London: pedestrians and cycling

[ncutler]

There is an Andrew Gilligan piece in today's Grauniad to do with a proposed pedestrianisation of Oxford Street that will include banning cyclists.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... on-cycling

By chance I happened to be walking along the Thames embankment from Tate Modern to The National Theatre at about 6pm last night. Many pedestrians, some tourists, some workers hurrying home, a few idle lovers ambling. Two extraordinarily stupid and dangerous cycle lunatics weaving their way round people and blind corners: showing off, far too fast, no warning, serious accidents waiting to happen.

I love cycling, and I enjoy cycling slowly and carefully on shared paths and spaces, but my current feeling is that if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on cycling in pedestrian spaces is entirely reasonable.

( and they were not wearing h*****s ).

[thirdcrank]

... if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on cycling in pedestrian spaces is entirely reasonable. ... .

I suspect your target group would treat a total ban with the same disdain that they treat the situation now.

[AdamS]

( and they were not wearing h*****s ).

Why should pedestrians have to wear helmets to protect themselves from irresponsible cyclists? I'll remind you that walking is statistically almost as safe per-mile travelled as cycling is and we wouldn't dream of telling cyclists to wear helmets to protect themselves from dangerous drivers

... if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on cycling in pedestrian spaces is entirely reasonable. ... .

I suspect your target group would treat a total ban with the same disdain that they treat the situation now.

Yes, these people were cycling illegally. They do not do this because it is legal to cycle illegally, but because they have contempt for the law and other people.

[mjr]

... if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on cycling in pedestrian spaces is entirely reasonable. ... .

I suspect your target group would treat a total ban with the same disdain that they treat the situation now.

Yes, these people were cycling illegally. They do not do this because it is legal to cycle illegally, but because they have contempt for the law and other people.

And that's why these cycling bans primarily harm the sort of cyclists who would cause no trouble anyway! Cycling that endangers walkers is bad because it endangers walkers, not because some moron in a town hall has written a dodgy rule banning all cycling there. It's illegal even if cycling is permitted. Such bans are a waste of money that could be better spent facilitating cycling on routes which the town hall would prefer people to use - positive direction, like they do for HGVs. But cycles don't cause such damage to property when driven dangerously, so don't get as much respect.

Overuse of cycling bans also harms walkers by distracting enforcement resources away from the minority of dangerous cyclists and wasting them on the majority of cyclists who have probably just failed to spot some tiny round sign, or used an access that has no such sign because many highway authorities are really poor at signing for vehicles which can use very narrow roads and turn in a fairly small radius... even though some of their designers seem to think we're even narrower and can turn on the spot.

Finally, I suspect many of the bans are themselves not legal because a Traffic Regulation/Management Order only has legal grounds to restrict cycling for a few defined reasons (RTRA 1984 section 1) and the only one which there's good argument for here is "for facilitating the passage on the road" of walkers. On streets not so full of walkers to make cycling difficult, councils should not be able to claim it's "for avoiding danger" when there's been repeated government findings for decades now that there are "no real factors to justify excluding cyclists from pedestrianised areas" (TAL 9/93, published 1993).

Sadly, some councils, including Mansfield, Windsor and others, have decided to double-up the absurdity and use the easier-to-sneak-through-and-easier-to-enforce PiSPOt orders (Public Space Protection Orders) to restrict cycling, despite that being explicitly disallowed by the legislation. I think the fines are even higher than for traffic offences. I guess it's nice to know which towns don't want business from cyclists, which is OK for tourists but not so good for residents. Shall we mark these bike-bashers on https://www.cyclescape.org/tags/pspo (yes, I know there's nothing there yet) so people can see more easily where cycling is not welcome and avoid them on tours?

[reohn2]

There is an Andrew Gilligan piece in today's Grauniad to do with a proposed pedestrianisation of Oxford Street that will include banning cyclists.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... on-cycling

By chance I happened to be walking along the Thames embankment from Tate Modern to The National Theatre at about 6pm last night. Many pedestrians, some tourists, some workers hurrying home, a few idle lovers ambling. Two extraordinarily stupid and dangerous cycle lunatics weaving their way round people and blind corners: showing off, far too fast, no warning, serious accidents waiting to happen.

I love cycling, and I enjoy cycling slowly and carefully on shared paths and spaces, but my current feeling is that if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on cycling in pedestrian spaces is entirely reasonable.

( and they were not wearing h*****s ).

Sadly the UK has far more than its fair share of complete and utter dangerous idiots,it seems endmic in UK towns and cities,if they're not on bikes they're in cars on motorcycles or just shouting randomly at pigeons on the street!
I don't know the answer

[mercalia]

and here -

https://lcc.org.uk/articles/oxford-street-is-sadiq-saying-no-to-cycling

seems to be shooting them selves in the foot - Oxford st is a rather long road, I would never want to walk the length especially with shopping so I bet shopping will go down as shoppers visit only one shop at a time. We have the Sadiq Sycles what better reason to have docks at various places along the road? Oxford st is a wide road and can afford to have a cycle lane in the middle.

Oxford St Consultation

TFL
https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/oxford-street/

London Cycling Campaign ( Reply )
https://www.cyclescape.org/threads/3655

[MikeF]

Where's the CUK input to these plans that ban cycling?

[MikeF]

and here -

Oxford st is a wide road and can afford to have a cycle lane in the middle.

But the artists' impressions show that space will be cluttered up with seats, children's play areas, tree tubs etc to make it more pleasant, all of which hinder pedestrian progress

[PRL]

and here -

https://lcc.org.uk/articles/oxford-street-is-sadiq-saying-no-to-cycling

seems to be shooting them selves in the foot - Oxford st is a rather long road, I would never want to walk the length especially with shopping so I bet shopping will go down as shoppers visit only one shop at a time. We have the Sadiq Sycles what better reason to have docks at various places along the road? Oxford st is a wide road and can afford to have a cycle lane in the middle.

I don't think anyone would walk the length of Oxford Street. Simply take the tube , or cycle along parallel streets, to the nearest station to the desired shop(s). My Idea of hell would be visiting all the OS shops !

[mjr]

I don't think anyone would walk the length of Oxford Street. Simply take the tube , or cycle along parallel streets, to the nearest station to the desired shop(s). My Idea of hell would be visiting all the OS shops !

I have walked its length a couple of times (including the National Funeral for the Victims of Traffic Violence), plus I've cycled it many times. If you took the tube, you'd end up walking quite a long way (even just the Central Line platforms are 130m long) plus it's the tube. Cycling along parallel streets is already a bit iffy because of the volume of traffic and adding buses to the traffic on them probably isn't going to make it any better.

[toontra]

Oxford Street is part of one of my occasional commute routes. It's already pedestrianised to all intents and purposes, only allowing buses, taxis and delivery vehicles. Pedestrians, particularly foreign tourists, wander hither and thither with little regard for traffic and far less for cycles, making it unwise to go fast.

A cycle lane in a totally pedestrianised Oxford Street wouldn't work for that reason - it would simply be unenforceable. It would be almost as quick to walk.

[mjr]

A cycle lane in a totally pedestrianised Oxford Street wouldn't work for that reason - it would simply be unenforceable. It would be almost as quick to walk.

But a damned sight easier to cycle, especially if one has to use a stick to walk (as I have for two spells this year )

It probably depends on the time of day, too.

[mercalia]

here is TFL consultation page and a chance to make your comment ( until Dec 17th )

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/oxford-street/?cid=oxford-street

Have your Say

https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/roads/oxford-street/consultation/subpage.2017-10-30.6506314450/

I think the plan is some ones fantasy like the garden bridge that wont happen now. Unforunately this fantasy may happen. Central Croydon is a good example how cyclists and peds coexist

[[XAP]Bob]

I love cycling, and I enjoy cycling slowly and carefully on shared paths and spaces, but my current feeling is that if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on cycling in pedestrian spaces is entirely reasonable.

So if we can't change the behaviour of the brainless then a total ban on motoring on public roads is entirely reasonable....

[[XAP]Bob]

By chance I happened to be walking along the Thames embankment from Tate Modern to The National Theatre at about 6pm last night. Many pedestrians, some tourists, some workers hurrying home, a few idle lovers ambling. Two extraordinarily stupid and dangerous cycle lunatics weaving their way round people and blind corners: showing off, far too fast, no warning, serious accidents waiting to happen.

They might appear dangerous, but the statistics suggest otherwise - there aren't a significant number of injuries caused by these people (though there is an amount of distress).
If you actually wanted to prevent serious accidents then you could trivially encourage these people off the pavement by banning those who kill hundreds of people a year...

( and they were not wearing h*****s ).

I know, and neither was the driver who passed me this morning - not even a Nomex suit, no helmet, HANS device, roll cage...
It's just crazy.