Woman condemned for helping illegal cyclists

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

If cyclists can't understand that they deserve to get a fine.

You are responding to an argument I have not made. I am not suggesting cyclists should cycle the wrong way down one way streets. Nor am I condoning their ignorance. Read my posts again.

Isn't this a case of looking for a solution of a non problem?

Well, forgive me, but I think one-way streets and gyratories are quite clearly a problem - certainly if one is interested in making towns and cities more suitable for bicycles and pedestrians, and consequently more humane.


Turning streets into one-way systems is an institutionally anti-cycling measure, given that - from the perspective of a pedestrian or a cyclist - there is no reason for a street to be closed off for them in a particular direction. It is farcical that their progress is being impeded to aid motor vehicle flow and on-street parking.


What is particularly insidious about one-way systems is that they make journeys that would ordinarily be quite attractive to putative cyclists lengthier and more unpleasant. I can give you plenty of examples, if you doubt me.


If you care about creating better conditions for cycling in towns and cities, then, yes, one-way streets are a problem.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

There are NO parking bays or parking areas for vehicles. IIRC there are double yellow lines down both sides the length of the street. A cycle contraflow would be totally impractical as there is just not sufficient space.

You are from Cambridge, so I bow to your superior knowledge

- but in Streetview, there do not appear to be any yellow lines along this street.

And there are also plenty of vehicles parked on the pavement/in bays - it's not quite clear to me the designation of those slightly different paving areas.

 

[2Loose]

You are from Cambridge, so I bow to your superior knowledge

- but in Streetview, there do not appear to be any yellow lines along this street.

And there are also plenty of vehicles parked on the pavement/in bays - it's not quite clear to me the designation of those slightly different paving areas.

The car shown is parked on a cobbled section of pathway and iirc only taxis and delivery vehicles (and University staff?) can get there at all due to rising bollards, so motor vehicles are quite rare. That 'road' is normally hidden by the footfalls of peds milling around.

 

[pshore]

I'm not quite clear as to how there can be room for parking bays, but not for a contraflow cycle lane.

Get rid of the space being used for people to park their cars, et voila. One-way flow for vehicles, two-way flow for cycles.

This is a pedestrian zone and for good reason - the amount of peds.

On the wider left pavement, in the brief bits of pavement without parked cars or sheffield stands there is room for 6 peds a breast. Sounds a lot but at lunchtime and rush-hours overtaking is hard on foot. Add in sheffield stands and then peds spill into the road.

To make a contraflow for bikes, you'd have to get rid of the Sheffield Stands outside Sainbury's in addition to the parking space (normally used by scaffolders and securicor). The sheffield stands are always full, and the knock on is the thinner pavement on the right has bikes leaned against the wall which make that pavement single file (more peds in road). If anything, more cycle parking is needed rather than contraflow.

Phil.


Checkout the images here for something more typical but not at its busiest.
http://www.cyclestreets.net/photos/space/19475/

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Those pictures are entitled "cyclists and pedestrians happily mixing."

Why can't they happily mix in both directions? In fact, the road itself could be narrowed to a two-way cycle lane, giving more space for pedestrians.

Delivery vehicles could still use the street, but with priority for pedestrians and cyclists. This wouldn't be hard, and does work. There is such a scheme in my town - a fully pedestrianized street with two-way cycle flow, and (one-way) delivery access.

It's proving very popular.

 

[pshore]

Those pictures are entitled "cyclists and pedestrians happily mixing."

Why can't they happily mix in both directions? In fact, the road itself could be narrowed to a two-way cycle lane, giving more space for pedestrians.

Delivery vehicles could still use the street, but with priority for pedestrians and cyclists. This wouldn't be hard, and does work. There is such a scheme in my town - a fully pedestrianized street with two-way cycle flow, and (one-way) delivery access.

It's proving very popular.

Interesting. What is the road and town ? And, is Google StreetView up to date ?

Members of the Cambridge Cycle Campaign will often go on fact finding missions and report back. They attempt to influence the city planners and are sometimes successful. In fact, we are experimented on quite a lot by the council.

I do wonder if we will be experimented on less now Cycling England and I presume Cycling Demonstration Town status gets the chop.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Interesting. What is the road and town ? And, is Google StreetView up to date ?

Streetview is not up to date - looks like it's about a year old - but it's here. The entire space between the buildings has been paved at one level. Vehicles can drive down for loading, but it is basically a fully pedestrianized street, with cycling allowed.

I'll see if I can find some current photos.

 

[As Easy As Riding A Bike]

Here's one from flickr -

http://www.flickr.com/photos/34888436@N02/4971259905/

Loading vehicles (and disabled drivers) are permitted to drive down here for loading and access, using the central (one-way) area. It's quite tricky to drive down here because it's usually quite busy with people walking, and there are plenty of benches and shrubs that have been carefully placed to slow vehicles, as you can probably see.

Cycles are allowed in both directions.

 

[Crankarm]

Here's one from flickr -

http://www.flickr.co...N02/4971259905/

Loading vehicles (and disabled drivers) are permitted to drive down here for loading and access, using the central (one-way) area. It's quite tricky to drive down here because it's usually quite busy with people walking, and there are plenty of benches and shrubs that have been carefully placed to slow vehicles, as you can probably see.

Cycles are allowed in both directions.

What town is it?

I doubt whether is has the issues with students, tourists and local people that Cambridge has.

It is quite simple. The current traffic system of one way streets or what ever, need to be enforced. Cycling in Cambridge is actually quite good if you could take the students and tourists out of it ........... But this is what makes Cambridge. One just has to be mindful of others and avoid really busy times or park up and walk.

But nusiance cyclists and dangerous loons who excessively speed the wrong way down one way streets deserve to be fined as they are a danger to every one in their path whether ped or another cyclist.

 

[ufkacbln]

Are TomTom, Garmin et al breaking the law then when they give the position of speed cameras?

There are a couple of well known "Road Safety" sites that have forum sections dedicated to warning other drivers of police clampdowns!

One here identifies the unmarked vehicles

Question si if this woman is "obstructing" then surely these are committing the same offence?

 

[snailracer]

Are TomTom, Garmin et al breaking the law then when they give the position of speed cameras?

There are a couple of well known "Road Safety" sites that have forum sections dedicated to warning other drivers of police clampdowns!

One here identifies the unmarked vehicles

Question si if this woman is "obstructing" then surely these are committing the same offence?

No. And if you don't have a satnav, the warning signs and hiviz yellow housings would make camera locations a bit of giveaway, no?

The police often announce impending "crackdowns" on speeding, drunk driving, mobile use, etc. on the local radio and newspapers in advance, so it's hardly hush-hush to begin with.

 

[ComedyPilot]

How would the 'warning' woman feel if she came home to find her back door had been forced open by a burglar, only to find that her neighbour had warned the burglar that a police car was nearby, so the burglar got away with it?

She'd be livid.

How would the 'warning' woman feel if she came home to find her child had been knocked over by a car speeding through the area on a day she hadn't 'warned' them as there were no police there?

She'd be a little bit miffed.

 

[semislickstick]

Have you read Raymond Browns other work?

http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/Home/Cyclist-scrapes-car-in-clash-at-narrow-roadworks-stretch.htm

 

[ufkacbln]

How would the 'warning' woman feel if she came home to find her back door had been forced open by a burglar, only to find that her negihbour had warned the burglar that a police car was nearby, so the burglar got away with it?

She'd be livid.

How would the 'warning' woman feel if she came home to find her child had been knocked over by a car speeding through the area on a day she hadn't 'warned' them as there were no police there?

She'd be a little bit miffed.

The difference is that there is a legal requirement to warn your speeding driver if the Police are checking their speed!

 

[ComedyPilot]

The difference is that there is a legal requirement to warn your speeding driver if the Police are checking their speed!

Is there?

That's news to me................I think it is obstruction.