Woking Cycle Users' Group

Frequently Asked Questions

Have there been any serious incidents between cyclists and pedestrians?
The answer is no. We are not aware of any collisions between pedestrians and cyclists within the shared use area and there have been no complaints of any such incidents in that area. This matches the experience with other shared use schemes elsewhere in the UK and overseas.

Don’t pedestrians have to dodge out of the way of fast moving cyclists?
The answer is no. At a public meeting on 19 February, a representative of the Guide Dogs for the blind suggested that it is unreasonable to ask a blind person to “jump left or jump right” to get out of the way of a cyclist. We agree. All that pedestrians need to do is to simply carry on whatever they are doing – carry on walking in the same direction as before. The cyclist will always get out of your way. Cyclists will try very hard to avoid a collision because it hurts the cyclist as much if not more than the pedestrian. And in dense pedestrian traffic a cyclist will slow down and may even be obliged to get off and walk with his or her cycle.

What about a blind person?
Exactly the same applies – carry on walking where you want to go and the cyclist will go round you. If you have a guide dog a cyclist will give you even more room. Cyclists know that dogs can be dangerous to them. Most cyclists who have cycled in the country will have been chased by a dog. It’s not pleasant.

What about fast cyclists weaving past pedestrians with inches to spare?
The very fact that there are inches to spare shows that the cyclist has avoided a collision. Cyclists, like pedestrians and those driving mobility scooters vary in the extent to which they display consideration to other users. Some will give a wide berth and go slowly among pedestrians, others will be less considerate. However, is one inconsiderate cyclist a reason to ban all the considerate ones? Again it is question of education and getting used to each other’s needs and wishes.

Surely cyclists going through the town centre could get off and walk?
While it is true that cyclists could get off their cycles and walk through the shared use area to insist on this would have the following effects:
• A person pushing a cycle takes up more space and is less manoeuvrable
than when cycling, causing greater inconvenience to pedestrians
• Carrying heavy shopping on a bicycle will increase the instability of the
machine plus rider
• Cyclists are much less likely to go through the town centre if they have to get off and walk and then remount. It is the continuity of routes that is most important in encouraging cycling
• Elderly cyclists are much more comfortable and safe when riding slowly than when being required to push a laden cycle
• There is no need and no evidence to support introducing this requirement
What would happen if a cycling ban is re-introduced?
Before cycling was permitted through the town centre it was quite common to see a cyclist riding illegally through the town centre. This will happen again if a ban is introduced. A cyclist doing this will try to avoid getting caught and will therefore probably be travelling faster and more dangerously. It is unlikely that scarce police resources will be directed to stop this.

Would a ban discourage cycling?
We believe it would. Alternative routes for cyclists consist of the High Street or Victoria Way. The High Street has lots of parked cars negotiated by many buses and deliver vehicles. This will be intimidating and possibly dangerous particularly for inexperienced cyclists. Victoria Way is obviously unsuitable for all but the bravest and most experienced cyclists. Discouraging cycling will add to the problems which cycling is so effective at resolving, namely obesity, health problems, CO2 emissions and more traffic congestion.

Will a cycling ban have any other effects?
At present local transport authorities (including Surrey County Council) are being encouraged to bid for funds from the Government under the Local Sustainable Transport Fund. As is obvious from its title this goes wider than just encouraging cycling. However in appraising bids it is likely that the Government will look closely at previous experience with the Cycling Towns, such as Woking. We think that a town that first encourages cycling through its centre and then subsequently bans it, is unlikely to be seen as a good place for funding future sustainable transport initiatives.
So both Surrey and Woking could suffer financially from a re-introduced ban.

Why do some groups object to cycling through the town centre?
The organisation called Guide Dogs for the Blind is running a strong national campaign against shared use with cyclists. Surrey Disabled People’s Partnership (SDPP) is backing this campaign. We believe these campaigns are based upon unreasonable fears and perceptions that have been blown out of proportion. If you read the Guide Dogs campaign at www.guidedogs.org.uk/sharedstreets/index.php?id=198 you will struggle to find evidence of any problem arising from conflicts with cyclists. Most of the campaign is concerned with lack of textured surfaces. Where
cycling is mentioned this refers to fears of conflict not actual conflict. We believe the answer to the perceptions of blind people sharing space with cyclists is education of both groups to understand and respect each others’ needs. Woking Cycle Users’ Group is very happy to work with SDPP and other groups to achieve this. We have recently signed an agreement with SDPP which will support such initiatives.

What real evidence exists about how pedestrians and cyclists share space?

There are a number of studies that have been carried out, none of which found a
significant problem with shared use between cyclists and pedestrians:

1. Some 25 years ago in 1986 a Local Transport Note was published on the
subject of shared use between cyclists and pedestrians. You can read this at:
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/cycling/ltn286.pdf. While this is much more cautious than later publications it does recognise that shared use can be arranged safely and notes that “consideration should be given to allowing cyclists to cross pedestrianised areas where there is a significant demand for such cross movement and when the alternatives are to force cyclists to use a heavily trafficked ring road or a complex, circuitous one-way street system.” This is precisely the situation in Woking.

2. A study in 1993 by the Department for Transport can be read at: www.dft.gov.uk/adobepdf/165240/244921/244924/TAL_9-93. This concluded that “ Observation revealed no real factors to justify excluding cyclists from pedestrianised areas, suggesting that cycling could be more widely permitted without detriment to pedestrians”

3. In 2000 the CTC carried out a study on a number of shared use schemes. A synopsis of this can be downloaded here: www.ctc.org.uk/resources/Campaigns/Cyclists_and_Pedestrians.pdf. While concluding generally against shared use, the study did show that shared use schemes generally increase cycling and also pedestrian use.

4. A more recent study in November 2009 by the DfT can be read at:
www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/sharedspace/ . This concluded that “shared space schemes appear to be beneficial in appropriate settings, and that from the data available, there is no evidence that shared space schemes, including those with shared surfaces, as implemented in the UK have more casualties than conventional layouts, or that particular groups, including disabled people, are injured more frequently following their introduction.”

This study which was carried out by MVA Consultancy (a Woking based firm) was very detailed and included a review of literature, interviews with people using Shared Space schemes, discussions with UK local authorities that have implemented Shared Space schemes and observation during site visits. Much of the study was about schemes where motor vehicles mixed with pedestrians and cyclists, which is not the case in Woking (apart from the West end of Commercial Way outside peak hours).

5. In October 2008 the DfT published “Cycle Infrastructure Design” This is available at: www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/roads/tpm/ltnotes/ltn208.pdf. The chapter on Off Road Cycle Routes has useful advice on design of shared use facilities and notes in particular that the speed of cyclists was perceived to be a danger but that in fact it was not the speed of cyclists but poor sight lines (blind corners and the like) that was the actual danger. This suggests that removal of obstructions in Commercial Way would improve the position for cyclists and pedestrians.

6. And finally have a read of this Guardian article and later posts concerning Cardiff’s shared use facilities: http://www.guardian.co.uk/cardiff/2010/aug/10/cardiff-to-copenhagen-city-centre-pedestrianisation. Interesting here is the comment that cycling on some of the area has been revoked, but clearly there are moves to get it reinstated.


We have sent an open letter to interested parties. To read it, click here