Police crackdown on people cycling on the pavements

[beeboo]

Rather than just fining people, perhaps they should be looking at WHY people are cycling on the pavement and do something about it.

Over short stretches I don't see any reason why pedestrians and cyclists can't share space. Around Vauxhall junction all of the crossings and some of the pavements are shared use and I've never seen pedestrians leaping out of the way or cyclists bombing about erratically.

The cut-through off Brixton Road could easily be made shared use, rather than just fining people who are trying avoid a dangerous junction.

 

[Crispy]

I think that's the major factor in the mindset of 'bad cyclists' - they're not pedestrians, and they're not cars - therefore they can have their own set of rules.

No. If you use the road, you abide by its rules and conventions. When I cycle, I cycle as if I was driving a car. I belong on the road, and when I leave the raod, I become a pedestrian - not some sort of pioneering hybrid. It's the best way to maintain civility and give a good impression of cyclists in general.

 

[Crispy]

Rather than just fining people, perhaps they should be looking at WHY people are cycling on the pavement and do something about it.

Most definitely.

 

[tarannau]

I'm not convinced by that theory. I would perhaps add that pedestrians aren't particularly good at entering 'road user' mode (to nick your terminology) when they're crossing the road, particularly where cyclists' rights of way are cncerned. I've seen at least as many cyclists inconvenienced and endangered by pedestrians stepping off into the road 'blind' without checking for cycles first.

In the interests of fairness, I suspect that more pedestrians should receive fixed penalty fares for jaywalking and 'walking without due care and attention.' Although I suspect that would lead to widespread protests about liberty and the nanny state - there's a certain double standard which tends to see the danger of cycles as way out of proportion, with all the fashionable 'lycra lout' headlines in the papers not helping. Cyclists are the new asylum seekers in some of the press...

 

[detective-boy]

They must be traffic police.

They won't be - they'll probably be members of the neighbourhood team. (Nor will they be on "punishment" duty either)

 

[detective-boy]

I cycle on the pavement ... if I'm a bit pissed,

Two offences for the price of one! Well done!

 

[detective-boy]

And I wondered just where the priorities should lie

As there are constantly murder and rape enquiries with urgent enquiries which need completion, I guess this means that absolutely everything else should be put on hold, yes?

Prioritisation means assigning resources according to importance and any crime or traffic or disorder problem which causes problems for other citizens and leads to complaints will get a share of those resources. Compared to the amount of officers and time dedicated to drug enforcement across the Met there are a trivial amount of resources dedicated to problem cyclists.

 

[Thora]

Two offences for the price of one! Well done!

Better than weaving in the road where I could cause an accident!

 

[detective-boy]

Rather than just fining people, perhaps they should be looking at WHY people are cycling on the pavement and do something about it.

The police do not have any pneumatic drills and are shite at tarmacing. All they can do is try to discourage offences by enforcement activity. Whilst things are as they are there is nothing else they can do.

 

[bluestreak]

The police do not have any pneumatic drills and are shite at tarmacing. All they can do is try to discourage offences by enforcement activity. Whilst things are as they are there is nothing else they can do.

Cop out

 

[Crispy]

Better than weaving in the road where I could cause an accident!

But worse than walking

 

[beeboo]

The police do not have any pneumatic drills and are shite at tarmacing. All they can do is try to discourage offences by enforcement activity. Whilst things are as they are there is nothing else they can do.

Clearly I meant "they" in the wider sense.

Call me crazy and old-fashioned, but it would be nice to think that the Met and TfL and Local Authorities all talked to each other and worked up some kind of strategy.

So, say rather than the police fining people using a shortcut across a pavement, those who are in charge of the roads and street looking to see if that cut-through can be made a legitimate cycle route, or if there is a hazard elsewhere that people are avoiding which could be minimised.

 

[cybertect]

Rather than just fining people, perhaps they should be looking at WHY people are cycling on the pavement and do something about it.

I might agree but my two encounters this week with pavement cyclists on the have been on the same relatively quiet suburban road round the corner from my house. Traffic calming measures are in place (speed humps, road narrowing, etc.). It ain't Hyde Park Corner.

1) I'm standing still at the bus stop, with a tree about three feet from my left hand side. Cyclist zips up from behind me at full tilt, with only a couple of inches to spare between his handlebar and my left arm. His tyres were remarkably quiet. If I'd chosen that moment to move even a little, I'd have had my wing clipped.

I suspect if he keeps that style of pavement riding up he won't be doing it much longer, as he didn't seem to slow down for the road junction a little further on, which had limited visibility with a van parked rather too close to the corner.

2) After dark (about 7.30pm) two teenagers on bikes pelting nearly abreast along the pavement require me to step into somebody's front garden to get out of their way as they round a bend with a high hedge. I imagine the reason why they weren't riding on the road was because they had no lights.

Peds and cycles can mix well enough if both expect each other to be there and behave appropriately. It's also true that some roads aren't planned from a cycling perspective, but cyclists need to ride responsibly if they're going to encroach into pedestrian space.

 

[bi0boy]

Clearly I meant "they" in the wider sense.

Call me crazy and old-fashioned, but it would be nice to think that the Met and TfL and Local Authorities all talked to each other and worked up some kind of strategy.

So, say rather than the police fining people using a shortcut across a pavement, those who are in charge of the roads and street looking to see if that cut-through can be made a legitimate cycle route, or if there is a hazard elsewhere that people are avoiding which could be minimised.

lol

 

[detective-boy]

Clearly I meant "they" in the wider sense.

Call me crazy and old-fashioned, but it would be nice to think that the Met and TfL and Local Authorities all talked to each other and worked up some kind of strategy.

That's OK then ... I just got the impression you may have fallen into the common trap of believing the police were responsible for everything!

Even though there is liaison, the process is massively bureaucratic and slow. In my time I suggested a number of improvements to road layouts, all relatively minor and to address an observed problem which caused the police problems which we tried to deal with by enforcement with little longer term success, and they all eventually happened ... between 3 and 5 years later!

You are far better directly hassling the highway, traffic and transport authorities than relying on the police to make it happen.

 

[nino_savatte]

I haven't a problem with cyclists occasionally using pavements when they're going slowly and giving pedestrians total priority. It's the fuckspuds who hurtle along at high speed and expect peds to jump out of the way I have a problem with.

Sure. I only mount the pavement when I've been squeezed off the road by unthinking motorists.

 

[newbie]

The cut-through off Brixton Road could easily be made shared use, rather than just fining people who are trying avoid a dangerous junction.

Cyclists using the cut-through have to cross the pavement leading to the PO. If it's declared an official route it will be more heavily used, and pedestrians will no longer own the pavement. At busy times you can imagine them having to dodge between the cyclists

Shared use seems to work where the peds and cyclists travel alongside each other on wide and relatively undersused pavements, as at Vauxhall, but by the PO the pavement is often crowded with people walking, mostly across the line the cyclists take.


Talking of wide pavements, I'd like the bit round Kennington Park made dual use, fighting off the buses on the stretch leading to the top of Brixton road is deeply unpleasant.

 

[nino_savatte]

There's a long stretch of pavement that runs along the A4 from Hammersmith to Hogarth's roundabout; there are hardly any peds using it and it's wide enough for dual use. Of course, the council has never considered this sort of thing; they prefer to concentrate on erecting "Cyclists dismount" signs instead.

 

[detective-boy]

There's a long stretch of pavement that runs along the A4 from Hammersmith to Hogarth's roundabout

There should definitely be off-road cycle lanes on all roads like this (urban dual carriageways with 40+ limits) as a matter of urgency - they simply are not safe for cyclists at any time.

 

[Cloud]

Why not give them your mates name and address?

 

[goldenecitrone]

Not sure if they have flashing lights. I've seen them pulling on red light jumpers on Borough high st. before.

Are those the special cycle-police jumpers with little flashing red lights all over them? Wicked!

 

[SpookyFrank]

They were hiding behind a hedge and shouting "Oi! Stop!" at people going past

That sounds like a fantastic way to cause accidents

 

[snowy_again]

I can proudly say that I only break the law by pavement cycling on the 5 metre patch between the end of my road and the front of my house. #smug face#.

But I can entirely understand why other wheeled people sometimes do it elsewhere because there's a massive divide between peds, cyclists and car drivers (and yes I know there's probably a Venn diagram somewhere saying you can be all three) but town / road planning has historically favoured the car.

The law's a bit vague on pavement cycling (and drunken cycling too, there’s no formal ‘test’ for it, so breathalysers don’t apply).

For those of you with time... http://www.bikeforall.net/content/cycling_and_the_law.php

Which includes the quote:

"The introduction of the fixed penalty is not aimed at responsible cyclists who sometimes feel obliged to use the pavement out of fear of traffic and who show consideration to other pavement users when doing so. Chief police officers, who are responsible for enforcement, acknowledge that many cyclists, particularly children and young people, are afraid to cycle on the road, sensitivity and careful use of police discretion is required."

Which doesn’t seem to have applied in the original post. (It also seems to imply that under 16s can pavement cycle cos fixed penalty notices can’t be applied to them).

And don’t get me started on the perilous state of Brixton Road, motorbikes in the green box thing, pedestrians stepping out into the road without looking, being attacked by unattended Tesco’s shopping trolleys full of meat meandering their way across Electric Avenue, or cyclists red light jumping (badly) when there’s traffic, or cyclists without lights. I could go on all night.

Oh and just to point and laugh

 

[Sweaty Betty]

Great News, i can put my trusty long umbrella away!!

 

[Crispy]

That is awesome.
I'd forgotten all about facility of the month

 

[snowy_again]

He's gone international now - spoke at the NY Bike seminar thing hosted by David Byrne

http://bikesnobnyc.blogspot.com/2007/10/cycle-killer-quest-ce-que-cest.html

 

[Dj TAB]

There are dedicated cycle police. They have lycra uniforms and special police bicycles with paniers full of kit. Not sure if they have flashing lights. I've seen them pulling red light jumpers on Borough high st. before.

...a good friend of mine cycled at great speed past a pair of said officers saying "c'mon you fat motherfuckers - PEDAL!"

 

[Cobbles]

road planning has historically favoured the car.

Apart, of course, from the uncannily large number of towns that were planned before the car (or the bicycle)........

 

[snowy_again]

yeah, I was being a bit glib in my statement, but I didn't mean since their inception (unless you count Boudicca as a prototype Jeremy Clarkson). I meant developments since the 60s...

 

[Roadkill]

I meant developments since the 60s...

Arguably, since the 1920s or 1930s. A lot of the suburban expansion of the interwar period, especially in the 1930s, and the establishment of towns such as Letchworth and Welwyn Garden City, was planned around the car to a great extent. It's then that houses started to be built with garages, and road access was prioritised far more than previously. It's after the war, however, that planning around the car really took off in existing towns and cities.