Letter: People will cycle – if it’s safe

YOUR correspondent (‘A danger for pedestrians’ A&T Letters 23rd Feb) picks up on one aspect of Dr McEwen’s excellent letter ‘Roads dangerous for cyclists’ (A&T Letters 19th Jan) concerning cycling on pavements. But we think Dr McEwen provided a more convincing diagnosis!

Your correspondent, by referring to cyclists using the seawall as an example, really misses the point. The seawall is widely used for recreation by walkers, dog-walkers, birdwatchers, parents with buggies and cyclists. It wasn’t designed primarily for any of these but just to hold the sea back. The reality is that even though sections of the seawall would probably fail just about every HCC test for a multipurpose track, it works for all these users 99.9% of the time, and contributes hugely to the local tourist economy.

And it’s a big leap to go from cycling on the seawall to generalising about cycling on pavements. Let’s start by accepting Dr McEwen’s premise that if cycling is made safe, many people would use a bike for all their short journeys.

He also pointed out that with improved pavements these could be shared by pedestrians and cyclists, with cyclists showing due consideration (and dismounting where necessary).

We suspect this could only be implemented in a few situations, but should not be ruled out – there are good examples of so-called ’combined paths’ (for use by cyclists as well as pedestrians) in Lymington where this works without any serious bother to anyone.

We know that the growth in cycling numbers will come mainly from the short everyday trips that most of us make. In those very few situations where this can be done without compromising on safety, it may be the least worst, and possibly the only option.

Transition Lymington, Christchurch Bicycle Club