Where Does The Cycle Lane End?

[@frenchdave69]

2:59 The textured tiles indicate to me that it is still a shared path. Those textured tiles with ridges perpendicular to the path indicate the pedestrian side, whilst those parallel to the path indicate the cyclist side. (I believe the primary use is to provide textured information to partially sighted people.)

[@roelsch]

That is super weird. You should never ride over tiles with ridges parallel to the path, these can catch your front wheel and throw you off.

[@lmaoroflcopter]

​@@roelsch if you're at risk of that you're riding a wafer thin wheel. The ridges aren't sufficient to catch a wheel.

[@robertparkinson2102]

I thought the ridges were there to prevent winter slipping, pedestrians feet tend slip forward or back while bike wheels slide sidways. Having cycled through 30 winters you might expect me to know but I also prefer the roads. Using UK cycle infrastructure is slower - unlike the Dutch cycle infrastructure which is used by their queen.

[@idavidmcclune]

And I thought ridged tiles were for the blind and partially sighted.

[@RuneyViolet]

This 100%, I was going comment this. I think Tom Scott even did a video on this years back. But the lack of knowledge about this for the average person in the UK still is a massive problem

[@PedroConejo1939]

That cycle path must have used up almost all of the £12 budget.

[@andrewnorris5415]

13:40 I did spot what looked like a "cycle path ends" sign. But it was hidden in the bushes and hard to see.

[@raymondbenjamins5884]

As somebody from the Netherlands, it's always shocking to see just how bad the cycling infrastructure is in other countries. I wouldn't expect everywhere to be up to the same standard as here, but surely having clear signage isn't asking too much?

[@Slaeowulf]

You go too far the other way, though. Pedestrians get blamed if hit by cyclists. Bonkers.

[@josephmcmahon7470]

@@Slaeowulf It isn't when you consider aspects such as their signalling and 'traffic' flow management are far superior to ours also.

[@wibbley1]

@raymondbenjamins5884 do the bikeys in the Netherlands al wear lycra fancy dress, ride racing bikes and think they are in the tour-de-france? There seems to be a mentality amongst bikeys in the UK that se themselves apart from other countries.

[@josephmcmahon7470]

@@wibbley1 Not sure what you're rambling on about. Go to London, don't see many lycra clad folk there. Ashley certainly isn't either.

[@Slaeowulf]

@@josephmcmahon7470 What does that have to do with strict liability?

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

Just after you said, "I don't think this is a shared path". The tactile paving said, "oh yes I am". The ones that go parallel to the edge are typical for cycle paths for widing the visually impaired.

[@kevelliott]

'Most 'cycling infrastructure' in urban areas is a box-ticking exercise for local authorities

[@raithrover1976]

Yup. Perth, Scotland is like box-ticking bingo. Narrow pavement (Edinburgh Road) now designated as a shared path complete with solid white line separating the 3 inches for pedestrians from the 2.5 inches for cyclists? Check! Useless white paint down the gutter (Edinburgh Rd and Glasgow Rd) that directs less experienced cyclist into sunken drain covers and down the blindside of buses? Check! Blue directional signs encouraging cyclist to take meandering routes through narrow residential streets that are often less safe to cycle on than main roads due to lines of parked cars and SUV drivers doing a high speed slalom between them? House!!!

[@craiglang3492]

@@raithrover1976 But you can cycle round and round the North Inch to your heart’s content. Dundee, one really good path along the river, everywhere else awful… really awful

[@michaelgurd7477]

Most 'cycling infrastructure' is just lines in the road. = not fit for purpose.

[@andrewnorris5415]

I also sometimes do not press the button and wait for a gap to avoid holding traffic up. When safe I just cycle across. Had no idea that was illegal!

[@ColinSmith2001]

If you just go the other side of the pole you aren't crossing on the crossing, and so not illegal? ;-)

[@nparsons]

I'm not convinced that red lights at toucan crossing need to be obeyed - I think it's the red lights on dedicated cycle paths that it actually applies to, because those have stop lines just like the road.

[@Pystro]

There really should be some law like "if you can finish crossing at least 5 seconds before the next vehicle/pedestrian/whatever enters into the intersection, then going through a red is not illegal". And by that I mean it should be a law for everyone. Problem is that it's not something that traffic cameras can easily detect, so it would make red light violations impossible to enforce.

[@QiuEnnan]

This is actually wrong - it’s only illegal to ride across at CYCLE ONLY crossings (i.e. where there are the tricolour traffic lights for cycles only)

[@fablolliesrock]

To add to the confusion, "End of Cycle Route" doesn't have any clear legal meaning, beyond "this cycle lane or recommended route stops here and we haven't provided anything further". You see it on lanes that are rejoining the road, where cycling is obviously legal, as well as on pavements where it isn't at all clear. It's actually on a TFL list of signs to avoid because of the ambiguity.

[@amushrow]

My 'favourite' cycle lanes around Liverpool are the ones that move onto the pavement for a bit and then seemingly randomly merge back onto the road again. It's usually more dangerous to follow them than to just stay on the road. Not that most of them are actually cycle lanes anyway, they're just painted on and parked cars & pedestrians get more use out of them than cyclists.

[@davefb]

where the road is nice and safe, cycle infrastructure... where its busy and dangerous, no cycle lane.... Its all done for 'we put in 100miles of cycle lanes" box ticking..

[@agirlisnoone8180]

To be honest. Unless a cycle lane is convenient, I’ll ride on the road. It’s not a legal requirement that cyclists must use lanes provided. I’m a confident cyclist and I’m more than happy on the road leaving a cycle lane or shared pavement to those less experienced or confident. (And yes, I am a car driver, both personal and business experience, as well as horse rider that has ridden on roads regularly.)

[@andrewnorris5415]

Something not mentioned here is that some drivers get angry if cyclists do not take the cycle path. Some even seem to think we should legally take it. Some of them have tree roots, glass, more potholes etc.

[@smilerbob]

⁠@andrewnorris5415 The roads aren’t much better, sunken trenches, potholes, glass, lorry tyres, bits of car bumpers and trim 😉 I wouldn’t trust any of the cycling infrastructure where I am, even the new bits

[@ExtantThylacine]

I totally agree. Even where I live which supposedly has good infrastructure (it doesn't: the half-decent infrastructure that does exists just leads you nowhere) the most convenient route is the carriageway, which I'll stick to until they decide to build proper cycle infrastructure.

[@wibbley1]

@@andrewnorris5415 Yes bikey types should be forced to use a bike lane if one is provided. Bikeys just think of themselves, failing to realise (or care) that the bike lane is there for everyone's safety, not just entitled bikeys.

[@wibbley1]

@@ExtantThylacine Yeah typical bike riders comment. Bike lanes should be used by bikes if provided. It segregates the slower traffic, so they do not hinder other road users and should be safer for the bike rider. They always bleat on about how vulnerable they are, but still refuse to use the lane provided for them!

[@TheCat333]

The tactile floor is meant to indicate its shared, e.g. 8:28 the left side is the 'cyclist' side, right is pedestrian.These should really be at the start and end and through out the path, which they are. Should also be seperated by a painted line - which it isn't. (Although painted infrastructure isn't really infrastructure and can be dangerous when it's icy). A guess but they probably planned on painting but decided not to. The main thing that stops me from using shared cycle paths is the constant conflict between myself and when having to cross an entrance / slowing down and stopping for cars. As the Dutch have done, 'raised' or uninterrupted paths and giving 'priority' to the cyclist and pedestrian would be a great step.

[@4ChordsNoNet]

You almost nailed it when you mentioned the tactile pavIng. The grooves that run inline with the direction that you're going indicate that's the cycling section and the ones that run 90 degrees across the path show that it's the pedestrian part. At.13:42 there's a sign that says 'End of route'. As much as people complain about TFL, the cycle infrastructure in London is miles better than what you have in Liverpool.

[@MattLowne]

0:16 above all the other (very valid) points, this was the biggest. A road I need to cross to get to work takes 7 minutes to cross if you don't chance it on a red man. It's apalling how we treat people who aren't in a car in this country.

[@busog97641]

Ashley, from what I know of British cycling (Yank here) on shared paths is, if the tactile (grooved vertical versus horizonal) pads. If there are grooved horizonal, it is for pedestrians and if it is grooved vertical it is meant from cyclist. So, where you were cycling was a shared path. *Edit: I am talking about the first half of the video*

[@markboscawen8330]

Ashley, if you go into Google maps, select the layers symbol in the top left corner & then select ‘cycling’ in ‘map details’, cycle lanes & shared paths are shown in green. Though even this can be confusing as the overlay might be on a pedestrian only footpath when the shared path is on the other side of the roadway. The green lines should indicate official cycling infrastructure as the data has been supplied by councils. One thing that is evident when at suburb/city view is just how disjointed it is. With the green lines along/between many major commuter corridors not joining up & showing where cyclists are forced back onto roads.

[@Foddeur]

Good video - good cycling infrastructure conforms to the 3 c's - Clear, Cohesive, Connected. If the infrastructure isn't clearly laid out or signposted, then users may not even know of its existence or - like you encountered here - where it starts and ends. If the infrastructure constantly stops and starts, dropping people on bikes out onto the road willy-nilly, or forcing them to constantly come on/off the road, then it's probably easier and safer to just be in the road from the off. And if the infrastructure doesn't go to where people want to go, or connect up with other bits of infrastructure, then usage is going to be low, too.

[@dylaanowen]

Best way to say is the markings near dropped curbs. The yellow textured tiles (yactile paving). It you see a uniform texture (usually dots/nubs protruding from the floor) they have not indicated that there is s cycle path. If there are two textures with one grooved structure that is the same as the direction of travel (transverse) and another next to it that is perpendicular (Longitudinal) to the direction of travel then you have a separation between the pedestrian section and the cycle section. People with visual impairment use the difference in feel to determine whether they are walking along the cycle path part of the pedestrian part as cycle paths are the longitudinal/perpendicular part of the pathway. They are also often placed on the road side of the pathway. At 3:14 you ride over a 2 textured tactile paving indicating that the shared path is still present. At 6:06 after you crossed the road and start cycling the markings just after the green billboard sign indicate the cycle path has only just begun as there were not any other markings present before.

[@darrenpotter6297]

I really hate the problem of suddenly ending cycle routes. I usually stick to the roads because the paths are of such low quality that they cannot navigated, however I see paths which just end. What are you expected to do? Keep getting off your bike? Keep hopping on and off the road? Can you imagine if a road suddenly had a "no motor vehicle" sign with no way for you to go?

[@raymondbenjamins5884]

13:41 there is actually a sign there, it's just hidden by the vegetation. It looks like it says the cycle route ends there.

[@wibbley1]

but road signs don't apply to bike riders. 🤣

[@TheGiff7]

Problem is that the tactile paving says otherwise.

[@misterflibble9799]

Although that situation is a good example of a terrible cycle route, and why many cyclists don't use them - even if it weren't overgrown to the point of being almost unusable, it still ends and spits you out at a junction on the "wrong" side of the road for the direction of travel where you're having to give way to motor traffic from three different directions and with pretty limited visibility in at least one direction.

[@LewisSkinner]

​@@misterflibble9799 I came here to say this. Whilst there is a (very poor and obstructed) sign; as Ashley says, "what am I meant to do?". Cycles get spat out on the wrong side of the road here with no crossing facilities. Nevermind the 2-300 yards before that where it's so overgrown that two pedestrians would struggle to share!

[@wibbley1]

@@misterflibble9799 Much of that was not a cycle route, as Ash cycled right past the end of cycle lane sign. Admittedly it was partially obscured by trees. Maybe this is why one should concentrate on cycling, rather than making a video whilst cycling? Tbh maybe Ash making videos whilst driving is not a good idea either.

[@TheSpacecraftX]

I think that's a sign hidden in the foliage at the end of the video. 13:42 top right.

[@smilerbob]

It appears, if I have read the document correctly: Blister / bubble paving is for pedestrian crossing points Striped paving indicates a hazard (steps, slope) but can be used to indicate segregated cycle / pedestrian infrastructure by having the cycle lane in the direction of the lane and the pedestrian side going across Interesting to see it used on a shared path…signage says something different to the guidance. Useful for cyclists to know which side to go should the meet a blind / partially sighted pedestrian 👍 I wont be able to paste the link but the long PDF guidance is called “Guidance on the Use of Tactile Paving Surfaces” and is available on the UK Government website

[@ColinSmith2001]

Yeah, guidance on tactiles for shared use paths isn't given explicitly, so you have to decide the intentions, so different places decide differently...... In the video minute 2 though it's also not a shared path, it's a segregated path by the signs, so the tactiles there follow that, it's just there is no dividing line painted between the cycling and walking halves.

[@skylarius3757]

The difference in pavement helps the blind people with canes too.

[@smilerbob]

⁠Indeed the lanes around the fire station are dedicated and marked, although no paint or centre strip in use. However one part I was thinking of was around 1:38 where the sign suggests shared use but the paving suggests dedicated lanes Perhaps they were thinking of continuing the segregation up to the crossing and maybe beyond but changed their mind and left the paving in place. If it isn’t explicitly defined then who knows what planners will decide

[@ColinSmith2001]

@@smilerbob The chances of well thought out intentions being agreed, and then being taken forward correctly to plans and then the correct construction detailing being ordered and then that actually being built are low.

[@grahambonner508]

All of this is useless if half the path is overgrown due to no maintenance, also sometimes with overhanging brambles, how is a blind person supposed to deal with those?

[@philkelsall1207]

Here in the East Midlands. There are rumble strips on shared pavements. They are at 90 degrees to the edge for pedestrians and parallel to the direction of travel for cyclists. We have a lot of shared paths, both on and off road. 8:24

[@silkdestroyer]

You are, of course, spot on about a lot of our so called 'cycling infrastructure. Here in the UK it seems as if every local authority does their own thing, whereas on the continent there seems to be a much more 'joined up' approach. Last year I rode up to Sweden from my home in Co. Durham. After getting off the ferry in Holland I must have rode about 450 miles up to Denmark on cycle paths. A lot of cycle lanes/paths here in the UK are hopeless. Some of them are OK for children or for those new to cycling, but a lot of the time I don't use them as they are just too unsuitable.

[@MrSJR39]

On my regular cycle commute route, I use a shared path that has designated sides for pedestrians and cyclists. The pedestrian side has dimpled tactile paving at crossings and the cycling side has ribbed paving laid in the direction of travel.

[@Eliddinn]

We definitely need more cycling areas and clearly marked out, on the way to southport there is a part of the road i have to ride on a dual carriageway as there is no cycle path

[@DanielDavies-il9kz]

I've come out there and just turned around. No chance on that road. By Altcar.

[@julianpenfold1638]

Totally agree about not "pressing the button" to cross automatically - I always have a look to see if the traffic flow is going to allow me an opportunity to cross without needing to do that. Seems like simple courtesy to me, and in any case quite often if you press the button, the lights only go red for the traffic when a gap appears anyway so you've gained nothing. It's certainly not ideal that those paths are not more clearly marked, but they look pretty decent otherwise. It helps that the area seems very quiet though - the busier somewhere is the more you need clarity. I think it's OK to use quiet pavements if you ride sensibly, and tend to think that people who don't ride sensibly tend to ignore signs anyway.

[@shm5547]

11:18 the speed at which you can cycle doesn't preclude you from using the road. The difference between a utility cyclist on a loaded bike doing 10mph and a roadie doing 20mph is minimal for a driver. They are both easy to overtake when a safe opportunity presents itself. The 10mph differential is here-nor-there in terms of impact on a motorists journey. However, you would consider the road over cycling infrastructure if you wish to travel faster on a bicycle, as the 10mph speed differential does have a significant impact on pedestrian/cyclist being able to safely share the same space.

[@lmaoroflcopter]

The textured paving being in two different directions are indicative of it being a shared path.

[@fastfreddy19641]

Same problem in my town of Hartlepool. Also there is a good cycle way on the road leading out of town along the A689 which must have cost a lot of money to put in but it is usually a rusk to ride there as its always covered in glass, stones, screws and alsorts of detritus thrown from the road and it never gets swept.

[@davidty2006]

Seems like that one has been there for atleast a decade. i know theres some with a 2nd curb up near the housing estate by the Sainsburys.

[@andrewnorris5415]

Some of them are not broke, they just take ages compared to others. I have seen this nearly cause accidents due to people getting impatient, fed up of waiting and running across when there is a gap in the busy traffic. The worse one I know is the ped/cycle crossing at Stockton Heath (Warrington) on the swing bridge over the ship canal.

[@JJRol.]

I appreciate these biking videos. I commute to highschool via bike, it keeps me healthy, happy and gives me a lot more personal freedom. I feel most drivers don't recognize just how vulnerable I am on the road. Being a highschool student, it's really scary that a collision could ruin my life so early. I've never been hit by a car but there have been some close calls (mostly close-passes or the "get in front" sydrome). Thanks for being one of the drivers who takes the time to respect those on the road who are more vulnerable than them. (Side question, what camera(s) do you use for these videos?)

[@marcushill315]

My favourite part about cycling is the expectation that I can teleport to the other side of the road when the cycle path suddenly disappears.

[@andrewnorris5415]

Been an odd occasion where I am going on a main road for a short while and due to be turning right. And there is a perfectly good footpath (not a cycle path) with no one on it on the right side of the road. I will take such a path. Otherwise I may have to slow traffic to a stop on the 60mph main road to make my turn! If any ped comes I my plan is to go extra slow and be extra respectful. But I have not encountered one yet!

[@matthewstreeter5169]

3:25 the tactile paving was laid as partly perpendicular to the path and partly parallel to the path. This implies it is still a shared path as the difference is to let the partially sighted know which half they should be using.

[@thomaselliot2257]

This is something you would need to highlight to the city of Liverpool Council ASAP. Like your new split screen with forward and backward views.

[@adamf7]

There's a few shared cycle paths near me where the only way to know when they end or start seems to be to look at what lights are on the nearest crossing button. If theres a person and a bike then it must be a cycle path on both sides of the road, when the bike disappears then I guess it's no longer a cycle path.. maybe? I saw near the start when you passed the fire station that the crossing only had the red/green man on it, which is where you thought the cycle path had ended. At 7:18 when going back there are bikes on the crossing lights again, even though the path doesn't really look like it is for cycling.

[@glenn1534]

I noticed this a while ago - so many paths which I assumed were only for pedestrians, then I notice the crossing and they've got bike lights on, too. Other than those crossings, I'd have no idea that I could cycle on those paths.

[@bramelsheretan]

I think we all need to slow down and start looking out for each other.

[@Bullwinkle39]

At the start of the video where you're not sure if it's shared or not, the tactile paving suggests it's shared. Where the lines go in different directions in either half, it's a shared path, the difference in paving is to tell blind people which side to use. The dismount signs were either side of that off shoot/driveway

[@TheGozzeh]

Yup ... in fact thats a definite indication its still shared use

[@FotosForArt]

Hi Ashley,. As a keen cyclist, I share your views and frustration at the cycling infrastructure in the UK. More time and investment is needed to make shared paths viable, safe and clear to all users. In my opinion, regular signage (preferably on the ground, as there's far too much street furniture around) should by used. Where wide enough, a white line between user side of a path help a lot. But there are some clues around whether the section of the path where you decide not to continue (3:20) there's some tactile paving before and after the crossing. The section of path nearer the road, where the paving runs parallel to the path is designed to show visually impaired people there is a pedestrian crossing ahead. The similar section to away from the road, where the paving runs at right angles to the path, is designed to show the path is shared with no-pedestrians. It is the norm to have cyclists ride nearer the road side of a path and pedestrians use the side away from the road. The above about tactile paving suggests there needs to be a section of cross-over near a crossing, to take pedestrians to the kerb-side at the crossing and cyclists to take the non-kerb-side, where the path approaches the crossing Hope this helps. Best regards, Brian

[@SirZerg]

Makes me realise how good the one i use Southampton is in comparison. Still has some issues such as toucan crossings that take too long to change and narrow points to allow for pavement parking.

[@calvinjonesyoutube]

Agreed, in most uk towns and citys any accommodation for cycling is piecemeal and poorly thought out. Its not a transport system. The things they ask and the mysteries they leave for the cyclist show a complete lack of care. I know we differ on this, but personally id like to see as much cycling as possible done on segregated cycle ways, this is not only good for kids, but also the elderly and less physically abled, or just people struggling with shopping. Cycling CAN be very accessible if safe, but on busy roads its one of he LEAST acessible (most demanding) forms of transport.

[@cyclecam6328]

That tactile paving with the two patterns of lines perpendicular to eachother suggest cycling infrastructure. Possibly it used to be and isnt now? Common sense rules here, there are situations where I will use a pavement that i know isn't a shared path but there's a right way to do this.

[@Chigleybus]

All fair enough Ashley when you're on Long Lane and there isn't one pedestrian, never mind another cyclist, about. Try the pavement where it's busy and as you already know it's just uncomfortable/dangerous for all concerned but mainly the pedestrians (which is probably one of the reasons riding on the pavement is illegal).

[@layla873]

There's a cycle path route local to me that has a separate bike cross button. This particular one, I've never seen the lights go red for me to cross. Every time I've waited for minutes, and I've never had it let me cross, even with large gaps in the cars. It's such a danger because I feel like I will take a greater risk on a busy day because I would have to wait so long for the lights to change. Yet on the pedestrian crossing it will change within a minute.

[@QiuEnnan]

0:23 you are wrong about that Ashley! The Highway Code says nothing about crossing on the red signal at toucan crossings. It only says you must not cross until the green signal shows at CYCLE ONLY crossings (i.e. at the tricolour traffic lights with cycle symbols).

[@GMBasix]

(This is a good example of why I don’t use ‘pavement’ to mean footway.) Signage is woeful in many districts. LHAs don’t implement enough to make shared paths v footways clear. Tactile paving may give clues to highway engineers’ intentions, but it isn’t indicative in terms that TSRGD would give. Often a short shared link leads to a shared crossing; but they fail to sign the end of the shared space on that side. The offence is not cycling on the pavement, it’s using a vehicle (including cycles) on that part of the road that is set aside for the use of pedestrians only. It remains for the prosecution to demonstrate that it IS set aside (but it may remain with the defence to point that out). If signage has taken you onto the pavement as a cyclist but has not taken you off, it has not effectively been set aside. The designation may be there on the highways maps, but it’s unenforceable. It remains for cyclists in that context to remain respectful do those with whom they share the pavement, of course. As for buttons at crossings, it seems appropriate that delays should be built in to aid general traffic flow - to reduce spurious or vexatious pedestrian/cycling phases; but there is no reason why that delay cannot begin at the end of the pedestrian phase: same delay factor, but built in to the period of time least likely to affect pedestrian use. Then, when the button is pressed (assuming it’s not part of junction phasing), the lights can change. That way, pedestrians/cyclists are respected as equal road users, don’t adversely affect overall flow, and aren’t waiting so long they cross anyway leaving a ghost phase to stop motor vehicles unnecessarily. But, for some reason, traffic engineers don’t seem to get that.

[@BarnardoPlays]

13:42 there is a sign saying the cycle path ends - hidden in an overgrown bush, as part of a shared use path where the pedestrian side is totally overgrown with bushes and moss. Every time you're on a cycle path and you have to give way to traverse a driveway or a junction is a reminder that the cycling infrastructure was an afterthought, and if you want to be safer and more efficient getting A to B on your bike you should just be in the main carriageway travelling with the same priority as every other road user.

[@Andy_ATB]

That's something I never knew; I try to avoid using the traffic lights on Brooms Cross Road, and instead wait for a gap......However, only last week, I'd been waiting for a minute or two, and another cyclist came up and pressed it - and he said "you'll be waiting for ever", which at that time of day may have been correct.

[@djwindhoek]

I can't remember which video it was but I recently saw a video about cycling in Tokyo where there is often no separate infrastructure for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians alike. The control and subsequent cooperation comes from the narrow streets which require low speed from vehicles. There are obviously still some large arterial roads but within communities, it's much more concentrated and cooperation from all road users seems to take place without fuss. So perhaps the best infrastructure in no infrastructure - just shared infrastructure within communities.

[@Ceramik666]

Great video Ashley. Well put, that cycling infrastucture is just a checkbox councils need to tick. Most of the cycling iffrastructure in the UK is not fit for purpuse and more dangerous then just riding on the road.

[@t0urdefrance7]

One of my bugbears is pelican crossdressings. I'm in the camp of look first, if it is or will be quite quickly, safe to cross, then I don't press the button. I just cross. What does bug me are people who walk up, push the button, then look to see if it's clear. If it is they cross and then the lights go red holding up the traffic for no reason. Look first then decide if you really need to activate the lights. Only excuse I feel is if you^re teaching children how to cross safely.

[@glenn1534]

This highlights the reason i prefer to cycle on the road - routes end with no prior warning which means I'd have to queue to rejoin the road if I used the cycle path and also the shared paths aren't wide enough if there are a group of pedestrians walking together.

[@wibbley1]

@glenn1534 what is wrong having to queue when re-joining the road? Bike riders are given their own protective route, to segregate them and also help traffic flow for other road users, but then bikes won't use them as they might have to -shock horror- pause before re-joining the carriageway. It just shows how bike riders want everything their own way and refuse to use any give & take on the road. Taking, as in given their own protective lane but then refusing to give, by having to stop or give way when re-joining the main carriageway. I do agree that many shared paths are not wide enough & are a really bad idea to mix slow walking peds with bikes that want to get somewhere.

[@glenn1534]

@@wibbley1 wanting to get to your destination quicker isn't solely a characteristic of cyclists. Every road user wants to get to their destination quicker. If this involves not queuing at a junction then so be it. Also, junctions are the most dangerous part of a road; why would someone, particularly as a vulnerable road user, want to add another junction to their journey if they don't have to?

[@wibbley1]

@@glenn1534 Yes everybody wants to get to their destination. Roads cross, so we need junctions. This is where every road user including bikes have to use a bit of give & take, which may mean stopping at traffic lights or give way signs, even bikes. Alas we have this mentality and often road-planning that put bikes first even if it were safer for the bike lane to have to give way.

[@glenn1534]

@@wibbley1 I think you missed my point. If it's quicker to cycle on the road than the shared footpath, then most experienced riders will choose to use the road. Did you even watch the video? Bikes are thought about as a tickbox exercise for most councils in the UK.

[@wibbley1]

@@glenn1534 Yes exactly my point. Bikeys will bleat on about how vulnerable they are, but when given an alternate, will still not use it. Also they selfishly just think of themselves rather than understanding bike lanes and shared paths are also to remove slower vehicles from the main carriageway, to aid better traffic flow for all.

[@TheTrooper115]

@3:30 you cross the road, that was still a shared path. The grooved slabs in the pavement are the giveaway. On the pedestrian side, they run horizontally, cyclists they run vertically. Certainly, if it isn't anymore, it was once upon a time.

[@ColinSmith2001]

In Scotland there is an added bit of fun - Core Path legislation takes precedent over Road traffic orders so, regardless of what any road signs there might say or not, considerate use is legal if it's a Core Path.

[@suchcone]

A Toucan crossing means "two can" cross! Cycle and by foot! :)

[@contessa.adella]

Good man! I always try to not push those buttons. I think stopping a line of cars when a wait of a few seconds would have enabled the crossing to be clear anyway is ridiculous and entitled. Of course if the traffic is streaming with no break arising, then fair enough, hit that button! How many people, especially kids, just walk upto a crossing and immediately automatically hit the button with no thought?

[@euanwill6196]

Pretty sure the "end of route" sign and "end" paint you encountered on the floor referred to the fact that the splitting of pedestrians and cyclists was ending. The path then continues as a shared path. You were fine cycling there.

[@derekmulready1523]

When i did cycle to work. I found that it was more appropriate to cycle on roads. The cycle paths through housing estates were littered with glass. Totally ignored by my local authorities 🇮🇪🇪🇺

[@alanstebbings2886]

Shared here in Cambridge generally have give way lines where they cross a side road

[@piratepear]

Hi Ashley, do you have a link to a source for cyclists not being allowed to cross at toucan crossings? The way it is structured, my interpretation of Rule 82 in the Highway Code is that the 'MUST NOT' refers to cycle-only crossings (i.e., the ones with an amber light that sequence like traffic lights but with cyclists symbols), rather than toucan crossings discussed in the preceding paragraph. Tried looking into the detailed legislation stuff but not sure if I'm looking at the right documents.

[@travelingtourers8654]

I struggle with this where I live. Painted cycle lane ends with painted markings leading you up a drop curb onto the pavement, but once your on the pavement no signs for shared path. So I'm never sure if I should be on it or not.

[@philipsmith9688]

Signage in the video was extremely poor throughout although I did spot one in the undergrowth stating the cycle route had ended after you said you was ending the video but not surprised you didn’t see it. In areas like Liverpool airport access roads or on the mouth of the River Mersey, signage is far more visible but localised areas it’s a postcode lottery as for what areas get funding. What is better, a cycling highway scheme where a chunk of money is thrown to one road time after time or accessible for all trails reserved for pedestrians and pushbikes?

[@MrAceyJay]

1:17 Video footage of Ash on a bike jumping a red light! 🤣😋

[@pipk7747]

Ta Ashley, it's good you doing this vid.

[@barrymurton8988]

Also the plants are very overgrown for the pedestrians on that last bit!

[@Lawdrich]

13:42 - The 'End of Cycle Route' sign was hidden in the trees. I guess with a lot of councils' budgets cut to the bone, and then cut some more, things like keeping pavements clear and signs visible aren't a necessity these days.

[@ianlinsey1133]

Paul Boateng issued a statement in 1999 "The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of the traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so"

[@smilerbob]

Looks like the button was working looking at the other button at 1:24, just not lighting up your side Quick question to yourself and the community…what is the additional box above the red / green signals for pedestrians and cyclists? I haven’t come across those on my travels with the whitish grey signal

[@grahambonner508]

Many of the profiled paving tiles you are riding over indicates that the path is shared, by orientation of the raised lines.

[@Hdtjdjbszh]

the tactile pavement is a big clue, as the son of a blind person I notice this more than others. The two sets of lines at right angles to each other denote that it is still a shared path, well technically that it is a split path and there SHOULD be some marking to say bikes one side peds the other. The marking SHOULD also be raised enough to hit with a guide stick.

[@robg521]

On the way home tonight i stopped at a red lighted t-junction that had segregated pedestrian crossing to turn right, and a cyclist went past on the inside, then illegally up into the pedestrian central reservation then across the pedestrian crossing to get around the junction, and I was thinking what an impatient idiot, Then after sitting there stationary for 5 minutes while the rights went through their cycle for 3 way traffic and 2 filter lanes I appreciated why the cyclist took the short cut. If you make the infrastructure a pain in the backside people will get impatient with it and do stupid things, because it is in our human nature to do so.

[@TheVanderfulLife]

1:29 them tactiles indicate it 'should' be a segregated path (even if just by a white line) and not shared path as mentioned since you come from a shared area. 1:38 shows back to shared path which is signposted correctly. 2:30 shows it should be back to segregated. 2:40 shows its back to shared path 2:59 shows it should be segregated. 3:09 back to shared path. 3:17 back to segregated path or more appropriately would be signage to state end of path. This would tie up with the crossing and tactiles would remain true. People putting in that many tactile pavings and nothing else with it, they have no idea what they're doing or what they're even for!! Honestly would love to hear from contractors who put this stuff in. Do they use their noggin or just say its on the drawing so I'm gonna do it.

[@douglasreid699]

i feel the problem for infrastructure is, the old layouts were not designed to include it and it costs a lot to redesign a layout and implement it. councils are aiming to spend the minimum and it shows a half hearted attempt. as for pressing the button, i hate it when a pedestrian walks up (probably on their phone) presses the button, then looks and sees a gap and walks across the road and all the traffic still needs to stop for the red light. where as, i am observing the road well in advance looking for a gap to cross because i dont want to stop traffic flow unless i need to and also because i know some councils want a long timer on the crossing to deter most, likely kids, constantly pushing the button to stop traffic. And that gets super annoying when its raining, its not safe to cross the road, i push the button, all the traffic clears but i wont go until i get a green light and i get soaked for doing the right thing. there are so many little things that could be changed on the roads that would help flow a lot for everyone but most likely the people in charge of doing something about them either dont care or dont realise the bigger picture. currently i am getting annoyed with traffic lights on the major road going back to red until a vehicle stops and activates the sensor, why cant the stay green until a vehicle on the minor road sets the sensor off? my guess is its for traffic calming annd attempting to get drivers to drive at the speed limit or less, but i not seen it work so far, if anything it annoys them and makes them want to speed more.

[@mattwoodford1820]

My opinion is that the pavement seems quite wide. There are very few other users. It helps maintain the flow of traffic on the road. I think if you use the appropriate speed and maintain good observations, slowing down for hazards like junctions and bus stops and taking a blue light approach to positioning for best view and visibility. I see no harm done and you're constantly reassessing the situation

[@Deedumdee]

I'd like to see cycle paths given their own colour of road marking paint to be honest, I've seen it in green in a few places but it's not consistent nationwide as it should be. As for pavements, I take the view any of those rarely-used pavements outside of built-up areas are de facto shared use and will generally cycle on them unless it's already a quiet street. Safer for everyone, and I can always slow down to walking pace for pedestrians or hop onto the road if needed.

[@jeffknight904]

Local authorities are under pressure from various organisations like Sustrans and cycling groups to create as many miles of cycle route as possible and many councils do so on the cheap. The guidelines for planners state that certain criteria should be met before turning a pavement into a cycle route but these are largely guidelines and not legal requirements. These include taking into account the pavement width, whether or not there are residential or publicly accessible business frontages along the route and how many obstacles there are such as bus shelters, street lamps, telecom cabinets and trees. Also, before turning a pavement into a cycle/shared route, there should be another pavement on the other side of the same road where cycling is prohibited so as to allow vulnerable pedestrians to choose not to mix with fast moving hardware. Authorities are also obliged to clearly sign the start and end of cycle routes and, unless there is an extreme reason, separate pedestrians from cyclists with a solid white line. Unfortunately, many authorities create cycle routes on the cheap and don't follow the guidelines. Consequently, many routes consist of pavements with randomly placed cycling permitted signs that don't indicate the start and end points of the route. This makes pavements extremely dangerous places to walk on in many urban areas.

[@shm5547]

2:39 you can tell if this path continues as a cycle lane by looking at the tactile pavement. Parallel lines for the cycle track and orthogonal lines for the footway.

[@shm5547]

3:10 still a shared path, the tactile pavement is the clue. But in the absence of a 'end of cycle route' sign, you can proceed.

[@philipsmith9688]

I always thought the groved paving stated shared path, as there was no bike on the crossing by the fire station could I be wrong?

[@EvilGav]

The oddity for me is the crossings. 2 of them are pedestrian/cyclist crossings and 1 was pedestrian only. To my mind, if it's a dual use crossing, then surely the path on either side must be a cycle route?

[@shm5547]

you would think so, but it's not always the case

[@ryanmarquess2654]

@@shm5547 What's the point of allowing cyclists to ride across if they have to immediatly dismount on the other side?

[@shm5547]

12:43 to be fair, _all_ road infrastructure is about safety, not pace. If you want to drive fast, take it to the track.

[@ptaylor5014]

That tactile paving shows it is for both cyclists and pedestrians, though i would have thought there should be the round Blue signs every hundred yards or so to inform people.

[@seancombes3757]

It helps to keep the infrastructure clear you can see any signs. At the end you missed the end of cycle lane sign because it was partly hidden in the trees.

[@andrewatherton316]

Those bushes on the cycle path need cutting back - they obscure the pedestrian part of the path. In my part of the country they cut back bushes and grasses once a year, only once they have gone above head height - I've resorted to a whistle to make known my presence to others on especially overgrown sections of the cycle route.

[@tin2001]

My council (in Australia) got funding from the state to build a shared path from one side of town to the other. They chose to build it on the side of the highway that has all the industrial businesses, fuel stations, etc. Other side is almost all residential. They also failed to install any signage or paint any markings along the vast majority, with only the first parts constructed having any. End result is I never use it. It's too dangerous. Drivers have no clues yo say they need to look for cyclists, and drive straight into the driveways without looking, with cyclists coming along at 15-20km/h. Its significantly safer on the road where they can see you.

[@pdsnpsnldlqnop3330]

I am the same with pressing the buttons at crossings - think of the emissions! Also the people that live nearby and have to listen to 'peep peep peep peep peep' every five minutes. I am all for accessibility, but that noise is for blind people and in some locations I do wonder if a blind person would ever get there!

[@facelessvaper]

Did anyone else not notice the big "traffic lights out" sign until the other side of the Fire Station?

[@Jonc25]

The people installing the infrastructure are confused, let alone Cyclists pedestrians and motorists. Shambles.

[@andrewatherton316]

Look at the direction of the grooves on those pale yellow tiles set into the pavement. They are set in perpendicular directions. They define which side is for pedestrians and which is for cycles. Cyclists having the side with the grooves in the direction of travel. So if you see them then (at the very least) you have a reasonable belief and evidence that you're on a shared path even if you cannot see a blue sign.

[@silkdestroyer]

If I come across those crossing lights, as a cyclist OR a pedestrian, I always check the traffic 1st before I press the button. What is the point if it is clear? Why hold the traffic up unnecessarily? I do drive cars myself too.

[@brianperrett3201]

On some shared paths and (supposedly) segregated paths the "tactile paving" can signify... paving with ribs across the path are for pedestrians, paving with ribs going in the direction of the path is for cyclists. These perpendicular ribs are supposed to give a "rumble strip" to inform cyclists that they shouldn't be there. As a mobility scooter user I can report that 1, they don't work as the information is not freely distributed and 2, they are uncomfortable to ride over in a mobility scooter! I also ride a tricycle and some cycle ways/paths etc are too narrow for 2 bicycles to pass, let alone a bicycle and a tricycle!

[@composimmonite3918]

So much infrastructure that was (rightly) deemed so important in the 90s and 00s, has fallen into disuse; local government has totally lost interest in maintaining or the departments who ran it have long since closed down.

[@asilver2889]

How hard is it for council to paint path markings as well as the few signs. I didn't see many pedestrians, but they also need ongoing prompts about shared paths. They dont tend to look (up) at signs.

[@alfaromeo1996]

I can't think of a single bit of road cycling infrastructurre in Sefton which helps cyclists (aside from maybe the new bit along the Strand past the Liver Building) and most of it makes life harder.

[@Batters56]

11:26 Do the give way signs on the cycle path here have any legal meaning? Given the Highway Code says that cars turning in should give way to bikes on the cycle path? What if there was a collision?

[@JeremyJones-t8e]

Nothing like how the Dutch do it. Or the Belgians or the French. In my area, a shared path keeps cyclists off the busy A4155 from Marlow to Bourne End. Yet 1/2 way there, it terminates on left side of the road and continues on the right. So cross the busy road in the rush hour (not happening, no crossings or lights). Then cycle for a little bit more on the right hand pathway until that stops in Bourne End. At which point you have to cross the same busy road to continue legally on the road. Some money from the Government and EU not backed up by local funding or longer term strategic planning or implementation. Cycling infrastructure in the UK is the third world solution. Something done rather than nothing but not nearly enough.

[@shm5547]

5:37 "no issues", but those drivers broke the highway code by not giving priority to a pedestrian already in the road, crossing the junction.

[@weevilinabox]

Yep, I'd have indulged in a little militant pedestrianism there and kept walking. I know Ashley maintains that priority is given, but I generally try to take it in these situations. I'm always ready to explain Rule H2 to any driver who gets argumentative, but it's not been necessary so far.

[@walterberry8703]

As a cyclist of over 50 years I prefer riding on the road I use shared cycle paths ie rainford by-pass and others the best one in my opinion is the Chester millennium green way . On the road you know where you can ride

[@TerryNutkins3]

Without watching the video from my experience the cycle path ends just where it's needed the most but the "designers" decided to prioritise road space instead of cyclist/pedestrian safety

[@phillwainewright4221]

All the shared paths in this area (south coast) have frequent signage and markings. Other than the tactile pavement, which many people don't understand, that path you were on has nothing.

[@michaelgurd7477]

Like most places in the UK the foliage encroaching onto roads/paths needs to be cut back. Roads paths would be so much wider. Neglect by our councils.