Along the prom, prom, prom.

[Colin Blackburn]

From:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/3-
698679.stm

*On-spot fines for illegal cycling*

Cyclists who insist on riding their bikes along Hove
seafront promenade are facing on-the-spot fines.

Council is seeking to crack down on the illegal cyclists.

Police officers and council staff patrolled the area on
Sunday, giving out the £30 penalties.

Chair of community safety Gill Mitchell said cyclists should
use the special paths earmarked for them.

*Intimidating behaviour*

"The promenade is clearly sign-posted and people should be
aware that cycling is illegal.

"There is a newly revamped cycle path running the length
of the seafront
from Brighton to Hove Lagoon for people who wish to
cycle," she said.

Ms Mitchell added that officials did not wish to
alienate cyclists.

"People who insist in cycling illegally need to be aware
that their behaviour is intimidating and dangerous for the
many people who use the promenade."

Colin

 

[Adrian Boliston]

"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...

> Police officers and council staff patrolled the area on
> Sunday, giving out the £30 penalties.

Were they also on bikes or did they chase the "rogue"
cyclists on foot?

 

[Iain Jones]

"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in
news[email protected]:

>
> From:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/369-
> 8679.stm
>
> *On-spot fines for illegal cycling*
>
> Cyclists who insist on riding their bikes along Hove
> seafront promenade are facing on-the-spot fines.
>

Could someone tell the pedestrians not to walk in the clearly-
signposted revamped cycle lane then please?

 

[Stan Cox]

Iain Jones wrote:
> "Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news[email protected]:
>
>
>>From:
>>
>>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/southern_counties/369-
>>8679.stm
>>
>>*On-spot fines for illegal cycling*
>>
>>Cyclists who insist on riding their bikes along Hove
>>seafront promenade are facing on-the-spot fines.
>>
>
>
>
> Could someone tell the pedestrians not to walk in the clearly-
> signposted revamped cycle lane then please?
That would be nice. I will be using the roads for the rest
of the summer as they are much safer. You never know which
direction the next tourist is going to come from.

Stan Cox

P.s. If you see a fat bloke on a yellow Fausto Coppi that
would be me, give us a wave

 

[Tony Raven]

Iain Jones wrote:
>
> Could someone tell the pedestrians not to walk in the clearly-
> signposted revamped cycle lane then please?

Pedestrians are entitled to walk on the pavement or cycle
lane. Cyclists are entitled to cycle on the cycle lane but
not the pavement. Similarly Cyclists are entitled to cycle
on the road or cycle lane. Motorists are entitled to drive
on the road but not the cycle lane.

Ergo asking the pedestrians not to walk on the cycle lane
when there is a pavement nearby is like asking cyclists not
to cycle on the road when there is a cycle lane nearby.

We all know what cyclists think of that last piece of advice

Tony

 

[Gawnsoft]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 18:32:26 +0100, "Tony Raven"
<[email protected]> wrote (more or less):

>Iain Jones wrote:
>>
>> Could someone tell the pedestrians not to walk in the clearly-
>> signposted revamped cycle lane then please?
>
>
>Pedestrians are entitled to walk on the pavement or cycle
>lane. Cyclists are entitled to cycle on the cycle lane but
>not the pavement. Similarly Cyclists are entitled to cycle
>on the road or cycle lane. Motorists are entitled to drive
>on the road but not the cycle lane.
>
>Ergo asking the pedestrians not to walk on the cycle lane
>when there is a pavement nearby is like asking cyclists not
>to cycle on the road when there is a cycle lane nearby.

Except that pedestrians 'lane discipline' wrt roads is
/much/ better than it is wrt to on-pavement cycle lanes.

And pedestrians stepping in front of moving cars on the road
are encouraged variously to feel at least partly 'at fault'
in many on-road vehicle/pedestrian collisions.

So the analogy isn't quite as close as we'd like it to be.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

 

[Tony Raven]

Gawnsoft wrote:

>
> Except that pedestrians 'lane discipline' wrt roads is
> /much/ better than it is wrt to on-pavement cycle lanes.

Most cycle lanes aren't wide enough for that to be relevant
>
> And pedestrians stepping in front of moving cars on the
> road are encouraged variously to feel at least partly 'at
> fault' in many on-road vehicle/pedestrian collisions.
>

I think the gentleman said don't walk in the cycle lane, not
don't step into the cycle lane

> So the analogy isn't quite as close as we'd like it to be.

Close enough

Tony

 

[Howard]

> "People who insist in cycling illegally need to be aware
> that their behaviour is intimidating and dangerous for the
> many people who use the promenade."
>
>

It is about time the police and authorities adopted a
similar approach to those who drive at an excessive speed
when passing cyclists!

 

[Tony Raven]

"Howard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "People who insist in cycling illegally need to be aware
> > that their behaviour is intimidating and dangerous for
> > the many people who use the promenade."
>
> It is about time the police and authorities adopted a
> similar approach to those who drive at an excessive speed
> when passing cyclists!

They are talking about cyclists cycling on the non-cycle
track pavement. The analogue would be to adopt a similar
approach to those who drive on cyclepaths. Driving at
excessive speed is equivalent to cyclists who wing past
slower moving pedestrian on shared use facilities - a
fairly common occurrence which is not I believe the subject
of this activity.

Tony

 

[Gawnsoft]

On Tue, 11 May 2004 08:31:09 +0100, "Tony Raven"
<[email protected]> wrote (more or less):

>Gawnsoft wrote:
>
>>
>> Except that pedestrians 'lane discipline' wrt roads is
>> /much/ better than it is wrt to on-pavement cycle lanes.
>
>Most cycle lanes aren't wide enough for that to be relevant

I don't know why this is, but most of the shared-use
pavement cyclepaths I've encountered are wide.

(unlike the modern-style 1' wide bit of red tarmac
provided on-road).

>> And pedestrians stepping in front of moving cars on the
>> road are encouraged variously to feel at least partly 'at
>> fault' in many on-road vehicle/pedestrian collisions.
>>
>
>I think the gentleman said don't walk in the cycle lane,
>not don't step into the cycle lane

Okay then, pedestrians walking with the flow of motorised
traffic are encouraged variously, including by case-law
precedent, to feel at least partly 'at fault' in on-road
vehicle/pedestrian collisions which ar enot of the 'step
into' variety.

>> So the analogy isn't quite as close as we'd like it to
>> be.
>
>Close enough

I still beg to differ.

--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk

 

[Just Zis Guy]

Gawnsoft wrote:

> I don't know why this is, but most of the shared-use
> pavement cyclepaths I've encountered are wide.

Presumably because the ones you don't see are so narrow
as to be invisible to the naked eye, like the ones
around here ;-)

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

Victory is ours! Down with Eric the Half A Brain!

 

[James Hodson]

On Mon, 10 May 2004 16:51:56 +0000 (UTC), Iain Jones
<[email protected]> wrote:

>> Cyclists who insist on riding their bikes along Hove
>> seafront promenade are facing on-the-spot fines.
>
>
>Could someone tell the pedestrians not to walk in the clearly-
>signposted revamped cycle lane then please?

Hi Iain

I assume you're a Brighton or Hove (actually) resident. I
live in Worthing and used to cycle along that part of the
A259 reasonably regularly.

IIRC, the sea front at Brigton has a cycle path which I used
to try to avoid but Hove does not. Incidentally, I'm never
quite sure where the Hove / Brighton boundary is.

Moreso (also IIRC), the A259 in what I consider to be the
Brighton part has signs which stongly suggest that cyclists
use the prom cycle path rather than the road itself. This
path, as you say, is full of meandering pedestrians.

I used to use the path when I was merely trundling and in no
hurry; especially when I was ahead of my self-imposed
schedule. However, if I was even in a semi-demi hurry, I'd
always use the road. After all, the traffic along that road
never moves particularly quickly.

James

 

[Iain Jones]

James Hodson <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Mon, 10 May 2004 16:51:56 +0000 (UTC), Iain Jones
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> Cyclists who insist on riding their bikes along Hove
>>> seafront promenade are facing on-the-spot fines.
>>
>>
>>Could someone tell the pedestrians not to walk in the clearly-
>>signposted revamped cycle lane then please?
>
> Hi Iain
>
> I assume you're a Brighton or Hove (actually) resident. I
> live in Worthing and used to cycle along that part of the
> A259 reasonably regularly.

I'm from Liverpool actually ;-)

I admit, I posted that comment with no knowledge of the
cycle track in question, I'm just writing from experience of
those up here. Lots of the cycle tracks I use are a sensible
width (at least two bike+rider widths I reckon), red tarmac
with white bike symbols, thick white line separating it from
the pavement and big blue signs at either end. One is even a
proper road, complete with kerbs, closed to motor vehicles.
But the peds still walk five-abreast in them and ignore any
"coming through"s or "excuse me"s.

So wherever possible I use roads instead.

 

[Terry D]

Iain Jones wrote:

> I admit, I posted that comment with no knowledge of the
> cycle track in question, I'm just writing from experience
> of those up here. Lots of the cycle tracks I use are a
> sensible width (at least two bike+rider widths I reckon),
> red tarmac with white bike symbols, thick white line
> separating it from the pavement and big blue signs at
> either end. One is even a proper road, complete with
> kerbs, closed to motor vehicles. But the peds still walk
> five-abreast in them and ignore any "coming through"s or
> "excuse me"s.
>
> So wherever possible I use roads instead.

Sensible width or not, there appears to be a total lack of
lane discipline on the only cycle track on my commute.
When cycling on the road I tend to keep to the left so as
to avoid colliding with vehicles travelling in the
opposite direction. This appears not to be the case with
the cycle track.

The cycle track in question, which is just wide enough to
accommodate two bicycles, runs up the hill by the sports
centre in Guildford. I tried it for size once and was amazed
to find that cyclists going in the opposite direction hadn't
a clue how to behave when meeting oncoming traffic. It may
have been me of course, being totally unaware of how to
behave on a cycle track. It isn't marked as one way, there
isn't a white line down the middle, just some coloured
tarmac and pictures of pedestrians or bikes depending on
which bit of the path you look at.

Are there any rules?

I stick to the road, the new bus lane is brilliant.

--
Terry Duckmanton.

The roads of the Kingdom were filling up with smoke
breathing dragonaughts. Evil Wizards created horseless
chariots to take the unwary traveller from zero to oblivion
in four seconds.

Enter the good Knight, clad only in colourful singlet, hose
and helmet, urging his metal steed onward into the fray.

 

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 11 May 2004 19:20:50 +0100 someone who may be Terry D
<[email protected]> wrote this:-

>Sensible width or not, there appears to be a total lack of
>lane discipline on the only cycle track on my commute.
>When cycling on the road I tend to keep to the left so as
>to avoid colliding with vehicles travelling in the
>opposite direction. This appears not to be the case with
>the cycle track.

In the absence of signs there is no requirement to keep to
the left lane, if there is one, of a road or to pass on the
left. AFAIK it is a convention. On single track roads it can
make sense to pass on the right in some circumstances,
though one has to allow for those who cannot cope with such
a concept.

>It isn't marked as one way, there isn't a white line down
>the middle,

So, in fact there are no lanes.

Relax, it's probably not as dangerous as you think. Risk
compensation.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number
F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK
government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.

 

[Brian Drury]

I cycle this route every day. Today is the first in years
that I have stopped using the prom in question and reverted
to the cycle lane.

There can be no doubt that cycling is discouraged on the
prom as the words NO CYCLING are painted in huge letters
many times on the ground. So why use it you say? Well there
are three options:

1. Use the prom (£30 fine)

2. Use cycle path. I have been punched twice. Sworn at many
times. Had two significant collisions (peds) umpteen
animal incidents (dogs of various forms) Several vehicle
attacks, white vans and Volvo's are popular. People do
not like bicycles on the pavement, especially the nice
red bit with the white line that everyone prefers to walk
on. Other significant obstacles are roller blade users,
skate board users and runners. All this lot are crammed
into a relatively narrow cycle lane.

3. Use the road (A259 runs parallel with both cycle lane and
prom) The problem with this is the taxi lorry and coach
drivers know there is a parallel cycle lane and they do
their best to educate you into realising this. The
agressive tactics are probably familiar to all.

The prom is wide, very wide. This provides a huge advantage
for rapid avoidance techniques, I never even come close to
impact on the prom even if the ped level is high. There are
simply no 'events' on the prom. The road or particularly the
cycle path produces at least one event per day in my
experience.

Suggestions (other than slow down) welcome.

Brian

"Tony Raven" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:2gbogcFsqjpU1@uni-
berlin.de...
>
> "Howard" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "People who insist in cycling illegally need to be
> > > aware that their behaviour is intimidating and
> > > dangerous for the many people who use
the
> > > promenade."
> >
> > It is about time the police and authorities adopted a
> > similar approach to those who drive at an excessive
> > speed when passing cyclists!
>
> They are talking about cyclists cycling on the non-cycle
> track pavement.
The
> analogue would be to adopt a similar approach to those who
> drive on cyclepaths. Driving at excessive speed is
> equivalent to cyclists who wing past slower moving
> pedestrian on shared use facilities - a fairly common
> occurrence which is not I believe the subject of this
> activity.
>
> Tony

 

[Jon Senior]

"brian drury" <briandotdruryatdsldotpipexdotcom> opined the
following...

> Suggestions (other than slow down) welcome.

Get a really big gun and wave it around with gay abandon
while riding in an otherwise sensible manner on the road.
Try feigning a twitch and generally give the impression
of being of less than sound mind. It'll put the fear of
god into the drivers, and once they get to know you, you
won't even need the gun anymore. Don't worry about the
police... they only shoot people who carry banister rails
in carrier bags!

Jon

 

[Just Zis Guy]

brian drury wrote:

> Suggestions (other than slow down) welcome.

Write letters to the local paper, especially pointing out
that you ave a right to use the road; write to the council
and ask them to do something about the problem which is
entirely of their own making; and in the mean time, stick to
the road whatever.

--
Guy
===
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after
posting. http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

Victory is ours! Down with Eric the Half A Brain!

 

[David Hansen]

On Tue, 11 May 2004 21:11:12 +0100 someone who may be "brian drury"
<briandotdruryatdsldotpipexdotcom> wrote this:-

>Suggestions (other than slow down) welcome.

Wear a big cycle lock, or better a motorcycle lock, with the
chain around your shoulder like a bandolier. This makes
stupid taxi drivers think twice.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number
F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK
government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.