Doncaster

I went to Doncaster last weekend for a friend's stag do (I know, I can't think why either.) I took the Brompton on the train for scooting about when I got there.

Three observations on cycling in Doncaster:

(1) Drivers unable to share the road nicely. In the hour it took me to get to the hotel on Friday afternoon, I got the worst treatment from drivers that I've ever experienced. Almost every car, and one lorry, passed too close muscling me into the gutter, and of every few car drivers that went past, even on wide roads with an empty overtaking lane, one would beep his horn or throw a visible tantrum at me from inside the car. One teenage boy wound the passenger side window down and started a swearing contest. Every few minutes, an incident of the sort that I'm used to happening in Edinburgh about once a week.

(2) Magic White Paint. On the pavements beside most main roads outside the city centre were painted white lines and the occasional diagram of a bike. Using these cycle lanes is not compulsory, and it is not convenient for anyone: these 'facilities' are typically lumpy from tree roots, covered in broken glass and dog shit, and used (quite rightfully) by pedestrians going far slower than cyclists and with no flow control. They also make junctions much more dangerous by sending cyclists across roads at right-angles where drivers don't expect to see them. So almost all serious cyclists prefer to use the roads when they're confident enough to do so. Where these lanes are common, drivers who do not cycle themselves often think cyclists ought to use them - the confusion is forgivable, even though the aggression isn't.

(3) Almost no cyclists. I saw about half a dozen other cyclists all weekend, and they mostly looked like they were cycling for leisure rather than usefulness (or both.) All but one were trundling as best they could along the pavement, wearing plastic hats. People in Doncaster think cycling is inherently dangerous, even on a pavement cycle lane that you can't do ten miles per hour on.

The web of causes and effects between (1), (2), and (3) is difficult to determine, but (3) is certainly undesirable from a public health point of view, and (1) should not be encouraged by regarding it as an unavoidable truth. I'll have a go:

Bad drivers encourage fewer cyclists, obviously.
Bad drivers encourage pavement lanes because they don't want to share, and (if they aren't cyclists) don't understand that pavement lanes don't work well, so they're likely to support the council in deploying them. And cyclists are more likely to use the pavements if they're scared of the road.
Bad drivers encourage bad drivers because they know they can get away with it.

Pavement lanes encourage bad drivers as drivers resent road cyclists, thinking they should be on the pavement.
Pavement lanes encourage fewer cyclists because cycling slowly on lumpy pavements is less enjoyable and useful than cycling on the road, and pavement lanes imply that road cycling is not safe.

Fewer cyclists encourages bad drivers because drivers aren't used to having to share.
Fewer cyclists encourages fewer cyclists because people don't see lots of cyclists enjoying themselves and think of getting their own bike.

Anyway, I was so scared of my experience on Friday that on Sunday morning I tried to get back into town along the 'facilities' - and spent much of my time trundling the bike around trying to understand where I was supposed to be among the forest of blue "shared use" signs and red "no cycling" signs, often close together on the same length of pathway. Segregating cyclists from the bigger boys does not work.