- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
No cycling on the pavement sign (CC licensed by Leo Reynolds:Flickr)Ipswich pavement riding fines brought about by lack of cycle paths say campaigners
Over the past five years, almost half of the fines handed out in Suffolk for riding on the pavement were issued in Ipswich. Campaigners say that this is because a high volume of traffic and poor infrastructure are making cyclists feel unsafe on the roads.
Of the 57 fixed penalty notices issued to cyclists for cycling on footpaths, 28 were handed out in Ipswich, reports the Ipswich Star. Riders were most commonly fined on Westgate Street, Tavern Street, St Helen’s Street and Elm Street.
The 2011 census found that the Ipswich built-up area had a population of approximately 180,000 against 669,000 for Suffolk as a whole. The town with the second highest number of offences was Newmarket with 14 fines and this was followed by Lowestoft with five.
Kevin Ablitt, of Cycle Ipswich, believes that the high proportion of fines handed out in reflects the fact that many cyclists feel unsafe on the town’s roads. “In certain footpaths people are not sure where they are and are not allowed to cycle. There are also not enough cycle paths in Ipswich, so people will make their own choices.”
As an example of poor infrastructure, Ablitt pointed to a recent test conducted along the Norwich Road/Chevallier Street/Valley Road junction where the off-road route was found to take a cyclist four times longer than the road route.
Organisers of the World Naked Bike Ride are planning to bring their event to Ipswich next year, building on their success in Clacton and proposed rides in Colchester and Chelmsford later this year. The rides are intended as protests about the lack of infrastructure for cyclists and as a call for safer roads.
Inspector Jane Coe from Ipswich North East said that pavement cycling was frequently a concern raised with neighbourhood teams. “A cyclist can reach significant speed, which can not only pose a risk to pedestrians but also themselves if they are involved in a collision. However our aim is to educate cyclists and discretion is used by officers in every case.”
Earlier this year, a police officer in Lincolnshire reportedly threatened to confiscate a bicycle that was being ridden on the pavement by a four-year-old girl. Her father was forced to carry her and her bicycle, as well as other items, for the remainder of their journey.
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- eburtthebike 48 min 56 sec ago
To re-phrase H.G. Wells...
- Trevor Anderson 2 hours 38 min ago
It seems Zwift are about to acquire Wahoo?
- Fixthebloodysite AKA David9694 2 hours 53 min ago
great to know you're on the side of the drivers, Prime Minister - here's a couple of examples of who you're backing:...
- mark1a 3 hours 6 min ago
There's a beta firmware release for the original Tacx smart bike that effectively enables most of the features of the Plus model (customise shift...
- hawkinspeter 3 hours 42 min ago
Thanks for adding those links. That's some scary evidence that we're indiscriminately poisoning the oceans....
- quiff 4 hours 6 min ago
Frequently, perhaps. But in this case not. Just thought it was an odd sentence, as I doubt a driver who receives a NIP is thinking "phew, I got...
- chrisonatrike 4 hours 7 min ago
Nah, they're just considering removing the onerous requirement that historic walled cities dependent on tourism should have historic walls. Or...
- Backladder 4 hours 24 min ago
Check your irony filter
- HoarseMann 4 hours 36 min ago
If you need cheering up, just watch Hunt squirming when he's forced to admit he flew from London to Manchester - whilst standing in an old railway...
- FixTheBloodySite 6 hours 30 min ago
How do you know that they are not a subscriber or allow ads? Posting on here helps too as it is a stat for potential advertisers.
Add new comment
15 comments
I wish more fixed penalties were issued. I've never heard of one being issued where I live.
As a cyclist I get fed up with the number of cyclists I see cycling on pavements (and jumping red lights), as well as the number of motorists I see using non hands free mobile phones whilst driving (about 1 a week on average).
I also object to having to take action as a pedestrian, to avoid being hit by pavement riding cyclists (I am quite happy to avoid small children).
Riding on the pavement is as illegal as shoplifting, driving without road fund licence or insurance, or exceeding the speed limit. Saying that the shop can afford the losses, I don't get anything for road fund, I've never made an insurance claim or it's perfectly safe to drive at 110mph on a near deserted motorway at 2am is completely irrelevant.
Whatever happened to "bringing the sport into disrepute" ,or is that too, irrelevant post Armstrong?
I half-agree with you in that I'd be happy to see better enforcement of the rules for all however there are a couple of points where our views differ.
Pavement riding is a funny old thing. Unlike the other illegal activities you list pavement cycling does not bring any tangible benefit to the perpetrator. Driving without insurance saves money and breaking the speed limit gets you to your destination faster. Sometimes pavement cyclists are taking a shortcut but in most cases they ride on the pavement out of fear or intimidation. It's more comparable to being a forced drug mule.
There's also the ever-increasing promotion of legal pavement cycling through shared use pavements and on-pavement cycle lanes. These often begin or end without any integration into the road network and it's not always clear where pavement cycling is allowed and where it isn't. It can be quite confusing and even where it's not the infrastructure often plonks riders onto footways with no where to (legally) go. There seems to be pressure in both directions: drivers want us off the roads and peds want us off the pavements.
As for bringing the sport into disrepute I think you are barking up the wrong tree (OK, if you are on a club run in club colours you have a point). Drivers who break the rules don't give motor racing a bad rep. so I don't see why you'd make this projection on a cyclist who rides to the shops on the pavement.
Oh, and if you only see one driver a week using a handheld phone you must live in a quiet part of the world. I see at least a handful every day.
Home Office guidance states you can ride on the pavement if you feel intimidated or threatened by traffic or have good reason, like you are 4 years old, but the plod don't see it this way, trying to confiscate said 4 year old's bicycle. Bullies.
Local authorities and the police need to have a good sit-down chat about what they want to achieve.
Shared-use pavements and pavement cycle lanes indicate to the average person that cycling should be done on the high side of the kerb. The inference is that the road is not there for cycling but for motor vehicles; it's no surprise that many stick to the pavements.
Many towns have these sections of pavement cycleways that would have the diligent rider hoping on and off of the pavement almost constantly, even though the cycleways rarely merge back into the main carriageway in a coherent way. This leaves the choice of ignoring the cycleways and using the road or ignoring the rules and sticking the the pavements regardless in order to make use of the cycleways.
The Ipswich Star is a trolling rag with a business model to makesup stories and get the local knuckle draggers clicking.
You shouldnt given them oxygen and please dont click on the link.
ffs.
'people will make their own choices'. Yeah, and they should have the balls to accept that if their choices are wrong, they should STFU and take it on the chin.
This is the sort of sh1t drivers come out with, not cyclists.
'ooh, I was caught by a speed camera because I was exceeding the speed limit, and now I have to pay a fine. It's not fair.'
Exactly!
Hmmm like the guy who refused to take the fixed penalty notice on near Elephant and Castle, and his case was thrown out before it got to court as not being in the public interest. If he'd just accepted it then he'd just be another statistic.
You may feel safe cycling on the road, but plenty of people don't. These are the people that cycle on the pavement, and are being fined unnecessarily.
I'm really not sure what the point of having a FPN for pavement cycling is. If someone's going along safely then why fine them? If someone's going along dangerously then a £30 FPN isn't really enough punishment: these people should be facing greater sanctions.
I don't really get your point.
Accepting fines for cycling on the pavement when caught is perfectly compatible with at the same time pointing out that the pavement cycling problem would largely go away if there were decent cycle paths and safer roads.
I fail to see what's wrong with pointing out that changing things so people don't feel the need to cycle on pavements is likely to be a better solution than endlessly spending time and effort trying to catch and fine people (and as far as I can see, they only nab a tiny proportion of offenders anyway). Why do you think its 'the sort of thing motorists say' to do point that out?
It's a nightmare on Elm Street...
I'll get my coat.
Like ct less than 6 per year! A non-story, other than the Police appear to be focusing their efforts on more worthwhile problems.
what like chasing after hit and run drivers when those pesky cyclists venture on the roads instead
http://www.ipswichstar.co.uk/news/boy_aged_13_injured_after_being_knocke...
28 in 5 years...less than 6 a year...honest now
It's understandable. Several footpaths have cycle lanes on them around town and then others don't. If you are encouraged to ride on some footpaths and then fined for others just because a white line hasn't been painted on it doesn't make sense.
The roads around Tavern Street, St Helens street area etc is busy and narrow so I'm not surprised less experienced cyclists would rather use the pavements.
I don't use any of the cycle lanes around Ipswich, I can't be bothered having to stop and wait for two sets of pedestrian crossings on off road routes as described above rather than wait at the red light with the cars.
None of the cycling around here is very joined up. I've just completed the CTC views on cycling to the MPs in my constituency and got nothing back but generic answers based on party policy. Not what they are going to do for local cyclists. Fills me with great hope.
Sussex / Suffolk confusion in the article sub-header.
thanks, invoice in the post.