Cycling on pavements...

Cunobelin

How does anyone manage to cycle on the pavement?

We don't have pavements in Portsmouth - they are called "Car parks"!



On a more serious note though - how do you tell kids that they can't cycle on a pavement when they see so many adults driving cars on them?

SunWuKong

Saw two of those pretend police cycling on the pavement today. :shock:

passout

Me too - they were on Letsby Avenue!

paulorg

Never use the pavement, it's for chavs on £75 Halfrauds MTB's and pedestrians only IMO

webbhost

I think paulorg hit nail on the head there lol

lark

I cycle on pavements when I have collected my little boy from school.

He is sitting on the pannier rack, holding on.

Double bad marks to me.

webbhost

Lark actually I'm with you there. School traffic seems to be that ignorant its unreal...if I had a child on my bike I wouldn't risk it during school rush hour.

lesz42

on the way to my work there is some bike lanes, with "peds" walking on them, often, as the bike lane, is a shorter way into town then the pavement.

pottssteve

It's being discussed here:
http://www.tes.co.uk/section/staffroom/ ... id=2642167

dondare

I've made this point before; pedestrians have a higher accident rate per mile than cyclists. Cycling on the pavement is probably therefore more dangerous than cycling on the road.
Anyone who answers this by asking "how can that be?" is missing the point; because it does happen to be, but the short answer is that crossing roads from the pavement on one side to that on the other is much more dangerous than riding along it with the traffic.

drumon

here in Norway, it seems riding on the pavement is accepted, and I think its even part of "the Rules".... if you're on a bike, you're not a "car" so essentially a pedestrian, pavements as much yours as theirs. You can use the road if you like though.

And it drives me crazy as a ped, and it certainly feels ridiculous when cycling the pavement, progress is slowed cos peds walk not run and there are no "lanes" on the pavement like the road, so people going in all directions, thats not safe weaving about on the bike, pavement slalom !! wish they HAD to cycle on the road here.

dondare

Well, Norway is a large country with a small population; the roads usually have a mountain on one side, a long drop into a fjord on the other and convoy of a mad German drivers throwing their Audis round all those blind bends at autobahn speeds so for cyclists, pavement riding might seem to be safer.

chuckcork

I think pavement riding is more than acceptable in the case of towns that have adopted a one-way ring road strategy, whereby if you want to follow the rules as a cyclist you have to do maybe 400-800 metres to travel 100 metres or less directly.

It only makes sense to go against the traffic on the footpath, rather than mix it with petrol heads. I'm thinking of cases like the Kingston Upon Thames one way system, which is almost designed to thwart cyclists and which be described as a racetrack, what with its starting lights and long straights where speed can really be achieved. I use to ride a motorbike around it in my previous incarnation so I know from experience.

On the pavement though, pedestrians have right of way absolutely, as long as that is foremost in your thinking and practice, and allowing for them to do the same unexpected things that we as cyclists wish motorists would allow for us on the roads, then I don't see the problem.

Courage Monsieur

I live in SE London. Anyone who cycles in my hood is usually some disaffected yoof on a BMX who has no real need to cycle on the pavement.

Near my work in central London, those who cycle on a pavement are either newbie idiot commuters who don't know better, or prick fixies who think they're above it all. Neither really need to be on the pavement.

To hell with them all.

huggy

Perhaps we should say - "Mr Ped, how many times do you walk on a cycle path?"
I seem to get lots of people walking on the cycle path, refusing to move to the side when you ride up to them, kind of defeats the point...

Coriander

Courage Monsieur wrote:

I live in SE London. Anyone who cycles in my hood is usually some disaffected yoof on a BMX who has no real need to cycle on the pavement.

Near my work in central London, those who cycle on a pavement are either newbie idiot commuters who don't know better, or prick fixies who think they're above it all. Neither really need to be on the pavement.

To hell with them all.

Amen.

passout

Coriander wrote:

Courage Monsieur wrote:

I live in SE London. Anyone who cycles in my hood is usually some disaffected yoof on a BMX who has no real need to cycle on the pavement.

Near my work in central London, those who cycle on a pavement are either newbie idiot commuters who don't know better, or prick fixies who think they're above it all. Neither really need to be on the pavement.

To hell with them all.

Amen.

Yes.... damn those working class and/or singlespeeding yobs!....If I lived in London I'd be more concerned with the gun and knife crime, rather than needlessly slagging off other cyclists.

1892

There's a postbox across the road from where I work, as I was gazing out the window yesterday, a chav in his Merc 4 x 4, drove across the road, and then up the pavement so that he could post his letters into the postbox, without getting out of his chavmobile, he also tried to post a parcel but it wouldn't fit
I think that might be worse than riding on the pavement, when a stupid cycle lane has stopped & you haven't noticed.

urban-commuter

As a rule pavements are for peds.

But funnily enough, I've noticed some traditional pavements be reclassified with a lick of paint to be shared use cycle routes and ped paths.

So it's a bit of a work in progress.

dondare

urban-commuter wrote:

As a rule pavements are for peds.

But funnily enough, I've noticed some traditional pavements be reclassified with a lick of paint to be shared use cycle routes and ped paths.

So it's a bit of a work in progress.

Encouraging cyclists to use the pavement is not progress.

clockworkwar

I think in some situations it's perfectly fine, car drivers hate cyclists in my town and I have almost pushed onto the path out of fear. I take the hint at this point and then do it.

Also when you have a truck behind you, thats a scary affair. Especially in traffic.

dondare

It's not fine if it's illegal. If you are forced off the road by a motorist then you should report them for dangerous driving.

Bikerbaboon

dondare wrote:

It's not fine if it's illegal. If you are forced off the road by a motorist then you should report them for dangerous driving.

I dont like to do things that way round...... let them run you over and then call the police? come on dondare even you must agree that on a personal level if you had a crazy driver swerving in to you rather than staying on the road you would take steps to get out of the way? Or would you refuse to break a law and get hit by a car ?

leagal or not i take the practical view. if a road section that i would have to travel across carries a significant of a crash and on a roundabout 3 lanes going in to it with only 2 lanes going round there is that threat, then i take steps to protect me and my famaily from the harm that haveing me dead or off work for 4 months would cause. to do that i pop down an underpass and am off road for no more than 15m.

on a side note don have you ever been hit by a car? do you know the sickaning crunch on the impact the feeling of bones snapping inside you, the dread as you are flying 4 foot in the air heading towards the oncoming traffic knowing that there is nothing that you can do and then the 15 min wait lying in the road for a ambulance that lasts for days. and last but not least that the person that put you in hospital for 4 weeks and off work for 2 months got a one day driving improving training?

if you gave me the choice i would follow the guidance given to the police that cycleists can use the pavement if they feel that they are at significant risk.

dondare

No, I've never been hit by a car in that way, only banged into the sides of ones making unexpected turns. Therefore my own experience of cycling on the roads (for 40 years) is that it isn't so dangerous that I need to use the footpath instead.
I know accidents do happen to cyclists on the road, they also happen to motorists on the road but that is no reason why anyone would drive on the path. Accidents also happen to pedestrians and so using the pavement can't ensure your safety.
When particular roads or juntions are genuinely unsafe for cyclists then they're probably unsafe for motorists, too; cyclists make up less than 5% of road accident victims. I'm not trying to make light of your experience; in fact in your position I might be making more of it to persuade the council to change the road layout or install trafic enforcement cameras.
Did you get any damages from the driver, by the way?

MoonCircuit

On a road bike this topic is a different matter.

Mithras

MoonCircuit wrote:

The consequences of a crash between a motor vehicle and a bike are a lot worse than the consequences of a crash between a bike and a pedestrian.

Not sure about that. Try ask the pedestrian that has been hit by a fast moving cyclist....neither option is particularly appealing!

SmellTheGlove

MoonCircuit wrote:

... I don't drive, so I am not an experienced road user...

... I've never had a problem in thirty years.

Two statements that add up to an all-too-common kind of defeat. Nothing personal, just an observation.

Dawnrider

Well i haven't used my bike in over a year but yea,I will use the footpath if its a busy dangerous road. I won't ride along it,just use it to get across a busy road or dodge a nasty island.

Patrick1.0

I usually have very little reason to ride on the pavement. I prefer a road because I can go a lot, lot faster on it than I can on a pavement. If there are cars obstructing the way then I just jump on the pavement and ride past them and then get back onto the road. I am not going to mess about sitting behind traffic when there are no pedestrians using the pavement. Who would do that? Pedestrians cross the road every now and then, too.

whyamihere

Nobody has a problem with people using the pavement when they feel unsafe on the roads, that's what they're there for. But what I really can't understand is the problem that people have with becoming a pedestrian for those few metres?

Bikerbaboon - You say you're off road for less than 15 metres. If you were to get off the bike and jog, how long would that 15 metres take you? Around 5 seconds? At a guess, you'll save 2 seconds by riding. Are 2 seconds worth annoying someone about people cycling on the pavement, possibly making them that bit less considerate towards the next cyclist they see on the road?