Usage of cycle infrastructure by new types of cycles – ECF’s discussion paper
Regarding speed cycles on cycle infrastructure, please indicate for each of the listed options, whether you find it preferred, acceptable or not acceptable. Feels free to add comments if you have already experiences with the given option, or suggestions how to improve it:
Pyöräliitto’s view:
1: Panels indicate suitability of cycle infrastructure for speed cycles
Preferred solution: This proposal aligns with existing procedures and ensures that high-speed bicycles are only used in areas with suitable infrastructure. Speed cycles share many similarities with lightweight mopeds. In Finland, mopeds were previously allowed on cycle tracks by default, but this practice changed in the 1990s, leading to a significant increase in bicycle safety.
The argument that stricter rules would be applied than those for cars raises questions. A vehicle's maximum speed isn't the only factor determining its usage; many other specific characteristics, such as weight, size, emission class, tire type, and even its classification (like being labeled as a truck), also dictate where it can be operated. Besides, even when bicycles are moving at pedestrian speeds, they are typically not allowed on sidewalks.
2: Non-compulsory use of cycle tracks
This idea seems acceptable and initially appealing, but it could potentially lead to implementing speed limits that force high-speed cyclists onto roadways. This could generate conflict between cyclists and car drivers, especially when there's disagreement on whether the cycle path is fit for the intended speed. Cyclists sometimes encounter aggressive behavior from car drivers when using the road, even when there are valid and lawful reasons to avoid the cycle path (for example, poor maintenance during winter, or obstacles like parked vehicles blocking the path). It's expected that such conflicts could arise in this scenario.
In general, making the use of cycle tracks non-compulsory is a way to cater to diverse user needs. For instance, it allows for short-distance cycling to schools or kindergartens on a cycle path, while providing an option for long-distance cyclists to overtake at higher speeds on the roadway. However, these solutions should be driven by local conditions and the needs of users, rather than simply accommodating the presence of 45km/h speed bicycles.
3: Speed limit on (selected) cycle tracks
This is not acceptable. There is a high risk that speed limits might be used to compensate for infrastructure deficiencies, just as described in the document. It's crucial that speed limits are clearly indicated from all possible access points to restricted bicycle paths, which might be challenging to implement in many urban areas. This could lead to confusion, with users unaware of the speed limit, and instead of limiting only specific problematic parts of the route, there could be unnecessarily extensive speed limit zones.
Regarding large carrier cycles, please indicate existing and/or preferred width maximums, separately for regular cycles (allowed on cycle infrastructure without limitations) and large carrier cycles (not allowed on cycle infrastructure or allowed with special signage only):
Max width for:
1. regular cycles
The current width requirement is 0.8 meters for two-wheelers without a motor and 1.0 meter for motorized bicycles. It should be standardized to 1.0 meter for both. For bicycles with more than two wheels, the current maximum width is 1.25 meters, but this could be increased to 1.5 meters. Bikes wider than this might face difficulties on existing bike paths, but these are likely to be used for specific purposes, such as bicycle-based café or restaurant carts, and would typically be used for limited distances.
2. large carrier cycles
Large carrier cycles don't align well with current cycling infrastructure, so legislation should encourage their use on roadways. If this is done, then the width could be expanded to match the dimensions of a passenger car, up to 2.55 meters. However, this might require additional restrictions to ensure safety when using these wider bikes. For instance, usage could be limited to city streets with lower speed limits and they might not be permitted on high-speed roads.
Pyöräliitto – Iso Roobertinkatu 3-5 A 22, 00120 Helsinki |