Downed by a ped on a cycle lane

[Black Sheep]

Is this a shared use cycle path? If so I think the ped is totally within his rights to walk wherever he wants. As far as I'm aware you have to give way to peds on a shared use cycle path.

Whats wrong with a bell on a road bike? Sounds like a sensible piece of equipment if you make a habit of using these paths.

if its the bit i know its wide enough to drag race two cars down, the cycle lane only being a meter or so wide.

 

[jonesy]

well, yes, bells are a nice idea. I have one on my bike and I do use it too, but do you think anyone notices?

There is a bit on my commute where there is a designated off-road cycle path, and there is a separate pedestrian path. Not that the pedestrians seem to realise. If it's one or two in the path, I don't mind, but I've regularly come across enough blocking the whole lane - completely oblivious to the whole world around them (either due to walking in a cycle path while texting and listening to ipod, or due to being with friends, or generally just not functioning at full speed...).

I have been considering getting the AirZound but I don't think it'd work - the pedestrians on the cycle path would likely freeze like a rabbit in the headlights rather than get out the way.

Mr Toad,

if a cyclist ever uses an Air Zound to hassle me when out walking with my toddler on the local railway path, they'll get a pretty curt response. They aren't supposed to be roads ffs . Fortunately the vast majority of users are more considerate than you appear to be. . .

 

[LOGAN 5]

It was a green cycle lane with bike pics on and separated by a white line. There are very few peds on it as it's on a stretch connecting two towns. i slowed down and shouted a polite warning of my approach. Got completely ignored and only at the last minute did the peds start moving all over the lane. I wasn't zooming along either, say about 10mph just enjoying he se aview. I do respect peds on paths and expect the unexpeced from them. Peds should, however, take some reponsibility to ensure they're know where they are and what they're doing and be aware of wandering into a cycle lane. Would they wander all over the road with no concern at all, not of course not.

Cycle paths are fine for really slow rides but are mostly a hazard and best avoided.

I have a bell on my commute bike which does absolutely nothing to warn peds of my approach. It is almost entirely and completely ignored most of the time. I'm on my way to get an Airzound now.

 

[SavageHoutkop]

Mr Toad,

if a cyclist ever uses an Air Zound to hassle me when out walking with my toddler on the local railway path, they'll get a pretty curt response. They aren't supposed to be roads ffs . Fortunately the vast majority of users are more considerate than you appear to be. . .

Mrs Toad, if you must
I wouldn't use an Air Zound on a toddler, and I'm not the one on the railway path. My bit is next to a park, and as I've said there is a pedestrian walkway and a cycle path, separate from eachother. I'm not sure if no-one notices that the lane has a big bicycle painted on it, quite regularly, or if they do notice and choose to ignore it.

Some of them probably acn't help ignoring cycle bells on account of being deaf / hard of hearing / going a bit deaf with old age but not acknowledging it although they're relatives have had to shout everything at them for the last 5 years. And then there are people who are beginning to get a bit 'confused' or have learning difficulties and might not realise the finer points of shared path usage. Or if they've got back problems they might not be able to move out of the way quickly. And so on.

Not all pedestrians are the fine examples of well-honed peak physical perfection and mental discipline that are cyclists.

Yip, again I agree 100% here. The pedestrians I come across, on this particular path, are definitely not ageing, and I'd bet quite a bit that they aren't hard of hearing or learning disabled either. It's in a student-y part of town, and most of them are university students.

 

[hackbike 666]

Peds should, however, take some reponsibility to ensure they're know where they are and what they're doing and be aware of wandering into a cycle lane.

Peds are never going to this though are they?

Some may but the norm is nitto and while peds worry me sometimes I try to make allowences.

 

[mangaman]

Peds should, however, take some reponsibility to ensure they're know where they are and what they're doing and be aware of wandering into a cycle lane. Would they wander all over the road with no concern at all, not of course not.

Not if they're children under a certain age though.

I used to use an old railway converted to a "cycle path" - The Centurion Way in Chichester in case anyone knows it.

It's pleasant enough and has cute little sculptures along the way and leads to South Downs. For that reason families and dog walkers use it a lot.

When approaching a family with young kids or dogs I used to slow down almost to a stop to be safe, after a few unexpected moves by random dogs or toddlers suddenly nipping across.

You can't blame them - they've as much right to be there as you have.

I prefer to think of such facilities are "general leisure areas" - you can ride a bike / horse / play football / walk your dog. They're no use if you want to ride from A to B

What I do is use the road - which is wide / safe / more direct / better maintained.

 

[Arch]

While I agree peds should be (and are) entitled to walk where they want. I find it highly inconsiderate when peds use a space marked out for cyclists, to walk on. They have their own bit that I’m not allowed to ride on!

Where I live there are designated cycle tracks (off road) which also have a designated pedestrian footpath alongside them, running parallel. Pedestrians use the cycle path all the time, especially when there is a group of four or five of them. If they walk on the cycletrack, they can all walk side by side (blocking the whole two lane cycletrack). Not enough room to do that on most pavements.

I want to ride above 15mph. But I dont want to ride on a dual carriageway with heavy vehicles driving past at 40mph. Especially if there is a designated 3m wide cycle track running parallel. I also don’t enjoy the pedestrian slalom. Its just, the peds make 15mph impossible, thus forcing me to ride on a more dangerous road.

Er, you could ride under 15 mph for a bit? I'm sure a lot of drivers would like to drive at over 70 on the motorway, but that doesn't mean they have the right to.

It might be inconsiderate, but if you wait for everyone in the world to be considerate, you'll wait a while. We've all seen our fair share of inconsiderate peds, drivers and shock horror, cyclists...

 

[summerdays]

Hmm... I've been the one in the wrong today... was on both the Bristol to Bath Cycle path and then later along the Portway. On both paths I was with a friend and was caught unawares chatting, and suddenly realised there was a cyclist behind me. I have to say they were all very polite and accepted my apologies for getting in their way. I was only pootling today - too hot for anything faster than 10-12 mph. Equally all the pedestrians were friendly and enjoying the sun as well.

 

[Theseus]

In what way were you in the wrong? There is no minimum speed limit for bikes.

 

[summerdays]

I was in the wrong in that between us we were sort of hogging the cycle path, and I wasn't looking back enough whilst chatting to notice some of them approaching. Any time that I did hear someone coming then I made sure that I moved over to leave a big gap for them.

 

[Joseph]

the very last part of my commute passes along a shared cycle path (running from the Rugby station area through to the brownsover estate). it's the type with the white line down the middle, peds on one side, bikes on the other. there is a blind corner at one point and i always go around it slow, tinging my bell as i go. last week i met a "family group" 50 yards past the blind bend who were coming along the path as a crowd, taking the full width of the path. had i met then 50 yards earlier i probably would have killed grandma and the little dog would it have been my fault if i had ???

I think I'd go with rule 126 of the highway code:

"Stopping Distances. Drive at a speed that will allow you to stop well within the distance you can see to be clear"

Seems like generally sound advice to me whether it legally applies to cycling or not.

 

[Arch]

I have a 'ping' bell (shaped like a teapot) and find it works well enough on most of the shared paths I use - one ping is noramlly enough to get someone to look round and shift over. Multiple pinging is the next option, but if I've had to resort to that, I'm slowing down already.

I always make a point of saying 'cheers!' as I pass too.

The one thing that annoys me (in a very minor way), is when people look round, and then scuttle to the side and stop dead, clutching their children to them, as if I'm going to plough through them. All I need is for them to step one pace to one side, and not step back again until I'm past...

 

[jonesy]

....

The one thing that annoys me (in a very minor way), is when people look round, and then scuttle to the side and stop dead, clutching their children to them, as if I'm going to plough through them. All I need is for them to step one pace to one side, and not step back again until I'm past...

Yes, but if they have previously encountered cyclists with attitudes like some of our 'poop poop get out of my way' Air Zounding fellow forummers then it is no surprise they are overly nervous for their children's safety.

I do find these frequent anti pedestrian threads terribly depressing. Off-road cycle paths aren't roads, so why does anything think they can bring the behaviours, priority rules etc of the road onto them? The 'might is right', 'fast has priority over slow' attitude has already turned our streets from being public spaces into dangerous environments that divide communities and constrain the mobility of children and anyone not in a car; now we seem to have cyclists demanding yet more roads, for their priority use, taking up even more public space and encroaching even more into the few places where people can walk without fear of traffic.

I suggest that some of you have a proper read of the guidance on shared use cycle and pedestrian facilities and get a better understanding of what they are for and what is expected. A good starting point is here:


Cycling England's Design Checklist and design guidance- following the hierarchy of measures that advocates on-road cycle provision before off-road infrastructure.

LTN 1/04 - Policy, Planning and Design for Walking and Cycling
This document sets out the policy context that supports the promotion of pedestrian and cycling facilities. It also describes common design principles for pedestrian and cycle provision.

LTN 2/04 - Adjacent and Shared Use Facilities for Pedestrians and Cyclists
Useful guidance on when shared use is appropriate and what standards are needed if this is to be done.

in particular note:
Annex D: Code of Conduct Notice for Cyclists
which very usefully states that: Ride at a sensible speed for the situation and ensure you can stop in time. As a general rule, if you want to cycle quickly, say in excess of 18 mph/30 kph, then you should be riding on the road.

 

[jig-sore]

Always respect pedestrians even if they stray onto the cycling side (if there is one); they are entitled to do so. Always thank people who move out of your way.

I'm sorry, but i find that ruling unbelievable. why create a separate cycle area and allow people to walk in it ???? anyone who chooses to walk in a clearly marked cycle lane when there is a clearly marked pedestrian lane next to it is a bit stupid

isn't that a bit like saying to car drivers... Always respect pedestrians even if they stray onto the road ;they are entitled to do so.

PS. thats not anti pedestrian, thats just a bit of common

 

[jonesy]

I'm sorry, but i find that ruling unbelievable. why create a separate cycle area and allow people to walk in it ???? anyone who chooses to walk in a clearly marked cycle lane when there is a clearly marked pedestrian lane next to it is a bit stupid

isn't that a bit like saying to car drivers... Always respect pedestrians even if they stray onto the road ;they are entitled to do so.

PS. thats not anti pedestrian, thats just a bit of common

Do try to grasp this fundamental distinction: cycle paths are not roads! So applying a principle based on the rules of the road to something that isn't a road isn't logical, is it?

All the cycle path markings do is to tell you that you are allowed to cycle there. Nothing else. That is it. If you don't believe me, then rtfm: I've provided the links...