Re: Legality of chaining Bicycles to footway apparatus



J

JohnB

Guest
Not Responding wrote:
>
> Colin Matthews wrote:
>
> >
> > This ties in with the specific issue I also want to discuss is , is it
> > illegal to chain bicycles to lamp columns ?
> >

>
> Illegal or not (and AFAICT, it's perfectly legal), it is antisocial if
> the pavement is narrow or busy. I'll often park my bike in a car bay
> using the sidestand if it'll hinder pedestrians locked to a lamppost.


This is what we do when out as a family or group.
if I'm on the trice It will go into a parking place and the other bikes
will lean against it and be locked up, particularly in towns like
Alresford, Stockbridge or Bishops Waltham, with their wide market streets
The aggro and dirty looks from some motorists is unbelievable - or
rather its true to form.

Its much better than blocking pavements.

John B
 
J

JNugent

Guest
JohnB wrote:

> Not Responding wrote:
>> Colin Matthews wrote:


>>> This ties in with the specific issue I also want to discuss is , is
>>> it illegal to chain bicycles to lamp columns ?


>> Illegal or not (and AFAICT, it's perfectly legal), it is antisocial
>> if the pavement is narrow or busy. I'll often park my bike in a car
>> bay using the sidestand if it'll hinder pedestrians locked to a
>> lamppost.


> This is what we do when out as a family or group.
> if I'm on the trice It will go into a parking place and the other
> bikes will lean against it and be locked up, particularly in towns
> like Alresford, Stockbridge or Bishops Waltham, with their wide
> market streets The aggro and dirty looks from some motorists is
> unbelievable - or rather its true to form.


Unbelievable.

Or should I say "true to form"?

> Its much better than blocking pavements.


That "justification" works just as well for any motor vehicle being left on
a double-yellow: "it's better than blocking pavements".

So it might be, but it's illegal and selfish.
 
N

Not Responding

Guest
JNugent wrote:
> JohnB wrote:
>
>
>>Not Responding wrote:
>>
>>>Colin Matthews wrote:

>
>
>>>>This ties in with the specific issue I also want to discuss is , is
>>>>it illegal to chain bicycles to lamp columns ?

>
>
>>>Illegal or not (and AFAICT, it's perfectly legal), it is antisocial
>>>if the pavement is narrow or busy. I'll often park my bike in a car
>>>bay using the sidestand if it'll hinder pedestrians locked to a
>>>lamppost.

>
>
>>This is what we do when out as a family or group.
>>if I'm on the trice It will go into a parking place and the other
>>bikes will lean against it and be locked up, particularly in towns
>>like Alresford, Stockbridge or Bishops Waltham, with their wide
>>market streets The aggro and dirty looks from some motorists is
>>unbelievable - or rather its true to form.

>
> Unbelievable.


Eh?

> Or should I say "true to form"?


Eh?
>
>>Its much better than blocking pavements.

>
> That "justification" works just as well for any motor vehicle being left on
> a double-yellow: "it's better than blocking pavements".
>
> So it might be, but it's illegal and selfish.
>


One of us is confused. While you are correct in saying that it's illegal
to park on double yellows, it's perfectly legal and within anyone's
rights to park a bike on the road. Often do it myself. But there's no
merit in your comparison of parking a vehicle on the road and parking a
vehicle on double yellows.

Like I say, it's not an ideal solution until you add sheffield stands to
the car parking bay[1]. This gives you the security you need and also
serves to stop some of those less well versed in the highway code from
getting their knickers in a twist and turning purple.

The examples above are all market towns where the shops depend on
maximising the number of customers. Replacing a car bay (with an average
passenger load of 1.2) with space for 8 bikes is good news all round.

[1] Interestingly, Hampshire CC plan to add on-road sheffield stands to
replace some car parking bays.
 
J

JohnB

Guest
JNugent wrote:
>
> JohnB wrote:
>
> > Not Responding wrote:
> >> Colin Matthews wrote:

>
> >>> This ties in with the specific issue I also want to discuss is , is
> >>> it illegal to chain bicycles to lamp columns ?

>
> >> Illegal or not (and AFAICT, it's perfectly legal), it is antisocial
> >> if the pavement is narrow or busy. I'll often park my bike in a car
> >> bay using the sidestand if it'll hinder pedestrians locked to a
> >> lamppost.

>
> > This is what we do when out as a family or group.
> > if I'm on the trice It will go into a parking place and the other
> > bikes will lean against it and be locked up, particularly in towns
> > like Alresford, Stockbridge or Bishops Waltham, with their wide
> > market streets The aggro and dirty looks from some motorists is
> > unbelievable - or rather its true to form.

>
> Unbelievable.


What?

> Or should I say "true to form"?


<shakes head>

> > Its much better than blocking pavements.

>
> That "justification" works just as well for any motor vehicle being left on
> a double-yellow: "it's better than blocking pavements".


What have double-yellows got to do with anything?
I suggest you re-read the post rather than simply seeing the reference
to cycles out the corner of your eye, then jumping in with all your
bigotry flailing on automatic pilot.

> So it might be, but it's illegal and selfish.


There is nothing illegal or selfish about parking cycles on the road.

John B
 

Chris Armstrong

New Member
Feb 21, 2005
32
0
0
"I'll often park my bike in a car bay
> using the sidestand if it'll hinder pedestrians locked to a lamppost."

Well, I think it's pretty anti-social of these lyrca louts to be locking pedestrians to lampposts. Live and let live is what I say.
 
J

JohnB

Guest
Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
>
> JohnB <[email protected]>typed
>
> > There is nothing illegal or selfish about parking cycles on the road.

>
> If parking other vehicles there is permitted...


Quite.
Mr Nugent seemed to have a problem with that.

John B
 
J

JNugent

Guest
JohnB wrote:

> Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
>> JohnB <[email protected]>typed


>>> There is nothing illegal or selfish about parking cycles on the
>>> road.


>> If parking other vehicles there is permitted...


> Quite.
> Mr Nugent seemed to have a problem with that.


I certainly "have a problem" with wasted carriageway space, which is what
was being suggested by others in the thread, and "a problem" with bikes
being left on the footway (whether outside or inside safety barriers makes
no difference except to which other category of road-user suffers the
resultant inconvenience and/or danger).

Bikes can easily be lifted across a footway and "parked" (ie, left)
off-street. There is simply no need to waste precious tarmac on facilities
for stationary "parked" bikes (because they are light and can be carried
off-street with no problem - even inside buildings) and certainly no
argument for allowing then to be left on footways. The same rules that apply
to other road-users are relevant in respect of footways - one might have
expected no argument about it.
 
B

Brimstone

Guest
JNugent wrote:
> JohnB wrote:
>
>> Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
>>> JohnB <[email protected]>typed

>
>>>> There is nothing illegal or selfish about parking cycles on the
>>>> road.

>
>>> If parking other vehicles there is permitted...

>
>> Quite.
>> Mr Nugent seemed to have a problem with that.

>
> I certainly "have a problem" with wasted carriageway space, which is
> what was being suggested by others in the thread, and "a problem"
> with bikes being left on the footway (whether outside or inside
> safety barriers makes no difference except to which other category of
> road-user suffers the resultant inconvenience and/or danger).
>
> Bikes can easily be lifted across a footway and "parked" (ie, left)
> off-street. There is simply no need to waste precious tarmac on
> facilities for stationary "parked" bikes (because they are light and
> can be carried off-street with no problem - even inside buildings)
> and certainly no argument for allowing then to be left on footways.
> The same rules that apply to other road-users are relevant in respect
> of footways - one might have expected no argument about it.


Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes into shops,
restaurants or whatever?
 
M

Mark McNeill

Guest
Response to Brimstone:
> > Bikes can easily be lifted across a footway and "parked" (ie, left)
> > off-street. There is simply no need to waste precious tarmac on
> > facilities for stationary "parked" bikes (because they are light and
> > can be carried off-street with no problem - even inside buildings)
> > and certainly no argument for allowing then to be left on footways.
> > The same rules that apply to other road-users are relevant in respect
> > of footways - one might have expected no argument about it.

>
> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes into shops,
> restaurants or whatever?


And the PP was talking about a Trice! :-D

Mind you, if doing so leaves more room for Mr Nugent to park his car,
that's all that matters, isn't it?

--
Mark, UK

"An obstinate man does not hold opinions, but they hold him."
 
J

JNugent

Guest
Brimstone wrote:

> JNugent wrote:
>> JohnB wrote:
>>> Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
>>>> JohnB <[email protected]>typed


>>>>> There is nothing illegal or selfish about parking cycles on the
>>>>> road.


>>>> If parking other vehicles there is permitted...


>>> Quite.
>>> Mr Nugent seemed to have a problem with that.


>> I certainly "have a problem" with wasted carriageway space, which is
>> what was being suggested by others in the thread, and "a problem"
>> with bikes being left on the footway (whether outside or inside
>> safety barriers makes no difference except to which other category of
>> road-user suffers the resultant inconvenience and/or danger).


>> Bikes can easily be lifted across a footway and "parked" (ie, left)
>> off-street. There is simply no need to waste precious tarmac on
>> facilities for stationary "parked" bikes (because they are light and
>> can be carried off-street with no problem - even inside buildings)
>> and certainly no argument for allowing then to be left on footways.
>> The same rules that apply to other road-users are relevant in respect
>> of footways - one might have expected no argument about it.


> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes into
> shops, restaurants or whatever?


Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere lawful and
non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other vehicle-users who are
customers of such establishments), and if a charge has to be made, that's as
OK for a bike it is as for a motor vehicle - I'm sure you agree.

OTOH, if they are workers at the business premises, I would expect them to
"park" offstreet (perhaps on the employer's premises), just like other sorts
of road-users, or to use some other form of long-term off-street
bike-"parking" facility (which may be nothing more than a piece of open
land). Definitely *not* the footway.

Fairness, consideration and safety.

Not much to ask, is it?
 
B

Brimstone

Guest
JNugent wrote:
> Brimstone wrote:
>
>> JNugent wrote:
>>> JohnB wrote:
>>>> Helen Deborah Vecht wrote:
>>>>> JohnB <[email protected]>typed

>
>>>>>> There is nothing illegal or selfish about parking cycles on the
>>>>>> road.

>
>>>>> If parking other vehicles there is permitted...

>
>>>> Quite.
>>>> Mr Nugent seemed to have a problem with that.

>
>>> I certainly "have a problem" with wasted carriageway space, which is
>>> what was being suggested by others in the thread, and "a problem"
>>> with bikes being left on the footway (whether outside or inside
>>> safety barriers makes no difference except to which other category
>>> of road-user suffers the resultant inconvenience and/or danger).

>
>>> Bikes can easily be lifted across a footway and "parked" (ie, left)
>>> off-street. There is simply no need to waste precious tarmac on
>>> facilities for stationary "parked" bikes (because they are light and
>>> can be carried off-street with no problem - even inside buildings)
>>> and certainly no argument for allowing then to be left on footways.
>>> The same rules that apply to other road-users are relevant in
>>> respect
>>> of footways - one might have expected no argument about it.

>
>> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes into
>> shops, restaurants or whatever?

>
> Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere
> lawful and non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other
> vehicle-users who are customers of such establishments), and if a
> charge has to be made, that's as OK for a bike it is as for a motor
> vehicle - I'm sure you agree.
>
> OTOH, if they are workers at the business premises, I would expect
> them to "park" offstreet (perhaps on the employer's premises), just
> like other sorts of road-users, or to use some other form of
> long-term off-street bike-"parking" facility (which may be nothing
> more than a piece of open land). Definitely *not* the footway.
>
> Fairness, consideration and safety.
>
> Not much to ask, is it?


Sadly that last so often depends on the behaviour and attitudes of the asker
and the askee.
 
A

Al C-F

Guest
On Fri, 6 May 2005 23:06:38 +0100, "JNugent"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>I certainly "have a problem" with wasted carriageway space, which is what
>was being suggested by others in the thread, and "a problem" with bikes
>being left on the footway (whether outside or inside safety barriers makes
>no difference except to which other category of road-user suffers the
>resultant inconvenience and/or danger).


I often leave my bike chained to railings that separate the footway
from the road. Frequently, I chain my bike on the road side of the
railings, where the wheels are still on the pavement.

Are you saying that you have a problem with this?

Why?
 
J

JohnB

Guest
JNugent wrote:
>
> Brimstone wrote:


> > Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes into
> > shops, restaurants or whatever?

>
> Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere lawful and
> non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other vehicle-users who are
> customers of such establishments)....


Designated parking space on a road seems to fit that quite nicely.
But remember, you declared that "illegal and selfish".

John B
 
J

JNugent

Guest
JohnB wrote:

> JNugent wrote:
>> Brimstone wrote:


>>> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes
>>> into shops, restaurants or whatever?


>> Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere
>> lawful and non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other vehicle-
>> users who are customers of such establishments)....


> Designated parking space on a road seems to fit that quite nicely.
> But remember, you declared that "illegal and selfish".


And it is, if the vehicle left there is not in a category for which the
space was provided.
 
J

JNugent

Guest
Al C-F wrote:

> <[email protected]> wrote:


>> I certainly "have a problem" with wasted carriageway space, which is
>> what was being suggested by others in the thread, and "a problem"
>> with bikes being left on the footway (whether outside or inside
>> safety barriers makes no difference except to which other category
>> of road-user suffers the resultant inconvenience and/or danger).


> I often leave my bike chained to railings that separate the footway
> from the road. Frequently, I chain my bike on the road side of the
> railings, where the wheels are still on the pavement.


> Are you saying that you have a problem with this?
> Why?


It isn't what the footway - on either side of a railing - is provided for.

And it is unsightly (noticed how many "no bicyces to be chained here" signs
there are in London these days?).

And it is dangerous for any pedestrian who (legitimately) wishes to use that
bit of the footway but is forced off it into the carriageway.

On topics which concern anti-social behaviour by bike-riders, I write
principally as a pedestrian (which is what I am most of the time).
 
J

JohnB

Guest
JNugent wrote:
>
> JohnB wrote:
>
> > JNugent wrote:
> >> Brimstone wrote:

>
> >>> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes
> >>> into shops, restaurants or whatever?

>
> >> Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere
> >> lawful and non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other vehicle-
> >> users who are customers of such establishments)....

>
> > Designated parking space on a road seems to fit that quite nicely.
> > But remember, you declared that "illegal and selfish".

>
> And it is, if the vehicle left there is not in a category for which the
> space was provided.


We are not discussing spaces reserved for disabled, emergency vehicles,
doctor's spaces...

Just simple roadside parking space.

But of course no one else can use that except yourself.

John B
 
J

JNugent

Guest
JohnB wrote:

> JNugent wrote:
>> JohnB wrote:
>>> JNugent wrote:
>>>> Brimstone wrote:


>>>>> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes
>>>>> into shops, restaurants or whatever?


>>>> Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere
>>>> lawful and non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other
>>>> vehicle- users who are customers of such establishments)....


>>> Designated parking space on a road seems to fit that quite nicely.
>>> But remember, you declared that "illegal and selfish".


>> And it is, if the vehicle left there is not in a category for which
>> the space was provided.


> We are not discussing spaces reserved for disabled, emergency
> vehicles, doctor's spaces...


> Just simple roadside parking space


....the use of the word "space" implies a space marked out for a small-ish
motor vehicle - a car or a van.

> But of course no one else can use that except yourself.


What are you talking about?

Would you be as happy for a pram to be "parked" on the highway in a marked
motor-vehicle space?
 
J

JohnB

Guest
JNugent wrote:
>
> JohnB wrote:
>
> > JNugent wrote:
> >> JohnB wrote:
> >>> JNugent wrote:
> >>>> Brimstone wrote:

>
> >>>>> Are you seriously suggesting that people should take their bikes
> >>>>> into shops, restaurants or whatever?

>
> >>>> Not if they are customers, but they should still find somewhere
> >>>> lawful and non-obstructive to "park" bikes (just like other
> >>>> vehicle- users who are customers of such establishments)....

>
> >>> Designated parking space on a road seems to fit that quite nicely.
> >>> But remember, you declared that "illegal and selfish".

>
> >> And it is, if the vehicle left there is not in a category for which
> >> the space was provided.

>
> > We are not discussing spaces reserved for disabled, emergency
> > vehicles, doctor's spaces...

>
> > Just simple roadside parking space

>
> ...the use of the word "space" implies a space marked out for a small-ish
> motor vehicle - a car or a van.


No it doesn't.

> Would you be as happy for a pram to be "parked" on the highway in a marked
> motor-vehicle space?


If the area said "motor-vehicle only", then no.

John B
 
M

Mark Thompson

Guest
> It isn't what the footway - on either side of a railing - is provided
> for.


....and?

> And it is unsightly (noticed how many "no bicyces to be chained here"
> signs there are in London these days?).


It's a frigging railing. A small dog turd perched on top of it would
improve it's looks.

In my arrogant opinion railings provide a cheap way of providing parking
space for bikes and the main reason for not doing it is when it causes an
inconvenience to peds.