When the shoe's on the other foot.

[Greenbank]

Strictly speaking, it's not.  There is a myth that pedestrians have the right to walk anywhere - they don't.  They are specifically barred from certain areas - motorways are one area and cycle paths are another (if they are not shared used).

Really? Got a cite for that cycle path claim? Sounds like rubbish to me. There's no mention of it in the HWC for a start.

[clarion]

There may be the best signage in the world at the ends of the track, but it's a park FFS.  People do not join the track at the ends.  They are simply crossing a public space in the direction they want to go, maybe using a bit of surfaced path along the way.

Actually, it's a common. I must get my sheep up there some time for the grazing. And get the Clapham Beagles out for a spot of hunting.

Park; Common; whatever.  It's a public space used in the sme way as a park.

[Snugsy]

There may be the best signage in the world at the ends of the track, but it's a park FFS.  People do not join the track at the ends.  They are simply crossing a public space in the direction they want to go, maybe using a bit of surfaced path along the way.

Actually, it's a common. I must get my sheep up there some time for the grazing. And get the Clapham Beagles out for a spot of hunting.

Park; Common; whatever.  It's a public space used in the sme way as a park.

There's a difference. A common is more like the New Forest than Hollland Park. Public open space, but you can do a lot more there than you can in a park.

[Julian]

It's a public space.

Don't whinge because the public are on it. 

Whinge because some inconsiderate tosser behaved sufficiently badly on a bike that now you're being penalised for his lack of consideration and habits of onanism.

[Snugsy]

It's a public space.

Don't whinge because the public are on it. 

Whinge because some inconsiderate tosser behaved sufficiently badly on a bike that now you're being penalised for his lack of consideration and habits of onanism.

I'm not whinging, Liz. I'm just annoyed that, as usual, cyclists come bottom of the heap when it comes to allocation of usable tarmac, and have their behaviour unreasonably restricted to the point of making cycling not worthwhile on the tiny bit of tarmac they're allowed, while others - pedestrians - are almost encouraged to behave dangerously and irresponsibly. They wouldn't stand for it in the Netherlands, Belgium or Germany. Try standing in a bike lane in Amsterdam.

[Snugsy]

BTW, does anyone know anything about the incident that started all this in the first place?
Was there a 'nasty accident', as a CSO informed me on Thursday?
What was the nature of this 'accident'?
Where is it reported?
Did it involve a little old lady trying to cross the path with her Zimmer frame, mown down by a hooligan in a face mask riding at 30mph on a lite-as-a-feather full-sus mountainbike*; or did it involve a bunch of teenage drunks playing chicken with some harmless civil servant riding home to tea at a sedate 10mph on a sit-up-and-beg* with a packet of HobNobs in the front basket?
It would be interesting to know.


*With apologies to any sensible cyclist who chooses to ride either of these machines.

[alexb]

It's pretty depressing to see exactly the same justifications given to riding as fast as you like as Deluded Muppets (I won't cite the actual name since it would then appear in web searches, but we all know who I'm talking about) would give for  their agenda of driving as fast as you like.

Replace "pedestrian" with "cyclist" move the debate from pedestrians on cycle paths to cyclists on roads and we all sound depressingly similar.

Personally I don't mind slowing down a bit, sitting up and looking around. The park is glorious at this time of year. Even so, as the only lycra'd up rider on the path this monring, in a stream of dayglo'ed or stealthed commuters on hybrids and mountain bikes, I was amused to be the only one reminded to slow down by the copper. Despite the fact that everyone else was visibly accelerating away from me...

Personally, even if I have to slow down quite a lot, it's part of my favourite route and I'd hate to have to radically change that if I wasn't allowed to ride across the Common.

[Snugsy]

It's pretty depressing to see exactly the same justifications given to riding as fast as you like as Deluded Muppets (I won't cite the actual name since it would then appear in web searches, but we all know who I'm talking about) would give for  their agenda of driving as fast as you like.

Hardly. They want to drive as fast as they think fit in all circumstances. We just want to carry on riding across the common normally, the way we have for (in my case) 24 years.

[ian]

I'm courteous until people are discourteous to me - for instance, by walking into my path when I'm riding along in a perfectly legal manner.

That's just rudeness and stupidity on their part.

And so what? What are you going to do about it? Pedestrians, unsurprisingly, will treat Clapham Common like a park. You can argue about your rights, you can argue about the definition of a common, you can argue that pedestrians are stupid and ignorant. It doesn't really matter. It's not Amsterdam. It's Clapham Common. People will surrender their higher mental functions to their mobile phone. They'll wander around as ipod zombies. Don't hold the front page.

Go ahead, whizz by them with a scowl. Convince more people that cyclists are idiots. Eventually, the path will disappear through the stupidity of a minority of cyclists.

[Snugsy]

I'm courteous until people are discourteous to me - for instance, by walking into my path when I'm riding along in a perfectly legal manner.

That's just rudeness and stupidity on their part.

Go ahead, whizz by them with a scowl.

Seen me do that, have you? I occasionally give them a Hard Stare.

Convince more people that cyclists are idiots. Eventually, the path will disappear through the stupidity of a minority of cyclists.

Errr... How can cycling on a clearly-marked, legally-founded cycle path be regarded as idiotic behaviour?

Eventually, we'll have decent cycle facilities or roads where it's safe to cycle. And eventually, pedestrians will learn to avoid cycle paths, as they do in other countries.

[ABlipInContinuity]

Looking at this from a slightly different tangent.

If you don't have a 'puter on your bicycle, how do you know for sure you are doing less than 5 mph? This is a very slow speed indeed for a bicycle.

It does just seem like yet another situation where common sense has failed to prevail. I mean, I can do a fast walk at 5 mph.

Surely the constructive thing to do here would be campaign for a more realistic 10 mph speed limit?

[TimO]

But you appear to be saying that pedestrians are entitled to get annoyed with us, but we aren't allowed to get annoyed with them?  Personally I find pedestrians using the cycle path to be impolite and generally showing a lack of consideration for other people...

Nope, you can as get annoyed and frustrated with them as you want. But snarling and yelling at someone isn't likely to change anything.

Did I ever say that I snarled or yelled at anyone?  In fact if you read what I did say;

I don't rant, or shout, or abuse pedestrians, but I don't particularly have to like it either.

[clarion]

I think Blip makes a good point, and maybe we should be starting that campaign.  Part of Clapham Common is in Wandsworth (though not, I believe, the cycle track - that's Lambeth), so we may well discuss it at the next WCC meeting.

[TimO]

Blip's argument could equally apply to Richmond Park, with it's 20mph speed limit, which does apply to cyclists, unlike the 30mph speed limit on most roads, which only applies to motor vehicles.  They certainly try to apply it to cyclists in Richmond Park, but has anyone actually been fined or taken to court, or just told "not to do it again" ?

[Regulator]

Blip's argument could equally apply to Richmond Park, with it's 20mph speed limit, which does apply to cyclists, unlike the 30mph speed limit on most roads, which only applies to motor vehicles.  They certainly try to apply it to cyclists in Richmond Park, but has anyone actually been fined or taken to court, or just told "not to do it again" ?

Yes.  There was a quite an uproar last year when cyclists were fined for exceeding the speed limit in Richmond Park.

[Andydauddwr]

...No one likes it when car drivers get antsy when delayed for a moment by a cyclist, yet cyclists oddly share the same attitudes.

Not comparable.  When I'm cycling on the road I have no viable legal alternative.  In this specific scenario, the pedestrians have a perfectly acceptable footpath which I cannot use, and for some random reason they cannot be bothered to use.  Why do I have to try and cycle through the thick grass in the summer, and mud in the winter on my narrow HP tyres that really don't like doing this?

Isn't that exactly the argument used to try and force cyclist onto farcilities in the recent highway code revision war?

AC

[ABlipInContinuity]

Blip's argument could equally apply to Richmond Park, with it's 20mph speed limit, which does apply to cyclists, unlike the 30mph speed limit on most roads, which only applies to motor vehicles.  They certainly try to apply it to cyclists in Richmond Park, but has anyone actually been fined or taken to court, or just told "not to do it again" ?

It's a shame any kind of speed limit is needed, but 20 mph is much more reasonable than 5 mph and unless Richmond Park is of any particular use to cyclists who want to train, I wouldn't see the point in making a fuss about it.

Staying under 20 mph without a 'puter is much easier in any case because without a good hill I can't imagine many cyclists achieving it without breaking at least a minor sweat.

[mattc]

...No one likes it when car drivers get antsy when delayed for a moment by a cyclist, yet cyclists oddly share the same attitudes.

Not comparable.  When I'm cycling on the road I have no viable legal alternative.  In this specific scenario, the pedestrians have a perfectly acceptable footpath which I cannot use, and for some random reason they cannot be bothered to use.  Why do I have to try and cycle through the thick grass in the summer, and mud in the winter on my narrow HP tyres that really don't like doing this?

Isn't that exactly the argument used to try and force cyclist onto farcilities in the recent highway code revision war?

AC

Well, yes and no.

In this case the footpath is AT LEAST as good as the cyclepath, so it's no worse for pedestrians to use it than it is to ask drivers to stay on the left - it's just a general protocol to make everyone's life easier in a shared environment.

And noone can realistically say that cyclists could ever bully pedestrians out of the way.

[ian]

But you appear to be saying that pedestrians are entitled to get annoyed with us, but we aren't allowed to get annoyed with them?  Personally I find pedestrians using the cycle path to be impolite and generally showing a lack of consideration for other people...

Nope, you can as get annoyed and frustrated with them as you want. But snarling and yelling at someone isn't likely to change anything.

Did I ever say that I snarled or yelled at anyone?  In fact if you read what I did say;

I don't rant, or shout, or abuse pedestrians, but I don't particularly have to like it either.

Nor did I say it was you. It was merely an allusion to the potential behaviour of some cyclists.

[dkahn400]

It's a shame any kind of speed limit is needed, but 20 mph is much more reasonable than 5 mph and unless Richmond Park is of any particular use to cyclists who want to train, I wouldn't see the point in making a fuss about it.

Staying under 20 mph without a 'puter is much easier in any case because without a good hill I can't imagine many cyclists achieving it without breaking at least a minor sweat.

Richmond Park is widely used as a training circuit by local cyclists and, as it's hilly, you will exceed 20mph on some sections just freewheeling. In fact it was quite easy to exceed the limit there when it was 30mph. I understand that London Dynamo have a mass training bash there once a week. Presumably the police turn a blind eye to that. Anyone know?

[Greenbank]

I understand that London Dynamo have a mass training bash there once a week. Presumably the police turn a blind eye to that. Anyone know?

From what I understand, freewheel down Sawyer's Hill at 25mph and they probably won't pull you over. Push hard down the hill to get 40mph and you'll probably get pulled over.

[PaulF]

Richmond Park is widely used as a training circuit by local cyclists and, as it's hilly, you will exceed 20mph on some sections just freewheeling. In fact it was quite easy to exceed the limit there when it was 30mph. I understand that London Dynamo have a mass training bash there once a week. Presumably the police turn a blind eye to that. Anyone know?

My observation is that the police are usually on Sawyers Hill* so only a problem if you're doing a clockwise circuit, London Dynamo when I've seen them seem to go anti-clockwise. The bit that the speed trap is on is uphill so cyclists are unlikely to be significantly exceeding the limit there. If you are then Chapeau!

*I have once seen a trap at the top of Bastard Hill but looking 'anti-clockwise' so probably not designed to catch cyclists.

[Greenbank]

The other place I've seen a speed trap is opposite the road leading to Ham Gate. So that will catch cyclists on the anti-clockwise lap putting the hammer down from Pembroke Lodge (I can quite easily get over 30mph down that bit).

[PaulF]

I can quite easily get over 30mph down that bit.

In theory at least 

[teethgrinder]

I don't know this route, but wouldn't it be quicker to use the road?

Another thing, which is a bit OT, but if I am cycling on a shared use cyclepath, then go onto the grass to pass a pedestrian, am I riding illegally by not being on the cyclepath? I doubt that it is illegal for the pedestrian to walk on the grass, but is it legal for me to cycle on the grass?
I sometimes ignore cyclepaths and take a straight line over the grass (or sometimes, I just fancy having a blast uo a steep bank) and have wondered whether I am riding legally or not. I don't have to worry about pedestrians when I have several tens of meters to avoid them.