|
|
 |
| |
Heath is big enough for cycles and feet
• FAR from joining the shortsighted and selfish Heath for Feet campaign, I’d like to suggest that cycling should be allowed on all the paths on Hampstead Heath.
There is no evidence whatsoever that cycling presents a danger to walkers on shared paths; most cyclists take care to avoid bumping into anyone, not just out of courtesy but because this is just as likely to injure them as the other person.
Cycling on roads shared with cars, on the other hand, is certainly dangerous, with growing numbers of cyclists being killed on London’s streets each year. The volume of traffic makes it no longer appropriate for cyclists to share roads with cars, and even cycle lanes are not always safe. A woman was recently killed by a lorry on a cycle lane crossing Euston Road.
On a recent trip to France I saw a regenerated riverside walk where cyclists weaved happily in and out among strollers, children, buggies and dogs, without anyone appearing put out in the slightest. The same could be true on the Heath. If it is safe for cyclists to use certain shared paths on the Heath, there is no reason why they should not be allowed to use all of them, provided they cycle with care and consideration.
The fact that a few irresponsible people ride their bikes too fast does not mean that all should be banned. Many motorists break the speed limit but no one suggests that this disqualifies all drivers from using the roads.
Reckless cyclists should be penalised, leaving others to cycle thoughtfully, without disturbing the peace and enjoyment of walkers.
Instead of vilifying cyclists, walkers should reserve their fury for car drivers. Most cyclists merely want to get from A to B safely and pleasantly, and many make the effort to pedal to do their bit to prevent pollution and global warming.
Children who would otherwise be chauffeured, to the detriment of both their health and the environment, need to be able cycle safely to school. If we want more people to get out of their cars and onto their bikes, walkers cannot insist on keeping every inch of the Heath to themselves.
NICOLE SEGRE
Quadrant Grove, NW5
• YOUR article on Heath cycle paths (Keep the Heath feet friendly, Oct 12) suggests Heath For Feet believes those who “ride at speed and off the dedicated cycle paths” and the “strong and well-organised cycling lobby” are one and the same group.
Heath For Feet apparently sees this as an argument for not introducing more cycle paths. But it’s precisely because the cycling lobby doesn’t want to ride off the dedicated routes that it wants more cycle paths installed.
Some cyclists will always break the rules, like some walkers on the Heath will always play loud music, start barbeques, and generally disturb the “rural and tranquil nature”.
There is, however, a significant majority of cyclists who would like to share the Heath in a responsible way, and when those same cyclists go walking they would like people on bikes to treat them with the same respect.
The balance of uses should be achieved through sensible rules and sensible fines for those who break them, rather than Heath For Feet’s ludicrous displays of archaic NIMBYism.
DOMINIC TINLEY
Ryland Road, NW5
• I GATHER from Sunita Rappai’s report on the Heath Hands AGM last week, which I regret I was unable to attend, that the City of London flew a very large kite over Kenwood House at that occasion.
She reports that Jennifer Adams, the City’s Director of Open Spaces and as such its most senior official with responsibility for the Heath, wants us all to debate the possibility that cyclists be allowed to cycle anywhere on the Heath.
It is pretty clear that this would expose the City to a huge risk of prosecution under the Health and Safety at Work Act, resulting from the near certainty that many people would meet with accidents from collision with cyclists, whether the injured were on foot or cycling, and whether they were blessed with all their faculties and senses or had the misfortune to suffer from any disabilities and impairments.
We can make this prediction with confidence, because it is clear that the Heath Constabulary does not presently have the resources to enforce the by-laws on cycling, nor to police properly even the four paths to which cyclists are theoretically confined.
The Heath budget, despite the continuing generosity of the City, is severely constrained relative to the demands upon it, and likely to remain so.
It therefore seems highly unlikely that more constables will become available to police peripatetic cyclists tearing about over all 800 acres.
It also follows that there will not be any funding to modify the huge network of paths across the Heath to comply with the minimum safety requirements for shared use.
Since the Director of Open Spaces must be aware of these facts, I can only assume that we are being prepared for a severe curtailment of cycling on the Heath, which its many million pedestrian users will surely welcome.
TONY HILLIER
Chairman Heath and Hampstead Society
|
 |
|
|
|
