Protesters against “reckless” cyclists – including a mother who says her son was left with a facial scar after he was knocked over by someone on a bike who immediately rode off – have blocked a street in the London Borough of Hackney.
Residents of the Blackstone Estate, which borders London Fields, are calling on the local council to put a bike lane in the park itself to avoid conflict between cyclists and pedestrians outside their homes, reports the Hackney Gazette.
The newspaper reports that yesterday morning, some of the people living on the estate, holding placards, put up fences on London Fields West Side, meaning that cyclists either had to make a diversion or dismount to get through.
They also asked passers-by – whom the Hackney Gazette described as “confused” – to sign a petition campaigning for a cycle path to be installed so that people can ride through the park itself – although as we have previously reported here on road.cc, there have been concerns about people riding too fast there, leading the council to install speed monitors.
One resident said: “Children come out here on their way to school and they can hear a car but they can’t hear a bike. Kids have fallen down and been injured badly.”
Another, Jacqueline Hoilett, spoke of how her son had been knocked over by a cyclist who rode off afterwards.
She said: “He literally just stepped onto the path and the bike just hit him and he went flying over the handlebars and fell in the middle of the tarmac. The cyclist was an adult man and just cycled off. He has a scar on his head now.
“I understand bikes are good for the environment, but the council aren’t thinking about the crossover between the environment and people’s immediate safety,” she added.
According to the Hackney Gazette’s report, the council has proposed putting shrubs and flowerbeds outside the houses, but the protesters do not think that will resolve the situation.
Cyclists trying to make their way through acknowledged that while there may be a problem at the location, targeting them wasn’t the solution.
One said: “This is a public highway, and there’s no sign to say it’s not. There’s clearly a lot of issues here with regard to what this space actually is, but lone cyclists really aren’t the problem. What you’re doing here is segregating yourselves.”
Another, Andy Wilkinson, said: “I can see their perspective and it is a really busy area. There needs to be a bit of infrastructure here that helps both sides, but cyclists are generally really considerate people.”
In 2017, we reported how parents of children at London Fields Primary School, which lies across the park, had different concerns – calling for cars to be banned at the time students arrive at the school and leave it, due to air pollution.
45 thoughts on “Protesters against “reckless” cyclists block Hackney street”
‘“Children come out here on
‘“Children come out here on their way to school and they can hear a car but they can’t hear a bike. Kids have fallen down and been injured badly.”’
I wonder are there a lot of blind children in the area, going around injuring cyclists?
‘She said: “He literally just stepped onto the path and the bike just hit him and he went flying over the handlebars and fell in the middle of the tarmac. The cyclist was an adult man and just cycled off. He has a scar on his head now.’
I don’t see much path on the photo, mainly a road, is she saying her child stepped into the road without looking and knocked someone off their bike? Her child apparently landed ‘in the middle of the tarmac’ which suggests he ran into the road. Also who went over the handlebars, I can’t imagine an collision where a 7y/o pedestrian colliding with a bicycle would go over the handle bars.
They definitely need some improvements there to protect cyclists from under-supervised children.
jh27 wrote:
I wonder are there a lot of blind children in the area, going around injuring cyclists?— jh27
If they teach their kids to cross the road only by listening then they are in for a nasty surprise with the increasing numbers of electric cars!
Parents: its called “The Green Cross Code”. Be responsible parents and f’king teach your kids it!
I wonder how many of those
I wonder how many of those same pedestrians forget all about road safety in their cars?
Quote:
I trust the Met came and had a stern word with these people who were stopping other people from making lawful use of the highway…
Quote:
Except that as soon as the council proposes to do that, these Very Same People will – I have no doubt – start protesting that that’s dangerous, too (“Oh, won’t somebody think of the children?”
Quote:
Duplicate post – sorry
Let’s be clear here, it is
Let’s be clear here, it is residents, not the bogeymen motorists, who are complaining about cyclists. There comes a point where cyclists should listen and try to understand the other person’s point of view.
Sriracha wrote:
I think you’ve wandered into the wrong forum, mate 😉
Sriracha wrote:
I think you’ve wandered into the wrong forum, mate 😉
Sriracha wrote:
I think you’ve wandered into the wrong forum, mate 😉
Sriracha wrote:
I think you’ve wandered into the wrong forum, mate 😉
leaway2 wrote:
I think you clicked ‘post’ too many times, mate 😉
Sriracha wrote:
I missed the bit where they’re petitioning for the road to be closed to all vehicles for the safety of their children… Oh, right, just want the pesky cyclists banned, then…
brooksby wrote:
I missed the bit where they’re petitioning for the road to be closed to all vehicles for the safety of their children… Oh, right, just want the pesky cyclists banned, then…
— Sriracha
The crass stupidity of the masses makes me despair.
The World Health Organisation reported 1.35 million people killed by vehicle operators in 2016 (Global status report on road safety 2018 WHO/NMH/NVI/18.20), the majority by use of excess speed, intoxication and ‘distraction’ caused by the use of mobile devices.
But these thick c**ts want bikes banned.
Any other human activity which resulted in the death of 3,699 deaths every single day, would be a public health emergency in every country on earth. But it’s vehicles and their operators, so well… LOOK, A CYCLIST ISN’T WEARING HI-VIZ!!!!!
Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:
And don’t forget the number of children made ill by the pollution from cars. But let’s ban cyclists.
Sriracha wrote:
Yes lets understand the residents point of view.
They don’t want cyclists there because a few of their children have been injured because they could not be bothered to teach their children to Stop Look and Listen. Because it is easier to blame cyclists rather than take responsibility for their own failings.
I can’t wait for them to protest to stop electric cars going down their street because one of their children steps out in front of one. Because I bet it will be the drivers fault not the childs fault.
As a cyclist there is only so much you can do to avoid accidents. There may be some of the incidents that are the fault of the cyclists but equally some the fault of the people walking in front of them. I can pretty much guarantee that at least once on every commute to work that I will have someone (most likely a teenager preoccupied on their phone) will walk out on the road in front of me on a 300m section of quiet one way road….. because they simply don’t look…. they just listen
Sriracha wrote:
I agree entirely with this, and disagree entirely with the tone and content of most of the posts.
We DO rely on our hearing as well as sight for our road safety. In that respect (but obviousy not in many other respects) cyclists do present a greater, or at least different risk to pedestrians.
Children do pay less attention than adults.
If adults do not hear any cars, they may be less concerned about little Mohammed or Jane stepping off the pavement.
I don’t think it is a helpful approach, to, in effect, put all the blame on the pedestrians/ children. All road users need to cooperate to maximise the safety of all.
Sriracha wrote:
I agree; but there is another point of view too. I know I keep banging on about it here, but what about road design?
Looking at the photo, it appears that the pavement on the right stops after a short distance. From then on, the properties give directly onto the road. Anyone emerging from a gate will step right into the way of any vehicles on the road. There is a pavement on the opposite side of the road, and parking is permitted on the opposite side so that traffic is forced over to the right-hand side as we look at it, i.e. close to those entrances.
The solution seems obvious: move the pavement to the other side of the road so that pedestrians step out of their properties onto a pavement where there will be no wheeled traffic of any description. Take away the pavement on the other side and move the parking bays into the same space — they can probably be fitted in between the existing lampposts, keeping the cost of the project fairly low.
Sensible design versus thoughtless design — and as always, the people involved blame each other rather than the planner.
Sounds like these residents
Sounds like these residents and their children need a lesson in using their eyes and not just their ears when they cross the road/cycle path. As do most pedestrians these days. It will be carnage when we’re all driving electric cars.
bikeman01 wrote:
A few years ago, when electric cars were first being mooted, wasn’t there some debate on whether to make them utter a fictional ‘car noise’ for precisely that purpose? The silent electric car was to have a recorded ‘brum-brum!’ sound so that people can hear it coming… (with Porsche engine noises for higher end cars…
).
brooksby wrote:
From July this year new electric vehicles and hybrids will need to be fitted with a device that emits a sound when the vehicle is travelling at less than 12 mph. I’m not a fan of the idea – but that said I wouldn’t mind buying one to fit to my bike so it sounds like a car 🙂
I don’t know, but as it is designed to help pedestrians who don’t look, I suspect that the minimum sound level of the device will be 150dB so that it can be heard over their noise cancelling headphones.
You’re all missing the point;
You’re all missing the point; cyclists are to blame. It’s always their fault. Any presumed liability law in this country would start from that premise, because it’s what the majority believe and we’re a democracy.
I used to cycle down this
I used to cycle down this exact bit of road every day on the way to and from work so know it well.
It’s not a particularly busy stretch as it’s a dead end for cars where it joins the park, so the only motor traffic would be the half dozen or so people that live there. One of the residents is well known locally as a prominent environmentalist who turned her ‘car parking’ space into a mini park in protest at the amount of space given over to cars.
I can’t personally see the point in putting a cycle path in the park – there’s already one on the far side of the park which is very well used and generally (except on very sunny days when the park is busy) well respected by those on foot.
You could make an argument for turning that whole bit of road in to a shared pedestrian/cycle route and doing away with the parking bays. Keep the cyclists to the east side (away from the houses) and therefore reduce any conflict. The road only serves as parking for residents as I said.
I looked on Google streetview
On Google streetview and if you go back about 10ft looking in the same direction there’s a blue cycle path sign on a bollard on the left and another on the right going the other way. Presumably the gap on the right side of the barrier in the photo is to allow cyclists through.
https://tinyurl.com/y37mmto6
https://tinyurl.com/y2344rlk
Where are all these silent
Where are all these silent electric cars I keep hearing (or not) about. The Teslas I have encountered are noisy, generally being driven a bit too hard (you know what I’m talking about), somewhat quieter than the Audi, BMW or Mercs that the’ve obviously replaced but they make proper noise. Some of the Hybrids in town, if driven in an efficient manner don’t make too much engine noise, but tyre/road noise is quite audible, I have never not been able to hear them.
I don’t know if it’s because I’m trying to always listen but I am very rarely suprised by a passing cyclist when riding or walking. My own 2 inch nobblies are not silent, definitely buzz, the superlight semislicks sound like rumbly balloons, and even my mostly slick Top Tourings make some noise. My Ice Claws sound like I’m riding on rice crispies.
Electric cars are quiet at
Electric cars are quiet at low speeds and so not heard by pedestrians.
As one who cycles in London I would say that too many people use their ears to check if the rosd is clear and as pointed out many times above, parents bear the responsibility of teaching their kids how to cross roads, even quiet ones like this. Cycling in town I am always on the lookout for errant pedestrians – a bell is useless, only shouting works!
Jem PT wrote:
Some electric cars emit a white noise at speeds below 30 mph. Our Nissan leaf does, but our Tesla doesnt. The Hyundai Kona EV has a white noise emmision too.
Over 30 mph, tyre noise is the loudest noise. I fully agree teach kids to look and listen, twice before crossing roads. Also berate them about being a phone zombie
Jem PT wrote:
Some electric cars emit a white noise at speeds below 30 mph. Our Nissan leaf does, but our Tesla doesnt. The Hyundai Kona EV has a white noise emmision too.
Over 30 mph, tyre noise is the loudest noise. I fully agree teach kids to look and listen, twice before crossing roads. Also berate them about being a phone zombie
I also know the area well
I also know the area well having cycled to work most days for the last two years. Since January I’ve also ran through the park a couple of mornings a week. I can say that most cyclists were an inconsiderate nuisance and I can well imagine parents feeling aggrieved. It’s a park! They’re narrow residential streets close to schools. So slow down and let pedestrians pass. And kids do stuff like run out.
Sadly great chunks of the cyclists I see on my commutes are no less selfish, no less entitled than the motorists they so readily whine about. And both seem to view pedestrians with equal contempt.
And yes, I’m on the wrong forum to suggest cyclists don’t have the sun shining out their nether regions at all times.
perfect1964 wrote:
I think I am with you on this. Also the warmer weather is tempting a lot more cyclists out. I have to use 2 way shared paths, and the sight of a wobbling, almost out of control , going too fast for the ability of a bloke on a bike is pretty common and eckin damgerous. Where the hell were you in winter to learn yaself some bike handling skills?
Norway and this area
Norway and this area particularly has a high number of electric cars, and I can assure you yo do hear them, even at lower speeds. Anything over 10mph and the tyre sound is there is people listen.
That said, the electric busses can be deceptively quiet. Had them sneak up behind me cycling a few times.
From what’s written in the article, it does sound like there are a number of people are too used to living on a cul-de-sac and simply walk into the road without ensuring it’s safe. No excuse for the guy riding off after an accident with a child, but somehow I feel we are not getting the whole story either.
The residents do have a point
The residents do have a point about the crappy infrastructure, but that’s not the cyclists fault.
I think if the pavement was on the other side it would create a buffer between the houses and the road and be way safer, but until they get the council to make improvements, anyone whose garden gate opens directly onto a road ought to be more careful.
Reminds me of an incident on
Reminds me of an incident on the Bristol-Bath path about ten years ago, with a mother in the local rag demanding that cyclists slow down and take care after her six year old son was mown down by a cyclist, who just rode away. I was so concerned I phoned the reporter and asked if she had any more details and was told that the woman and her child were on opposite sides of the path, she saw the cyclist coming and called the boy to her, into the path of the cyclist. The cyclist had braked and tried to avoid the collision but had struck the child. He stopped, made sure the boy was ok and not injured and then rode on.
But the newspaper report was that he was a reckless, inconsiderate, dangerous fool, not that the mother should have taken a little more care on a path which she knew was shared with cyclists.
burtthebike wrote:
Oh, is THAT the Real Story there?
(I remember when that was in the news, and have seen all the (not legal) zebra crossings painted there, and hand-painted ‘slow down’ signs all along that section of the B&B Railway Path).
burtthebike wrote:
Seeing the child and its mother separated by the path the cyclist was taking, any responsible rider would have assumed the worst and slowed down already just in case. This cyclists was clearly going at such a speed that when the predictable happened the best they could do was to hit the child. Bravo.
Sriracha wrote:
Reminds me of an incident on the Bristol-Bath path about ten years ago, with a mother in the local rag demanding that cyclists slow down and take care after her six year old son was mown down by a cyclist, who just rode away. I was so concerned I phoned the reporter and asked if she had any more details and was told that the woman and her child were on opposite sides of the path, she saw the cyclist coming and called the boy to her, into the path of the cyclist. The cyclist had braked and tried to avoid the collision but had struck the child. He stopped, made sure the boy was ok and not injured and then rode on.
But the newspaper report was that he was a reckless, inconsiderate, dangerous fool, not that the mother should have taken a little more care on a path which she knew was shared with cyclists.
— Sriracha Seeing the child and its mother separated by the path the cyclist was taking, any responsible rider would have assumed the worst and slowed down already just in case. This cyclists was clearly going at such a speed that when the predictable happened the best they could do was to hit the child. Bravo.— burtthebike
Thank you for proving so conclusively my proposal that cyclists are always wrong.
As I recall, the child was in the bushes and invisible, but of course the cyclist should have seen him with his x-ray vision. Even travelling at a relatively slow speed, if someone runs out right in front of you, you’re going to hit them. Perhaps we should all get off and walk? Clearly, your view is that the only people with any responibility in any collision are cyclists.
Thanks again, and don’t forget to chant to yourself a hundred times a day “cyclists are always wrong.” Perhaps you could do stickers for cars?
burtthebike wrote:
“Sorry mate, I didn’t see you!”
If you are riding on a
If you are riding on a residential street, or driving for that matter, then you must expect children to literally run out in the road. They are children, they make mistakes. Responsible adults need to accomodate them and modify their own behaviours, not expect every 5 year old to be tied to their Mother’s apron strings or fully trained in the art of not getting run over.
Cyclists have even less excuse to be involved in a collision in such an environment, we have a height advantage, better visibility, unimpeded hearing (deaf cyclists aside) and should have much better situational awareness.
Mungecrundle wrote:
I could not agree more.
Mungecrundle wrote:
This is a perfectly reasonable view, and one I have adopted myself, and have avoided hitting children as a result.
What I find rather difficult to swallow, is that these rules only apply to cyclists. A driver in the same situation who struck a child would almost certainly not be blamed, but a cyclist would. This is a double standard and until it changes and all similar hypocrisies stop, then we are being discriminated against and held to a higher standard than everybody else.
See my previous post about cyclists always being in the wrong.
burtthebike wrote:
This is a perfectly reasonable view, and one I have adopted myself, and have avoided hitting children as a result.
What I find rather difficult to swallow, is that these rules only apply to cyclists. A driver in the same situation who struck a child would almost certainly not be blamed, but a cyclist would. This is a double standard and until it changes and all similar hypocrisies stop, then we are being discriminated against and held to a higher standard than everybody else.
See my previous post about cyclists always being in the wrong.— Mungecrundle
My own policy is to always assume that I am in the wrong.
This works for both marriage and driving.
Mungecrundle wrote:
As both a cyclist and husband, your official designation is “scapegoat.”
burtthebike wrote:
I’ve made my choices…
I always slow down in urban
I always slow down in urban areas such as these, those pesky kids can break a spoke if you are not careful.
muppetkeeper wrote:
It’s really difficult cleaning blood from disc brakes as well.