware of your presence.

Btw, I've actually ridden along there (in company with a friend) but only once, as it was not a pleasant or safe experience. Unfortunately unless you go a long way around, apart from a few short stretches of old road, there's no practical alternative to the A584 between Lytham and Preston.

That 'cycle lane' is hardly wider than a set of handlebars, leading to fast vehicles passing at very close quarters. Whilst Lancs County has done a fair bit to improve infrastructure in/around Preston, main cross-country routes seem to have been entirely overlooked.

Fast A-roads like that one, are crying out for a good quality bi-directional cycle path to be sited along the verge. Until that is done - if it ever is - riders will continue to be at risk and drivers will be inconvenienced.

[libraryguy]

With regard to this and the other thread about PNR, there's a simple answer to having a dedicated cycle lane WITHOUT one millimetre of tarmac reduced for motor vehicles.

Simple, you remove the grass verges and the trees! Turn them into a dedicated cycle track. They're wide enough, can have a kerb either side to denote the cycle lane. This also leaves enough pavement for pedestrians.

Don't know why I didn't think of it sooner.

Job done!

[Alikado]

With regard to this and the other thread about PNR, there's a simple answer to having a dedicated cycle lane WITHOUT one millimetre of tarmac reduced for motor vehicles.

Simple, you remove the grass verges and the trees! Turn them into a dedicated cycle track. They're wide enough, can have a kerb either side to denote the cycle lane. This also leaves enough pavement for pedestrians.

Don't know why I didn't think of it sooner.

Job done!

No need to remove the trees,the cycle track could be the current flagged area and a new pedestrian area created through the grassed area.

[The PNP]

With regard to this and the other thread about PNR, there's a simple answer to having a dedicated cycle lane WITHOUT one millimetre of tarmac reduced for motor vehicles.

Simple, you remove the grass verges and the trees! Turn them into a dedicated cycle track. They're wide enough, can have a kerb either side to denote the cycle lane. This also leaves enough pavement for pedestrians.

Don't know why I didn't think of it sooner.

Job done!

Agree, except for the trees. There is enough verge along PNR for a good cycle-path, without removing the trees. It may require taking 2ft off the pavement, but pedestrians would still have space to walk at least two-abreast.

[The PNP]

No need to remove the trees,the cycle track could be the current flagged area and a new pedestrian area created through the grassed area.

Problem with that, would be the residents vehicles exiting driveways. Works ok with pedestrians walking past, but a bike moves faster and collisions would happen. Keeping the pavement closest to the properties, allows space for cars to nose out and check for bikes before proceeding.

As it happens, Sefton intend to upgrade the cycle provision along PNR. Guess we'll have to wait and see what sort of a job they make of it.

[donkey22]

Simple, you remove the grass verges and the trees! Turn them into a dedicated cycle track.

What a ridiculous thing to say, and it also suggests you have a complete disregard for the environment.
Sefton are busy increasing our tree population, not decreasing it!
https://www.qlocal.co.uk/southport/n...n-55050977.htm

[The PNP]

What a ridiculous thing to say, and it also suggests you have a complete disregard for the environment.
Sefton are busy increasing our tree population, not decreasing it!
https://www.qlocal.co.uk/southport/n...n-55050977.htm

They also happen to be cherry-blossoms, particulary beautiful when in bloom each Spring.
I don't expect the residents of PNR would take kindly to them being felled.

[justbecause]

A) As for the ''v' sign, at least you knew they'd heard you and were aware of your presence.

B) Btw, I've actually ridden along there (in company with a friend) but only once, as it was not a pleasant or safe experience. Unfortunately unless you go a long way around, apart from a few short stretches of old road, there's no practical alternative to the A584 between Lytham and Preston.

C) That 'cycle lane' is hardly wider than a set of handlebars, leading to fast vehicles passing at very close quarters. Whilst Lancs County has done a fair bit to improve infrastructure in/around Preston, main cross-country routes seem to have been entirely overlooked.

D) Fast A-roads like that one, are crying out for a good quality bi-directional cycle path to be sited along the verge. Until that is done - if it ever is - riders will continue to be at risk and drivers will be inconvenienced.

A) I suppose I could have expected a stupid answer like from you.

B) There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the road, IF and WHEN used properly.

C) A cycle lane wider than a set of handlebars is adequately wide enough, again, IF used properly.

D) The majority of the A584 is 30MPH, how you can define that as a ‘fast A road’ is beyond me.

Not one of your four paragraphs did anything to actually address that this incident was one of inconsiderate or even possibly, dangerous riding, and the point I tried to make that it is no surprise that many motorists get annoyed at the cycling fraternity, but that wouldn’t fit with your anti-motorist mantra, would it.

[Desert Region]

Agree, except for the trees. There is enough verge along PNR for a good cycle-path, without removing the trees. It may require taking 2ft off the pavement, but pedestrians would still have space to walk at least two-abreast.

That would be before what remains of pavements are made into dedicated e-scooter lanes.

[The PNP]

A) There’s absolutely nothing wrong with the road, IF and WHEN used properly.

B) A cycle lane wider than a set of handlebars is adequately wide enough, again, IF used properly.

C) The majority of the A584 is 30MPH, how you can define that as a ‘fast A road’ is beyond me.

D) Not one of your four paragraphs did anything to actually address that this incident was one of inconsiderate or even possibly, dangerous riding, and the point I tried to make that it is no surprise that many motorists get annoyed at the cycling fraternity, but that wouldn’t fit with your anti-motorist mantra, would it.

A) Problem is, riders can't rely on everyone to drive properly. Endless close-passes aside, it only takes one distracted/drunk/drugged driver to fail to notice your bike, ploughing straight over it - and you're history. Where infra keeps vulnerable road users physically separated from motor traffic (e.g. with kerbing) they can ride how they like without getting up drivers noses.

B) Disagree. Drivers in the traffic lane, feel they are ok passing riders in a narrow bike lane without moving out. This leads to dangerously close passes. Think it's ok for your kids go for a nice ride in that narrow bike lane? What about when a juggernaut thunders past within a couple of feet, blowing them off their bikes? Separate tarmac would clearly give them a greater chance of surviving the ride.

C) I remember making it through a fast 50mph section where the carriageway splits, with trees/shrubs in between - pretty scary. Lytham end is safe enough, with a good cycle-path along the seafront past the windmill, etc. The 20mph old road through Freckleton is ok too. We went that way and found a handy convenience store.

D) Motor traffic and bikes are not a good combination, except perhaps in traffic-calmed zones. Motorists blame cyclists, for what are in fact infra shortcomings. It's time those at the top did more to separate out the two very different modes, to the benefit of all!