Cyclists &Pavements

[Tr?]

This.

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Lady D, you are a hoot! If you had an ounce of

> self-awareness you would see how each

> self-justifying retort just adds to the blanket of

> arrogant solipsism you managed to shroud yourself

> in on your first response. You sound high-handed,

> self-entitled and - frankly - a little bit

> socio(cycle)pathic.

>

> I'd love to know what your Green Party higher-ups

> - always aware that public opinion is very

> valuable to small, niche parties - think of your

> particular and peculiar take on sustainable

> transport and road safety!

[Callie]

I'm wondering whether a cyclist lane on the corner of Barry Rd /P. Rye would solve the problem, make it safer for cyclists & pedestrians alike.

[jimbo1964]

A cycle path alongside the pavement from East Dulwich Road to Barry Road would be great. Speaking as someone who's been under a bus it's actually very scary when a bus looms up behind you along that stretch.

[JohnL]

Agreed - and I still believe seperation of cars etc. and cycles is the best (and most expensive) solution i.e. dedicated cycleways. That would get me on my bike.

As a driver I am extremely careful around cyclists.

jimbo1964 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A cycle path alongside the pavement from East

> Dulwich Road to Barry Road would be great.

> Speaking as someone who's been under a bus it's

> actually very scary when a bus looms up behind you

> along that stretch.

[Applespider]

You're right - it doesn't help that it's very very slightly uphill as you go up that way so it's easy to find yourself slowing (particularly if laden with panniers) and then pedalling for dear life as a bus looms up - although to be fair to the bus drivers, they're usually fairly good about not sitting on your rear mudguard; you just feel a bit guilty for holding them up.

[cle]

Echoing sentiment towards cyclists on pavements.

If you don't have a kid on the back, or aren't sub-12 yourself, don't do it.

Lady Delilah - you're missing a very obvious third way: don't cycle. If you can't abide by the laws - whether you agree with them or not (the phrase the law is an ass exists for a reason) - then you shouldn't do so.

It's illegal and unsafe - and your warped perception of your own personal safety and self-preservation is not legislated for. Not to mention moronic - endanger others to save yourself! Just don't cycle if you can't hack it on the road - although 25 years' experience should surely have readied you.

If you ever cycled into me on the pavement and injured me, I'd physically drag you to the police station or 'citizen's' you while I called them.

[savvygirl]

There was a woman cyclist who passed me on the pavement the other day even though there was a cycle path running alongside. The cyclist with her was using the cycle path. It really made me angry as there was no need for her to be on the pavement. Cyclists can be a real pain at times and a number of them don't bother to stop at red traffic lights. In the previous week I was crossing at a controlled crossing, stepped out when the green man appeared, and was nearly hit by a bloke on a bike speeding by. They should be given hefty fines if caught - that might put a stop to it.

[Coops46]

Stop saying "cyclists" as a collective term. One persons actions shouldn't reflect on others just because they both ride a bicycle.

Someone too busy looking at their phone bumped into me the other day, yet I don't blame the collective pedestrians for her actions.

Grow up.

[Zebedee Tring]

I, for one, don't condemn all cyclists, only those who behave illegally - and remember, we are talking about people who are breaking the law - one can't choose which laws to obey.

However, people walking along staring at their phones to the exclusion of everything else are another of my bugbears. If someone using their phone in this way walks in my direction, I carry on walking and they usually come off worse- which is easier for me to do than other people because I am 6ft 2in and pretty hefty.

[Zebedee Tring]

Perhaps I should have added that I don't recommend this course of action to someone who is a slender 5ft 3in!

[sledge]

In principle I agree - cyclists should not go on the pavement. However, I admit I do occasionally go on the pavement and I would love the "right" solution. I cycle with my 6 year old to school sometimes and have to go down East Dulwich Grove to the village, or alternatively I go down Court lane. I need to be close enough to my son to shout out reminders, to be "aware of cars coming out of drives" "beware of people" etc etc etc ...... and sometimes there is no space alongside the curb because the cars are so close to the pavement. Sometimes you have to go near the middle of the lane if you are going straight ahead at a junction - because if you stay by the pavement you risk getting hit by cars turning left.

SO - for those of you who are experienced cyclists or just knowledgeable I would love to hear the solution.

Yes, some of us are mummies who do not want to commit a crime,,,,but equally it would be nice for the kids to cycle to school and for me to feel they are safe.

And to add to the debate....my husband has a hand bike (he is a paraplegic) and he has experienced much abuse from car drivers about cycling on the road! So who knows what he should do?

[Nigello]

Manda,

Though you might think you are being all 'laid back and whatevs' and therefore a nice person, do think about the elderly, the hard of hearing, the blind, the deaf, the mentally handicapped and then reflect on whether cycling on the pavement is something to be discouraged.

[matryx]

sledge Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sometimes you have to go near the

> middle of the lane if you are going straight ahead

> at a junction - because if you stay by the

> pavement you risk getting hit by cars turning

> left.

>

This is the correct positioning for travelling straight ahead so you shouldn't be feeling like this is a bad thing.

As a cyclist you should ideally remain approx 1m from the left hand edge of your lane to ensure you are visible at junctions for traffic merging from the left, don't get doored by parked cars, and don't encourage drivers to make dangerous overtaking moves.

[henryb]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Manda,

> Though you might think you are being all 'laid

> back and whatevs' and therefore a nice person, do

> think about the elderly, the hard of hearing, the

> blind, the deaf, the mentally handicapped and then

> reflect on whether cycling on the pavement is

> something to be discouraged.

Well car drivers kill and seriously injure more people walking on the pavement than cyclists do so the problem needs to be put in perspective. The reason it is disallowed is mostly cultural rather than any genuine Health and Safety grounds. Many countries allow it, Japan for example, and there is no noticeable difference in pedestrian cyclists accidents and it can be shown to encourage cycling especially amongst the elderly and children where it is allowed.

I have been living in London 20 years and have never seen anyone cycling dangerously on the pavement. Mostly there are going slowing and give way to pedestrians.

Yes reckless behaviour that endangers others should stopped but that should apply to all forms of transport and be proportionate to the actual risk rather than the perceived risk.

[ultraburner]

Same as Henry, I have been living and cycling in London for decades now and have never seen any sort of collision on the pavement. Maybe I'm lucky, but I think the problem is far worse in peoples heads than in reality. On the other hand, I have to keep very alert riding to work as I have near misses on an almost weekly basis.

The majority of these are pedestrians stepping out into the road while they are on their phone.

[edcam]

henryb Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nigello Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> >> I have been living in London 20 years and have

> never seen anyone cycling dangerously on the

> pavement. Mostly there are going slowing and give

> way to pedestrians.

I don't know where you live but I see it pretty much at least once a week. I also see cyclists jumping red lights and ignoring pedestrians on a daily basis (and that's no exaggeration.) A fair proportion of cyclists screw it up for those that do observe the rules of the road. It's that sort of cyclist that winds up lorry drivers/bus drivers/taxi drivers, whose dangerous driving is inexcusable but it explains their antipathy towards cyclists in general.

[polla2256]

I'm both a cyclist and motorcyclist. As a cyclist I look out for No 1 and ride as if on a motorcycle (progressive, observant with forward planning). Today on my motorcycle I nearly T boned cyclists on 2 occasions on my motorbike, they both jumped the lights. 2 weeks ago 1 cyclist jumped the lights, saw me locked his front wheel and tipped over his handle bars. If I had crashed on any of these occasions who would pay for the damage ? My advice is fit cameras to your helmets, car dash whatever - This works in Russia and China. Even without insurance you could probably sue the money out of them.

[henryb]

I have lived all over London and now in ED. I regularly see cyclists on the pavements but never cycling in a particularly a dangerous way. This perception born out by the actual number of people killed or seriously injured by cyclists on pavements which is very few.

Yes cyclists should not jump red lights but about 16% do. People should not speed either but on average around 50% break the speed limit. Plus speeders kill hundreds every year yet cyclists don't. One action doesn?t excuse the other but the reaction should proportionate to the actual danger.

A mother cycling to school slowly along the pavement with her child giving way to pedestrians should be encouraged not frowned upon. Far better that and less dangerous to pedestrians than doing the school run in a car.

The antipathy towards cyclists in general is cultural. It isn't there in other countries yet cyclists behave the same. Just been cyclisng in France and the difference is amazing.

[rodneybewes]

edcam Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> henryb Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Nigello Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > >> I have been living in London 20 years and

> have

> > never seen anyone cycling dangerously on the

> > pavement. Mostly there are going slowing and

> give

> > way to pedestrians.

>

>

> I don't know where you live but I see it pretty

> much at least once a week. I also see cyclists

> jumping red lights and ignoring pedestrians on a

> daily basis (and that's no exaggeration.) A fair

> proportion of cyclists screw it up for those that

> do observe the rules of the road. It's that sort

> of cyclist that winds up lorry drivers/bus

> drivers/taxi drivers, whose dangerous driving is

> inexcusable but it explains their antipathy

> towards cyclists in general.

Agreed. I cycle to and from the city every day and there are plenty who cycle badly. I've seen quite a few get tickets in the city from police as well.

I don't really understand the antipathy to cyclists though. Quite how anyone can look at the separate stats for death and injury caused by cyclists and those caused by other road users and reserve all their spleen for bikes is beyond me.

I don't agree that drivers dislike cyclists because they've seen them ride badly. Most aggression I've received from drivers has not because I've been cycling badly but because they just don't feel that they should have to share the road with me at all and I've somehow "held them up". If that were the case then drivers would despise each other all of the time. Anyone who drives a car around south London regularly is exposed to terrible drivers all of the time.

[Applespider]

One problem is that rogue cyclists are very visible - one idiot sailing through a red light, across a zebra crossing or along the pavement is far more memorable than those who are sitting waiting or going along the road. And since those misdemeanours affect more than one group of users - both pedestrians and motorists which is pretty much the entire non-cycling population - you end up with virtually everyone having at least one bad cyclist story. I suspect every cyclist has at least one bad pedestrian/driver story but as a smaller subset of people, there's not the same antipathy amongst the rest of the world. The frustrating thing is that both pedestrians and cyclists should be on the same campaigning side to get better provision for all vulnerable road users against the more powerful motorist lobby groups.

A driving friend once explained her frustration with cyclists to me; that when traffic is moving reasonably freely, she is 'slowed' by cyclists if the road narrows or goes uphill. But that she's then jealous when there's a traffic jam because cyclists can sail through it - be that filtering or using bus lanes or even hopping off and going round the obstruction on foot. I can see her point - car adverts sell driving as fun or sexy, when was the last time you saw a traffic jam in one.

[kirstyrosendale]

it's illegal to cycle on the pavement if a police catch you get

?60 fine

[chuff]

What about the muggings that are happening by kids on bikes, speeding past and snatching your phone/bag? I had someone cycle past me while walking on the pavement last year, that pulled my shoulder bag as they went past. Luckily the bag stayed on my shoulder as my puppy was inside making it too heavy to get pulled off.

Generally I think it's fine for parents with young kids and where the roads are too dangerous to cycle on but the pedestrian should have right of way and ringing a bell to get them to move out of the way is wrong. Wait until there's a gap.

[GEEKASAURUS]

I know the original post wasn't referring to the shared space on rye lane, but that truly is an awful place to cycle (and i'm sure for pedestrians, to walk also). No one seems to have a clue that there is a little cycle lane. Does anyone else here ride on it? It really would be better if it were completely segregated. My bell just doesn't seem to cut the mustard going along there.

[bawdy-nan]

I use rye lane and don't mind it really - I just go really slowly for a bit - mostly because I'm sharing the road with pedestrians ...

[DaveR]

Not strictly on topic (but more efficient than starting a new thread), interesting recent stats on the extent of bike use in Central London:

http://www.london.gov.uk/media/mayor-press-releases/2013/06/bikes-make-up-around-a-quarter-of-rush-hour-traffic-in-central

How much higher would the figures be if the roads were more overtly bike friendly?