legalised cycling on pavements - cycle-to-work campaign

I find cyclists passing me especially from behind quite disturbing, and I really do jump when one of them rings a bell right behind me. I've seen others post about this, so thought it might be appropriate to flag up recent developments that might affect people on the spectrum.

There's a lot of drive at the moment towards green (environmentally friendly) travel, one manifestation of which is the cycle-to-work campaign. Most local authorities have policies to make it easier to cycle to work.

The commonest solution is to make cycling on the pavements legal, either a shared surface, or segregated with a white line down the middle (or usually not quite middle - more space for cyclists than pedestrians). There are Dept for transport Guidelines (LTN 1/12) which say segregated pavements should not be less than 4 metres and shared pavements not less than 3 metres. In reality the widths implemented are well below that. Quite often now pavements less than 1.5 metres wide are shared walking and cycling, and segregated often less than 3 metres.

On segregated pavements this often means pedestrians walk in a 1 to 1.5 metre strip on the inside of the pavement, irrespective of street furniture (lamp posts, telecoms units, litter bins), overgrown hedges etc. This creates problems for wheelchair users and other disabled.

Cyclists and pedestrians are now in very close proximity, with the cyclists rights protected, and often expecting to cycle fast.

With so much of this policy of opening up pavements to cyclists going on, there must be some quite scary situations for people on the spectrum.

Has anyone had any adverse experiences?

Parents
  • I'm not attacking cycling. I'm drawing attention to the increased "legal" presence of cyclists on pavements.

    Do you cycle on pavements legally or otherwise. Are you arguing that your need to cycle allows you to cycle on pavements?

    The problem I raised lies with the interpretation of segregated and unsegregated pavements. If the DfT Guidelines are followed, having a two metre wide lane for cyclists, and a two metre wide lane for cyclists could work. Not having shared walking and cycling on a pavement less than 3 metres wide might work.

    But what is happening in many towns is that segregation is happening on pavements too narrow to segregate, and shared use it happening on pavements that are very narrow,

    My concern was also that people on the spectrum might be adversely affected by this.

    Notwithstanding that cycling might be beneficial to people on the spectrum, is it nevertheless a problem for people on the spectrum walking?

    Ringing your bell when you are ten feet behind a pedestrian is fair enough. A lot of cyclists wait until they are practically touching the pedestrian before they ring.

    If you don't believe me try this....get your spouse or a friend to ring the bell while you are standing right beside the front wheel. If it doesn't bother you maybe you don't have the sensory sensitivity problems of many people on the spectrum.

    I knew posting this I risked getting "black and white thinking" like a total defence of cycling. I'm looking for reactions a little in between.

Reply
  • I'm not attacking cycling. I'm drawing attention to the increased "legal" presence of cyclists on pavements.

    Do you cycle on pavements legally or otherwise. Are you arguing that your need to cycle allows you to cycle on pavements?

    The problem I raised lies with the interpretation of segregated and unsegregated pavements. If the DfT Guidelines are followed, having a two metre wide lane for cyclists, and a two metre wide lane for cyclists could work. Not having shared walking and cycling on a pavement less than 3 metres wide might work.

    But what is happening in many towns is that segregation is happening on pavements too narrow to segregate, and shared use it happening on pavements that are very narrow,

    My concern was also that people on the spectrum might be adversely affected by this.

    Notwithstanding that cycling might be beneficial to people on the spectrum, is it nevertheless a problem for people on the spectrum walking?

    Ringing your bell when you are ten feet behind a pedestrian is fair enough. A lot of cyclists wait until they are practically touching the pedestrian before they ring.

    If you don't believe me try this....get your spouse or a friend to ring the bell while you are standing right beside the front wheel. If it doesn't bother you maybe you don't have the sensory sensitivity problems of many people on the spectrum.

    I knew posting this I risked getting "black and white thinking" like a total defence of cycling. I'm looking for reactions a little in between.

Children
No Data