- 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
news
Victoria_Street_West,_Grimsby_-_DSC07296.JPGBusiness owners complain cyclists still riding in pedestrianised zone despite council handing out thousands of pounds worth of fines
Cyclists are regularly being handed £100 on the spot fines for riding through a pedestrianised shopping street.
Two years ago, businesses on Grimsby's Victoria Street raised concerns for customer safety following a number of incidents involving cyclists.
Signs which alert cyclists to a ban on cycling along Victoria Street were subsequently installed at the entrances to the precinct.
The area is also patrolled by enforcement officers for North East Lincolnshire Council, who dished out 550 fines in the first 15 months of the ban, which was brought in as part of a Public Space Protection Order in July 2019.
But one business manager has now said she is still worried someone will get hurt by a passing cyclist, The Grimsby Telegraph reports.
She said: "We have families come in with children and sometimes the children wander out the door and it scares me to think there could be a cyclist going past a speed."
Another shopworker said: "You see it all the time everyday. The cyclists don't pay any attention to the signs.
"It is very rare to see anyone walking with their cycle. I look out our window and there is always some one riding past. Some don't care that there are people walking close by and they are going fast on their bikes."
A total of 550 fines were issued from July 2019 to October last year, according to council figures.
Courts imposed fines and costs of more than £9,000 on 14 defendants whose cases were taken to court.
All the cyclists had been issued with a £100 fixed penalty notice for cycling in the pedestrianised area on Victoria Street.
Councillor Ron Shepherd, cabinet member for Safer and Stronger Communities at North East Lincolnshire Council, said: "We will fine you if you put other people at risk by cycling in Grimsby’s pedestrian zone
“Those who choose not to pay the £100 fixed penalty notice, find themselves facing a larger bill in court.
“Enforcement officers patrol the area regularly. Shoppers, businesses and people working in the town centre often complain about nuisance cycling.
“There’s no need to cycle in the pedestrian area – Bethlehem Street and Osborne Street are literally a few metres away and run parallel to it."
Latest Comments
- Clem Fandango 1 sec ago
Jesus. F*cking. Wept. And there's a "war on motorists" you say?
- Rendel Harris 12 min 58 sec ago
It would be immature to say just tell them to fuck off, so I won't do that......
- biking59boomer 26 min 18 sec ago
What's normal about driving a contraption that belches out co2 on what may be a totally unneccessary journey. The majority of UK car journeys are...
- mark1a 53 min 1 sec ago
Thankfully, there was a massive clue at the top of the article.
- john_smith 1 hour 44 min ago
"Not really - use of the word 'accident' implies that an incident was unavoidable."...
- chrisonabike 2 hours 6 min ago
But did you go to The Netherlands though? ...
- Hirsute 2 hours 53 min ago
I didn't read it like that as strict liability was in quotes. I think they meant the concept has been introduced at a very low level and can be...
- mattw 3 hours 5 min ago
It's pathetically NY Authorities, isn't it - hypocrisy on an heroic scale?...
- chrisonabike 3 hours 11 min ago
I did! Of all the animals I've seen on bicycles dogs always look the most relaxed.
- The_Ewan 4 hours 17 min ago
I don't think that's a 'very large Garmin', I think that's a phone on a QuadLock mount.
Add new comment
87 comments
I largely agree but it is a question of degree. In general people cycling from a-b don't want to find pedestrians in their route and neither do you want to be meandering on a through cycle route - see my moan about off-street paths below. The UK problem is that in an
attempt to tick boxes for "active travel"create an actual "off-road route" without spending any money we pretty much stick a blue and white "shared use" pedestrian and cycle sign in a space and dust off our hands. We just wouldn't do this for motor vehicles - but there is still very little comprehension that cyclists are neither motorists nor pedestrians.If people have separate walking and cycle routes for actually going places as well as "mainly pedestrian" space too, the evidence suggests that these tend to self-regulate. This even "works" in town centres right now with cars! Lots of pedestrians, cycling is by necessity slow or people walk. Empty streets, speeds will go up. (Any wronguns causing trouble - just as they always do - can be an enforcement issue).
(Aside - another nuisance is we rarely clearly delineate "space for pedestrians" and "space for cycles" even when building new infra. If we could only settle on something like e.g. a single colour of asphalt nationwide people might have a hope of understanding where "their own" space was.)
If cycling becomes more popular then - just like with cars now - providing some "really pedestrian only" zones with cycle parking outside them - just like with cars - is how to do it.
OK as long as the same applies to speeding cars in 20 zones, which kill a lot more people. 85% of drivers ignore 20 limits so that should raise a few bob.
So if we're agreed this should be a universal punishment and proportionate to the risk - which seems fair - presumably the cyclists will have to endure lettuce, grapes and baby tomatoes. Motorcyclists and car drivers should face baking potatoes, melons and pineapples. That's including pavement parkers - because the cars didn't really get there by crane did they? I'm not sure we normally have suitable projectiles available for bus and lorry drivers but presumably this would be a jackfruit, yam, sweet potato or pumpkin level offense and thus generally fatal?
Although pedestrians and cyclists can mix quite safely I think that this is generally not a good idea as it slows down the cyclists. This is a common source of friction / complaints because a) both modes are fighting over scraps of space after the motor vehicles are provided for and b) motor vehicles are seen as "normal" and bicycles are not - so they attract disproportionate negative attention. Maybe also putting someone in a box has a two-way psychological distancing effect ("pedestrian was hit by a car" as opposed to "hit by a cyclist")?
Why do people reply to Boo? 80% of what he posts is just to get a reaction. That is why they takes the very extreme positions on most things ( or their "jokes" when called out on some of it). They almost got bored previously as evidenced with the flouncing and name changes but people started reposnding again.
Why does anyone post here? The pleasures of shouting into an internet-sized cave to hear the echos? This poster doesn't have an entirely one-sided history ("80%...") else I wouldn't bother. Plenty of people here have bees in their cycle-basket. If it's always repetitive and boring then just kill it by silence, yes. If you respond with something sensible and unruffled but always get ad-homs, sealioning or the Gish Gallop you know.
I'm prepared to given occasional benefit of the doubt on the "trolling" vs. "banter" - plus I quite like the surreal too...
With no dissenting voices though - even if you think they're largely in bad faith - that would leave us all creating Cyclopedia, nodding over our beer or shouting into the void. With the exception of squirrel memes, pedantry and pun-fights of course.
I love a bit of Wondermark (where sealioning comes from):
As ever the devil is in the detail.
I wonder if any of the business owners, councillors or enforcement officers have ever asked themselves why cyclists continue to flout the pedestrian zone rules?
The suggested route, Victoria Street/Bethlehem Street is full of bus stops, on-street parking bays, some which motorists have to reverse out of and heavy goods vehicles. No wonder cyclists prefer to risk a fine by cycling through the pedestrian zone rather than using the adjoining road infrastructure.
Unfortunately, Grimsby is your typical local authority where the councillors are still in the thrall of the automobile and everything has to defer to it's might. Sadly there aren't any viable alternatives, but to use Victoria Street, unless you are extremely brave/stupid.
I'm glad someone local came along to clarify why this is happening.
why dont the local council muppets use some of that funding to improve the alternate routes for cyclists?
It would be rude to ignore a possible Strava KOM opportunity.
It's just not cricket old boy 😉
I'm joking. Get off and push when it's crowded with zombie consumers.
Who would have thought that criminalising normal behaviour would be appreciated by the new criminal class? If I were anywhere near there, I'd be cycling through it as a protest against ridiculous group punishment (i.e. punishing all cyclists for the behaviour of a few).
Cycling is not a crime!
I suppose you ride your bike on the highway too ?
Hell yeah!
🎵 Get your e-bike runnin'
Head out on the highway
Looking for adventure
In whatever comes our way 𝅘𝅥𝅮
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nH5g_YWiRM
Pffft! The kid would have been fine if they'd been wearing a helmet.
I'm surprised that none of the traffic stopped and ushered the kid to safety as the police officer did.
"Highway"? We call them roads here and cyclists ride them by right (motorways excepted).
I was puzzled by that question as it didn't seem to fit in with the rest of kettlenorth's line of questioning - now it makes more sense if he meant U.S. highways.
If people are walking out of shop doorways without looking, might they also run the risk of being walked into by a passing pedestrian or hit by a person driving a mobility scooter? Ban doorways, that's what I think!
You were promised a simple solution to your perceived horrors, you were lied to, it turns out that things are far more complex than you could possibly have imagined.
Ah well...
It's tragic that none of the many people killed and seriously injured by these incredibly dangerous cyclists are being respected.
I forget, how many victims were there?
Uncountable multitudes...
No actual figures given, but I guess they must have just lost count after the first thousand. Whatever the figure, this is a serious, very real risk, and definitely worth spending time and money to police.
It sounds serious enough that there should be a mandatory pedestrian helmet law brought in and maybe the shops should be handing out hi-viz tabards for their customers.
Presumably it's hard to properly identify the mangled pedestrian remains. Or it's possible that the poor pedestrian was carried away entirely.
Fortunately I found a video by an American on how to survive in the worst terror-cycle-afflicted place on earth which may help although I appreciate this may just re-traumatise people. Actually, don't watch it. It's all frightful really, people given as little thought as squirrels...
Is that Hitchcock's lost horror masterpiece?
How would I know if it's been lost?
From: http://www.amaninthewoods.com/2015/12/alfred-hitchcocks-lost-screenplay.html
Pages