matryx

I can very strongly recommend bikehub - both the website ( http://routes.bikehub.co.uk/ ) and the app. Excellent cycle routing with options for speed versus traffic density, user maintained by a strong community of cyclists via the openstreetmap data, and if you use the app you can use your phone GPS for voice based satnav (so you don't need to take your eyes off the road while you go). Incidentally, this is my route : http://routes.bikehub.co.uk/journey/40629861/#fastest (I go the fastest out of the three options provided here) Which I have slowly revised over time to give me a route largely devoid of traffic. Several roads which are closed to cards, and through a park or two here and there. Here's my route from this morning : http://www.strava.com/activities/138759957 Takes me 20-25 mins, so would just be another 5 over to holborn at the end. Edit: I leave at 7am every morning from Friern Road and am more than happy to show you the route I take if you like. You should arrive before 8 even with the extra up to Holborn (I like time to shower and change at the office, get a coffee etc before my own 8:45am start). Feel free to drop me a message if you want to tag along.

I'm sure you genuinely believe that you're as you say "within my rights" but legally you've no leg to stand on and you really should recognise that so you don't do anything rash to cars (or their owners) which may park there in future. No one has the legal right to park their vehicle outside their property, be it rented or private. In addition, it is an offence to obstruct the highway whether it be with vehicles or in this case objects. It's public road, if parking is legal, anyone can use that space. Generally the only grounds on which you can object to people parking outside your house is if they are physically blocking access to your property (ie the end of a driveway).

KalamityKel Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How is any of this "creepy'? > > Confuzzled muchly Well, creepy can just mean something causes unease. Some people get very uneasy about the prospect of surveillance. The rest, potholes etc, doesn't strike me as creepy though - infuriating perhaps, but not creepy. However, I'm sure there are people who get creeped out by the prospect of horrible budget mismanagements etc.

Legally they do not apply to cyclists. There may be bye-laws for a local area which do limit the speed of cyclists, but this section of the act genuinely does not apply to cyclists.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What if cyclists did? They seem to want no rules applied to them. I note davidk's comment, > "The rules on the highway are designed to restrict the movement of heavy and dangerous vehicles, > not cyclists." Although this seems to be the attitude of may cyclists, it is patently wrong. The > highway code specifically points out it applies to ALL users of the road. Felt I should point out that some aspects do only apply to motor vehicles and not cyclists. It's not all the same for everyone. As a good example, Rule 124 of the highway code (pertaining to speed limits) does not apply to cyclists. The rule itself references a table, with no information for cyclists but information for several motor vehicle types, and the rule references "Law RTRA sects 81, 86, 89 & sch 6" which is the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, sections 81, 86, 89 & schedule 6. In fact, these sections all fall within Part VI of the act, which is entirely about speed limits. Section 81 is quite explicit that "It shall not be lawful for a person to drive a motor vehicle on a restricted road at a speed exceeding 30 miles per hour" (my emphasis). Further reading reveals that throughout this act, the speed limits discussed apply to motor vehicles and their drivers, not to cyclists. Note, for example section 89: "A person who drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a limit imposed by or under any enactment to which this section applies shall be guilty of an offence." Now, I am by no means advocating cycling at excessive speeds, or ignoring speed limits set for other road users (disparities in travel speeds are a large cause of accidents) - and anyone doing so could find themselves at risk of breaking other laws related to riding dangerously or carelessly depending on the situation, but I see people saying this sort of thing all the time and in reality there are several laws for the road which do not apply to cyclists or apply in different ways.

I would also offer a pregnant man a seat, but I have yet to meet one. Facetiousness aside, when on public transport I always offer my seat to anyone who looks like they would be better off sat down. Anyone who looks overburdened with shopping / is pregnant / looks uneasy on their feet. That's not sexism (or ablism/ageism), it's just polite. I don't assume they need it, or insist they take it - I just offer. Always quite happy for them to refuse :)

"Nice" derail then. Back onto the real topic, I'm curious myself about how residents could be helping with speed enforcement (though not enough to actually contact the safer neighbourhood team myself) - I didn't think handheld speed guns had built in cameras, but I suppose that might be a thing? Without photographic evidence along with the speed gun log, usually a statement from the PC would be used as evidence. Anyone know what the tech is like currently?

I don't see the relevance. He's not mentioned cycling at all in his post?

Why are you making this about cycling when it's unrelated? I would imagine in your unlikely scenario of a cyclist-fronted-anti-car-group trying to fabricate evidence of speeding the equipment will be tamper proof and individuals will undergo rigorous training and background checks.

Honestly they should use a bit of common sense and try a more sensible sign like this (taken around Wandsworth Common): http://www.cyclestreets.net/location/52433/cyclestreets52433-size640.jpg

Thanks for the warning, I'm very curious what they're trying to fine people for. I've seen no bylaws on the park signs and it's not in the highway code at all, nor in any road legislation I'm aware of - also not a road, so there's that. Edit: Should anyone else wish to read up on cycling and the law, this has a useful plethora of information http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/ including a small section on Cyclist Dismount signs.

nununoolio Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 3 choices. Dismount and walk through, cycle up the > ramp on to the road or cycle through the chicane > and risk being fined. There is no legal weight behind the signs saying to dismount anymore than if I put up a sign saying all dogs or small children must be carried. You can't be fined by anyone for it. I should add, I'm always a considerate cyclist and prompt pedestrians to go first when we've met along this terrible area. Not seen anyone come afoul on any side, except cyclists having to akwardly navigate for a while. Incidentally, dismounting makes it harder to get through the chicane because they're so narrow there isn't room to turn and wheel my bike at the same time.

I think the only thing a local currency would accomplish would be to add a sense of elitism to the area and make the area seem less approachable to outsiders. The aim of Mr Woolf's talk seems to be to get big chains out of the high street, which I do not think is necessarily a bad idea, but his model (the brixton pound) for accomplishing that is unnecessarily restrictive. While you have any of this 'local currency' your own liquidity (asset wise) is hampered. There could be other ways to accomplish the same sort of thing, e.g. "Southwark" cards as a general area loyalty scheme (annual fee so non-residents can buy them, perhaps small discount in local stores), which wouldn't lock up your money in an actual currency which can't be used anywhere else. Ok, yes, you could argue that an area loyalty scheme is also a form of currency, but you seem to be talking specifically about the brixton pound rather than anything else he mentions in passing at the start of his talk. He says it launched in 2009 and is a point of pride for the area / talking point / community pride etc - but this is the first I've actually heard of the local currency for Brixton and I used to visit the area quite frequently back in 2010, so the other potential pitfall is a lot of effort expenditure getting this set up, and then no-one even knowing it exists. He's quite right when he says (in passing) that people will not generally be bothered to go to get money out, in order to get the local currency, in order to buy their groceries - I certainly wouldn't - I already shop locally whenever I can so why would I make things harder for myself?

As an example edhistory, there is a Toucan crossing at the Rye end of Friern Road, and a stretch of shared use path surrounding it on about 6 footpaths nearby.

While they are breaking the law, you should never advocate violence against anyone. Get in their way, report them, but never assault them. I'm sure in your cases the footpath is indeed just pedestrian only, but there are plenty of areas around Peckham and ED which are shared use or even just plain cyclepaths with little/no signage - So make sure you're not causing a hazard to cyclists in these areas!