Pavement perils

Guest101

Tobster86 wrote: »

The flaky-as-it-is ones in Worcester are used by pedestrians with iPods, usually next to a perfectly good (and vacant) pavement. I prefer to use the road.

There are also many shared paths. Ringing your bell at people on these often elicits a similar response to asking them to remove their trousers.

- Lancaster.

It's literally a cycle lane along the main roads through the city, cycle tracks leading into and out of the city, cycling through the pedestrianised ( recently changed to not allowed between 10am - 4.30pm, but largly ignored ). Our Mayor owns 5 bicycles!

it's a cycle friendly city, and yet some still take the absolute !!!!. That's what annoys me.

Guest101

AndyBSG wrote: »

The problem though is that many cycling lanes simply aren't fit for purpose and are death traps waiting to happen.

The infamous Bow roundabout and the Elephant & Castle roundabouts are prime examples.

Fair enough, but it's not the case here.

we have 1 roundabout in the city. (aside from mini's in residential areas and theres not many of them)

Tobster86

Guest101 wrote: »

- Lancaster.

It's literally a cycle lane along the main roads through the city, cycle tracks leading into and out of the city, cycling through the pedestrianised ( recently changed to not allowed between 10am - 4.30pm, but largly ignored ). Our Mayor owns 5 bicycles!

it's a cycle friendly city, and yet some still take the absolute !!!!. That's what annoys me.

You say 'cycling friendly', but that description strikes me (as a confident, and I'd like to think fast, road commuting cyclist) as not necessarily cycling friendly. It just sounds like a load of restrictions have been imposed, and cyclists are discouraged off the roads and onto 'cycle paths' that are likely just a free-for-all for anyone of any age & competence, with or without two wheels.

And every 'cycle path' just seems to reinforce the belligerent actions of the minority of dangerous drivers who dislike cyclists as 'they should be on the cycle path'.

But I haven't been into Lancaster so couldn't say for definite. I'm also in a very much Southern town and due to move back up North to York soon; it'll be interesting to observe the difference in attitudes (if any).

brat

This mornings jog took me through a new build suburbia sprawl with lovely wide pavement and grass verge separating driveways from the road. Not a pedestrian in sight. Yet my life was endangered by Mr Big in his 'C class' reversing at speed from his drive onto the pavement having presumably given a cursory glance for pedestrians.
I was forced to stop suddenly and wait until he completed his manoeuvre. He shrugged his shoulders at my stare and failed to respond to my 'euro anchor' gesticulation.

Comparing the manner of Mr Big to the cyclist, I'd argue that Mr Big's driving was poorer than the cyclist with a greater potential to have more serious consequences.

johannalf88

AndyBSG wrote: »

Can't find more recent ones but from 2001 to 2009 here's some figures

Pedestrians Killed by cyclists - 18
Pedestrians seriously injured by cyclists - 434

Now lets compare that to car figures...

Pedestrians killed by cars - 3,495
Pedestrians seriously injured by cars - 46,245

These figures are for all of Great Britain and are from the Department for Transport.

In accidents between adult cyclists and motor vehicles the driver of the vehicle was found solely responsible in over 60% of cases with the cyclist solely responsible in under 25% of cases(the remainder were no fault/both parties at fault).

These are also DFT figures but only from 2009 as they're the most recent I could find.

to really put those figures into perspective, here's some figures for causes of death in 2008

387 pedestrians were killed by motor vehicles
4 people were killed by bees
3 pedestrians were killed by cyclists
2 people were killed by lightning

Odd that lightning and bee deaths don't receive the same press coverage that pedestrians killed by cyclists do considering the comparable number of deaths!

Cyclists are simply an easy target for the press

How many cyclist have been injured by pedestrians?
I was cycling to work the other day through a park (cycling allowed I may add), there was a kid running about. I slowed right down, and went the other side of the path (space to throw an arm out without hitting anyone), the kid then ran into me, I hit the brakes, turned my front wheel, stopped with inches to spare. Kid was fine. I on the other hand... huge bruises on my legs from my bike pedals and the wheel where I jumped off so quickly! :rotfl:

I find the problem is I find cars tend to follow the rules of the road, but badly. They don't decide to drive on the other side of the road, or stop with no warning/change direction (on the most parts). Pedestrians do, and it is impossible to predict. Whats worse is walking along listening to music, then people can't hear cyclists (or runners) coming, and suddenly change direction.

That doesn't excuse what happened though, the cyclist saw the mum cross, and should have slowed down regardless, even if we pretend it was a cycle path.

System

Update

Cyclist was found guilty of 'Dangerous Cycling' at Lancaster Magistrates Court today

It has cost Andrew Holland £829 in fines and costs

Guest101

!!!!!! wrote: »

Update

Cyclist was found guilty of 'Dangerous Cycling' at Lancaster Magistrates Court today

It has cost Andrew Holland £829 in fines and costs

Read that in the local paper - Was confused why it was in Lancaster.

I presume he is a resident here.

Lancaster has the first congestion outside of city of westminster, so it's pretty much a standstill here - hence all the cycle lanes on the main roads. Keep cyclists moving.