Forum Topic

PAVEMENTS ARE FOR PEDESTRIANS – 11

“I can see Pavements are for pedestrians - Part 11 coming shortly”; Nigel Brooks post 14/02/14 18:18:00WARNING – SOME OF THE INFORMATION BELOW COULD CAUSE DISTRESS TO OVER-SENSITIVE READERS!“YOU ARE FREE NOT TO READ THE THREAD AND NOT TO COMMENT”; Phillipa Bond post 07/03/14 08:51:00    STALEMATE? The lively discussion on this topic which has been raging for the last two months seems to have dried up. Is it due to Lenten observance, or have the ‘opinion formers’ who seem to dominate the pages of the ‘ealingtoday’ Forum finally run out of RED HERRING arguments to offer? Too much ‘free speech’ can, it seems, lead to verbal indigestion!Prompted by the 170-odd collective ‘musings’ on this topic I refer readers to the DfT’s guidance for Town Planners “LTN 2/04 - Adjacent and Shared Use Facilities for Pedestrians and Cyclists” which provides authoritative answers to some of the rare ‘on topic’ points made ‘in debate’. See http://www.ukroads.org/webfiles/LTN%202-04%20Adjacent%20and%20Shared%20Use%20Facilities%20for%20Pedestrians%20and%20Cyclists.pdfIT OFFERS THE FOLLOWING GEMS:STATEMENTS OF THE OBVIOUS: 3.1.1.Schemes that involve adjacent or shared use of space between pedestrians and cyclists may be contentious, particularly when the scheme introduces cyclists into areas previously reserved solely for pedestrians. 3.2.3 IT IS IMPORTANT TO RECOGNISE THAT PEDESTRIANS AND CYCLISTS ARE NOT HOMOGENEOUS GROUPS AND THEIR NEEDS VARY CONSIDERABLY. SHARED USE FOOTPATHS ARE A MEASURE OF LAST RESORT: 3.1.2.The process can be summarised thus: identify the need for a cycle route within a particular corridor; check for possible on-carriageway solutions; IF AN ON-CARRIAGEWAY SOLUTION CANNOT BE ACHIEVED conduct a site assessment to determine whether adjacent or shared use is feasible; and if it is feasible, determine what form the facility should take. If not, CHECK AGAIN FOR ON-CARRIAGEWAY SOLUTIONS or alternative alignments. Ultimately, RETAINING THE CURRENT ARRANGEMENT MAY BE THE PREFERRED COURSE OF ACTION. 3.4.1 It should not automatically be assumed that cyclists can be better served off the carriageway because an improved on-carriageway solution is not available. 5.2.5.If it is decided to abandon the proposal, THE SEARCH FOR AN ON-CARRIAGEWAY SOLUTION MAY BEGIN AGAIN.ILLEGAL FOOTPATH CYCLING MAY BE AN INDICATION OR THE NEED FOR AN ON-CARRIAGEWAY ROUTE: 4.3.10 Illegal cycling on the footpath or footway is recorded. This can indicate both a problem and a desire line to be addressed. If cyclists take to the footway only occasionally, this may indicate that on-road measures to assist cyclists at those locations are more suitable than an adjacent or shared use route.SAFETY INCLUDES PERCEIVED SAFETY: 4.5.3. Any notable changes to conditions for pedestrians should be noted. In most cases, journey times will be unaffected and in a facility with sufficient width, the safety and comfort will also be unaffected. SAFETY IN THIS CONTEXT SHOULD INCLUDE CHANGES TO PERCEIVED SAFETY. CONSULTATION IS A MUST: 5.1.1. A thorough consultation process should be applied no matter what legal process is being used to create the cycle track. Before recommending the detailed design of an adjacent or shared facility, it is essential to seek the views of user groups and others likely to have an interest. LEGAL: 10.1.1. Where the need for cyclists to use existing footways or footpaths has been identified at a specification, their right to be there must be established by changing the legal status of the footway or footpath to that of a cycle track. A SHARED FOOTPATH REMAINS A FOOTPATH IN LAW: 10.1.2. ……… Where the facility is an adjacent use one - the remainder is a footway or footpath. IT IS ILLEGAL FOR A CYCLIST TO RIDE ON THE PEDESTRIAN SIDE. [See also Highway Code rule 62 ] 6.1.5 …….. PEDESTRIANS CAN LEGALLY USE A CYCLE TRACK BUT CYCLISTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO RIDE ON THE PEDESTRIAN SIDE. POLICE TO ENFORCE: 10.2.1  A considerable amount of public concern is generated by cyclists misusing footways and footpaths, particularly where badly planned or designed facilities encourage such behaviour. 10.2.2 Cycling on the footway in England and Wales is an offence under Section 72 of the Highways Act1835 as amended by Section 85Å1Ç of the Local Government Act 1888. 10.2.3.Enforcement is a matter for the Police. INVALID CARRIAGES CAN USE THE PAVEMENTS: 10.3.3. An invalid carriage can be used on footways, footpaths, bridleways or pedestrianised areas providing that it is used in accordance with the prescribed requirements. Invalid carriages have no specific right to use a cycle track but users commit no offence in doing so, unless an order or local bye-law exists creating one.ALSO:EALING’S BY-LAWS GOVERNING CYCLING IN THE BOROUGH’S PARKS can be found at: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/downloads/download/713/parks_and_open_spaces_by-laws Para (1)(11) says: “No person shall, without reasonable excuse, ride a cycle, except in any part of the ground where there is a right of way for cycles, or along such routes as may be fixed by the Council and indicated by signs placed in conspicuous positions in the ground.”AND:EALING’S ‘MINI HOLLAND’ PROGRAMME:  Ealing Council is bidding to create a MINI HOLLAND for cyclists within the borough – see  http://www.ealing.gov.uk/downloads/download/2548/mini_holland_cycle_bidFINALLY:Last Monday BBC2’s ‘Top Gear’ team presented their own ideas on improving road cycling safety to Westminster Council – available on i-Player.KEEP DEATH OFF THE ROADS BY ALL MEANS, BUT DON’T BRING IT ONTO THE PAVEMENTS. CHECKMATE!COMPLAINTS about the content of the above documents should be addressed to:DfT minister Robert Goodwill – re “LTN 2/04 - Adjacent and Shared Use Facilities for Pedestrians and Cyclists”Councillor Bassam Mahfouz (bassam.mahfouz@ealing.gov.uk) , Ealing Council Cabinet Member for Transport and the Environment: re EALING’S BY-LAWS GOVERNING CYCLING IN THE BOROUGH’S PARKSJulian Bell (julian.bell@ealing.gov.uk) Leader Ealing Council: re EALING’S ‘MINI HOLLAND’ PROGRAMMEhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/: re Top Gear’s programme Monday 24 February

Tony Purton ● 4406d18 Comments

You write as if cyclists never get fined for offences..."More than 11,000 cyclists caught running through red lights and riding on pavements in just one yearMore than 7,000 cyclists were fined for cycling on pavements4,000 were caught jumping red lights and ignoring other road signsMost offences were in London with 3,508 fixed penalty notices issued"http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2541739/More-11-000-cyclists-caught-running-red-lights-riding-pavements-just-one-year.html

Paul James ● 4394d

"Er, they are."I think what he really means is that somebody should HOLD them accountable for their actions.

Tony Colliver ● 4395d

Probably much the same as I dislike Chelsea fans, but only when they are supporting that horrible club from SW6. The rest of the time they can be good company!

Ben Owen ● 4398d

You state "I dislike cyclists", which means you dislike every person that owns a cycle, or at least every single person on a bike at the time, from 5 year olds kids to 85 year old men.Do you really mean that?

Paul James ● 4398d

I belong to the ramblers and yesterday we had a very interesting walk from Hampton court to Shepperton but it was a small minority of cyclists who were quite rude because they couldn't get past.They come cycling at such speed and wonder why they have to slow down.They are brainless.I think all cyclists should be made to hold a cycle licence and pay an annual fee of £100 and everytime they  cause an offence, they should get points and 12 points mean you are disqualified from cycling.

Rhys Smith ● 4399d

Thanks for keeping pavement cycling on the front page with your bizarre RED HERRING posts.

Tony Purton ● 4399d

By his own admission, Tony Purton claims to have taken 560 photos of a cyclist/s riding on the pavement.  Unless he has a record of their age and name, his private collection will no doubt include pictures of teenagers and children.  Google StreetView, an un-biased capture of thousands of miles of UK street activity, Tony has yet to find an image of a pavement cyclist.  Mr Purton's Ealing threads are, perhaps, a cover for his photographic interests." M'lud, I was , errr, I only took those 560 photos for my, errr, private, err, errrr,  pavement campaign. "

Fred Bray ● 4399d

Well done, Fred, for that! I chuckled at it. So it proves it was worth !posting!Thanks again. I was despairing on what TP had to say next!

Ben Owen ● 4399d

Could even be a naked cyclist, riding an invisible bike, on the pavement.  

Fred Bray ● 4400d

>any true Londoner that does not ignore the green/red person an a pelican crossing and just cross when it is clear?The red and green man lights on a pelicon crossing for crossing the carriageway are purely advisory, pedestrians (or cyclists or horses in the case of a Toucan or Pegasus crossing) do not break the law by crossing on a red man, it's perfectly legal to do so, if not advisable.About the only thing pedestrians can do that's illegal (so far as using the road goes) is loiter on a zebra crossing or walk along a motorway.

Paul James ● 4405d

As a pedestrian, cyclist and car driver I am conscious of the risks and dangers of the heavier/faster modes to the others and adapt my style accordingly.  In fact I would guess my non-compliance to traffic signals is aimed at close to perfect as a driver, significantly worse as a pedestrian (any true Londoner that does not ignore the green/red person an a pelican crossing and just cross when it is clear?)and somewhere in the middle as a cyclist.

Philip Coe ● 4405d

Errrrrr... No.In the same way people in cars can't skittle cyclists down, although there are many many that state that they would like to.

Paul James ● 4406d

Can't legally skittle them down then?....

Philip Coe ● 4406d

It's not a criminal act. If the footpath is designated shared then the paint on it is just decoration.In all cases just the posted signs are required, and i think maybe the occasional cycle painted on the floor.Peds have priority on the whole  pavement, even the bit with the cycle track painted on it.

Paul James ● 4406d

I regularly cycle eastwards from Park Royal Tube Station towards Acton along the south side of the A40 Western Avenue where there is, for the most part, both a pedestrian footway and adjacent cycleway.  However I would estimate that approx 75% of pedestrians walk on the cycleway in preference to the footway - perhaps because it is further away from the main road.My instinct is to similarly switch tracks until I pass them but mindful that this is seen as a criminal act by some what should I do?

Philip Coe ● 4406d

More evidence Mr Purton that your campaigning efforts would be more fruitful should be directed toward the council and TFL so they provide safe on carriageway cycle tracks and environment.I've said before, on pavement cycle paths alongside roads are a cop out, a cheap way of providing cycle facilities, and they should be on the road.

Paul James ● 4406d

>They disobey all the rules of the road,All of them?>they never stop at a red lightReally? I see many stopped at red lights. I myself don't ride through them when I'm on my bike. However, I do see people on bikes ride through red lights, but then I see many people in cars jump them too.>and try and run over pedestrians when crossingReally? All of them?>They should be accountable for their actions.Er, they are.

Paul James ● 4406d

HA HA. Good on you Tony for annoying the 'people'.Just to say, i haven't read any of it, but I believe cyclists are a pain in the butt and should stick to the roads. They disobey all the rules of the road, never stop at a red light and try and run over pedestrians when crossing. They should be accountable for their actions.

Rhys Smith ● 4406d