Cycle users on pavements.

[Apollonius]

As this appears to be a wild generalisation, state your evidence - !
And as I'm not and never have been a football fan in any way, shape or form, your statement is a bit shakey to say the least - !

This is called selective quotation and is intellectually dishonest. If you look at the whole of my statement, it is very hard for anyone to disagree with. The point about "wild generalisation" is a literary device known as irony.

 

[Tracy]

I really dont see it as a problem. I'm a motorist, cyclist and at times a pedestrian. I've got no problem with sharing paths or roads with anyone else.
I think people just need something to moan about and cyclists are an easy target. We are not wanted on the roads and not wanted on the paths. Cant win.

 

[Apollonius]

Chris Boardman would doubtless point out that 66 pedestrians were killed on the pavement by powered vehicles last year. Where exactly does the problem lie?

 

[nickr]

Chris Boardman would doubtless point out that 66 pedestrians were killed on the pavement by powered vehicles last year. Where exactly does the problem lie?

Would Chris Boardman be able to give a link to verify the above?

 

[Lonestar]

folks are frightened

https://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.com/2017/12/07/why-so-angry/

That was an awful road and in the rush hour the motorbikes used the so called cycle lane (in the opposite direction) as well.I didn't mind that so much but some were real titheads.

I'm actually relieved this woman realised how dangerous it was there.It's never really changed.

 

[dantheman]

I really dont see it as a problem. I'm a motorist, cyclist and at times a pedestrian. I've got no problem with sharing paths or roads with anyone else.
I think people just need something to moan about and cyclists are an easy target. We are not wanted on the roads and not wanted on the paths. Cant win.

Oh. Now that is a post I would like multiple times if I could...

 

[dantheman]

I use pavements occasionally if I see fit, it's not often and I'll always go slow (I'm happy to get off and walk behind a pedestrian if need be) and polite to anyone who may be there... I don't think it's right to use them often or not to expect to give way if you do use them..

Haters will hate whatever..

As a side story, last week I was on a wide cycle path (two lanes over 2m wide each clearly marked with bike pictures on both lanes) when I see a couple walking a dog on them ahead of me. I slow down, they didn't notice me behind them, as I went to go to the left past them they're dog (on one of those extending line leads) who was blocking the right side, decided to run across left... I had time so I switched and went to go past on the right... The dog goes back over to the right, by this time I'm close so instead of switching again I just skidded almost to a stop. At this point the lady (not holding the lead) jumped as she realised I was there, and said sorry, I'm afraid I did t reply and just went past (usually I'd always be polite)...

Then, from the bloke I heard "oi, what you doing" called at me - I didn't stop or reply but I wonder, if they had been using the pedestrian walkway which is separated from the cycle lane by 1m grass verge (and clearly marked for pedestrians) and his dog was running across the road next to it, would he think the cars should stop for his dog also?

It surprising how a person's reaction can sway how you feel about others doing the same thing, I realise he was just a NUMPTYS but then for the rest of my ride I was thinking what dic*s dog walkers are - when most aren't...

People see this same stuff with cyclists and the stuff some of us do, which today was me - as I cut-through a closed road and simply didn't see the thin rope that was across the road, the cones came down the road with me.... What a NUMPTY.. I did stop and carried cones back, the road worker got out of van to see I was OK and I said "yes I'm fine mate, sorry I'm just being a dic* and didn't see the line across" - he was polite and laughed, I bet he took the pee out of me to the others(rightfully so).

 

[Apollonius]

Would Chris Boardman be able to give a link to verify the above?

Given his prominence in this field, I am sure he would. A quick search online gives me figures from 2016, which are in line with that sort of number.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/views-and-briefings/pedestrians

 

[mjr]

This should start a few views / opinions flying - !
In the fair city of Norwich, on the basis that it's no different from any other city / town in this respect, more cycle users seem to ride the pavements than the roads. There's no point in asking them why; you'll just get a load of abuse. I know, I've tried.
So, why do they do it - ? Is it simply because they can get away with it and it saves them having to stop or slow down for mundane things like traffic signs - ? It's also common to see them cycling along the pavement with a cycle lane on the road right beside them - !
If they come across pedestrians, either solo or with prams, disability frames or whatever who have the temerity to also be using the same bit of pavement, the pedestrian is expected to get out of the cycle users way and they usually do. Any comment or reaction from said pedestrian is invariably greeted with abuse.
Thoughts on the matter folks - !

Either you're cycling through different parts of Norwich than the one I used to live in (in Tuckswood, mostly) and still visit on a bike a few times a year, or your perception is out of whack or maybe people cycling on the pavement are more noticeable than those on the roads and cycleways. When I've been to Norwich, far more people are cycling on the pedalways than the footways.

And bizarrely, I can think of several places in Norwich where there is a cycle lane on the road ALONGSIDE a pavement which you are allowed/encouraged to cycle on. The Avenues may be the best-documented one online because of its involvement a few years ago in the Pink Pedalway Peeing-cycling-money-away-on-cars Parking Project. Interestingly, The Avenues has been closed to motorists recently for some works and the world hasn't ended like the local press said it would when Sustrans first suggested that closure decades ago - but of course, the works closure is only temporary.

Anyway, Norwich has too long encouraged people to cycle on footways that look little different from all other footways in the city, so it's no surprise that some just ride on all footways now, but it surprises me that there seem to be fairly few of them.

What are you defining as a pavement? Unless there's a local by law prohibiting such antics, it's only specifically an offence on a footway.

There certainly used to be a general bylaw in Norwich named on signs prohibiting it in general and I thought it was the Norwich Paving Law from some year in the 1800s, but I find no mention of this online and it looks on Streetview like the set of signs I cycled past when I was younger has been removed...

Cyclists on the footway isn't hard or clever, but I'm with winjim on this - motor vehicles on the footway present a far greater hazard to life and limb, but many of the people that whittle about slavering puppy torturing cyclists will park their car on a surface intended for pedestrians without a second thought.

Amen!

 

[straas]

My wife is considering using her bike to head up to the gym, but will only do it if she can use the pavement as she's terrified of the road traffic.

 

[SkipdiverJohn]

I really dont see it as a problem. I'm a motorist, cyclist and at times a pedestrian. I've got no problem with sharing paths or roads with anyone else.

It's a problem because of the bad attitude and lack of respect shown by most illegal pavement cyclists. Not only are they breaking the law, but they don't even have the decency to break the law in a polite manner by taking it slow and
give way to those who are legally entitled to be there - which they are not. Basically rude ignorant Chavs on two wheels.

 

[Tracy]

It's a problem because of the bad attitude and lack of respect shown by most illegal pavement cyclists. Not only are they breaking the law, but they don't even have the decency to break the law in a polite manner by taking it slow and
give way to those who are legally entitled to be there - which they are not. Basically rude ignorant Chavs on two wheels.

No different to rude ignorant charvs in four wheels. Or on two feet for that matter.

 

[bigjim]

There is a cycle-path near me that I use. It borders the insane A56. You have to negotiate busy side roads, pedestrians, dogs and the entrance and exit of a large petrol station. It then spits you out onto a huge, crazy, motorway roundabout. It is considered so dangerous they built an underpass for the safety of cyclists and pedestrians. However some Walking society or other complained about having to share it with cyclists, so cyclists are banned from using it. I still use the underpass, as do most of the other local cyclists.

 

[lane]

Sticking a painting of something that looks like a bike on a pavement and then claiming shared usage has a lot to answer for

Indeed. Our local village Facebook group recently had query from a local regarding if a particular pavement (which has been widened) was a cycle path. They had been using it as such assuming it was because it is wide, and also because there is a shared use path further up the road. They had then been challenged for doing so. A number of people answered correctly that it wasn't, although the consensus seemed to be that it was acceptable to use it for bikes, because the road was "dangerous" (it isn't particularly) and that they wouldn't risk life and limb cycling on any road.

 

[rugby bloke]

There is a typical example along a stretch of the Bedford Road between a couple of village. Initially the pavement is designated as a shared footpath / cycle path. Once you get beyond one of the villages it reverts to being just a pavement, although nothing else has changed. Now the Bedford Road can be pretty busy and requires a degree of confidence / bloody mindedness to ride. Therefore the more nervous rider is going to take the shared space - what happens when this reverts to a pavement - they are going to continue riding along it, and who can blame them ?