I'm absolutely furious!

On 10 May 2005 07:25:50 -0700 someone who may be
wrote this:-

As yet the Environment Agency are not commenting.

There's a surprise:-)

I am not quite ready
to burn the gate down (its made of metal anyway!)

Angle grinder. However, being guilty of being a cyclist, the police
will have a go at you.

If someone just decided to build a
wall across the M25 there would be outrage, why do cyclists always get
the worse end of the deal???

Because motorists are hard working, salt of the earth, oppressed
people.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Tue, 10 May 2005 15:51:43 +0100 someone who may be Peter Clinch
wrote this:-

As it is I consciously avoid a lot of these paths now because taking the
road is just easier than having to heave my bike over/round something
installed on the whim of a cretin who is so concerned about blocking off
people that shouldn't be there he's forgotten to easily allow the folk
who should be.

Indeed. http://www.sustrans.org.uk/webfiles/...heets/ff22.pdf
is clear enough on the matter and has been available for six and a
half years.

I am a cyclist. I am avoiding cycle paths because they obstruct my
progress. There is something wrong with this picture...

I think there is something right. You have made the correct
deductions.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Tue, 10 May 2005 07:25:50 -0700, oliver.keating wrote:

As yet the Environment Agency are not commenting. I am not quite ready
to burn the gate down (its made of metal anyway!) but certainly this
isn't one I am going to let rest. If someone just decided to build a
wall across the M25 there would be outrage, why do cyclists always get
the worse end of the deal???

Indeed. We can build a national road network, such that you can drive
or cycle from Lands End to John O'Groats without going over a bump more
than an inch high (speeds humps excepted, but you know what I mean).
But just try to get a wheelchair/pushchair through any given city in
Britain. Even have the ludicrous situation of workmen constructing
a dropped pavement near me, and leaving at least a two inch kerb.
If there was even a two inch kerb laid across a busy road there
would be complaints.

On Tue, 10 May 2005 15:51:43 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote:



Well, quite. Though I can see that the aforementioned yoof may be a
problem in some times and places, the whole point of a cycle path should
be to actively make it accessible to /cyclists/. I would personally
much rather share one with the odd numpty if it meant I could also share
it with tandems, tricycles, handcycles, and bikes powered by people who
weren't up to manhandling their mounts over bloody awkward obstacles.

As it is I consciously avoid a lot of these paths now because taking the
road is just easier than having to heave my bike over/round something
installed on the whim of a cretin who is so concerned about blocking off
people that shouldn't be there he's forgotten to easily allow the folk
who should be.

I am a cyclist. I am avoiding cycle paths because they obstruct my
progress. There is something wrong with this picture...

Well said that man. Totally agree.

I had a bit of a go at a local councillor recently,
regarding some metal barriers which had appeared on one of the docksides
near where I live.

A bit of Googling reveals that there are standards for how such barriers
should be laid out. I made a quick visit with a tape measure, and lo and
behold these ones measured up.
The barriers need to be constructed thus (from above):

0--------------------0



0---------------0 0----------------0

where the 0 characters represent verticals.

I'll dig out the URL - if I'm not wrong it is on the sustrans site.

On Tue, 10 May 2005 17:02:40 +0100, John Hearns wrote:



As it is I consciously avoid a lot of these paths now because taking the
road is just easier than having to heave my bike over/round something
installed on the whim of a cretin who is so concerned about blocking off
people that shouldn't be there he's forgotten to easily allow the folk
who should be.

I am a cyclist. I am avoiding cycle paths because they obstruct my
progress. There is something wrong with this picture...

Well said that man. Totally agree.


I'll dig out the URL - if I'm not wrong it is on the sustrans site.

Not what I was looking for, but relevant:
http://www.sustrans.org.uk/webfiles/...heets/ff05.pdf

On Tue, 10 May 2005 16:52:23 +0100 someone who may be John Hearns
wrote this:-

Indeed. We can build a national road network, such that you can drive
or cycle from Lands End to John O'Groats without going over a bump more
than an inch high (speeds humps excepted, but you know what I mean).

I have yet to see a "MOTORISTS GET OUT AND PUSH" sign on this
network either.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

in message , John Hearns
') wrote:

On Tue, 10 May 2005 15:51:43 +0100, Peter Clinch wrote:

I am a cyclist. I am avoiding cycle paths because they obstruct my
progress. There is something wrong with this picture...

Well said that man. Totally agree.

A bit of Googling reveals that there are standards for how such
barriers should be laid out. I made a quick visit with a tape measure,
and lo and behold these ones measured up.
The barriers need to be constructed thus (from above):

0--------------------0



0---------------0 0----------------0


And that helps someone with a bent trike how, precisely?

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

[ This .sig subject to change without notice ]

in message .com,
') wrote:

Well, heres an update:

According to sustrans, I am not the only one who has complained about
this particular gate. Apparently it has been constructed by the
Environment Agency itself to "deter motorcyclists". I find this
particularly amusing because:

Oliver, someone said upthread, apparently quoting the Highways Act 1980,
that 'any person' (which means you) can bring a prosecution against
anyone who obstructs a highway (which includes a cycle path).
Unfortunately a quick google did not find the full text of the act
online, but I suggest you

(i) Go down to your local reference library and check the act to be sure
and then
(ii) Write a polite letter to the Enviornment Agency advising them of
your intention to prosecute them.

Then sit back and await developments - I'd be hugely surprised if you
actually had to come good on your threat.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

The Conservative Party is now dead. The corpse may still be
twitching, but resurrection is not an option - unless Satan
chucks them out of Hell as too objectionable even for him.

Simon Brooke wrote:
in message .com,
') wrote:


Well, heres an update:

According to sustrans, I am not the only one who has complained about
this particular gate. Apparently it has been constructed by the
Environment Agency itself to "deter motorcyclists". I find this
particularly amusing because:


Oliver, someone said upthread, apparently quoting the Highways Act 1980,
that 'any person' (which means you) can bring a prosecution against
anyone who obstructs a highway (which includes a cycle path).
Unfortunately a quick google did not find the full text of the act
online, but I suggest you

(i) Go down to your local reference library and check the act to be sure
and then
(ii) Write a polite letter to the Enviornment Agency advising them of
your intention to prosecute them.

Then sit back and await developments - I'd be hugely surprised if you
actually had to come good on your threat.

I think you were referring to a post I made or a subsequent quotation of
it. Its not the Highways Act, its the Countryside and Rights of Way Act
2000, and I think the critical point is that the path must be a highway
or a right of way.

This is the Act
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/20000037.htm

and this is what I posted befo

http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-cou...issues/public/

.... says: "Protecting Rights of Way"

"Highway authorities (usually synonymous with surveying authorities)
have a duty to assert and protect the rights of the public to the use
and enjoyment of any highway. In this instance, ‘highway’ includes
rights of way. This means they are obliged by law to keep rights of way
open and useable. There are various provisions that assist in carrying
out this duty."

"It is an offence to wilfully obstruct free passage along a highway
without lawful authority or excuse. Anyone can take out a prosecution
against those who obstruct a highway. In addition, highway authorities
may secure the removal of obstructions by serving notice on the person
responsible for the obstruction. If that person fails to comply with the
notice the highway authority is entitled to arrange for the removal of
the obstruction at that person’s expense."

"New powers, to be introduced under the Countryside and Rights of Way
Act 2000, enable any person to serve notice on a highway authority
requesting it to secure the removal of an obstruction. Such a notice may
lead to an order requiring the removal of the obstruction being imposed
by a magistrates’ court. In addition, the 2000 Act already provides for
a magistrates’ court to order the removal of an obstruction following a
conviction for wilful obstruction. Failure to comply with such an order
can lead to further fines, which may be imposed for each day the offence
continues. For more details about these provisions of the Countryside
and Rights of Way Act 2000,
http://www.defra.gov.uk/wildlife-cou...e/cl/index.htm "

"The Government expects authorities to ensure that any obstructions they
discover, or have reported to them, are removed as soon as is reasonably
practicable."

--
Joe * If I cannot be free I'll be cheap

On Tue, 10 May 2005 21:09:15 +0100, Simon Brooke wrote:

The barriers need to be constructed thus (from above):

0--------------------0



0---------------0 0----------------0


And that helps someone with a bent trike how, precisely?

I must grudgingly admit that these barriers aren't that bad to negotiate
when on a bike. Slow down, a quick dab of the foot on the ground and you
are round them.
Which then begs the question what good do they do to stop noisy scooter
riders... I believe though that nuisance from scooters has been cut in
that area (I think yoofs were racing each other round the dock,
Greenland Dock if anyone knows it).