ROB DERRY is on the steering group of Swindon Bicycle Users' Group, which aims to represent cyclists in and around Swindon.

THIS week I thought I would turn to a pet subject of mine and that is “If shared paths are the answer, what on earth was the question?”.

Many people in the comments section of last week’s article wanted cyclists to use the provided paths rather than the roads. However, this simply moves the conflict from one of “car v bike” to one of “bike v pedestrian.” This conflict is increased when the path has no dividing line or kerb.

I have it first-hand that there is a preference within parts of the local authority for shared paths with no dividing lines separating the cycle and pedestrian side. Personally, I don’t think this is a good solution.

Shared spaces are OK when there are several roads, paths and users coming together (like the Regent Circus development), but as a thoroughfare they just don’t work.

Many people believe that a lot of the problems between cars and bikes exist because of the difference in speeds. A bike doing a reasonably modest 15mph on the road is only being passed at twice that speed by a car in a 30mph limit.

But a bike doing 15mph on a shared path is moving four to five times faster than the pedestrians sharing the space.

On a shared path, in my experience, a lot of pedestrians do not even realise it is shared with cyclists. There are not a lot of signs and the whole space has the appearance of a footpath.

Many times I’ve had people tell me that I shouldn’t be riding “on the pavement” when I’m actually on a shared path.

Hence I would rather be on the road than on a shared path as the majority of motorists are actually expecting to encounter bikes, rather than shared paths where the majority of pedestrians are not.

I haven’t even mentioned the condition of some of them – maybe that’s for another week.