Plans to allow two-way cycling on a pedestrianised shopping street – which local cyclists argue would provide a “great boost” to a “struggling” area which is “ideal for cycling” – have been opposed this week by local traders, who say the proposed trial will lead to “carnage” and health and safety concerns for elderly shoppers.
Oxfordshire County Council is currently carrying out a public consultation on the implementation of an 18-month trial to enable cycling on the pedestrianised area of Sheep Street in Bicester.
The shopping street has been pedestrianised for three decades, but earlier this year an Experimental Traffic Order (ETO) to allow cyclists access to the route, which local cycling campaigners the Bicester Bike Users Group said has “ample” room for bicycle riders and pedestrians to co-exist safely, was set to be approved by the Liberal Democrat-controlled local authority’s transport chief Andrew Gant.
However, after Conservative councillors and Thames Valley Police raised concerns about the trial, with the force noting that the proposal would “split public opinion”, Gant acknowledged the views of those councillors demanding that the “lack” of listening to concerned residents was addressed, and instead opted to order a public consultation.
And as the consultation draws to a close on Saturday, traders on Sheep Street have told the Oxford Mail that the potential legalisation of cycling in Bicester’s shopping area could have serious health and safety implications for elderly residents.
“It’s definitely a no-go for me – for the simple reason I sit out the front watching every day and the street is full of elderly people with Zimmer frames, mobility scooters, and mothers with push chairs,” John O’Leary, the landlord of McCafferty’s at the White Hart on Sheep Street, told the newspaper.
“I observe bikes up and down the street everyday – it’s a disaster. From what I’ve seen myself, my main concern is health and safety.
“At the moment it’s not working, it’s not going to work in the future. The market will be carnage. Sheep Street is a pedestrianised street and it should stay that way.”
O’Leary’s argument that some cyclists already (illegally) use Sheep Street was in fact raised earlier this year by Bicester Bike Users Group chair Catherine Hickman, who told road.cc that a lack of enforcement in the area means “the least responsible cyclists” cycle along the pedestrianised area regardless, leading to a “worst of both worlds” situation.
However, other locals who work on the street argue that the trial would make matters worse and make the street more “dangerous”.
“We don’t need it,” Holly Lewis, who works at Lewis’ Butchers, said. “People will speed along here – when it’s busy on a Friday you can’t see up the street. I think it will be a bit dangerous.”
Meanwhile, Janette Lee, who works at Nash’s Bakery and says she is a cyclist, added: “We all cycle here and we don’t think they should [allow the trial] because it’s not fair on the old people. It’s an accident waiting to happen.”
“There’s nothing more frightening than someone coming up behind you,” her colleague Angela Stephens agreed.
“There’s so many things that need doing in Bicester, it’s not a priority.”
Despite these apparent health and safety concerns, Bicester’s cycling campaigners have pointed out that there is plenty of room on Sheep Street for both pedestrians and cyclists, and that opening it up to allow those who have travelled into the town by bike access to the street could prove to be a “great boost to the struggling high street”.
“It’s really wide and spacious with a delineated central ‘road’ area and ample wide pavements,” Hickman told road.cc in March when the plans were first raised in the council.
“Almost all week the footfall is very light. Guidance and research indicate that it would be the ideal place for combining walking and cycling, so we’d really like to see the current cycling ban lifted, at least on a trial basis.
“If we don’t give it a go, it’s hard to know how well it will work. It would be a great boost to the struggling high street, as well as encouraging healthy and sustainable travel choices.”
She continued: “The current situation is unworkable because the current blanket prohibition is not enforced anyway. This means that the least responsible cyclists cycle regardless, causing aggravation and resentment towards cyclists.
“More responsible cyclists either have to lock their bikes out of sight at either end of the street as there is no provision for cycle parking along the street, push their bikes the whole way, or leave their bikes at home and choose to access the town centre by car instead.
“For some disabled cyclists, pushing a bike is very difficult or not possible. It’s therefore really frustrating that some of the local councillors say they are ‘totally opposed’ even to a trial.”
A spokesperson for the coalition of Healthy Streets and Active Travel agreed, calling the current restrictions on cycling “ridiculous” and saying that “every study of cyclist-pedestrian interaction shows it to be safe”.
Those comments came as Conservative councillor Michael Waine claimed that allowing cyclists to use the route would mean being unable to “safeguard pedestrians and other users, especially on busy days when the street is full of people”.
Beyond the local authority, Thames Valley Police also weighed in on the situation, noting that the street has been “the source of misuse” by cyclists for years, and that lifting the ban “could set a precedent for other locations”.
Calling the decision a “tricky one”, before adding that the council is “only trying to formalise what is the norm”, a spokesperson for the police said: “Allowing this could set a precedent for other similar locations. This location has been the source of misuse by cyclists for many decades despite the restriction and also a burden on use. This is probably one of those proposals that will split public opinion.”
And while much of this criticism of the plan, from councillors and police officers alike, has centred around pedestrian safety, especially on days when Sheep Street hosts markets, campaigners have pointed out that there is rarely the same concern about large HGVs and delivery vehicles accessing the route to supply businesses.
“Their priorities seem all wrong,” Hickman suggested while speaking to road.cc. “Cycling responsibly along the street would be relatively low risk, particularly as there is space, and it would provide a safe route given that there are no alternative routes that actually have safe cycle provision. It’s also worth mentioning that Sheep Street is part of NCN route 51.”
Responding to the latest criticisms from traders, a spokesperson for Oxfordshire County Council said: “We would urge everyone who wishes to raise an issue to go to the consultation page and log them there, so they can be taken into account during the decision-making process.
“We want to hear all views on every aspect of this proposal. Please remember that the scheme being proposed is a trial.
“If it is approved, an additional public consultation will be held for the first six months of its operation. This will enable people to give their views on how the trial is progressing, potentially allowing amendments to be made or ending the trial.
“It will also form part of the considerations about whether or not to recommend the scheme be made permanent.”
26 thoughts on “Allowing “speeding” cyclists to ride on “struggling” high street would lead to “carnage” and “frighten” elderly, say traders opposed to lifting cycling ban in pedestrianised shopping area”
these shopkeepers will get
these shopkeepers will get the defunct street they deserve ?
My thoughts precisely. Let
My thoughts precisely. Let them starve.
It’s a struggling high street
It’s a struggling high street, but also it’s so rammed with people that there’s no room for bikes.
I assume there’s also nowhere to park bikes, which is the investment required to actually get the most benefit from opening up the space to customers who come by bike.
Fail to see a problem. When
Fail to see a problem. When you reach the noi cycling area get off and walk. These areas are never long. Whinging self entitled types tar all cyclist with the same brush.
A lot of older and less abled
A lot of older and less abled people use their bikes/trikes as a mobility aid, there is no exemption for these people and they can’t “just get off and walk”. They can however, drive right to the front door of the shop in a car with a blue badge and the current speed limit is 30mph. That’s the problem
High Street “retailers” are
High Street “retailers” are doomed in any case. Not because of cyclists, but because of the Internet. Unless they are offering something that can’t be delivered, they are fighting a losing battle; yes, even despite a few worthy citizens who smugly boycott Amazon.
There are still ways the “High Street” can thrive, all of which entail making it an attractive destination, offering something that Amazon can not deliver. Typically that will be “experiences”, a meal out, coffee and cakes, etc, but I’m sure there are other possibilities, given enough imagination and business acumen.
But for existing retailers invested in their past and facing their own decline like frogs in a kettle, croaking at cyclists is their only response.
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
pturner wrote:
Am I too late?
So cyclists are dangerous but
So cyclists are dangerous but hulking great HGVs with poor visibilty manoeuvering in a pedestrianised street aren’t? Riiiight!
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
“Meanwhile, Janette Lee, who
“Meanwhile, Janette Lee, who works at Nash’s Bakery and says she is a cyclist, added….”
Sure, great story.
As a baker myself I don’t think we should be making money off selling cakes to anyone riding a bike. I mean: gluten allergies, the calorie count, the environmental damage in the supply chain. Won;t somebody please think of the children!! (and old people for some reason)
Clem Fandango wrote:
As someone who’s made a few baguettes, I feel your pain.
oh you’re on a roll.
oh you’re on a roll.
Why did the baker have brown hands?
He kneaded a poo.
I think cycling and baking go
I think cycling and baking go together, but then I’m a fan of pavé.
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
pturner wrote:
Who can reply to the consultation and how long is it open for?
It’s perfectly possible to
It’s perfectly possible to use “considerate cycling welcome” signs on a pedestrianised street*. It is also possible to caption that with a s59 (Police Reform Act 2002), such that the sign is the first warning. If an authorised officer has cause to stop anti-social use of a cycle in the area, that’s the 2nd count and the vehicle can be seized.
It’s not always possible for the right authorised officer to be there when the anti-social use is committed, or for them to be capable of stopping the rider, but that’s already the case.
The only people they can currently catch are the ones who are not really a justifiable reason for the prohibition in the first place.
To spell that out: if I, as an upstanding citizen, was wanting to ride through the zone in a sensible manner and with due regard for pedestrians, I would probably stop if a PC/PCSO/enforcement officer invited me to do so. If I was some scrote zipping through without regard for others, I am not likely to make myself available for their enquiries.
(* ‘pedestrianised’ doesn’t necessarily mean ‘no cycling’, although the signs in the photo show that it does in this instance)
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
It’s a ‘dying’ high street
It’s a ‘dying’ high street that is also too crowded to allow cyclists. Are they ALL just window shopping?
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
Oh dear, it’s those Terror
Oh dear, it’s those Terror-Cyclists again! People losing count of the number of times cyclists have knocked them to the ground from their wheelchairs, given them COPD from all the traffic jams and pollution caused by the cyclists, given them nighmares from the hordes of cyclists travelling at over 40 mph emerging from the empty cycle lanes. The disability these Tory voters are suffering from is right there in their heads, and the only way they can be cured is by ignoring the stupid pillocks
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
There’s always a reason isn’t
There’s always a reason isn’t there? We can’t stop cars because the high st will die. We can’t get rid of parking spaces because the high st will die.
And now it’s “we can’t allow cycling because the old people will die”.
It’s as if they’re all invented by people who love cars but hate cycling.
The consultation is open to
The consultation is open to all but closes today. Your response would be very welcome: https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/sheep-street-etro
The Dutch do the majority of
The Dutch do the majority of their shoping by bike, so this argument doesn’t hold water. Granted they have better facilities than us, but it doesn’t alter the fact that pedestrians and cyclists co-exist well there. As for the Police’s concerns, if they have any concerns about this they should ensure that officers patrol there to prevent any problems.
Hmm… while I agree the
Hmm… while I agree the traders are mistaken (or would be, eventually) the “pedestrians and cyclists co-exist” means something different in NL.
For one – where cyclists are not expected to be cycling on the streets they have their own space AND pedestrians have their own *. So in fact aside from crossing the cycle path (easy) there’s little need for interaction.
The Dutch do in fact have pedestrianised areas where cycling is restricted for at least part of the day. Like the UK, this may be essentially “self-enforcing”, I don’t have details of actual enforcement or if this causes people to get irked with each other.
I think that in NL in many places people are cyclists first e.g. when they’re walking around town, they often arrived there by cycling. That means that there’s probably more “understanding” – because I’m walking now and she’s cycling, but in a minute our roles may be reversed.
Finally – shopping patterns (and indeed shop types and locations) may be different.
* Pragmatically, in places like the countryside between villages where there will be few people and especially few walking, only cycle paths are built (pedestrians are always allowed on these).