Login Register

Marazion residents appeal for sensible cycling through town

By The Cornishman  |  Posted: June 06, 2013

Comments (7)

MARAZION residents are concerned that fast-moving cyclists using the centre of the town as part of their route are putting lives at risk.

A number of people spoke at a recent Marazion Town Council meeting saying that they were worried someone could be injured because of the way cyclists ride through the town.

One resident, who did not wish to be named, said: "They are not club cyclists, they come through at maybe 30mph. What I saw on Saturday, it was maybe inches away from somebody being killed. It will happen."

Hugh McColl, the husband of Marazion postmistress Jane, said: "They come down that hill and there is an awful lot of them and if there is a car in the way they will go straight on the pavement."

Town councillor Penney Hosking added at the meeting last month: "The main problem is when the cyclists come through they ride two or three abreast and they will not pull in to let cars past – they seem to think that they own the road."

Councillors will look at how they can raise awareness of the issue to improve safety.

Rod James, of Penzance, who is chair of One and All Cycling said club members were always asked to stick to road rules and respect other road users.

But he added: "In any population there is going to be people that will do things that are not in the rules."

Mr James said it was important for different groups to communicate with each other, particularly as cycling was becoming more popular.

Read more from The Cornishman

Do you have something to say? Leave your comment here...

max 4000 characters

7 comments

  • ScaredAmoeba  |  June 08 2013, 8:47PM

    It's hard to untangle road casualty statistics, but it's almost certain that the majority of road casualties in Marazion are caused by motor-vehicles, as indeed motor-vehicles dominate in road casualty stakes nationally and indeed internationally almost everywhere cars are used, (there are a few notable exceptions, such as the Netherlands, where special protective measures have been adopted for pedestrians and cyclists). In the UK, even on the footway (pavement) the danger to pedestrians from cyclists is vastly outweighed by the danger from motor-vehicles. But listen to the dishonest and ill-informed, and their claims are completely at odds with reality as revealed by STATS19. Road casualty map - just enter Marazion to zoom-in. http://tinyurl.com/ckv28ta Pedestrian casualties in reported1 road accidents: 2008 Road Accident Statistics Factsheet No. 3 – January 2010 Pedestrian location: In total, more than half (57 per cent) of reported pedestrian casualties were crossing the road (not masked by a stationary vehicle) when injured. Of these, 19 per cent were on a pedestrian crossing and a further 12 per cent within 50 metres of one. Of the remaining 43 per cent of casualties: ... • 10 per cent were on the pavement or verge. Pedestrian fatalities (all locations) 1 by pedal cycles 449 by motor-vehicles (Now apply the 10% weighting for pedestrian deaths on the footway or verge) Pedestrian casualties in road accidents: 2007 Road Accident Statistics Factsheet No. 3 – November 2008 Pedestrian location. In total, more than half (57 per cent) of pedestrian casualties were crossing the road (not masked by a stationary vehicle) when injured. Of these, 18 per cent were on a pedestrian crossing and a further 12 per cent within 50 metres of one. Of the remaining 43 per cent of casualties: ....• 10 per cent were on the pavement or verge. Pedestrian fatalities (all locations) 3 by pedal cycles 512 by motor-vehicles (Now apply the 10% weighting for pedestrian deaths on the footway or verge)

    Rate   -1
    Report
  • ScaredAmoeba  |  June 08 2013, 11:46AM

    Lafrowda said: "I am heavily taxed for every mile I travel, so be appreciative of what we pay for you parasites." Despite paying Vehicle Excise Duty and fuel duty, motorists do not pay the external costs of motoring. A 2012 study showed that in the UK, each registered car was subsidised by an average of just over £2,000 Euro each year. University of Dresden report The above subsidy does not include congestion costs. A mid-value would be around £20 bn per year. Whereas utility cyclists benefit the economy. A utility cyclist is someone who cycles instead of driving. Many cyclists are licensed to drive and own a car, yet they choose to cycle. It has been estimated that each 109 cyclists cycling at least three times a week benefit the economy by a million pounds over thirty years. Reference Cycling England report. So, who are the parasites now? It's certainly not cyclists. It would seem that you're pointing the finger in the wrong direction. You're not subsidising the cyclists, cyclists are subsidising YOU! ----- References The True Costs of Automobility: External Costs of Cars Overview on existing estimates in EU-27 TU Dresden Dresden, October 12th, 2012 Planning for Cycling Report to Cycling England SQW Consulting 18/12/08

    Rate   1
    Report
  • ianhargreaves  |  June 07 2013, 12:42PM

    Lafrowda, you obviously still think it's the 30s before Churchill abolished said road tax. In the current day, however, drivers pay what's actually called vehicle excise duty (VED), a tax that you pay to pollute, not to use the roads per se. After all, pedestrians don't pay "road tax" while crossing the road, nor do they levitate across them. How much VED you pay depends on the band your vehicle falls in, and, in turn, what band your vehicle falls in depends on how much Co2 your car emits. There are cars that fall into band A, (e.g., Smart cars, Prius, Bluemotion, and V40), and they're there because they emit low Co2 levels. Coincidentally, band A vehicles owners also pay NO VED, much like cyclists. The only difference is motor vehicles all have to be banded, while cyclists don't. Every time you band a vehicle but take no VED you lose the country money. So, if cyclists had to have tax discs, they'd still not be charged because of the Co2 status, this would costs the country money and make the country nothing. Now, how are the roads paid for then? Via local and general taxation, i.e., WE ALL PAY FOR THE ROADS. The VED you pay has NEVER been ring fenced to pay for the roads, even if it was, it would NEVER cover the true cost of private motoring in the UK, let alone the maintenance of the roads. The true cost of motoring takes into account not just the cost of roads, but pollution, congestion, and even road deaths (estimated at 27m per death, while there are some 450 deaths per year in the UK caused by drivers). The TRUE cost of motoring is estimated at BILLIONS a year, your VED does not even scratch the surface of this, let alone the fact that VED goes into the general tax pot to pay for ANYTHING, e.g., schools, hospitals etc... So, the truth is, motoring is subsidised in the UK by EVERYONE who pays ANY KIND OF TAX, I think then, that makes YOU the parasite. You mention cyclists not using cycle-lanes. I admit, it's hard to understand, as a driver, why this would be. Often, cycle-lanes are the most dangerous place to be due to grids, potholes, glass and debris etc; add to this the fact they're parked in by drivers, they're often only advisory, and they're piecemeal. All these factors make them a supremely dangerous thing for cyclists so, sometimes, it's sometimes best to avoid them. I'm not saying that cycle-lanes are a bad idea, if they're continuous, wide, well marked and maintained, they're amazing, but the councils have not got the guts to spend money on them, mainly because they're too busy paying for motorists. This whole idea that cyclists are dangerous and that they go riffling through towns risking everyone's life and safety is redonculouse! If you remove any subjectivity (often caused by media hype and social bias) out of the equation and look at where most of the accidents come from, you'll see that cyclists simply are not dangerous, well, barely: Of all the road accidents between 2001 - 2010 cyclists make up a minuscule proportion of them. In this period KSIs for pedestrians vs car incidents were 53901 while KSIs for pedestrians vs. bikes incidents were 532. Even taking into account the fact that cyclists make up a much smaller percent of traffic, it still means cars are WAY, WAY more dangerous. No one ever states that cyclists riding in certain ways is not anti-social, some cyclists can be very antisocial, but it's important that newspapers respect this fact, and don't try to up us on par with the damage that cars cause to lives in the UK. But hey, far be it from me to expect a journalist to use good rhetorics, and fellow posters to use some research skills before putting their opinions to the public. http://tinyurl.com/mszlpgu

    Rate   2
    Report
  • PaddyTrembath  |  June 06 2013, 10:19PM

    doubledex72 wrote:- "They have a perfect lawful right to use the road - yes, even 2 abreast." Just to clarify the point, from the Highway code:- "never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends" So, not always.

    Rate 0
    Report
  • doubledex72  |  June 06 2013, 8:29PM

    Very poor ill informed comment Lafrowda. There is no such thing as "road tax" and you should be grateful for cyclists keeping cars off the roads and with better fitness, reducing burden on the NHS. They have a perfect lawful right to use the road - yes, even 2 abreast. Lobby for law change if you must - we live in a democracy so accept not everything will be to your liking. Your ignorance, anger and aggression is what leads to innocent people getting injured and killed when aggressive people use cars as a weapon. Did those cyclist make your journey maybe last 30 seconds longer? Very sad.

    Rate   6
    Report
  • josdave  |  June 06 2013, 4:38PM

    While there are a lot, albeit a small minority, of irresponsible cyclists they have my sympathy over the aggressive selfish impatient motorists. Once a prolific cyclist I no longer have the confidence to ride on the roads having been knocked off twice both times by drivers who refused to stop.

    Rate   4
    Report
  • Lafrowda  |  June 06 2013, 10:26AM

    With the upsurge in cycles on our roads it is not only the motorist who has responsibility to drive with care. I drove to Helston & Falmouth at the weekend and there were a large number of cyclists on the route, in the places where cycle lanes existed they were not used by 95% of the riders. Two abreast on single lane roads means great difficulty for motorists getting past. I am heavily taxed for every mile I travel, so be appreciative of what we pay for you parasites.

    Rate   -11
    Report

      YOUR COMMENTS AWAITING MODERATION

       
       

      MORE NEWS HEADLINES