On 1 Aug 2003 18:05:36 GMT, Robin May
wrote:

CJG wrote the following in:


In message , Robin May
writes
On the stretches where I do cycle on the pavement I show as much
respect as possible.

If you were showing them respect your be walking your bike rather
than riding it. Pavements are there for walking. Not riding a bike
on. End of story.

I hope some time I come across you while riding my bike on a pavement,
as I shall feel happy showing you disrespect.

Have you been instructing the kids on Holloway Road in the ways of
righteousness? I nearly pushed one into oncoming traffic this morning
because he was coming up behind me fast, I didn't see him and I
stepped into his path. You know, it's not second nature to assume
you're in a fast moving vehicular path when you're walking to the
tube.

It's worse at night, because none of them have anything approximating
to lights.

Cycling on the pavement is bloody stupid. Cycles and pedestrians don't
mix. Where would you have us walk, if the pavements are too dangerous?
In the road? Swinging from lamp-post to lamp-post like so many
commuting gibbons?

R

On Thu, 31 Jul 2003 12:32:32 GMT Martin Underwood wrote:
}
} In terms of cycling on pavements, I can't help thinking that on a quiet
} pavement on a fast road with no pedestrians around, the pavement is the best
} place for a cyclist to be - he's less of a hazard to drivers who may be
} doing three times his speed. On a crowded city street, it's a differnt
} matter - few pedestrians (except me) look out for other pedestrians, never
} mind cyclists - and cars and cyclists are likely to be going at much more
} similar speeds so cyclists are less of a hazard to drivers.

Unfortunately the practical approach takes a degree of thought that some
seem unwilling to invest in the problem. Riding on the pavement where
sensible too easily translates into riding on the pavement anywhere.
The kids do it around here in a quiet residential area where there is
no reason to and considerable danger to pedestrians on narrow pavements.
Not just the kids either, one local takes his daughter to school riding
on the cross-bar of his bike. Using the pavements and the footpath that
affords the quickest route because with his daughter on board is "isn't
safe" to use those aforementioned quiet streets. Sheesh...

Occasionally the reverse might apply. Along Temple Mill Lane E15
there's a shared pavement and cycle lane that's so thoroughly covered in
grit and dust that it is far safer to join the vehicles on the road than
risk using it.

[Rose-tinted spectacles time] When I were a kid... Well, seriously when
I was at Junior school a police officer came into the school for one
day every term to put us cyclists through our paces, make sure we knew
the rules and how to ride safely. I wonder if anything like that goes
on these days becasue I see very little evidence of it on the roads.

Matthew
--
Il est important d'être un homme ou une femme en colère; le jour où nous
quitte la colère, ou le désir, c'est cuit. - Barbara

http://www.calmeilles.co.uk/

Good point, Matthew

I wonder what effort, if any, the police make nowadays? Here in SW London
I don't see much evidence but then it's rather more likely that one will
run into the film set of "The Bill" than a real policemen. I suppose that
might be some kind of deterrent. But then, I've even seen one of them (the
ex-Broodside chappie) cycling up to the front entrance of Safeway and
dismounting in the doorway. Some role model!

Jeff


[Rose-tinted spectacles time] When I were a kid... Well, seriously when
I was at Junior school a police officer came into the school for one
day every term to put us cyclists through our paces, make sure we knew
the rules and how to ride safely. I wonder if anything like that goes
on these days becasue I see very little evidence of it on the roads.

I wonder if anyone here was the "gentleman" aged about 50 who blythely
sailed through a group including 3 young children and a pregant woman who'd
waited patienty at the pedestrian crossing on Westminster Bridge on Saturday
morning? I won't repeat here what I expressed at the time, only remind you
that you are old enough to know better. Why did you look so offended I
wonder?

Getting metaphorically, back in the saddle and also on my soapbox, there's
something else the cyclist has to endure and the way in which many
motorcyclists behave. We often occupy the same roadspace and meeting one
head on in a "game of chicken" with them on the wrong side of the road is a
frequent experience while attempting a right turn or positioning for one at
traffic lights.

More than once I've been forced out of my saddle by those that insist on
using designated cycle routes and can't wait for legitmate users to go
through the barriers provided specifically for our use. I won't condone
pavement cycling but I can understand why so many are put off using the
roads.

In many cases these barriers are vandalised such that the passage of
motorcycles, specifically scooters, is more easily facilitated. I've been
trying to persuade Wandsworth Council to repair one in front of a local
school for the past 18 months to no avail. I've even seen one of their
traffic wardens in full uniforrn abusing this particular barrier at the time
when many children cycle to school. The Council don't see it as an issue,
obviously.

Jeff Mowatt

Jeff Mowatt wrote:

Thanks all for those thoughts. I'm pleased to learn that there's a concensus
that the pavement should be a place for walking and one shouldn't need to be
looking over one's shoulder all the time for cyclist appearing from nowhere.

This consensus is unfortunately not shared by many traffic engineers,
who tend to think
(1) that pedestrians and cyclists are second-class citizens who have to
be kept out of the way of cars
(2) that pedestrians are too stupid to keep out of the way of cars
unless fenced in
(3) that no normal person is willing to share a road with fast or heavy
traffic on a bike.

They then engineer the road to maximise the difficulty of motor vehicles
overtaking any cyclist that does have the temerity to use the road -
thus ensuring that cyclists are frightened off.

If they have money for cycling, they will try to spend it on converting
pavements to shared use, regardless of the type of road. I am in the
process of trying to prevent a developer making the pavements shared-use
alongside roads that are being implemented as a 'home zone' - which
supposedly prioritises people over motor vehicles.

I am ONLY in favour of shared use pavements for contraflow travel along
a dual carriageway to get to the nearest crossing point.

I also believe cycling should generally be allowed on footpaths that
don't parallel roads. The idea of park rangers having the power to fine
inconsiderate or dangerous cyclists on the spot is also a good one.

From his hysterical statements, the young man in my example quite obviously
believed he was standing up for a cause, the freedom to engage in healthy
exercise unipeded by the nuisance of pedestrians. To be fair there are many
pavement cyclists who defer to those who might not be aware of their
presence, but there's a growing trend for quite the opposite, a kind of
street fascism which is not that far removed from his expression of
individual freedom and we don't even have the sound of jackboots to alert
us.

There is an urgent need for good on-road cycle training. Proper
assertive cycling can cope with almost any road conditions safely,
albeit sometimes at the cost of annoying drivers on roads that have been
engineered without any thought of cyclists. Very few drivers
deliberately endanger cyclists; you have to learn to control them so
that they don't do so inadvertently. I'd almost go so far as to say that
if you are frightened off any road, you need more cycle training - but I
might make an exception for narrow, twisty roads with 50 or 60 mph
limits.

Colin McKenzie

In article , CJG
writes
Until someone steps out of their garden/house/shop onto the pavement
without first looking to make sure no cyclists are taking advantage of
a quiet road.

There's a problem in that most official shared-use cycle routes do
exactly that and with little thought to people who - quite rightly -
are coming out of their residences. And there's now a feeling amongst
most drivers that if there's a cycle-path then cyclists should be on it
rather than the road, even if the path is more dangerous to pedestrian
and cyclist.
The thoughtlessness of council road safety officers is legion amongst
cyclists, as they mostly appear to be just blindly following some
'target', rather than really thinking through problems.

There are strong parallels between drivers and cyclists; most are
pretty well-behaved most of the time but unfortunately there are two
types that continuously flout the Highway Code - these are the
Boy-racers and the Lazy Susans.
Boy-racers are obvious as they are continually cycle on pavements,
down the wrong way on one-way streets and cut through red traffic
lights. Their driving equivalent screeches round corners, races
everywhere, wears a baseball cap and plays stuff on his 1kw stereo that
only has bass lines.
The Lazy Susan driver is normally in a 4x4, distracted by children, on
a mobile phone and is making a shopping list up in her mind. The cyclist
equivalent cycles an extremely clapped out bike with an annoying squeak,
never stops for traffic lights but is always cycling so slowly and far
from the kerb that she then manages to block all the cyclists who did
stop from overtaking her. This goes on ad infinitum for about five
traffic lights until she's taken out with a well-aimed machete.

--
Martin @ Strawberry Hill