I’m not making this up. That’s my nightly running and walking route, there is not a week that goes by when I don’t have a near miss with a cyclist speeding around that corner, on the path. I’ve lived in the area for nearly 15 years. Unless you or I stalk that corner 24/7 neither of us are going to have an expert knowledge of what goes on. Plus I never said cyclists were the biggest problem, I said there was a problem (one problem) with some cyclists mounting the path to turn right.
Why has this thread turned into ‘well if I didn’t see it, it never happened’ or ‘I’m a cyclist and I don’t do therefore neither do others’? Not just this thread, I’ve noticed it on others too. People being disrespectful of others opinions and experiences.
Also the ‘I’ve lived here longer than you so I know better’ has to stop. We each have our own experiences living in the area, none of which are more important or more real than the other.
There is no disrespect here. You are allowed to give your opinion and I am allowed to give mine, just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I am being disrespectful.
Also it is a bit disingenuous to say
So I did say they were the biggest problem. I didn’t articulate myself very well. What I actually meant is the Lycra brigade were the biggest problem out of the cyclists who mount the path at that intersection, not out of all the traffic.
You are being disrespectful. You are saying that my experience is invalid because you have never seen it happened yourself. And I only mentioned the 15 years to give to validate my experience because I felt that with you stating that your had lived in the area 20 years made your opinion or experiences more valid than mine therefore I had to play the game to make my voice heard.
This is my last post on this thread. I get it, not all cyclists ride on the path therefore it’s not a problem.
I’ve been startled by cyclists and e-scooters on the pavement on both the Cranston to Woolstone right turn and the Houston to Woolstone right turn. Both have hedges / fences which hinder visibility.
And it’s a dangerous junction, so I don’t really blame some for trying to avoid it - the whole thing needs sorting out.
If cyclists are too afraid to ride on the road, they would probably be nervous, wobbly riders and less able to control their bikes. But if they then ride on the pavement because they see it as a safe alternative for them, where does that leave pedestrians? We have nowhere else to go!
Can I just add that we have motorbikes riding on the pavement almost constantly at the fire-gate on Honor Oak Park - Grierson road.
It’s an unusual setup where the pavement is actually part of the cycle route. So motorbikes feel they have a right to it too (even though there’s a clear sign in both directions to say that they don’t).
I’ve seen a few near misses there, definitely feels like it needs to be thought out again, as it’s a busy part of the high street.
Has the free adult cycle instruction started back up again? That helped me enormously to become more confident on my bike and using busy roads.
In my experience, it’s the inexperienced who tend to prefer the pavements because of bad experiences on the road - often caused by positioning. It’s easy to feel that tucking yourself out of the way towards the kerb is safer where in actual fact it’s not.
I know that it’s small comfort (I’m a pedestrian when I’m not a cyclist and tut at poor behaviour) but cyclists really don’t want to hit anything either. Falling off hurts. But just as a faster car feels close to a cyclist, a cyclist feels close to a pedestrian. The loss of control of the situation exacerbates the feeling.
I sometimes take to the pavements, although very slowly and I’d never expect pedestrians to jump out of the way for me.
The reason is that the lack of cycle lanes, the hills, and the fact that speeding is normal in Lewisham means it’s not always safe for cyclists to be on the road.
Dartmouth road for example, vehicles always speeding, including buses, and there’s a bend in the road hindering visibility.
Cyclists have a right to safe travel, just as much as pedestrians and car drivers. It’s just a lot more difficult in Lewisham than places like Wandsworth where provisions for cyclists are one or two decades ahead of what we have in Lewisham, which is pretty much nothing.
Cyclists are surely less of a risk to pedestrians, than cars are to cyclists or pedestrians.
Pedestrians have been killed by cylists. Cycling on the pavement is illegal and dangerous. Why should pedestrians always have to shove up and make way, we need and deserve our own safe area.
That said as a cyclist myself I sympathise on the issue of busy and dangerous roads. We do need better cycle lanes round here.
It’s possible for cyclists to use the pavement in a way that’s respectful to pedestrians. I’ve also experienced cyclists going too fast along pavements and don’t think it’s ok.
But equally, why do pedestrians have a right to safety when cyclists seemingly don’t. If speed limits are not enforced, and basic provisions like cycle lanes not put in place even along the most dangerous stretches of road, why should cyclists risk their safety by cycling along the road, when there is a pavement and that’ll be much safer.
SE23 is a very dangerous place for cyclists. Hills, tight blind corners, nothing done about about speeding, no cycle lanes. Today I watched two blinged up cars have some sort race along Dartmouth Road at maybe 60/70mph.
I have to say I have slightly the same feelings about tone. Which is interesting given that I’ve been surprised in the past by comments that this forum can feel unfriendly.
At least you were told your views were acceptable because you ‘gave examples’. Presumably my general observation that I’d seen something, without providing ‘proof, isn’t enough .
But only where it’s designated to do so i.e. on roads or cycle ways. Cyclists don’t have a right to travel on pavements at all. It is both advised against in the highway code, and illegal and punishable by fine - according to the 1835 Highways Act, it is an offence to wilfully ride on a footpath by the side of the road. (source)
Personally I don’t mind cyclists (or e-scooters) on pavements if they are going carefully, pass at reasonable speed and are prepared to stop or make way. I’m not sure however what percentage of cyclists on the pavement this represents, but I’m certain people tend to remember the worst behaviours the most.
It is against the law, it is also unpleasant for pedestrians to share space with faster wheeled vehicles. Pedestrians come in all shapes and sizes, some will be disabled or elderly and cannot get out of the way. I know of very few cyclists, myself included, who wouldn’t be happy to cycle at the rate of the slowest pedestrian - which is what you should do if you insist on cycling on the pavement.
Campaign for safer cycling spaces, don’t take the limited safe space away from pedestrians.
Shared pedestrian/cyclist spaces are a different matter and have big place in our infrastructure. They are also better as pedestrians know to expect cyclists in the same space and can be aware.
I’m glad this topic has brought us all together in such a peaceful non-argumentative way. Just don’t get me started on the senior citizens racing around pavements in the area on their “souped-up” mobility scooters, think we can all join together (again…) in agreement that they’re a menace and danger to unsuspecting pedestrians.
Ha! I can’t remember the last time I saw mobility scooter in London. Now a trip down to Bognor Regis last year was a different matter - loads of them!
Wnen I commuted to Stratford there was a guy who used the Jubilee Line who had a customised electric mobility scooter - it was sort of a wheelchair/trike hybrid all dressed up like a big Hells Angels style hog. It was very cool.
I agree that electric mobility scooters should have speed limiters … even though they go nowhere near as fast as e-scooters and bicycles. The problem with mobility scooters is their weight and some people’s inability to control them. One ploughed into my mum in Waitrose before careering on to also knock down a display unit.
Mobility scooters are also the only way some disabled eople of all ages can get out and about. But bikes and e-scooters are entirely optional in this area, where we have public transport, and they can do a great deal of harm just by passing too close and too fast to a person with poor balance.
Just to put the conversation into perspective.
Research by the University of Westminister’s Active Travel Project found that between 2005 and 2018, 548 pedestrians on pavements were killed by vehicles. That is, about 40 people a year. And of that 548, just 6 were killed by cyclists.
Now of course that is 6 too many and I in no way support riding bikes on the pavement. I have ridden maybe 200,000 miles in London and maybe done about 1 mile on a pavement and that was years ago…
I just wonder why there is so much concentration on the dangers of cyclists on pavements while many many more pedestrians are killed by cars on pavements - for every single cycling death there are 90 car related ones. I guess it is because most people drive??
It would be interesting to know how many of those are caused by cars actually choosing to drive on the pavement, rather than on the road. In other words: subtracting deaths caused by cars entering or leaving premises or in car parks, cars careering out of control, cars being deliberately used as a weapon.
By the way, you mention 90 x more deaths caused by cars than cyclists. But isn’t that ALL vehicles other than cyclists? Or have I misunderstood and tge report states they are all cars? And how are those figures calculated? An older person who loses their balance and falls as a result of the shock at a cycle passing too close and too fast can be seriously injured both physically and emotionally. That can stop someone from going out. They lose independence and confidence. Their mobility and health suffer. Very often a fall, though not immediately fatal, can be the beginning of the end. Those incidents - like my mum being hit by the mobility scooter - usually go unreported.
.