What's happened to the cycle parking in the High St?

[stuart]

Converting two disabled bays ON THE HIGH STREET to provide parking for 36 bikes is not what HB and similarly minded cyclists want. They want restrictions for others, but not themselves. So we'll never have consensus. Motorists can do no right and cyclists can do no wrong. Motorists are lazy not to want to walk from the car park, but a cyclist has to park their bike immediately outside the very shop they want to use.

Mary I can understand your frustration if this is what you believe. I will only say your belief is mistaken. How can I justify this?

I walk, ride and motor down Sydenham Road. I am guessing most of cyclists here do the same. How can we be both right as cyclists and wrong as motorists? We are the same people. It is possible to take a balanced view and indeed want a consensus. That's the only way money will be spent or space found for cyclists. The other people who have posted here and are not cyclists can see a way forward. But not you.

I really don't know where to go from here. You are entitled to your view but I think you are not going to progress it if you say "I'm not anti-bike, but" and then go on to label all cyclists as this or that. You would not accept that from me if I made a similar remark about motorists or women or ... whatever.

The greater danger here is that these discussions go downhill and create division where there really ought not to be any to the benefit of nobody. So this will be my last word. I think last words all round might be best. There are no winners here.

Stuart

[marymck]

Regarding siting cycle racks, I'm with HB on this. The area of pavement by the Co-operative is vast (not very well thought out I'd say as it's never THAT busy there, I'd have thought it would have been better as a bit more parking) and is a very good point for cycle racks outside the biggest supermarket in the high street. I know when I had a bike I preferred to have it somewhere close to where I was. I certainly wouldn't leave a bike in a car park out of site of passers by.

If the bike racks are well sited I see no problem with them. They need to be in sites well used for shops and pedestrians.

!

But Lee if it's kept clear of permanent structures, can't you also envisage a wonderful pop up pitch for an occasional market stall or street food vendor. Hot chestnuts or smoothies for e.g., while still keeping some space to breathe. We lose so many possibilities if permanent bike racks are installed there rather than build them in a NEARBY on street parking bay.

Of course this is all academic. Cyclists are a powerful and PC lobby, so they'll get what they want, but it us nice to dream of a what if?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[marymck]

Converting two disabled bays ON THE HIGH STREET to provide parking for 36 bikes is not what HB and similarly minded cyclists want. They want restrictions for others, but not themselves. So we'll never have consensus. Motorists can do no right and cyclists can do no wrong. Motorists are lazy not to want to walk from the car park, but a cyclist has to park their bike immediately outside the very shop they want to use.

Mary I can understand your frustration if this is what you believe. I will only say your belief is mistaken. How can I justify this?

I walk, ride and motor down Sydenham Road. I am guessing most of cyclists here do the same. How can we be both right as cyclists and wrong as motorists? We are the same people. It is possible to take a balanced view and indeed want a consensus. That's the only way money will be spent or space found for cyclists. The other people who have posted here and are not cyclists can see a way forward. But not you.

I really don't know where to go from here. You are entitled to your view but I think you are not going to progress it if you say "I'm not anti-bike, but" and then go on to label all cyclists as this or that. You would not accept that from me if I made a similar remark about motorists or women or ... whatever.

The greater danger here is that these discussions go downhill and create division where there really ought not to be any to the benefit of nobody. So this will be my last word. I think last words all round might be best. There are no winners here.

Stuart

I'm sorry you feel that way Stuart. But I can see a way forward that I believed would satisfy everyone's needs. So please don't label me as a non cyclist who can't see a way forward. Just because it's not your way forward doesn't mean wasn't a valid attempt at fairness. I truly felt I was suggesting something that could work for everyone. But I had not taken into account the fact that some cyclists who post on here simply are not prepared to give an inch of ground. I should have learned it's possible to debate many things on here and for all participants to remain open minded ... as long as they don't involve cycling.(or jay walking lol)

I now accept that there's no point in installing cycle racks in Girton road and that there are genuine concerns about theft from there. I would have thought that carefully sited cctv, angled to capture faces as in other towns would have worked. But I can see cyclists would still be too nervous to park there, so that's obviously a non starter. But I still think converting some on street disabled parking bays for use of cycles and motorbikes could have worked. Clearly some cyclists don't think that's good enough.

And by the way, I used to use a cycle. I wish I still could.

But, as a final word, just to clarify, I am not labelling all cyclists as this or that. It seems some on here have the attitude that motorists can do no right and cyclists can do no wrong. I share neither that view nor the opposite one. I apologize if I didn't make that clear.

Obviously I bow out on this one. I think it's a shame about the clutter and the wasted opportunity. But I accept that I'll always be outgunned.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[Rachael]

As a non-cyclist, pedestrian and one-time buggy pusher, I don't see cycle racks as clutter. I like to see bikes parked up on the pavements (in sensibly located places, of course). To me, it makes the high street look well-used,a popular place with shops that people use. Study after study has shown that a well-used public space attracts further use and is seen as both safe and enticing. I think plenty of bikes on the high street would have just as positive an effect as an occasional pop-up stall, if not more so.

In the days when I did have small children I can't remember any occasion when I had my route blocked by bicycles parked on the pavement. Either they were in racks where the pavement was wide enough, or they were attached to lamp-posts, parallel to the kerb and thus taking very little pavement space.

As a driver I would also support all parking being for the disabled or deliveries only. I never get a parking spot on Sydenham Road and almost always park in Girton Road (occasionally at the side of Whites if there is a space there when I turn in).

[stuart]

And by the way, I used to use a cycle. I wish I still could.

Sorry to immediately break my promise but I felt I must point you to http://www.wheelsforwellbeing.org.uk/ only a short distance away in Herne Hill. Truly inspirational. Getting people of any age back on the road who can neither walk unaided nor drive.

Stuart

[hairybuddha]

Well that was probably one of the more amusing message board flounces that I've had the pleasure to read.

The trouble is Mary (if you're still reading), is that putting cycle racks out of the way and around the corner is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. My suggestion to repurpose some parking spaces as cycling bays is I think workable, but not if you only had two of them in the entire High St. That would be completely pointless.

As for why a cyclist shouldn't have to walk from a car park or from a cycle park a distance away? Well, I didn't arrive at the High St in a 2 tonne metal box with enough space for 5 people and their belongings to pick up a pint of milk. Most motorists do, so are expected to leave their metal boxes out of the way.

Quite hilarious that you think pedestrianising the High St is "Little Britainer" - It would actually be a very modern and progressive thing to do. The cycling lobby is "strong" and "PC". What on earth does that mean? The cycling lobby is anything but strong. That's why you can uproot cycle parking during construction work and leave it unreplaced for months on end without raising an eyebrow. Imagine the fuss if they had tried to close the road through the high st for three weeks while they did the work.

[JulietP]

This thread is highly entertaining!

[Robin Orton]

This thread is highly entertaining!

Matter of opinion.

[14BradfordRoad]

Remember those shopping bikes:

----------------------------------------------------------
Or even handier still:

----------------------------------------------------------
To some this one has character, just clutter to others

------------------------------------------------------------
Well thought out shopping bike:

-------------------------------------------------------------
The ultimate in shopping Convenience:

--------------------------------------------------------------

OK, nuff said, I'll just get my coat then! ..

[TheDon]

As a pedestrian I really don't care about cyclist except when I have to avoid them as I walk down the pavement. Cyclists don't pay any taxes for using the roads and think they own the pavements as well. They should be taxed in the same way as motorists. Why should I as a council tax payer provide facilities that enable cyclists to break the law and have no disregard for pedestrians.

[14BradfordRoad]

As a pedestrian I really don't care about cyclist except when I have to avoid them as I walk down the pavement. Cyclists don't pay any taxes for using the roads and think they own the pavements as well. They should be taxed in the same way as motorists. Why should I as a council tax payer provide facilities that enable cyclists to break the law and have no disregard for pedestrians.

Oh dear! I can see it's live and let live with you then!

[Annie.]

People should be encouraged to ride bikes rather than use a car, no tax on bikes is a good thing, however, I do think the people who ride on the pavements should be stopped,also,I would prefer it if there were some sort of raised area for bikes to be totally seperate from cars.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[mikej]

Don said

Cyclists don't pay any taxes for using the roads and think they own the pavements as well. They should be taxed in the same way as motorists. Why should I as a council tax payer provide facilities that enable cyclists to break the law and have no disregard for pedestrians.

This is an oft-quoted misunderstanding of the system we have in the UK.

My wife has a car which she doesn't pay any tax on - because it pollutes so little. Would you, Don, now not allow her to use the roads???? Crazy!
Cyclists emmit no pollution - sho they pay no tax either.
I am a cyclist and a motorist and I pay tax on my car (it's a bit more polluting than my wife's).

And anyway your first few words are nonsense because NO ONE pays tax for using the roads. The tax is a vehicle tax - Car vehicle tax rates are based on either engine size or fuel type and CO2 emissions. Cycles have no engines, emit no pollution so pay no vehicle tax.

Roads are paid for from general taxation.

[marymck]

Risking wrath by sticking my head above the parapet, but I don't think cyclists should pay road tax. Most road tax is paid on petrol anyway.

But, as I've said in the past on this forum, I do think they should carry third party insurance and a clear means of identification such as motorbikes do. I do know responsible cyclists do already have this insurance, but I'd be surprised if they weren't the minority.

Bike racks though should get paid for by TFL or the council tax payers, same as lots of other street furniture.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[hairybuddha]

Cyclists don't pay any taxes for using the roads and think they own the pavements as well. They should be taxed in the same way as motorists. Why should I as a council tax payer provide facilities that enable cyclists to break the law and have no disregard for pedestrians.

Oh dear, TheDon wins cycle debate bingo. As mikej has already said, this is nonsense. The UK has not had hypothecated taxation since the 1930s. All taxation goes into a single pot, and the tax revenue raised from motoring doesn't even come close to paying for the cost of motoring. The vast majority of spending on the roads comes from council tax which everyone pays. Over 85% of cyclists also own a car so your attempt to draw a line is a touch pathetic. As for law breaking cyclists, well, taxation and insurance hasn't stopped people in cars habitually breaking the law, has it? TFL recently found that 16% of all motor vehicles run red lights while the figure for cyclists was a touch lower. What a shame the reality doesn't fit with your prejudiced world view....

But, as I've said in the past on this forum, I do think they should carry third party insurance and a clear means of identification such as motorbikes do. I do know responsible cyclists do already have this insurance, but I'd be surprised if they weren't the minority.

There is definitely a case to made for cyclists to carry third party insurance. Especially in the event of collisions with pedestrians, though thankfully these are rare (far more rare than motor vehicle collisions with pedestrians).

All cyclists who are members of a club will have third party insurance and many will also be covered through their home insurance. I think to make this compulsory would be expensive and difficult to administer but worth encouraging.

[Eagle]

Insurance should be a legal requirement.
Perhaps we could give all cycles Reg Numbers which would need to be registered with DVLC.

Would be also great source of additional revenue.

[mikej]

I am afraid Eagle your suggestion is just impractical.
It would - for a start - cost a fortune to administer.
What about children? Should I have insurance for my (theoretical) 6 year old's bike?
Be sensible - how many thousands of bikes are there in this country, many gathering dust in sheds?

[marymck]

I am afraid Eagle your suggestion is just impractical.
It would - for a start - cost a fortune to administer.
What about children? Should I have insurance for my (theoretical) 6 year old's bike?
Be sensible - how many thousands of bikes are there in this country, many gathering dust in sheds?

For a bike to be licensed/insured could be a one stop, low cost action. Not a tax, the licence part of the fee could just cover the admin cost and number plate. And of course it would be up to the parents to pay, in the same way that they would pay for a helmet or any other piece of cycling equipment. If the ID number were engraved on the frame, this could help prevent theft as well.

Obviously there will always be those who don't take out insurance, just as there are those who don't take out car insurance. I believe that in that case insurance companies would pay a levy. In the same way that honest motorists subsidize the dishonest ones.

There will be admin issues at first, as probably was the case with compulsory car and motorbike insurance. But eventually the system sorts itself out. Eg when you buy a new tv you have to give your name and address and the authorities may check you have a tv licence. The same thing could happen with the sale of new bikes. It takes a while to filter through, but would be easy to check if there are registration numbers visible on every legal and road worthy bike.

Lights blue touchpaper ...

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[hairybuddha]

OK, I'll bite.

What is the problem that will be solved by compulsory bike insurance?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

[marymck]

OK, I'll bite.

What is the problem that will be solved by compulsory bike insurance?

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Duh. Ok I'm sure it wad a rhetorical question, but HB's day wouldn't be complete if he didn't get to beat me up, so to here goes ...

eg the van driver who phoned in to radio four. He was standing at the back of his van when a cyclist crashed into him. Cyclist got up and pedalled quickly away. Van driver left with badly broken wrist, no job and no compensation.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]