Cyclists and pedestrians to share City Beach space

First published in News by

CYCLISTS will share the same space as pedestrians along Southend seafront when the £7.6million City Beach scheme is complete.

There will be no dedicated cycle path along Marine Parade, but instead cyclists will use the wider promenade area with people walking along the seafront.

Council bosses plan to paint markings to indicate the cycle path in the paving, rather than a designated track and have set aside £10,000 to carry out the work from their highways budget.

Their vision of City Beach is of a recreational area where they want to discourage fast cycling near pedestrians.

Southend’s councillor for transport, Mark Flewitt, said the cycle provision was not subject to the same deadline as the rest of the City Beach project, but he expected it to be done by the end of the month.

He added: “The enhanced paving area at City Beach is designed to be used by both pedestrians and cyclists.

“We are currently looking at ways of managing this designated shared space, but it will not involve the type of engineering measures employed elsewhere on the seafront where sections of pavement have been removed and coloured cycle tracks have been introduced.

“Provision for cyclists will be met from the annual highways budget and is therefore not subject to the March 31 deadline set for the main City Beach works.”

The Government-funded City Beach scheme has to be completed by the end of the month, otherwise any unfinished work will be paid for by the council.

Graham Pearl, of Southend Wheelers and a Bike-It officer for Sustrans, welcomed the idea, adding: “Anything that allows us to cycle in more places is beneficial.

“When it comes to shared use, it’s all about respect for each other, both cyclists and pedestrians.”

However, Carmel Bishop, 42, of Bishopsteignton, Shoebury, added: “You used to get serious problems, particularly in Chalkwell during busy periods when pedestrians were dodging cyclists.

“It looks like we’re going back to that.”

Comments (43)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:10am Mon 14 Mar 11

Nebs says...

Will probably be fine most of the time, but in the summer when it is full of tourists and small children I think provision will need to be made in the budget to fund an additional ambulance.
Will probably be fine most of the time, but in the summer when it is full of tourists and small children I think provision will need to be made in the budget to fund an additional ambulance. Nebs
  • Score: 0

7:11am Mon 14 Mar 11

SARFENDMAN says...

""Council bosses plan to paint markings to indicate the cycle path in the paving, rather than a designated track and have set aside £10,000 to carry out the work from their highways budget.""
Then, Why? oh Why? did they not do this all along the seafront where they put in a great expense a cycle track. Around parts of Switzerland they just paint on a track marking and it works fine. Would have saved a whole packet too!
""Council bosses plan to paint markings to indicate the cycle path in the paving, rather than a designated track and have set aside £10,000 to carry out the work from their highways budget."" Then, Why? oh Why? did they not do this all along the seafront where they put in a great expense a cycle track. Around parts of Switzerland they just paint on a track marking and it works fine. Would have saved a whole packet too! SARFENDMAN
  • Score: 0

7:29am Mon 14 Mar 11

'V' says...

This was in the design right from the beginning. Although painting a track will cause conflict, with people being misled into thinking cyclists should be restricted to the space between the lines.
This was in the design right from the beginning. Although painting a track will cause conflict, with people being misled into thinking cyclists should be restricted to the space between the lines. 'V'
  • Score: 0

8:03am Mon 14 Mar 11

Phil McCrakin says...

Using my powers of prediction I see the Echo headline summer 2011:

Family of East End dobbers sue council as brat gets run over by cyclist. Granny Chelsea, aged 27, said: It ain't right, my little Lee was runnin abart on the front an this geezer run over 'is toe. I'm gonna sue em aint I - he can't run to the shops to get my fags no more.
Using my powers of prediction I see the Echo headline summer 2011: Family of East End dobbers sue council as brat gets run over by cyclist. Granny Chelsea, aged 27, said: It ain't right, my little Lee was runnin abart on the front an this geezer run over 'is toe. I'm gonna sue em aint I - he can't run to the shops to get my fags no more. Phil McCrakin
  • Score: 0

8:04am Mon 14 Mar 11

Tony Bman says...

If the speed limits are kept at there current level along the front then there isn't a huge problem is there? It will perfectly safe for "sports" cyclists to ride on the road and for families who tend to ride at much slower speeds the wider sea front can easily accommodate both pedestrians and "recreational" cyclists.
If the speed limits are kept at there current level along the front then there isn't a huge problem is there? It will perfectly safe for "sports" cyclists to ride on the road and for families who tend to ride at much slower speeds the wider sea front can easily accommodate both pedestrians and "recreational" cyclists. Tony Bman
  • Score: 0

8:20am Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Tony Bman wrote:
If the speed limits are kept at there current level along the front then there isn't a huge problem is there? It will perfectly safe for "sports" cyclists to ride on the road and for families who tend to ride at much slower speeds the wider sea front can easily accommodate both pedestrians and "recreational" cyclists.
The vast majority of cyclists using the road are utility cyclists, people who use the bicycle for commuting, shopping, and general travel. Among cyclists 'sport' cyclists are a minority.
[quote][p][bold]Tony Bman[/bold] wrote: If the speed limits are kept at there current level along the front then there isn't a huge problem is there? It will perfectly safe for "sports" cyclists to ride on the road and for families who tend to ride at much slower speeds the wider sea front can easily accommodate both pedestrians and "recreational" cyclists.[/p][/quote]The vast majority of cyclists using the road are utility cyclists, people who use the bicycle for commuting, shopping, and general travel. Among cyclists 'sport' cyclists are a minority. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

8:39am Mon 14 Mar 11

Bosniavet says...

"However, Carmel Bishop, 42, of Bishopsteignton, Shoebury, added: “You used to get serious problems, particularly in Chalkwell during busy periods when pedestrians were dodging cyclists.

“It looks like we’re going back to that.”"

I find myself agreeing with Carmel, whose comments from the story I have cut & pasted above.
If they are going to paint lines on the pavement area to indicate where cyclists should ride, & they give adequate signage informing BOTH cyclists & pedestrians that that is the area where cycles should be ridden, & IF both parties take notice, then all should be OK.
However, given the fact that the majority (it seems) of cyclists who ride in the London Road area already illegally ride on the oavement, showing no consideration for pedestrians, many of whom I have seen almost physically pushed into the gutter or forced to stop & dodge into doorways etc, then I can predict chaos. Yes, an extra ambulance, dedicated to the area during the period from Easter to October may be a good idea as I can foresee countless injuries as results of both accidents & physical violence, but we also need to consider the provision of extra Police Officers, not PCSOs to enforce the law & keep the peace. I can see the oiutcry when, as will happen, the first serious injury or death ocurs in this area as a result of a collision between a cyclist & a pedestrian.
As a cyclist myself, I will ensure I stay with the designated area, or ride in the road, & I sincerely my fellow bicycle rider will do the same.
"However, Carmel Bishop, 42, of Bishopsteignton, Shoebury, added: “You used to get serious problems, particularly in Chalkwell during busy periods when pedestrians were dodging cyclists. “It looks like we’re going back to that.”" I find myself agreeing with Carmel, whose comments from the story I have cut & pasted above. If they are going to paint lines on the pavement area to indicate where cyclists should ride, & they give adequate signage informing BOTH cyclists & pedestrians that that is the area where cycles should be ridden, & IF both parties take notice, then all should be OK. However, given the fact that the majority (it seems) of cyclists who ride in the London Road area already illegally ride on the oavement, showing no consideration for pedestrians, many of whom I have seen almost physically pushed into the gutter or forced to stop & dodge into doorways etc, then I can predict chaos. Yes, an extra ambulance, dedicated to the area during the period from Easter to October may be a good idea as I can foresee countless injuries as results of both accidents & physical violence, but we also need to consider the provision of extra Police Officers, not PCSOs to enforce the law & keep the peace. I can see the oiutcry when, as will happen, the first serious injury or death ocurs in this area as a result of a collision between a cyclist & a pedestrian. As a cyclist myself, I will ensure I stay with the designated area, or ride in the road, & I sincerely my fellow bicycle rider will do the same. Bosniavet
  • Score: 0

8:56am Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

" I can see the oiutcry when, as will happen, the first serious injury or death ocurs in this area as a result of a collision between a cyclist & a pedestrian."

Not between car and pedestrian, or car and cyclist then? As has already happened. Or had you forgotten the paramedic who was mowed down and left in critical condition by a quadbike which had mounted the pavement and cycle track?

I have a question for you, where are eastbound cyclists supposed to ride when there are vehicles parked in the seafront cycle lane?
It is illegal to ride on the pavement, so that's out. We can't switch to the road because we would be on the wrong side of the road.
So where then?
" I can see the oiutcry when, as will happen, the first serious injury or death ocurs in this area as a result of a collision between a cyclist & a pedestrian." Not between car and pedestrian, or car and cyclist then? As has already happened. Or had you forgotten the paramedic who was mowed down and left in critical condition by a quadbike which had mounted the pavement and cycle track? I have a question for you, where are eastbound cyclists supposed to ride when there are vehicles parked in the seafront cycle lane? It is illegal to ride on the pavement, so that's out. We can't switch to the road because we would be on the wrong side of the road. So where then? ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

8:58am Mon 14 Mar 11

Phil McCrakin says...

Lets hope that these cyclists are not the same lycra wearing half-wit twonks who ride 3 abreast on the roads holding up the traffic for miles. Ban the lot of them or make them pay tax & insurance to use the roads.
Lets hope that these cyclists are not the same lycra wearing half-wit twonks who ride 3 abreast on the roads holding up the traffic for miles. Ban the lot of them or make them pay tax & insurance to use the roads. Phil McCrakin
  • Score: 0

9:02am Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Phil McCrakin wrote:
Lets hope that these cyclists are not the same lycra wearing half-wit twonks who ride 3 abreast on the roads holding up the traffic for miles. Ban the lot of them or make them pay tax & insurance to use the roads.
Cyclists do pay tax for the roads. Roads are paid for through income tax and council tax, both of which cyclists pay.
[quote][p][bold]Phil McCrakin[/bold] wrote: Lets hope that these cyclists are not the same lycra wearing half-wit twonks who ride 3 abreast on the roads holding up the traffic for miles. Ban the lot of them or make them pay tax & insurance to use the roads.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do pay tax for the roads. Roads are paid for through income tax and council tax, both of which cyclists pay. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

9:03am Mon 14 Mar 11

reptile says...

There are two things I hate on pavements, dog sh*t and cyclists.
There are two things I hate on pavements, dog sh*t and cyclists. reptile
  • Score: 0

9:11am Mon 14 Mar 11

Bosniavet says...

Do what I would do, either:-
1. dismount, & wheel your bicycle on the pavement past the obstruction, then remount & continue riding along the cycle path.
or
2. dismount, cross the road, & ride on the correct side of the road in the correct direction until safe to reverse the procedure & continue on your way using the cycle path.
At the same time, I would also expect you would take a note of the registration number of any vehicle which has done this, along with the time & date, as well as considering photographic evidence, so you can bring the attention of the authoritues to this matter. I would have suggested finding a Civil Enforcement Officer & asking them to carry out their duties, but personal experience tells me this won't be successful.
Your example of the paramedic who was hit by an illegally driven motor vehicle (quadbike) is a little disingenious to say the least & is not a valid example of the risks involved in the specific area that is under discussion, especially as it took place elsewhere along the seafront.
I know you will continue to argue this point as you seem to believe that cyclists have a god-given right to take precedence over everyone else, regardless of the legalities.
Do what I would do, either:- 1. dismount, & wheel your bicycle on the pavement past the obstruction, then remount & continue riding along the cycle path. or 2. dismount, cross the road, & ride on the correct side of the road in the correct direction until safe to reverse the procedure & continue on your way using the cycle path. At the same time, I would also expect you would take a note of the registration number of any vehicle which has done this, along with the time & date, as well as considering photographic evidence, so you can bring the attention of the authoritues to this matter. I would have suggested finding a Civil Enforcement Officer & asking them to carry out their duties, but personal experience tells me this won't be successful. Your example of the paramedic who was hit by an illegally driven motor vehicle (quadbike) is a little disingenious to say the least & is not a valid example of the risks involved in the specific area that is under discussion, especially as it took place elsewhere along the seafront. I know you will continue to argue this point as you seem to believe that cyclists have a god-given right to take precedence over everyone else, regardless of the legalities. Bosniavet
  • Score: 0

9:16am Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

http://tinyurl.com/5
tfconw
http://tinyurl.com/5 tfconw ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

9:58am Mon 14 Mar 11

Phil McCrakin says...

I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.
I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want. Phil McCrakin
  • Score: 0

10:10am Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Phil McCrakin wrote:
I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.
You would lose the bet.
[quote][p][bold]Phil McCrakin[/bold] wrote: I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.[/p][/quote]You would lose the bet. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

10:32am Mon 14 Mar 11

BD says...

another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible...

And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here.

And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide...

This town continues to amaze me...
another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me... BD
  • Score: 0

10:33am Mon 14 Mar 11

Laurence Ward says...

Phil McCrakin wrote:
I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.
Cyclists do have a right to use the road. Motorists don't - that's why they have to put that little disc inside you windscreen, to show that they have been granted the privilege. Of course, it's possible to get a disc that costs you £0 if you buy the right sort of car.
[quote][p][bold]Phil McCrakin[/bold] wrote: I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do have a right to use the road. Motorists don't - that's why they have to put that little disc inside you windscreen, to show that they have been granted the privilege. Of course, it's possible to get a disc that costs you £0 if you buy the right sort of car. Laurence Ward
  • Score: 0

10:34am Mon 14 Mar 11

Phil McCrakin says...

BD - do you wear lycra and go out on your little bike side by side with Mr Shoebury ?
BD - do you wear lycra and go out on your little bike side by side with Mr Shoebury ? Phil McCrakin
  • Score: 0

10:42am Mon 14 Mar 11

liseinga says...

The trouble is that many cyclists suffer from the same phobia as car drivers about letting other road users know what they are going to do i.e. indicating. I drove behing a cyclist at Chalkwell yesterday who first went into the middle of the road then pulled over to the left without indicating. Lucky for him I don't trust other road users to kept well back and he was OK.
The trouble is that many cyclists suffer from the same phobia as car drivers about letting other road users know what they are going to do i.e. indicating. I drove behing a cyclist at Chalkwell yesterday who first went into the middle of the road then pulled over to the left without indicating. Lucky for him I don't trust other road users to kept well back and he was OK. liseinga
  • Score: 0

11:00am Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Laurence Ward wrote:
Phil McCrakin wrote:
I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.
Cyclists do have a right to use the road. Motorists don't - that's why they have to put that little disc inside you windscreen, to show that they have been granted the privilege. Of course, it's possible to get a disc that costs you £0 if you buy the right sort of car.
That disk is nothing to do with right to use roads. It is Vehicle Excise Duty, which is a tax on car ownership, all it shows is that the vehicle has an MOT and the owner has bought insurance. It does not indicate if the driver is licenced to be using a vehicle on the road.

To win the right to use a motor vehicle on the public highway (note that PUBLIC highway, which means everyone, pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders etc. have the automatic right to use roads) drivers have to pass stringent education and be tested in their ability to safely operate a motor vehicle.
[quote][p][bold]Laurence Ward[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Phil McCrakin[/bold] wrote: I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.[/p][/quote]Cyclists do have a right to use the road. Motorists don't - that's why they have to put that little disc inside you windscreen, to show that they have been granted the privilege. Of course, it's possible to get a disc that costs you £0 if you buy the right sort of car.[/p][/quote]That disk is nothing to do with right to use roads. It is Vehicle Excise Duty, which is a tax on car ownership, all it shows is that the vehicle has an MOT and the owner has bought insurance. It does not indicate if the driver is licenced to be using a vehicle on the road. To win the right to use a motor vehicle on the public highway (note that PUBLIC highway, which means everyone, pedestrians, cyclists, horseriders etc. have the automatic right to use roads) drivers have to pass stringent education and be tested in their ability to safely operate a motor vehicle. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

11:06am Mon 14 Mar 11

Laurence Ward says...

Phil McCrakin wrote:
I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.
Oh, I agree, SC, it's deeper than just the "tax" disc, but the point remains. Some ignorant motorists seem to be under the impression that cyclists have no right to use the roads whereas in reality they have a greater right than do motorists, who have to meet a whose set of stringent criteria that a cyclist doesn't. Cyclists just go out and ride.
[quote][p][bold]Phil McCrakin[/bold] wrote: I am willing to bet that ShoeburyCyclist is one of the lycra clad selfish half wits that I am talking about - cannot agree more with Bosiniavat -they do think they have a god given right to do what they want.[/p][/quote]Oh, I agree, SC, it's deeper than just the "tax" disc, but the point remains. Some ignorant motorists seem to be under the impression that cyclists have no right to use the roads whereas in reality they have a greater right than do motorists, who have to meet a whose set of stringent criteria that a cyclist doesn't. Cyclists just go out and ride. Laurence Ward
  • Score: 0

11:38am Mon 14 Mar 11

Bosniavet says...

BD wrote:
another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me...
If, as I suspect, you are referring to my post & stating that my reference to the behaviour of cyclists in the area of the A13 (commonly known as London Road), then I take umbrage at what you state.
My comments, here & elsewhere are based on personal experience, & I can guarantee you are not based on one isolated instance as you state (rather strange that you are able to make such a sweeping statement about me, as I am pretty sure you & I have never met, meaning you have no knowledge of what I have or have seen & experienced on a regular basis). Maybe you would like to arrange a mutually convenient time when we can walk along the pavement from say, Hamlet Court Road to the Odeon, & then through the pedestrianised High Street, so I can prove the truth of what I say, just contact me privately, as you must have my number etc seeing as you know me so well.
Additionally, you might wish to take notice of the fact that I am a cyclist myself.
I do agree with your disparaging remarks about motorists not parking correctly, & though I have not witnessed the incident you relate personally, am more than willing to believe it, without making any other comments, insulting or not.
Perhaps you would like to apologise for the personally insulting remarks you have posted. Alternatively, as your post implies we are personally acquainted, you couls always email or phone me in person......
Thank You
[quote][p][bold]BD[/bold] wrote: another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me...[/p][/quote]If, as I suspect, you are referring to my post & stating that my reference to the behaviour of cyclists in the area of the A13 (commonly known as London Road), then I take umbrage at what you state. My comments, here & elsewhere are based on personal experience, & I can guarantee you are not based on one isolated instance as you state (rather strange that you are able to make such a sweeping statement about me, as I am pretty sure you & I have never met, meaning you have no knowledge of what I have or have seen & experienced on a regular basis). Maybe you would like to arrange a mutually convenient time when we can walk along the pavement from say, Hamlet Court Road to the Odeon, & then through the pedestrianised High Street, so I can prove the truth of what I say, just contact me privately, as you must have my number etc seeing as you know me so well. Additionally, you might wish to take notice of the fact that I am a cyclist myself. I do agree with your disparaging remarks about motorists not parking correctly, & though I have not witnessed the incident you relate personally, am more than willing to believe it, without making any other comments, insulting or not. Perhaps you would like to apologise for the personally insulting remarks you have posted. Alternatively, as your post implies we are personally acquainted, you couls always email or phone me in person...... Thank You Bosniavet
  • Score: 0

11:43am Mon 14 Mar 11

Tony Bman says...

ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
Tony Bman wrote:
If the speed limits are kept at there current level along the front then there isn't a huge problem is there? It will perfectly safe for "sports" cyclists to ride on the road and for families who tend to ride at much slower speeds the wider sea front can easily accommodate both pedestrians and "recreational" cyclists.
The vast majority of cyclists using the road are utility cyclists, people who use the bicycle for commuting, shopping, and general travel. Among cyclists 'sport' cyclists are a minority.
Is that true? Even if so, regular utility cyclists should be confident and equipped to use this particular stretch of road especially, as I said, if the speed limits are kept at the current levels. I would have been and as somebody who was a regular "utility" cyclist to my workplace in Basildon.
[quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tony Bman[/bold] wrote: If the speed limits are kept at there current level along the front then there isn't a huge problem is there? It will perfectly safe for "sports" cyclists to ride on the road and for families who tend to ride at much slower speeds the wider sea front can easily accommodate both pedestrians and "recreational" cyclists.[/p][/quote]The vast majority of cyclists using the road are utility cyclists, people who use the bicycle for commuting, shopping, and general travel. Among cyclists 'sport' cyclists are a minority.[/p][/quote]Is that true? Even if so, regular utility cyclists should be confident and equipped to use this particular stretch of road especially, as I said, if the speed limits are kept at the current levels. I would have been and as somebody who was a regular "utility" cyclist to my workplace in Basildon. Tony Bman
  • Score: 0

11:51am Mon 14 Mar 11

drofmor1 says...

well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.
well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement. drofmor1
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

drofmor1 wrote:
well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.
Cyclng on the pavement is illegal for adults. In my opinion the police should stop those who do, explain to them why it is illegal and take their name and address. If they are caught riding on the pavement again their bicycle should be confiscated and sold for charity, and the rider should be fined.

Those who ride on the pavement (excluding children and toddlers) get all cyclists tarred with the same brush, and I have no sympathy for them if they fall foul of the law.
[quote][p][bold]drofmor1[/bold] wrote: well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.[/p][/quote]Cyclng on the pavement is illegal for adults. In my opinion the police should stop those who do, explain to them why it is illegal and take their name and address. If they are caught riding on the pavement again their bicycle should be confiscated and sold for charity, and the rider should be fined. Those who ride on the pavement (excluding children and toddlers) get all cyclists tarred with the same brush, and I have no sympathy for them if they fall foul of the law. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Mon 14 Mar 11

Alice in Her Own Land :P says...

reptile wrote:
There are two things I hate on pavements, dog sh*t and cyclists.
Totally with you Reptile, on that one. You honestly need eyes in the back of your head some days when walking on the pavements where cyclists are concerned and eyes at all angles to avoid the dog sh!t!!
[quote][p][bold]reptile[/bold] wrote: There are two things I hate on pavements, dog sh*t and cyclists.[/p][/quote]Totally with you Reptile, on that one. You honestly need eyes in the back of your head some days when walking on the pavements where cyclists are concerned and eyes at all angles to avoid the dog sh!t!! Alice in Her Own Land :P
  • Score: 0

12:52pm Mon 14 Mar 11

drofmor1 says...

ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
drofmor1 wrote: well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.
Cyclng on the pavement is illegal for adults. In my opinion the police should stop those who do, explain to them why it is illegal and take their name and address. If they are caught riding on the pavement again their bicycle should be confiscated and sold for charity, and the rider should be fined. Those who ride on the pavement (excluding children and toddlers) get all cyclists tarred with the same brush, and I have no sympathy for them if they fall foul of the law.
Iknow it is illegal but why is it so. I'm not saying bomb down the high street at 50 miles an hour but where I live in Shoebury there are hardly any pedestrians on the pavements so what harm would it cause if I was to cycle slowly on the pavement. I would be posing no more of a threat to pedestrains than any other person using the pavement.
[quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]drofmor1[/bold] wrote: well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.[/p][/quote]Cyclng on the pavement is illegal for adults. In my opinion the police should stop those who do, explain to them why it is illegal and take their name and address. If they are caught riding on the pavement again their bicycle should be confiscated and sold for charity, and the rider should be fined. Those who ride on the pavement (excluding children and toddlers) get all cyclists tarred with the same brush, and I have no sympathy for them if they fall foul of the law.[/p][/quote]Iknow it is illegal but why is it so. I'm not saying bomb down the high street at 50 miles an hour but where I live in Shoebury there are hardly any pedestrians on the pavements so what harm would it cause if I was to cycle slowly on the pavement. I would be posing no more of a threat to pedestrains than any other person using the pavement. drofmor1
  • Score: 0

1:26pm Mon 14 Mar 11

elconguero says...

I've recently returned from a trip to Japan (thankfully before the quakes and subsequent tsunami) and it appears that in many cities, cycling is fully permitted on pavements. Pedestrians and cyclists happily co-exist, without issue or injury (not that I witnessed, anyway).

Maybe they can cope with this arrangement as a sense of respect for each other is ingrained into their society and culture.
I've recently returned from a trip to Japan (thankfully before the quakes and subsequent tsunami) and it appears that in many cities, cycling is fully permitted on pavements. Pedestrians and cyclists happily co-exist, without issue or injury (not that I witnessed, anyway). Maybe they can cope with this arrangement as a sense of respect for each other is ingrained into their society and culture. elconguero
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Mon 14 Mar 11

Andycal 172D says...

It will all end in tears!
It will all end in tears! Andycal 172D
  • Score: 0

1:44pm Mon 14 Mar 11

Ivanna Goodhump says...

"Their vision of City Beach is of a recreational area where they want to discourage fast cycling near pedestrians"
~
The problem we have is that Southend Council (as demonstrated with Sh1tty Beach, Cuckoo Corner, Seafront Cycle Lane, Victoria Ave junction etc etc) have no vision - they have to rely on the expensive "vision" of consultants who's advice they swallow hook line and sinker to the detriment of all in the town.
~
Flewitt, Waite, Longley etc have so little vision they need guide dogs ...
"Their vision of City Beach is of a recreational area where they want to discourage fast cycling near pedestrians" ~ The problem we have is that Southend Council (as demonstrated with Sh1tty Beach, Cuckoo Corner, Seafront Cycle Lane, Victoria Ave junction etc etc) have no vision - they have to rely on the expensive "vision" of consultants who's advice they swallow hook line and sinker to the detriment of all in the town. ~ Flewitt, Waite, Longley etc have so little vision they need guide dogs ... Ivanna Goodhump
  • Score: 0

2:00pm Mon 14 Mar 11

BD says...

Bosniavet wrote:
BD wrote:
another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me...
If, as I suspect, you are referring to my post & stating that my reference to the behaviour of cyclists in the area of the A13 (commonly known as London Road), then I take umbrage at what you state.
My comments, here & elsewhere are based on personal experience, & I can guarantee you are not based on one isolated instance as you state (rather strange that you are able to make such a sweeping statement about me, as I am pretty sure you & I have never met, meaning you have no knowledge of what I have or have seen & experienced on a regular basis). Maybe you would like to arrange a mutually convenient time when we can walk along the pavement from say, Hamlet Court Road to the Odeon, & then through the pedestrianised High Street, so I can prove the truth of what I say, just contact me privately, as you must have my number etc seeing as you know me so well.
Additionally, you might wish to take notice of the fact that I am a cyclist myself.
I do agree with your disparaging remarks about motorists not parking correctly, & though I have not witnessed the incident you relate personally, am more than willing to believe it, without making any other comments, insulting or not.
Perhaps you would like to apologise for the personally insulting remarks you have posted. Alternatively, as your post implies we are personally acquainted, you couls always email or phone me in person......
Thank You
not aimed at you - was one of phil's first posts referring to lycra idiots...

reading his other posts though it looks like one of the usual trolls that pop up when the word cyclist is ever mentioned.
[quote][p][bold]Bosniavet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BD[/bold] wrote: another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me...[/p][/quote]If, as I suspect, you are referring to my post & stating that my reference to the behaviour of cyclists in the area of the A13 (commonly known as London Road), then I take umbrage at what you state. My comments, here & elsewhere are based on personal experience, & I can guarantee you are not based on one isolated instance as you state (rather strange that you are able to make such a sweeping statement about me, as I am pretty sure you & I have never met, meaning you have no knowledge of what I have or have seen & experienced on a regular basis). Maybe you would like to arrange a mutually convenient time when we can walk along the pavement from say, Hamlet Court Road to the Odeon, & then through the pedestrianised High Street, so I can prove the truth of what I say, just contact me privately, as you must have my number etc seeing as you know me so well. Additionally, you might wish to take notice of the fact that I am a cyclist myself. I do agree with your disparaging remarks about motorists not parking correctly, & though I have not witnessed the incident you relate personally, am more than willing to believe it, without making any other comments, insulting or not. Perhaps you would like to apologise for the personally insulting remarks you have posted. Alternatively, as your post implies we are personally acquainted, you couls always email or phone me in person...... Thank You[/p][/quote]not aimed at you - was one of phil's first posts referring to lycra idiots... reading his other posts though it looks like one of the usual trolls that pop up when the word cyclist is ever mentioned. BD
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Mon 14 Mar 11

jolllyboy says...

Disaster waiting to happen and when a cyclist runs over someone who doesnt hear or see them coming there will be no prosecution because it will be allowed for cylcists to run over pedestrians - and their dogs. Watch out cyclists for the long dog leads because they too are lethal.
Disaster waiting to happen and when a cyclist runs over someone who doesnt hear or see them coming there will be no prosecution because it will be allowed for cylcists to run over pedestrians - and their dogs. Watch out cyclists for the long dog leads because they too are lethal. jolllyboy
  • Score: 0

3:07pm Mon 14 Mar 11

wælcyrge says...

I'm not at all happy with this plan.

While I have some sympathy for cyclists and understand why they -illegally - use the pavements, especially seeing how motorists treat / mistreat them on the roads, I wish I could see more evidence of cyclists' consideration for pedestrians when they take over the pavement. Unfortunately, these cyclists often simply replicate on the pavements the inconsiderate behaviour they are escaping on the roads.

This City Beach scheme reinforces the idea that it's OK to cycle on pavements, and that will surely lead to an increase in cyclists taking over even more pavements, including those that do not have designated cycle paths.

When I was young, my mother always told me to watch out for cars on the road. These days there seems to be an even greater danger from cyclists on the pavements. Ok, the ensuing accidents are probably not as bad as an encounter with a car, but yes - if this scheme is to go ahead, bring on those extra ambulances!
I'm not at all happy with this plan. While I have some sympathy for cyclists and understand why they -illegally - use the pavements, especially seeing how motorists treat / mistreat them on the roads, I wish I could see more evidence of cyclists' consideration for pedestrians when they take over the pavement. Unfortunately, these cyclists often simply replicate on the pavements the inconsiderate behaviour they are escaping on the roads. This City Beach scheme reinforces the idea that it's OK to cycle on pavements, and that will surely lead to an increase in cyclists taking over even more pavements, including those that do not have designated cycle paths. When I was young, my mother always told me to watch out for cars on the road. These days there seems to be an even greater danger from cyclists on the pavements. Ok, the ensuing accidents are probably not as bad as an encounter with a car, but yes - if this scheme is to go ahead, bring on those extra ambulances! wælcyrge
  • Score: 0

3:13pm Mon 14 Mar 11

colsmith says...

I can see the tears, hand-wringing and recriminations this one will surely end up as....First death will be an elderly person or a child. Silly, silly idea. 'Nough said.
I can see the tears, hand-wringing and recriminations this one will surely end up as....First death will be an elderly person or a child. Silly, silly idea. 'Nough said. colsmith
  • Score: 0

3:31pm Mon 14 Mar 11

Bosniavet says...

BD wrote:
Bosniavet wrote:
BD wrote: another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me...
If, as I suspect, you are referring to my post & stating that my reference to the behaviour of cyclists in the area of the A13 (commonly known as London Road), then I take umbrage at what you state. My comments, here & elsewhere are based on personal experience, & I can guarantee you are not based on one isolated instance as you state (rather strange that you are able to make such a sweeping statement about me, as I am pretty sure you & I have never met, meaning you have no knowledge of what I have or have seen & experienced on a regular basis). Maybe you would like to arrange a mutually convenient time when we can walk along the pavement from say, Hamlet Court Road to the Odeon, & then through the pedestrianised High Street, so I can prove the truth of what I say, just contact me privately, as you must have my number etc seeing as you know me so well. Additionally, you might wish to take notice of the fact that I am a cyclist myself. I do agree with your disparaging remarks about motorists not parking correctly, & though I have not witnessed the incident you relate personally, am more than willing to believe it, without making any other comments, insulting or not. Perhaps you would like to apologise for the personally insulting remarks you have posted. Alternatively, as your post implies we are personally acquainted, you couls always email or phone me in person...... Thank You
not aimed at you - was one of phil's first posts referring to lycra idiots... reading his other posts though it looks like one of the usual trolls that pop up when the word cyclist is ever mentioned.
That's fine, thanks for the clarification
[quote][p][bold]BD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bosniavet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BD[/bold] wrote: another laughable part to this lovely story - £10000 to paint some lines?!! Incredible... And yet again an ignorant poster instantly labels all cyclists under one banner becasue of something he saw once, and decides they dont belong anywhere - what great intelligent people we have here. And I did notice the newly angled parking bays this weekend and the brain dead motorists that were reversing into them! At least 80% of the parking spaces were filled with cars facing outwards. I also witnessed someone reversing into one - not only did he swing right into the cycle lane he actually nearly hit a pedestrian on the path the turning circle was so wide... This town continues to amaze me...[/p][/quote]If, as I suspect, you are referring to my post & stating that my reference to the behaviour of cyclists in the area of the A13 (commonly known as London Road), then I take umbrage at what you state. My comments, here & elsewhere are based on personal experience, & I can guarantee you are not based on one isolated instance as you state (rather strange that you are able to make such a sweeping statement about me, as I am pretty sure you & I have never met, meaning you have no knowledge of what I have or have seen & experienced on a regular basis). Maybe you would like to arrange a mutually convenient time when we can walk along the pavement from say, Hamlet Court Road to the Odeon, & then through the pedestrianised High Street, so I can prove the truth of what I say, just contact me privately, as you must have my number etc seeing as you know me so well. Additionally, you might wish to take notice of the fact that I am a cyclist myself. I do agree with your disparaging remarks about motorists not parking correctly, & though I have not witnessed the incident you relate personally, am more than willing to believe it, without making any other comments, insulting or not. Perhaps you would like to apologise for the personally insulting remarks you have posted. Alternatively, as your post implies we are personally acquainted, you couls always email or phone me in person...... Thank You[/p][/quote]not aimed at you - was one of phil's first posts referring to lycra idiots... reading his other posts though it looks like one of the usual trolls that pop up when the word cyclist is ever mentioned.[/p][/quote]That's fine, thanks for the clarification Bosniavet
  • Score: 0

3:34pm Mon 14 Mar 11

Bosniavet says...

ShoeburyCyclist wrote:
drofmor1 wrote: well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.
Cyclng on the pavement is illegal for adults. In my opinion the police should stop those who do, explain to them why it is illegal and take their name and address. If they are caught riding on the pavement again their bicycle should be confiscated and sold for charity, and the rider should be fined. Those who ride on the pavement (excluding children and toddlers) get all cyclists tarred with the same brush, and I have no sympathy for them if they fall foul of the law.
Have to say that I agree with your comments ShoeburyCyclist
[quote][p][bold]ShoeburyCyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]drofmor1[/bold] wrote: well it will be no different than cycling along the dedicated cycle path then. Has anyone tried cycling along the Shoebury to Southend section. Pedestrians constantly walk along the path with their kids in pushchairs strolling along knowing full well it is a cycle path and woe betide any cyclist who dares asks them to step aside. Can you imagine the outcry if you knocked somone over on the cycle path? It would be the cyclist that gets the blame as the pedestrian would claim they did not realise it was a cycle path as there is not a sign every 2 metres telling them it is so. I don't see what is wrong with cycling on the pavement anyway if you do it carefully. Blimey the amount of disabled scooter drivers I have seen bashing into people and objects I don't know why there is not a debate over them as well. If you are seen driving/cycling on a pavement in a reckless manner or cause an accident then yes give out a fine but let the responsible ones ride on the pavement.[/p][/quote]Cyclng on the pavement is illegal for adults. In my opinion the police should stop those who do, explain to them why it is illegal and take their name and address. If they are caught riding on the pavement again their bicycle should be confiscated and sold for charity, and the rider should be fined. Those who ride on the pavement (excluding children and toddlers) get all cyclists tarred with the same brush, and I have no sympathy for them if they fall foul of the law.[/p][/quote]Have to say that I agree with your comments ShoeburyCyclist Bosniavet
  • Score: 0

3:58pm Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

I want to now what the council plans to do beneath the pier. Currently the Western Esplanade cycle track ends outside southend Radio. There is no indication for cyclists where they should continue their journey. Some ride around the back of Adventure Island, under the pier and then along City Beach. Some just carry on along the pavement to City Beach, and some (myself included) cross the road and use the road through City Beach.
This part of the seafront cycle track really needs better markings for novice and occasional cyclists so they can clearly see a safe option to continue their eastward journeys.
I want to now what the council plans to do beneath the pier. Currently the Western Esplanade cycle track ends outside southend Radio. There is no indication for cyclists where they should continue their journey. Some ride around the back of Adventure Island, under the pier and then along City Beach. Some just carry on along the pavement to City Beach, and some (myself included) cross the road and use the road through City Beach. This part of the seafront cycle track really needs better markings for novice and occasional cyclists so they can clearly see a safe option to continue their eastward journeys. ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

3:59pm Mon 14 Mar 11

ShoeburyCyclist says...

Obviously that should be 'know' in the first sentence above. It's been a long day!
Obviously that should be 'know' in the first sentence above. It's been a long day! ShoeburyCyclist
  • Score: 0

4:28pm Mon 14 Mar 11

beppo1 says...

Cyclists just ride wherever they want....the pedestrian precinct in Southend High Street for a start! I have lived all my life in Southend and have yet to find out where CITY BEACH is? What city?
Cyclists just ride wherever they want....the pedestrian precinct in Southend High Street for a start! I have lived all my life in Southend and have yet to find out where CITY BEACH is? What city? beppo1
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Mon 14 Mar 11

pinchitter says...

I believe pedestrians and cyclists can co-habit if they respect eachothers rights.Having just had a walk along the sea-front at Thorpe Bay on a beautiful morning spoilt by the sight of dog-owner standing by and letting their dog c**p on the beach by where children are playing and making no attempt to clear.This is what needs addressing more urgently than the endless cycle-path debate
I believe pedestrians and cyclists can co-habit if they respect eachothers rights.Having just had a walk along the sea-front at Thorpe Bay on a beautiful morning spoilt by the sight of dog-owner standing by and letting their dog c**p on the beach by where children are playing and making no attempt to clear.This is what needs addressing more urgently than the endless cycle-path debate pinchitter
  • Score: 0

7:04pm Mon 14 Mar 11

Andycal 172D says...

beppo1 wrote:
Cyclists just ride wherever they want....the pedestrian precinct in Southend High Street for a start! I have lived all my life in Southend and have yet to find out where CITY BEACH is? What city?
In case you haven't noticed Southend Council along with this esteemed organ has launched a campaign to promote Southend's claim to being a city. The give away is the five option questionaire which gives five daft reasons why Southend should be made a city but doesn't allow the answer - No, Thank You Very Much!
.
As for City Beach, unless one of my fellow contributors knows better, I thought this came from the French idea of creating a pretend beach on the left bank of the Seine some years back. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
.
Whatever the reason, it is unbearably pretentious and awfully designed and just so bleak and grey and horrid. It is actually worse than the original dual carriageway it replaces. If you don't believe me, just go and have a look between the Kursaal and the Pier where this civil engineering nightmare has been perpetrated.
[quote][p][bold]beppo1[/bold] wrote: Cyclists just ride wherever they want....the pedestrian precinct in Southend High Street for a start! I have lived all my life in Southend and have yet to find out where CITY BEACH is? What city?[/p][/quote]In case you haven't noticed Southend Council along with this esteemed organ has launched a campaign to promote Southend's claim to being a city. The give away is the five option questionaire which gives five daft reasons why Southend should be made a city but doesn't allow the answer - No, Thank You Very Much! . As for City Beach, unless one of my fellow contributors knows better, I thought this came from the French idea of creating a pretend beach on the left bank of the Seine some years back. Please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. . Whatever the reason, it is unbearably pretentious and awfully designed and just so bleak and grey and horrid. It is actually worse than the original dual carriageway it replaces. If you don't believe me, just go and have a look between the Kursaal and the Pier where this civil engineering nightmare has been perpetrated. Andycal 172D
  • Score: 0

11:12pm Mon 14 Mar 11

saarfender says...

"Council bosses plan to paint markings to indicate the cycle path in the paving, rather than a designated track and have set aside £10,000 to carry out the work from their highways budget."

INTERESTING!!!!! When the Council brought the plans to the Cycle Forum they set up with the intention that local cyclists and stakeholders contribute to the designs...
1) It was all shared space and no painted lanes existed. They thought this was excellent.
2) It was too late for us to provide any input!



Shoeburycyclist asked above about the plans to join **** Beach to the Western Esplanade Suicide Track. The Council's plans that they showed us were for a shared use path around the seawall and under the Pier. They said they were going to lower the ground level and install pumps so that we didn't hit our heads on the pier or encounter flooding.
"Council bosses plan to paint markings to indicate the cycle path in the paving, rather than a designated track and have set aside £10,000 to carry out the work from their highways budget." INTERESTING!!!!! When the Council brought the plans to the Cycle Forum they set up with the intention that local cyclists and stakeholders contribute to the designs... 1) It was all shared space and no painted lanes existed. They thought this was excellent. 2) It was too late for us to provide any input! Shoeburycyclist asked above about the plans to join **** Beach to the Western Esplanade Suicide Track. The Council's plans that they showed us were for a shared use path around the seawall and under the Pier. They said they were going to lower the ground level and install pumps so that we didn't hit our heads on the pier or encounter flooding. saarfender
  • Score: 0

5:52pm Tue 15 Mar 11

Dougal says...

as soon as a cyclist nudges some chav an his chips get dropped he will get his head shuvved thru his spokes.
as soon as a cyclist nudges some chav an his chips get dropped he will get his head shuvved thru his spokes. Dougal
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree