Cycling oh the footpath

Press, 24 October 1984, Page 16

Cycling oh the footpath

Sir, — Many correspondents seem to imagine that a child on a pushbike weighs at least half a ton. Application of the “common sense”

one such correspondent invokes might reveal the reality that a young cyclist is little (if at all) heavier than a pedestrian. A roadusing motor-vehicle, however, generally • does weigh at least half a ton. A collision between a cyclist and a pedestrian may cause superficial injuries; a collision between a car or truck and a cyclist can kill. Apparently it is more important to protect adults from minor injury than to protect children from being killed or maimed. It seems to be children who are “dispensable” in our sick society. The idea that because cycles have wheels they should not be on a footpath is surely the oddest of all. Perhaps prams, pushchairs, and wheelchairs should be relegated to the road too. — Yours, etc., CATHERINE GLUE. October 21, 1984.

Sir, — As a pedestrian, cyclist and motorist, it appears to me that the cyclists are in the unfortunate position of being seen as both the victims and the assailants and who are also the ones who have virtually no provision made for their sensible mode of transport. Have the designers of the Linwood Avenue-Gloucester Street realignment taken cyclists’ needs into account as promised? Linwood Avenue has ample room for a cycleway from one end to the other. Why; when making Worcester Street narrower near Stanmore Road, was the opportunity not taken of using the wider verge for cycling? Cyclists now feel more vulnerable on the narrower street. Some obvious opportunities for improvement have been neglected. Surely the question is “what measures need to be taken urgently to protect both pedestrians • and cyclists, while acknowledging the needs of maximum safety for all?” I believe the answer is more provision of cycleways. — Yours, etc. ANNE EDMUNDSON. October 22, 1984. Sir, — The Ministry of Transport needs to sort out its priorities for all forms of transport. Pedestrians have the first right to the country’s thoroughfares, and horse riders, cyclists, and horse and cart drivers should all take precedence over motorised vehicles. Zebra crossings should be convenient safety zones for pedestrians, and compulsory stops for all other traffic. Every school, kindergarten and play centre should be enclosed by low-speed zones during school sessions. When the Ministry of Transport accepts the humane principle of human, animal and bird life being more important than motorised transport there will be no need for cyclists on footpaths. — Yours, etc., M. A. HOGAN. October 22, 1984.

Sir, — Your reasoned, logical and unbiased leading article of October 22, should be studied and digested by the Ministry of Transport. Further to this discussion, a danger that I have not seen mentioned is the extreme danger to children themselves when they dart from the footpath on to the road. This, dangerous enough with children on. foot, is even greater when they move so much faster on their bikes. Like many other motorists, I can testify to children’s lives depending solely on my watchfulness, my reflexes and my brakes under these circumstances. To have thousands in every city, twice a day legally dicing with death, would be madness. As a side issue, have locdpbodies considered the cost of

sealing the berms on suburban footpaths? No householder is likely to try to maintain a lawn being cut to pieces by bicycle tyres. — Yours, etc., . R. J. CRICHTON. October 22, 1984.