-----Original Message-----
From: [John Heath]
Sent: 29 November 2007 18:30
To: [Lin Hand]
Cc: [Dale Bostock]; Pete & Tina Davis; Lindsi Bluemel;
Eric Reed; Dilys Gartside
Subject: Lovers' lane


Dear Lin Hand,

	Last night I had a document forwarded to me from Southampton
Cycling Campaign. I believe that this document, which concerns a trial
switching off of lighting in that part of Lovers' Lane which ends at
Burgess Road, originated from you and that you are looking for
responses to it from the public.

	Perhaps the greatest dangers facing cyclists at night are those
stemming from the use of motor vehicle headlights. For this reason the
paths on the Common are particularly useful to cyclists at night in that
they provide car-free routes, the more so since most of them are
adequately wide and well surfaced.

	The introduction of lighting on some of the main routes and the
re-surfacing of some of the paths in about 1992 were further
improvements which made it possible to maintain reasonable speeds in
these areas and thus make them practical routes for those using the
bicycle as transport.

	The removal of lighting from paths on the Common is bound to
inconvenience cyclists in that their speed will be limited by the reach of
their front lights. However, I already go through the Common from the
Bellemoor Road junction up to Butterfield Road along the N-S unlit
route in preference to cycling up Hill Lane at night. It is only necessary
to re-position my front light to point 3-5 metres in front of the bike
instead of the normal horizontal alignment (and, of course, keep the top
of the light taped over to avoid light coming back into the eyes). The
only difficulty is that in fog, heavy rain, or when there are leaves on the
ground it is difficult to distinguish the edges of the path.

	While I appreciate that less confident cyclists may be unwilling
to use unlit paths and therefore be forced to use alternatives which, as
your document states "have . . . heavy traffic" and are therefore much
more dangerous as well as possibly being less convenient, I personally
am quite happy with the removal of lights from the paths on the
Common provided that:
(1) 	The paths are regularly swept to remove leaves and potentially
dangerous debris such as sticks.
(2)	Narrow paths, and those well used by cyclists, (such as Lovers'
Lane) have the margins painted white or otherwise delineated. This
would also be helpful for partially sighted pedestrians.
(3)	The surface of the paths are maintained to a high standard and
any defects potentially hazardous to cyclists are repaired without delay.
(4)	The owners of dogs are required to equip their dogs with
reflective collars or other devices (e.g. collars with flashing lights) and
also keep their dogs under control.

	I might add that in 30 years cycling across the Common the
only time I have myself been attacked was by a group of youths
congregating in an area of Cemetery Road, in full view and not "hiding
in the shadows".

Yours sincerely,


John Heath






--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.11/1161 - Release Date: 11/30/2007
12:12 PM