Coping with Shared Use Pavement

Norman_Castle

A high proportion of my cycling is on shared use paths and I find a proportion of cyclists ride to fast or to close to pedestrians. I suspect the problem may be worse with commuting cyclists.

Marco_Panettone

surreysaver wrote: »

The trouble with shared use is, people on bicycles do not realise that by law pedestrians have priority, and should yield to them at all times. Even on marked ones with one side marked bicycles, pedestrians have priority. Some people might be deaf / distracted by their children / dogs, or children might be running around not knowing they need to be aware of cycles appearing from nowhere.

Anyone riding a bicycle at much more than walking pace should be on the road.

No - they should on a high-quality cycle path.

Mids_Costcutter

I wouldn't expect to ride as fast on an unsegregated shared-use path as on the road and always try to slow down and give a wide berth to pedestrians.

The only way to improve this situation is to demand better facilities for cycling: email your local councillor. Measure the width of the path. If only 8 feet, that's less than 2.5 metres: an unsegregated path for cyclists and pedestrians needs to be a minimum of 3 metres wide.

fred246

AndyBSG wrote: »

Pedestrians on foot at 5MPH and cyclists on several kilograms of metal moving at 15MPH+ is not a good idea.

I think a 70kg man on a 10kg bike at 15MPH sharing space with a 40000kg truck at 70MPH is a much worse idea.

boliston

fred246 wrote: »

I think a 70kg man on a 10kg bike at 15MPH sharing space with a 40000kg truck at 70MPH is a much worse idea.

I was thinking along the same lines - the combined weight of myself AND my bike is probably still less than a typical overweight brit and a 10mph differential being a problem would mean cars and cyclists sharing road space would also be no-go, and a typical car would weigh about 20 times the combined weight of myself and my bike, even without any passengers!

brat

boliston wrote: »

I was thinking along the same lines - the combined weight of myself AND my bike is probably still less than a typical overweight brit and a 10mph differential being a problem would mean cars and cyclists sharing road space would also be no-go, and a typical car would weigh about 20 times the combined weight of myself and my bike, even without any passengers!

I agree with the maths, but while we still have integrated traffic systems and shared spaces, the important task is to ensure that those carrying the greater momentum into a situation take the share of responsibility proportionate to their momentum.

Altarf

Teapot55 wrote: »

Last night a woman my age on a bike gave me the six foot of room that I would give to someone (I have tried it out the one day I took my bike to work) but most people are coming up from behind and 'buzzing' me, even though the pavement is about 8 foot wide and I am walking close to the wall.

There is no simple answer.

As you have experienced, the majority of cyclists are totally inconsiderate to the safety of pedestrians, although they will moan on for ever about their own safety (which is ironic as the majority of cyclist deaths are due to their own stupidity).

brat

Altarf wrote: »

There is no simple answer.

As you have experienced, the majority of cyclists are totally inconsiderate to the safety of pedestrians, although they will moan on for ever about their own safety (which is ironic as the majority of cyclist deaths are due to their own stupidity).

Ignoring your trolly petulance for the moment, it would seem your facts are also way wide of the mark.
From a DfT report in the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

With adult cyclists, police found the driver solely responsible in about 60%-75% of all cases, and riders solely at fault 17%-25% of the time.

But I'm sure you won't let facts get in the way of a good whinge!

Marco_Panettone

Brat (and everyone else) - ignore the troll. He can't be educated. It just isn't worth anyone's energy. Ta.

Altarf

brat wrote: »

Ignoring your trolly petulance for the moment, it would seem your facts are also way wide of the mark.
From a DfT report in the Guardian http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

All the cycle death reports in London seem to be cyclists squashed by trucks, when they have stupidly cycled up the inside.

Anyway, I notice how you didn't try to defend or explain the obnoxious behaviour of the cyclists that the OP reported.