Biggest Threats to Cyclists?

Altarf

solihullrose wrote: »

I feel that I should just point out that it is still illegal to cycle on a footpath. A fact that many simply ignore these days as the police as too few and overstretched to enforce the law.

Unfortunately many local authorities have decided to meet their "safer cycling" obligations by designating many pavements shared use, with only infrequent signs indicating this.

Therefore many pedestrians are unaware that the "pavement" is now a shared pavement / cycle path (and yes I know that cyclists must defer to pedestrians, but the mere presence of a cycle on a "pavement" seems to send some people into a rage, no matter how you courteously the cyclist is behaving).

In some places, the pavement varies every few metres between being a pavement, and a shared pavement /cycle path, without any apparent logic. It is understandable that some cyclist are likely to think that if it is acceptable to cycle on this "pavement", then it is equally acceptable to cycle on similar pavements.

To give you an example in a town I was visiting recently, would you consider the pavement where the lady on the right is walking a pavement or a shared pavement / cyclepath (taking account of the shop entrance, the postbox, the parked cars, etc).

https://maps.google.com/?ll=52.217599,-0.281224&spn=0.021744,0.038366&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=52.217522,-0.289389&panoid=6QO8FZSyzTcLBAy4Yyfoaw&cbp=12,0,,0,0

The answer, it used to be a pavement, but has now been designated by the local authority to be a shared pavement / cyclepath, but I expect more than few OAPs that step out of the Post Office complain about the cyclists on the pavement.

Yet ironically 100 meters away from that location, where Google Maps has captured someone cycling on the pavement, that is still a pavement and is not a shared pavement / cyclepath, despite it being a much safer place to cycle, both from a cyclists point of view (the pinch points in the road) and a pedestrians point of view (no stepping out of shops, wide grass verge, etc).

https://maps.google.com/?ll=52.215101,-0.28131&spn=0.021745,0.038366&t=m&z=15&layer=c&cbll=52.215174,-0.289492&panoid=3K8FRJzmr4PBq2g7FtDapg&cbp=12,13.06,,0,16.38

solihullrose

Neither of the cyclist "encounters" that I mentioned (baby sling & hip operation) had anything to do with shared pavement space. In each the place for a cyclist was on the road. These were just plain examples of cyclists behaving badly. There is also no place for cyclists to ride through the grounds of the Cathedral in the city I worked (where they often seem to think pedestrians should step out of the way). There is in fact a notice of the fence surrounding the Cathedral saying no cycling. Again this is just another example of cyclists who behave badly. I am not someone who is unreasonable about shared space and as I said can ride drive and walk.

Cycrow

Altarf wrote: »

Therefore many pedestrians are unaware that the "pavement" is now a shared pavement / cycle path (and yes I know that cyclists must defer to pedestrians, but the mere presence of a cycle on a "pavement" seems to send some people into a rage, no matter how you courteously the cyclist is behaving).

Yeah i've had this before, i was actually pushing my bike down a shared footpath (i had a flat tyre). And some guy just jumped infront of me, grabbed my bike and told me i shouldn't be on the footpath and started trying to push me onto the road

markfj

i Used to cycle every day too, but I drive too

As a cyclist point of view, you see people skipping red lights in their cars, one a few inches from killing me because he obviously weren't looking at his lights. But also see many other cyclists when you stop at lights putting themselves in danger as well as other

From a motorist

You see plenty of motorists that dont want to be behind a slow bike and overtake quite dangerously, but also see cyclists jumping red lights or even worse the ones at night without any lights at all

discplayer

SidP wrote: »

Given the increase in cyclists, maybe it is about time there were more regulations. Certainly the events related in this thread show that many are incapable of being good cyclists without it.

There has been a recent increase in cyclists in many cities but the number of miles cycled is still way down on a few decades ago. We do not need more regulations for cyclists or motorists, we need education and enforcement of the current regulations - for example there are some cyclists and motorists who do not stop at zebra crossings.

It's idiots we need to deal with, they knock cyclists off bikes, pedestrians to the ground and write off cars.

Norman_Castle

I feel that I should just point out that it is still illegal to cycle on a footpath. A fact that many simply ignore these days as the police as too few and overstretched to enforce the law.

If done with regard to pedestrian safety its acceptable.

sdavies13

Rather fascinating article http://www.bikehub.co.uk/featured-articles/cycling-and-the-law/ on cycling and the law.

On the matter of cycling on pavements what is and isn't allowed isn't always clear. It also mentions that Home Office Minister, Paul Boateng, wrote to Chief Police Officers advising them to use police discretion when issuing fixed penalty notices to people cycling on pavements.

Plus never realised it is an offence to ride a bike in the dark without amber pedal reflectors. So I'm breaking the law as I use SPD pedals!!!

Norman_Castle

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CEkQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.parliament.uk%2Fbriefing-papers%2FSN00623.pdf&ei=uG9uUsrUHqLK0QW49IHgCA&usg=AFQjCNHvVon8YhEUxvMfgHFo4yhoHWmTBg&sig2=xkt6D99PrTVWj0sgxd1Piw&bvm=bv.55123115,d.d2k

Cycrow

sdavies13 wrote: »

Plus never realised it is an offence to ride a bike in the dark without amber pedal reflectors. So I'm breaking the law as I use SPD pedals!!!

Thats actually a stupid rule.

as the law says the reflector must be on the pedals themselves, so you could have them on shoes or legs or anything, even thou the end result is the same

Rosemary7391

Cycrow wrote: »

Thats actually a stupid rule.

as the law says the reflector must be on the pedals themselves, so you could have them on shoes or legs or anything, even thou the end result is the same

What about if the way you're riding covers them up? I've seen women with chunky high heels wedge the pedal into the gap between sole and heel.

I have asked cyclists to keep to the left on cycle paths - usually with the addition of 'Excuse me' and 'please' though - it's rather frustrating to be behind people slowly riding 4 abreast and additionally leaves no room for any oncoming cyclists (and no, they don't just move when there is an oncoming cyclist!).