Cyclist escapes prosecution after fatal collision with pensioner

[Dogtrousers]

Well, I am an idiot. I've only just realised this incident was in Regents park, not Richmond Park. For some reason I'd seen the word "Regents" before and read it as "Richmond". After that I don't think I bothered completely reading any words beginning "Re".

Anyway. I used to ride up that way sometimes on my Brompton some years back (2015?). Just round the western side of the Park before turning left and heading north. There were indeed a lot of wannabe racers charging round and round like it was a race. I could see how residents could get a bit hacked off.

I guess the council just need to do the stats over a sufficiently long period. If the rate of accidents is sufficiently high then they should introduce calming measures like speed bumps or similar.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5...F0nUoO60pE5Fsmzw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

both accidents appear to have occurred ^^ here:

Whilst there are two "island crossings" they also have traffic lights with pedestrian buttons. There is no suggestion red lights have been jumped, in the second one the cyclist was on wrong side of road overtaking a car.

One can only assume both pedestrians didn't wait to activate the lights in the relatively sparse early morning traffic, but crossed relying on their senses.

I don't know exactly where the incidents occurred other than that reports say "near Hanover Terrace". They could equally well be south of that junction where there is a pedestrian island crossing with no lights. But maybe that's due to me not reading the reports in sufficient detail.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5...jvPniGjmFr93hXFA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

 

[T4tomo]

don't know exactly where the incidents occurred other than that reports say they were "near Hanover Terrace". They could equally well be south of that junction where there is a pedestrian island crossing with no lights. But maybe that's due to me not reading the reports in sufficient detail.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.5...jvPniGjmFr93hXFA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

It well could be there, although a bit further from the mentioned playground, but it does have a walkthrough path from Park road etc to the west, and the other junction is arguably nearer Hanover Gate than Hanover Terrace.

I guess the point still remains its very easy to walk up to the traffic light crossing from their. I dont think the road is lacking in safe crossing points.

 

[Dogtrousers]

I guess the point still remains its very easy to walk up to the traffic light crossing from their. I dont think the road is lacking in safe crossing points.

Why on earth would I walk up to the traffic light crossing if I was there? That island should be a perfectly good crossing point.

 

[T4tomo]

Why on earth would I walk up to the traffic light crossing if I was there? That island should be a perfectly good crossing point.

I was meaning if someone was especially frail or had lots of small kids with them etc and wanted absolute surety of being able to cross without a car or a bunch of bike whizzing up thinking they had priority.

I agree the island is a good crossing point, if used safely - tufty club and all that.

 

[PK99]

I was meaning if someone was especially frail or had lots of small kids with them etc and wanted absolute surety of being able to cross without a car or a bunch of bike whizzing up thinking they had priority.

I agree the island is a good crossing point, if used safely - tufty club and all that.

That sounds very like Victim blaming.
?Cyclists should use a cycle path if available, instead of the road?

 

[Dogtrousers]

Royal Parks have called for a route in Regent’s Park to be removed from time trial apps after an 81-year-old woman was struck and killed by a speeding cyclist.

The Royal Parks, which runs eight of London’s famous outdoor spaces, has written to Strava and other GPS app companies demanding the Outer Circle be removed from their tracking devices.

Telegraph on-line

That's very interesting. I imagine Strava have all the legal I's crossed and T's dotted and are completely confident that they can say something like "It's not our fault guvnor, we're just a platform. Anything bad happens, it's all someone else's fault". And point to page 77 of the Ts and Cs that everyone signs up to, which says "If anything bad happens, I agree it's all my fault".

I had a search around and found a couple of interesting legal blogs that consider a few significant cases (all in the US I think) https://blogs.kentlaw.iit.edu/islat/2016/11/22/need-speed-apps-inspire-dangerous-behavior/
https://www.bicyclelaw.com/road-rights-suing-strava/

As @Alex321 says the segment may get flagged as hazardous. (And a duplicate will just get created in its place - is there anything to stop that?)

 

[Mike_P]

Strava can label a segment as dangerous and stop times being taken

 

[Cycleops]

That's very interesting. I imagine Strava have all the legal I's crossed and T's dotted and are completely confident that they can say something like "It's not our fault guvnor, we're just a platform. Anything bad happens, it's all someone else's fault". And point to page 77 of the Ts and Cs that everyone signs up to, which says "If anything bad happens, I agree it's all my fault".

I had a search around and found a couple of interesting legal blogs that consider a few significant cases (all in the US I think) https://blogs.kentlaw.iit.edu/islat/2016/11/22/need-speed-apps-inspire-dangerous-behavior/
https://www.bicyclelaw.com/road-rights-suing-strava/

As @Alex321 says the segment may get flagged as hazardous. (And a duplicate will just get created in its place - is there anything to stop that?)

Chicken in my local bar caused a bit of a stir this lunchtime:

 

[classic33]

That sounds very like Victim blaming.
?Cyclists should use a cycle path if available, instead of the road?

Anything above 18mph and you're expected to use the road, not the cycle path.

 

[Time Waster]

There's a Strava segment on my old commute route. Back when I was fitter it always amazed me how much faster the top 10 time were than me. Considering how it was a 30mph zone through a decent sized village with pubs, coop, chippy, Chinese restaurant/takeaway, doctors, pharmacies, several car garages, numerous crossing lights (that activate quickly), curry House, various pedestrian cut through to school, library, other shops, etc.

Put simply, a busy stretch for cars, pedestrians and cyclists. However despite regularly doing it at 28mph I was still way off the pace of the top 10 who regularly topped high 30s mph. Usually top few were about 39mph average speed on that segment, a slight downhill. Usually came about 33rd!

My long winded point was that if there's a Strava segment listed on an urban, suburban or restricted speed for motorists Road then you will always get people going as fast as they physically can on a bike. If that segment is on a 30mph or 20mph road you'll get cyclists easily going over the motorist speed limits. If the road is not suitable for this then there's a big risk going on. Imho strata segments are wrong to be allowed and recorded on such roads. Perhaps Strava should only allow segments on sections of roads that meet safe standards for this kind of activity.

PS strata segments makes me think of hillbaggers or other types of baggers among the rambling community. How many wainwright's, marilyns, dartmoor letterboxes and strata segments kom have you got? I'm off to the Isle of Lewis to bag a 1500ft hill I need and while I'm there there is a segment I can get too!

 

[Ming the Merciless]

If the road is not suitable for this then there's a big risk going on

The official accident stats say there isn’t a big risk going on from bikes.

 

[Dogtrousers]

My long winded point was that if there's a Strava segment listed on an urban, suburban or restricted speed for motorists Road then you will always get people going as fast as they physically can on a bike. If that segment is on a 30mph or 20mph road you'll get cyclists easily going over the motorist speed limits. If the road is not suitable for this then there's a big risk going on. Imho strata segments are wrong to be allowed and recorded on such roads. Perhaps Strava should only allow segments on sections of roads that meet safe standards for this kind of activity.

Strava would never buy that. It would totally destroy their business model. That's all about defining your own segments and challenging others for the Q/KOM on them. All done locally and without top heavy moderation. Not my kind of thing* but a lot of people like it. Strava have built their business on this and have legally engineered things so that they are not responsible for safety or legality. They don't "allow" (or disallow) segments, they just enable them. Safety and legality is all down to the riders who set things up.

Nor would such a top-heavy approach seem to be really justified in general. Overall we aren't seeing peds being mown down in their dozens by Strava racers. On this specific stretch of road - who knows? We've had one fatality and one injury but we have no idea what the long term stats are. In this case it might be right to call a halt to to it. The Royal Parks certainly think that, and they probably know more about it than we do.

Anyway, my totally unreliable gut feel is that Strava KOM-mania may have peaked. I've got no evidence for that, so you'll have to trust me that a thing that I just made up in my head is 100% right.

* This is because I'm very high-minded and above that sort of thing. It's definitely not because, even if I trained like a demon for a year, my chances of making it into the to 1,000 on most segments would still be nil. No, nothing to do with that.

 

[Alex321]

Anything above 18mph and you're expected to use the road, not the cycle path.

Expected by who?

As a cyclist, I would certainly prefer to do so in that circumstance, but I've never seen anything suggesting it is required (or expected).

 

[Alex321]

There's a Strava segment on my old commute route. Back when I was fitter it always amazed me how much faster the top 10 time were than me. Considering how it was a 30mph zone through a decent sized village with pubs, coop, chippy, Chinese restaurant/takeaway, doctors, pharmacies, several car garages, numerous crossing lights (that activate quickly), curry House, various pedestrian cut through to school, library, other shops, etc.

Put simply, a busy stretch for cars, pedestrians and cyclists. However despite regularly doing it at 28mph I was still way off the pace of the top 10 who regularly topped high 30s mph. Usually top few were about 39mph average speed on that segment, a slight downhill. Usually came about 33rd!

Maybe those top 10 were all done early morning/late evening when hardly anybody was about?

You were used to seeing it at commute time, when presumably it would be quite busy.

 

[classic33]

Expected by who?

As a cyclist, I would certainly prefer to do so in that circumstance, but I've never seen anything suggesting it is required (or expected).

"Most segregated paths are designed for approximately 12 mph, and the Department for Transport say that cyclists going faster than 18 mph should use the road."
https://forum.cyclinguk.org/viewtopic.php?t=101809

"Using cycle tracks"

"Slow down. There’s no specific speed limit for cycle tracks, but if you’re regularly doing more than 15mph you’re better off on the road. Give way to pedestrians, and take extra care around children, dog-walkers using extendable leads, and joggers with headphones. Ring your bell to alert other cycle-track users or call out a cheerful “good morning”.
https://www.cyclescheme.co.uk/community/featured/a-commuters-guide-to-cycle-paths