Cycling on pavements...

Robspedding

Should cyclists be allowed to ride on pavements. Richard Bacon will be discussing this next Tuesday on Radio Five Live, you can call in if you like. Anyway, do you ever hit the pavement?

Massimo

Real men don't eat quiche or ride on the pavement...

PETER 216

Cyclist should be on the road (unless it's a child), same goes for motor vehicles parking partly or fully on the pavements. Pavements are for pedestrians.

redddraggon

I use the road nearly exclusively, who doesn't go on the path at some point?

On my commute, there's three times that I go over (cross maybe a better word) a path. On the way out of my campus there's one of those self raising barriers, which never raises for me, so I pop around it on the path. Halfway home I go through a car park onto another road necessitating going across a short path. Finally to get into my flat I go over a path. Each one of those is only about 3m long, so I do the cheeky thing and stop on the bike - not really pavement riding though.

The people who use pavements nearly exclusively p!ss me off though. I've had a few run ins with them as a ped, and while riding along the road (they've pulled off the kerb into my path without looking)

redddraggon

PETER 216 wrote:

(unless it's a child)

I nearly had my dog killed by idiot children cycling down paths, "it's too dangerous on the road" they told me (me doing over 100miles a week on the road in worse conditions).

Children are worse than adults on paths - sprinting down paths isn't dangerous?

toontra

I was on the pavement only yesterday! There was a long traffic jam going in my direction with heavy oncoming traffic in the other. The road was narrow so it would have been very dangerous up the outside. In this situation there are usually a couple of vehicles who have pulled tight over to the left and therefore prevent filtering up the inside.

When this happens, if there are no pedestrians around I will mount the pavement and cycle slowly (5-8mph) to get past the obstruction and then continue filtering. If there are any pedestrians around at all then I either walk the bike (if very busy) or push along scooter-style at 4-5mph. If at any time I think I will encounter a pedestrian I get off and walk.

Not doing so in the conditions given above, I could be waiting many minutes in a queue of traffic simply because a single vehicle has decided to hug the verge.

cyclingfury

In my town (Oakham, in Rutland), there are a number of pavements which are designated for use by both pedestrians and cyclists. These paths are identified by a round sign in blue with the logo of two people walking, and a logo of a cycle above them. They actually seem to work. I think this is because pedestrians expect to see cyclists sharing the paths and on the whole because it is shared one tends to ride a bit slower and keep an eye out for people walking. They are well used by families with young children on bikes and I can ride the 2 miles to the Co-op to get my morning paper without having to venture on the road if I don't want to! They've now started designating similar paths in and around some of the villages in Rutland, which I think is a great way to provide safe journeys for younger riders and encouraging tolerance and respect between cyclists and pedestrians.

The only point I would add is that Oakham is a small market town in a rural area and maybe this strategy of shared pathways wouldn't work in a busier town or city.

SteveR_100Milers

The only "pavement" is the Taf trail, otherwise I'd never ever ride on the pavement.

popette

cyclingfury wrote:

In my town (Oakham, in Rutland), there are a number of pavements which are designated for use by both pedestrians and cyclists. These paths are identified by a round sign in blue with the logo of two people walking, and a logo of a cycle above them.
.

I can think of one of those in our area as well. The problem with it is there are stacks of side roads on it so you're constantly stopping and starting.
I personally wouldn't ride on the pavement. If I needed to go on the pavement I would get off and walk.

richardast

I just think that even if there are no peds on the pavement you shouldn't be riding on it, not even at walking pace.
If there's a traffic jam so you use it to get past 10 cars, that's potentially 10 drivers plus their passengers thinking, "and they want us to give them respect on the roads."
Add to that the people in the oncoming vehicles.
Doesn't help the image.
And it's illegal.

I hate it when I see impatient car drivers mount the nearside pavement to get around somebody in front of them who is waiting to turn right. This sounds pretty similar.

If you really can't wait with the rest of the road users then it looks better if you get off and push it.

1892

Another question should pedestrians walk on cycle paths or should cars park blocking cycling paths?
I do sometimes ride on the pavement but only until I can get onto the road and only when it's a wide path.
If cycling paths were improved (more than 1 metre long) and not put in stupid positions, more people would use them getting them of the footpath.
Cycling paths should be designed by cyclists not car drivers makes sense to me.

redvee

I am guilty of pavement riding but when I do I give the ped priority which confuses them greatly. When the roles are reversed, I make things difficult for the cyclist, making sure that they have to slow down cause I'm in their way. I've made contact with a pavement cyclist when a ped, a wide 15ft pavement and the cyclist was coming towards me so I moved out towards the curb and so does the cyclist depite the width and space available, our shoulders made contact and he had to go onto the road, also ttelling them to ride on the roads or asking 'Should I walk on the roads so you can ride on the pavement?'

Random Vince

cyclingfury wrote:

In my town (Oakham, in Rutland), there are a number of pavements which are designated for use by both pedestrians and cyclists. These paths are identified by a round sign in blue with the logo of two people walking, and a logo of a cycle above them. They actually seem to work. I think this is because pedestrians expect to see cyclists sharing the paths and on the whole because it is shared one tends to ride a bit slower and keep an eye out for people walking. They are well used by families with young children on bikes and I can ride the 2 miles to the Co-op to get my morning paper without having to venture on the road if I don't want to! .

thats fine if the pavement is wide enough to do it, and you're not in a hurry

I rode the mountain bike into uni and back today, had 3 near misses with pedestrians in the cycle lane / walking into the cycle lane right in-front of me

had 3 near misses due to blind corners (for which i was slowing down a lot for) and narrow cycle lanes, including nearly hitting a bike police dude, who informed me that riding along shouting "ding" was no substitute for a bell!

on the road bike i click my levers as i ride along bike paths that share pedestrian bits (5M wide pedestrian bits, 1M wide bike lane and the peds walk in the bike lane "wooo look, red pathway, lets follow it" )

on the mountain bike i jab the back brake to make the rear tyre skid a little bit, not a full on braking skid, just a short scrape noise

does the job

forgot to say (hence the edit) once or twice i've expected to be getting home about 2-3pm at the latest and so not taken lights with me

so have occasionally ridden on the pavements very slowly until getting to the crap cycle lanes that are just the other side of the city centre

does this make me a bad person?

SteveR_100Milers

richardast wrote:

I just think that even if there are no peds on the pavement you shouldn't be riding on it, not even at walking pace.
If there's a traffic jam so you use it to get past 10 cars, that's potentially 10 drivers plus their passengers thinking, "and they want us to give them respect on the roads."
Add to that the people in the oncoming vehicles.
Doesn't help the image.
And it's illegal.

I hate it when I see impatient car drivers mount the nearside pavement to get around somebody in front of them who is waiting to turn right. This sounds pretty similar.

If you really can't wait with the rest of the road users then it looks better if you get off and push it.

100% agreed, excpet for the patronising term "peds". Kind of them and us, like lycra clad road warriors is to white van man etc etc.

synchronicity

The only time I ride on the pavement here is in one particular climb back to my house. 10% grade and no shoulder for about 150m. There is no room to overtake, so it's just more polite for me to adopt the pavement rather than force a line of cars to have to wait it out... yes it's safer too (for me! :P ).

knedlicky

The hard and fast attitudes of some of the posters here I find surprising.

On the Continent, strictly-speaking it's not allowed for adults to cycle on the pavement (unless they are designated mixed use areas when cyclists are supposed to ride at only a pedestrian's speed).

Nonetheless, on the whole, in many places cycling on the pavement is common, by all ages and types, especially those out shopping, grannies included. For the most part, this is comfortably accepted and tolerated by pedestrians and ignored by police (except in areas with a lot of pedestrian traffic, like mid-afternoon in a city centre which doesn't have its pedestrian zone designated as a mixed-use area).

This liberal and tolerant approach by all sides must play a role because the cyclist accident rates in Continental lands, despite much higher cyclist densities than in the UK, aren't any different to the rate in the UK, whether measured in cycle-km ridden or % of all accidents.

If there is an accident on a pedestrian-only pavement involving a cyclist, even if it wasn't his fault, like a car coming too fast and inattentively out of a driveway (the driver is supposed to give way to those on a pavement), the cyclist won't get any support from insurance companies or the police. But generally there are very few accidents, especially between pedestrians and cyclists. It's the above example which is more common.

When accidents do occur between the pedestrians and cyclists, most are on designated bike-only paths, because pedestrians walk inattentively on to them, or when pedestrians step suddenly out on to the road having failed to notice on a cyclist.

I think the whole issue of riding on the pavement is over-played; there are a lot more matters one could discuss which would benefit both pedestrians and cyclists.
I almost wonder if the subject is purposely periodically raised, as part of a sort of 'divide and conquer' policy by those who support the motor lobby.

knedlicky

A couple of posters write only children should be on the pavement. Well, by law in the UK not even your 4-year who has learnt to ride a bike without stabiliser wheels should be on the pavement, and I have met some stroppy pedestrians in UK urban areas who made it quite clear that they felt my daughter and nephew, when only that age, should be out on the road competing with the buses and lorries.

But they say 'tolerance' is one of essential components of what it means to be British. :?

In many Continental countries, children under 8 years old aren't allowed to cycle on the road or on bike paths, but have to be on the pavement. Only when they are 10-years old must they be on the road. Those between 8-10 years may ride on either road or pavement (I suppose this overlap is to allow for different degrees of maturity in the children). I consider this the much more sensible approach with respect to children.

richardast

SteveR_100Milers

The word peds was not intended to be patronising, just an abbreviation like roadie, MTB, bike, Steve, etc.

redvee

Nearly got wiped out/wiped out 2 cyclists this morning when I pushed my steed out the front door this morning. Usually I pull back for peds but 2 furiously pedalling cyclists??. It was OK because they had leds on the rear of their bikes :?

bigflangesmallsprocket

Generally I ride on the road, though there are exceptions: when I'm out later than expected and have forgotten to bring lights 'just in case'; when I have to use a narrow but very busy road, and continuing on these roads ( one PARTICULAR road I'm thinking of right now) would mean quite a tailback. At peak times I'll hop onto the pavement to enable free traffic flow, and the drivers directly behind me usually show polite gratitude; when theres a big tailback and no way to get round it on the road. In a previous job, when I first started cycling after many years layoff, I did this before I regained confidence to overtake...carefully.

When I do use the pavement I ride at walking pace or slightly faster. I always slow right down for pedestrians and move over to keep right out of their way as I pass. At a walking pace a cyclist takes up less frontal space than a pedestrian with 2 full bags of shopping, and is more agile! As a cyclist intruding on pedestrian territory I always make momentary eye contact as I approach and slow, often give a polite nod, so they know Im aware of them and that theyre aware Im taking action to stay out of their way.

Habitual pavement riding is rife where I live, and think the council, to a certain extent is actually taking advantage of this to designate some of the wider pavements as cycling zones, which I feel encourages it as a habit. So on a busy road with reasonable pavement, they simply slap down some white paint. This means that the cycle paths round here are often pretty awful for riding at speed unless youre on an mtb or bmx! I dont consider myself a pavement cyclist at all, as I rarely actually use the pavement, except for a couple of cycle paths that take me down by the river, and I ignore most cyclepaths and stick to the road as its smoother and provides better continuity. Theres one particular cycle path that jumps on and off the road, which I consider pretty dangerous, especially for casual cyclists who may assume that drivers will be keeping off the cycling lane ( and it can be disconcerting for a motorist when I bike just pops out onto the road directly in front of them!). I dont mind pavement cyclists generally (my motorist sister says shed rather have a nervous rider on the pavement than on the road in front of her), but there are some that do take the pi55, taking no account of pedestrian safety. The ones that annoy me are the ones using the pavement at 6am when the roads are empty....that just makes me think..why!

buddha

Yesterday I was beeped by the plod for riding on a 'pavement'.

It was 2 meters after a cycle track/path ends and abruptly transforms into a pavement with NO means to exit to the road (other than ride through a fence, across a grass verge and over a kerb into fast, oncoming, one-way traffic). I think the last time I saw a pedestrian on the path was in the summer.

Anyway, I just waved at Mr Policeman and carried on riding the further 20 metres until I reached a side road.

The other time I ride the pavement is to cross a park. But if I see a ped, I always ride past them on the grass. This is to avoid a poorly maintained main road that has cost me 2 wheels in the last couple of years. Unknown to most people, South London has its fair share of fault-lines, with constantly moving tectonic plates that leave vast chasms and ridges across it's main roads . Though TBH I'm just being lazy here.

Mithras

I have no choice, I have to ride on pavements, if I don't billy burglar gets away. I'd look pretty silly chasing someone pushng my bike!

Now is this a case of one rule for me and another for everybody else?

cee

Mithras wrote:

I have no choice, I have to ride on pavements, if I don't billy burglar gets away. I'd look pretty silly chasing someone pushng my bike!

Now is this a case of one rule for me and another for everybody else?

Are all burglars called billy? or could some theoretically be called bernard?

and how many have you chased on your pushbike? Oooh ooh and how many have you caught?

(all this assumes of course that you are one of these new fangled specialized bike ridin, helmet touting, blue light flashing policepersons and not infact just some other hooner extractin the urea)
edit oooh oooh and if you are on eof these policepersons on a pushbike......have you seen the way us cyclists (including yourself actually dress.......lets just say you wouldn't have to be pushin your bike to look silly.....be honest folks......we all look a little silly)

Mithras

Mmm. Point taken....I do look silly. Yes Iam one of those new fangled specialized bike ridin, helmet touting, blue light flashing policepersons, except I work for cambridgeshire constabulary and they are too hard up to put air in our tyres,never mind give us decent machinery and proper clothing to wear. (crash hat, ill fiitting and summer gloves is all we get)
Did get one Billy the other week, could have been a Bernard but said his name was Dave, didn't believe him. Said his crowbar was not for burgling....belived him, no I did honest!....Knocked him off (not literally) for possesion of an offensive weapon instead of going equipped. Well serves him right for not being honest and saying his name was dave!
Anyway, point is I was on a footpath at the time, riding my non speacialized unmarked police bike without my crash hat (too cold, wore non issue police beanie) and without flashing lights of any description (batteries dead)
Now can you imagine the results I could get If I was one of those new fangled specialized bike ridin, helmet touting, blue light flashing Endura clothed police persons.
Anyone want to sponsor a Copper in Peterborough to the tune of £1000?

windyphil

Since I've moved to Australia, I've ben tooted more than once for riding on the road!

It's more accepted that in Sydney, or rather the suburbs, you should be on the path. I don't get it myself as you have to stop every two meters for a side road!

dessertwarrior

OK, I admit it ... I do ride on pavements occasionally. :oops:

When riding up particularly steep hills, I sometimes use the pavements as it is safer than sharing the road with cars traveling at 3 (or more) times my speed. There being no cycle lanes on these busy roads, it makes more sense to me.

I am prepared to be proved wrong but doesn't the law say that a cyclist may use the pavement if continuing on the road would be dangerous?

Porgy

I must admit I occasionally end up on the pavement. I find the cycle lanes at Vauxhall just give out at very inconvenient places - so I will keep going on the pavement till I can get back on to the road.

I had a woman this morning look startled because I was entering a traffic island which I believe I'm allowed to cycle on since it leads from a cycle lane to a toucan crossing. I wasn't going fast, or indeed anywhere near her, but I bet she was complaining about pavement cyclists at work this morning. These things need to be more clearly marked so we all know where we stand.

I got fined last month for being ont he pavement. There's a junction on Camberwell New Road where four lanes of traffic narrows to about 3 and a bit - and if you place yourself in the middle to turn right you're in a position to be crunched by oncoming traffic (while avoiding buses coming past you on the left). I have taken to cutting across the pedestrian crossing, across the pavement and then back on to the road. There's hardly ever anyone on this stretch in the evenings and I always let peds go first. Anyway I got fined - the officer said he wouldn't have fined me only his colleage was doing a bloke across the road for recklessly cycling along the pavement and they couldn't be seen to be letting me off in front of him.

So I'm back on the dangerous junction and immediately I'm getting abuse from motorists. Still - better than having to pay a fine I guess.

C-S-B

I hardly ever ride on pavements, and when I do its usually because theres a long traffic jam with too many vehicles not leaving enough space to squeeze past.

Also, many pedestrians seem to have a very anti-cycling-on-pavements attitude - just today I had cycled only 2 metres on the pavement (after which distance I stopped to read a map), and an old man had already yellied at me telling me to get back on the road

bigjim

Interesting. This morning at 11am. 2 PCSOs cycling along the very busy pavement in the centre of Cheetham Hill in the rain on their official MTBs. One law for ............
Jim

Mithras

bigjim wrote:

Interesting. This morning at 11am. 2 PCSOs cycling along the very busy pavement in the centre of Cheetham Hill in the rain on their official MTBs. One law for ............
Jim

See my post above...It is as it is. PC's and PCSO's can't do thier job without riding on the pavement. I do it all the time. I also cycle at night without lights and in dark clothing.
But it gets the job done.

bigjim

quote]See my post above...It is as it is. PC's and PCSO's can't do thier job without riding on the pavement. I do it all the time. I also cycle at night without lights and in dark clothing.
But it gets the job done[/quote]

Thats confirmed then. One law for...............

Jim