It’s cyclists vs newts!

Members of Southampton Cycling Campaign gather to protest about proposals to narrow the underpass beneath The Avenue.

Members of Southampton Cycling Campaign gather to protest about proposals to narrow the underpass beneath The Avenue.

First published in News Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

IT is a row that is pitching cyclists against the humble newt.

Council chiefs have unveiled a £40,000 plan to protect a key habitat for the aquatic creatures, famously loved by former London mayor Ken Livingstone.

That involves a new pipeline to supply clean water to the boating lake on Southampton Common, one of the main breeding sites of the great crested newt.

But the scheme has come under fire from cycling campaigners because it would mean narrowing a frequently used underpass that helps riders, pedestrians and dog walkers get across The Avenue safely.

They have argued that narrowing the underpass by 70 centimetres, or just under 28 inches, will cause more accidents.
Southampton Cycling Campaign spokesman Dilys Gartside said: “I feel this is a huge problem.

The underpass is one of the most used cycling areas in our city. Thousands of people use it and these include students from Tauntons College, King Edward VI School and Southampton University as well as cyclists and dog walkers.

“This is not the place to put a narrowing pipe. One must remember that the protection of human beings is equally as important as the protection of wildlife.

“The council has it in its Local Transport Policy to improve cycling routes in Southampton and says it is council policy to improve cycling and walking and active travel around the city; this goes against that.”

Related links

Dilys, who lives in Shirley, is concerned that her group was not even consulted by the council about the proposal and added: “We want to work with the council to find a better way of doing this.”

Highfield Residents’ Association committee member Simon Hill is also unhappy with the plans.

He said: “The cyclists that use the tunnel go faster down it to gain momentum down the tunnel. Currently it is just about okay, but to narrow it would be unacceptable. This is right at the centre of a point of movement.

“I feel that it would be potentially very dangerous with the different users that use the underpass, and this will be more oppressive in terms of personal safety. There is just about room for two cyclists to pass and if there is a pedestrian on the path then you have just got about the minimum space to do it.”

Great crested newts are fully protected under UK and European law, and the council has to carry out work to protect them.

The proposal is to run a 450-millimetre water supply pipe through underpass will provide clean water to the boating lake where the newts are threatened by “salty” water that runs off The Avenue.

A spokesman for Southampton City Council said: “The subway option would require a marginal narrowing of its width and some residents have raised concerns as to whether this will make the subway difficult to use.

“We are still evaluating the different options and will take the comments received into consideration when deciding which option to implement.”

Comments (30)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

1:27pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Micle1974 says...

Get off your bike and walk it through the subway....simples!
Get off your bike and walk it through the subway....simples! Micle1974
  • Score: -41

1:31pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Dasal says...

These newts have got bad PR.
ALWAYS "PIxxed"............
....................

although, I've never seen one.
These newts have got bad PR. ALWAYS "PIxxed"............ .................... although, I've never seen one. Dasal
  • Score: 6

1:37pm Wed 2 Oct 13

SaffaInTheUk says...

Typical. Cyclists always thinking they are more important. News for you, the universe doesn't revolve around you. If you can't respect nature, which was there long before your precious underpass, stay indoors.
Typical. Cyclists always thinking they are more important. News for you, the universe doesn't revolve around you. If you can't respect nature, which was there long before your precious underpass, stay indoors. SaffaInTheUk
  • Score: -36

1:59pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Tony S says...

How many roads have been ruined to make cycle lanes and crossings? Now the boot is on the other foot and they don't like it.

How much? £40000 is a lot! Two days with a JCB and plant a reed bed would be cheaper?
How many roads have been ruined to make cycle lanes and crossings? Now the boot is on the other foot and they don't like it. How much? £40000 is a lot! Two days with a JCB and plant a reed bed would be cheaper? Tony S
  • Score: -40

2:12pm Wed 2 Oct 13

AFrustratedCyclist says...

If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense. AFrustratedCyclist
  • Score: 43

2:26pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Pikey Pete says...

Why can the pipe be run along the ceiling? Plenty of room and no one gets affected.
Why can the pipe be run along the ceiling? Plenty of room and no one gets affected. Pikey Pete
  • Score: 18

2:35pm Wed 2 Oct 13

sass says...

**** Pete wrote:
Why can the pipe be run along the ceiling? Plenty of room and no one gets affected.
Bury the pipe under the road bed, or put multiple small pipes on the ceiling, it doesn't have to be one huge one.
[quote][p][bold]**** Pete[/bold] wrote: Why can the pipe be run along the ceiling? Plenty of room and no one gets affected.[/p][/quote]Bury the pipe under the road bed, or put multiple small pipes on the ceiling, it doesn't have to be one huge one. sass
  • Score: 10

2:49pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Torchie1 says...

AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.
[quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote: If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic. Torchie1
  • Score: -39

3:05pm Wed 2 Oct 13

insane saint says...

i use the underpass to go to and from work. and it wont bother me if 700mm is taken for the newts.

the few trying to spoil for a fight usually ruins it for others.
i use the underpass to go to and from work. and it wont bother me if 700mm is taken for the newts. the few trying to spoil for a fight usually ruins it for others. insane saint
  • Score: -25

3:10pm Wed 2 Oct 13

elvisimo says...

Torchie1 wrote:
AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.
its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote: If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.[/p][/quote]its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work. elvisimo
  • Score: 41

3:21pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Someone_New says...

By the look of the tunnel, it must be constantly full of graffiti "artists" which probably means there isn't room to cycle through it anyway!
By the look of the tunnel, it must be constantly full of graffiti "artists" which probably means there isn't room to cycle through it anyway! Someone_New
  • Score: 3

3:21pm Wed 2 Oct 13

sotonbusdriver says...

How much space do cyclists need for god sake...

I know lets ban all traffic and pedestrians so the cyclists can have all the room hey need.... for a 18inch wide vehicle...
How much space do cyclists need for god sake... I know lets ban all traffic and pedestrians so the cyclists can have all the room hey need.... for a 18inch wide vehicle... sotonbusdriver
  • Score: -38

3:22pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Zeo says...

Maybe put traffic lights at either end of the subway and maybe a Red Light Jumper Camera is well, pay off the newts improvements in no time :)
Maybe put traffic lights at either end of the subway and maybe a Red Light Jumper Camera is well, pay off the newts improvements in no time :) Zeo
  • Score: 5

3:56pm Wed 2 Oct 13

wossit says...

They will not be breeding in there for long if we fill it with the chlorinated water !!
They will not be breeding in there for long if we fill it with the chlorinated water !! wossit
  • Score: 1

4:01pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Torchie1 says...

elvisimo wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.
its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.
The story concerns a pedestrian/bicycle facility with no motor vehicles in the equation so don't try to widen the argument to create a smokescreen. For the duration of the tunnel transit the safest way to proceed is for all to walk. If the cyclists agendas are so important then they could allow an extra thirty seconds for their journey.
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote: If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.[/p][/quote]its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.[/p][/quote]The story concerns a pedestrian/bicycle facility with no motor vehicles in the equation so don't try to widen the argument to create a smokescreen. For the duration of the tunnel transit the safest way to proceed is for all to walk. If the cyclists agendas are so important then they could allow an extra thirty seconds for their journey. Torchie1
  • Score: -32

4:03pm Wed 2 Oct 13

bigfella777 says...

I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians.
These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus.
I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order.
I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead.
The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious.
These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.
I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians. These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus. I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order. I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead. The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious. These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts. bigfella777
  • Score: 7

4:46pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Mary80 says...

bigfella777 wrote:
I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians.
These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus.
I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order.
I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead.
The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious.
These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.
Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians. These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus. I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order. I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead. The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious. These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.[/p][/quote]Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this Mary80
  • Score: -1

4:51pm Wed 2 Oct 13

bigfella777 says...

Mary80 wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians.
These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus.
I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order.
I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead.
The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious.
These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.
Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this
There's plenty of green space let your dog off there and when you go back on the path put the dog on a lead, easy.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians. These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus. I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order. I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead. The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious. These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.[/p][/quote]Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this[/p][/quote]There's plenty of green space let your dog off there and when you go back on the path put the dog on a lead, easy. bigfella777
  • Score: 3

5:51pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

SaffaInTheUk wrote:
Typical. Cyclists always thinking they are more important. News for you, the universe doesn't revolve around you. If you can't respect nature, which was there long before your precious underpass, stay indoors.
It's a segregated cycle path though and the boating lake was never intended as a wildlife habitat, it was intended for boats but this story is just another case of the council cutting corners at the expense of others yet again, also as others have said, why not save many thousands of pounds and put in a reed bed around the lake? I've seen it used effectively first hand at college where the lake was fed by waste water from the on-site hatchery but the water drained into a large pond behind reed beds and it slowly filters through the reeds that absorb any impurities, the water enters the lake so clean that it's one of the few places I've seen southern damselflies breeding in large numbers and even mayfly which need very clean water to survive, would be a better and cheaper option(plus it wouldn't put more stress on water supplies) and it would keep everyone happy.

And before anyone asks, I do know what I'm talking about, I didn't do coursework and stuff on such ecosystems for 2 years at Sparsholt college for nothing.
[quote][p][bold]SaffaInTheUk[/bold] wrote: Typical. Cyclists always thinking they are more important. News for you, the universe doesn't revolve around you. If you can't respect nature, which was there long before your precious underpass, stay indoors.[/p][/quote]It's a segregated cycle path though and the boating lake was never intended as a wildlife habitat, it was intended for boats but this story is just another case of the council cutting corners at the expense of others yet again, also as others have said, why not save many thousands of pounds and put in a reed bed around the lake? I've seen it used effectively first hand at college where the lake was fed by waste water from the on-site hatchery but the water drained into a large pond behind reed beds and it slowly filters through the reeds that absorb any impurities, the water enters the lake so clean that it's one of the few places I've seen southern damselflies breeding in large numbers and even mayfly which need very clean water to survive, would be a better and cheaper option(plus it wouldn't put more stress on water supplies) and it would keep everyone happy. And before anyone asks, I do know what I'm talking about, I didn't do coursework and stuff on such ecosystems for 2 years at Sparsholt college for nothing. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: -2

5:55pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

Mary80 wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians.
These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus.
I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order.
I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead.
The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious.
These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.
Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this
I think there is actually a by-law relating to the common that says cyclists shouldn't exceed 10mph through there but I'm not entirely sure but I'd stick to 10mph through there anyway, it's often busy and it's not a race track.
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians. These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus. I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order. I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead. The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious. These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.[/p][/quote]Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this[/p][/quote]I think there is actually a by-law relating to the common that says cyclists shouldn't exceed 10mph through there but I'm not entirely sure but I'd stick to 10mph through there anyway, it's often busy and it's not a race track. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 1

7:33pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Someone_New says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
Mary80 wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians.
These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus.
I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order.
I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead.
The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious.
These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.
Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this
I think there is actually a by-law relating to the common that says cyclists shouldn't exceed 10mph through there but I'm not entirely sure but I'd stick to 10mph through there anyway, it's often busy and it's not a race track.
Good for you, but on the common I've seen plenty of morons on bikes hurtle by very close to people at >10mph. Shame there is no way to trace this minority of inconsiderate, dangerous people - as with cars of course we can take the registration but not possible for bikes.
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I'm starting to get bored of these cycling stories now which are just simply to stir up a row between cyclists, car drivers and pedestrians. These people in the photo don't represent the majority of cyclists in Southampton anyway they look more like people from Highfield and the Uni campus. I cycle across the common regularly and the biggest problem is loose dogs on the path, you know the people who can't just have one dog they have to have three and let the roam across the whole width of the path so that you have to completely stop while the owner gets them in order. I came across a woman the other week who had 5 dogs with her and when I asked her why she had ignored the signs which are at every entrance to the common which clearly state that dogs must be kept under control she gave me a torrent of abuse and claimed that they were under control, actually no dear, under control means on a lead. The other big danger is pedestrians who think that they can cross the road by ear without looking, not realising that a 17 stone man travelling at 20 mph on a bicycle is quite lawfully riding down the road, these people make me furious. These are the real issues for cyclists not great crested newts.[/p][/quote]Both cyclist and pedestrians at times don't look where they are going. Driving thru town you have to have eyes in the back of your head as people will randomly walk out in front of you without LOOKING and nearly causing accidents. Many times i've nearly been run over by cyclists in the common even when at the EDGE of the dang path and out of their way. Even when walking a dog on a lead we were stood at the edge of the path yet one zoomed past and nearly ran over the dog without even saying sorry.Others cycling thru the common dont fly past you as most go at a safe speed in case a child runs out suddenly shame all don't do this[/p][/quote]I think there is actually a by-law relating to the common that says cyclists shouldn't exceed 10mph through there but I'm not entirely sure but I'd stick to 10mph through there anyway, it's often busy and it's not a race track.[/p][/quote]Good for you, but on the common I've seen plenty of morons on bikes hurtle by very close to people at >10mph. Shame there is no way to trace this minority of inconsiderate, dangerous people - as with cars of course we can take the registration but not possible for bikes. Someone_New
  • Score: -1

9:52pm Wed 2 Oct 13

derek james says...

as a cyclist and dog owner i can see both points of view, dog owners who let their animals off the lead running where they like are indeed a menace as are the hordes of cyclists who use the pavement this time of the year with no lights.as for ruining roads with cycle lanes i'd say by far the worst damage is done by bus lanes
as a cyclist and dog owner i can see both points of view, dog owners who let their animals off the lead running where they like are indeed a menace as are the hordes of cyclists who use the pavement this time of the year with no lights.as for ruining roads with cycle lanes i'd say by far the worst damage is done by bus lanes derek james
  • Score: 0

10:09pm Wed 2 Oct 13

Mary80 says...

When i've been walking on the common i had the courtesy to move to the edge of the path to let them by but the select few hurtle past and nearly hit you even when you DO move out the way and many dont even acknowledge they nearly hit you. Its a shame a few ruin the name of the cyclists who are good and have good manners. Many cyclists are good its just the few who want to be jerks who sour the image
When i've been walking on the common i had the courtesy to move to the edge of the path to let them by but the select few hurtle past and nearly hit you even when you DO move out the way and many dont even acknowledge they nearly hit you. Its a shame a few ruin the name of the cyclists who are good and have good manners. Many cyclists are good its just the few who want to be jerks who sour the image Mary80
  • Score: 2

10:53pm Wed 2 Oct 13

southamptonadi says...

Mary80 wrote:
When i've been walking on the common i had the courtesy to move to the edge of the path to let them by but the select few hurtle past and nearly hit you even when you DO move out the way and many dont even acknowledge they nearly hit you. Its a shame a few ruin the name of the cyclists who are good and have good manners. Many cyclists are good its just the few who want to be jerks who sour the image
its the same in every walk of life unfortunatly, everyone thinks white van man cant drive beacause of a few drivers are idiots etc etc etc.

But back to the story.

Why cant a pipe come up from the lido instead?

It is a bit of nothing get over it, and walk or slow right down to walking pace. council should just put no cycling signs up in the tunnel haha.

by the way i do a lot of cycling and commuting by bike
[quote][p][bold]Mary80[/bold] wrote: When i've been walking on the common i had the courtesy to move to the edge of the path to let them by but the select few hurtle past and nearly hit you even when you DO move out the way and many dont even acknowledge they nearly hit you. Its a shame a few ruin the name of the cyclists who are good and have good manners. Many cyclists are good its just the few who want to be jerks who sour the image[/p][/quote]its the same in every walk of life unfortunatly, everyone thinks white van man cant drive beacause of a few drivers are idiots etc etc etc. But back to the story. Why cant a pipe come up from the lido instead? It is a bit of nothing get over it, and walk or slow right down to walking pace. council should just put no cycling signs up in the tunnel haha. by the way i do a lot of cycling and commuting by bike southamptonadi
  • Score: 1

10:16am Thu 3 Oct 13

robich says...

This story is absolutely ridiculous.

The newts have survived so far. Is the run off from the common really that toxic? If so how does the flora survive?

Does it really need a wide mains water pipe to deliver sufficient water to keep the lake clean? Or is the real reason the water board wish to put a new water main under the avenue and want to save themselves money?

IF it really is necessary to deliver that much water, how about in a number of smaller pipes along the ceiling of the underpass?

One thing is for certain. IF the width is restricted, sooner or later a pedestrian will be hurt by collision with a cyclist. Then the cyclists will get more bad press or even be banned from cycling on the common.
This story is absolutely ridiculous. The newts have survived so far. Is the run off from the common really that toxic? If so how does the flora survive? Does it really need a wide mains water pipe to deliver sufficient water to keep the lake clean? Or is the real reason the water board wish to put a new water main under the avenue and want to save themselves money? IF it really is necessary to deliver that much water, how about in a number of smaller pipes along the ceiling of the underpass? One thing is for certain. IF the width is restricted, sooner or later a pedestrian will be hurt by collision with a cyclist. Then the cyclists will get more bad press or even be banned from cycling on the common. robich
  • Score: 0

10:50am Thu 3 Oct 13

Solomon's Boot says...

Micle1974 wrote:
Get off your bike and walk it through the subway....simples!
Spot on Micle1974!

Just a bit of tolerance needed!
[quote][p][bold]Micle1974[/bold] wrote: Get off your bike and walk it through the subway....simples![/p][/quote]Spot on Micle1974! Just a bit of tolerance needed! Solomon's Boot
  • Score: -7

11:53am Thu 3 Oct 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

elvisimo wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.
its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.
It's worked for quite a while so far without incident, the cycle path is segregated from the footway(though you still get silly pedestrians walking on the cycle path) and it's part of a well used cycle route, so what's the problem other than having a dislike of cyclists?
[quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote: If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.[/p][/quote]its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.[/p][/quote]It's worked for quite a while so far without incident, the cycle path is segregated from the footway(though you still get silly pedestrians walking on the cycle path) and it's part of a well used cycle route, so what's the problem other than having a dislike of cyclists? Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 5

7:04pm Thu 3 Oct 13

froots says...

Micle1974 wrote:
Get off your bike and walk it through the subway....simples!
Only idiots still say "simples".
[quote][p][bold]Micle1974[/bold] wrote: Get off your bike and walk it through the subway....simples![/p][/quote]Only idiots still say "simples". froots
  • Score: 1

6:12pm Fri 4 Oct 13

southamptonadi says...

Ginger_cyclist wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.
its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.
It's worked for quite a while so far without incident, the cycle path is segregated from the footway(though you still get silly pedestrians walking on the cycle path) and it's part of a well used cycle route, so what's the problem other than having a dislike of cyclists?
looking at that photo the tunnel is clearly wide enough to cope, theres 4 cyclists abreast and three kiddies, plenty of room
[quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote: If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.[/p][/quote]its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.[/p][/quote]It's worked for quite a while so far without incident, the cycle path is segregated from the footway(though you still get silly pedestrians walking on the cycle path) and it's part of a well used cycle route, so what's the problem other than having a dislike of cyclists?[/p][/quote]looking at that photo the tunnel is clearly wide enough to cope, theres 4 cyclists abreast and three kiddies, plenty of room southamptonadi
  • Score: -1

7:05pm Fri 4 Oct 13

Ginger_cyclist says...

southamptonadi wrote:
Ginger_cyclist wrote:
elvisimo wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
AFrustratedCyclist wrote:
If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable.

it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody.

They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really.

So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.
It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.
its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.
It's worked for quite a while so far without incident, the cycle path is segregated from the footway(though you still get silly pedestrians walking on the cycle path) and it's part of a well used cycle route, so what's the problem other than having a dislike of cyclists?
looking at that photo the tunnel is clearly wide enough to cope, theres 4 cyclists abreast and three kiddies, plenty of room
Actually, there wouldn't be enough room, not to be safe and legal, those extra 2 cyclists width, that's the minimum amount of "wobble room" needed for 2 cyclists so they pass each other safely and without breaking the law by crossing that solid white line that "segregates" the cycle path from the footway, besides, I've already explained a much easier and cheaper solution than piping "fresh" water to the lake.
[quote][p][bold]southamptonadi[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ginger_cyclist[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elvisimo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AFrustratedCyclist[/bold] wrote: If a road was being narrowed for this, drivers would be asking if there were alternatives no different. Nothing unreasonable. it's an existing, well used and safe route for cyclist which keeps cyclists off of the Avenue, why on earth is that such a bad thing for anybody. They're just asking for an alternative if there is one, nothing unreasonable about that is there really. So a crossing for cyclists "ruins" roads, what about the many many more pedestrian crossings, no problems with them? no! just bigoted anti cycling nonsense.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with motor vehicles or being 'anti', the problem is with people who won't bend slightly and walk their bicycle through a tunnel that's only just over the width of a road. In the cold light of day your attitude is rather pathetic.[/p][/quote]its to do with the fact that people wont get off and walk in the same way that people wont stick to speed limits etc etc . not a car v bike thing more a bit of common sense needed. Mixing pedestrians with bikes, cars, motorbikes whatever in this sort of close environment just wont work.[/p][/quote]It's worked for quite a while so far without incident, the cycle path is segregated from the footway(though you still get silly pedestrians walking on the cycle path) and it's part of a well used cycle route, so what's the problem other than having a dislike of cyclists?[/p][/quote]looking at that photo the tunnel is clearly wide enough to cope, theres 4 cyclists abreast and three kiddies, plenty of room[/p][/quote]Actually, there wouldn't be enough room, not to be safe and legal, those extra 2 cyclists width, that's the minimum amount of "wobble room" needed for 2 cyclists so they pass each other safely and without breaking the law by crossing that solid white line that "segregates" the cycle path from the footway, besides, I've already explained a much easier and cheaper solution than piping "fresh" water to the lake. Ginger_cyclist
  • Score: 2

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