Pavement cycling

[icowden]

 

[bladderhead]

In Walthamstow in North London there is a bit of Lea Bridge Road where each half of the road is wide enough for two and a half lanes of cars. There is a bike lane between two car lanes, one in which they drive, one in which they park. How sensible is that?

 

[icowden]

I've seen that sort of thing before. Comes under "well we just drew a line on the road - surely that's enough for the box ticking exercise?"

 

[T675Rich]

There is a really odd bit on my commute where the shared use section stops for a couple of hundred yards then starts again, it's a a wide pavement that has little use by pedestrians with no side roads (the first road to cross it is just after it becomes a shared use path again. I use the pavement there as I feel switching is probably more dangerous, I have give way to the odd pedestrian from time to time but very infrequently. Everywhere else I use the road, even the one hill where I have had idiots shouting at me for going to slow.

 

[ericmark]

A side note: motorway is one where you can drive at 70mph and cyclists are not allowed due to danger of high speeds. Dual carriage way is also a road where you can drive at 70mph but cyclists are allowed.

Not where I live, there are large sections of A55 where cycling is not permitted. However there are no motorways in North Wales.

Blue circles generally give a mandatory instruction,such as "turn left", or indicate a route available only to particular classes of traffic, e.g. buses and cycles only.

Red rings or circles tell you what you must not do, e.g. you must not exceed 30 mph, no vehicles over the height shown may proceed.

Most regulatory signs are circular. A RED RING or RED CIRCLE indicates a prohibition. A BLUE CIRCLE generally gives a positive(mandatory) instruction or indicates a route for use only by particular classes of vehicle (see sections on tram signs and bus and cycle signs). Two notable exceptions are:
Stop and Give Way.

Reading the link given it seems what I thought is correct, and the signs do tell cycle users as much as other road uses what is or is not permitted or required. The exception is when pushing a cycle.
Walkway could include an unpaved section.
Pavement only means it has a hard surface, i.e. not a simple path across a field.
Pedestrian Zone it seems depends on the sign used, if a simple read circle then no pedal cycles, but with a motorbike and car in the centre of the circle it seems push bikes are permitted. I suppose since we use our feet to move the push bikes then they are pedestrian in a way.

I love English, to cycle you need to use the crank, so a scooter is not classed as a cycle, however the old thing has always been, let the courts decide, so if a court has stated that you can or can't do something even if the English seems to say different then what the court says goes. So thank you for the link, however if a court case shows that link is wrong, then it would be good to know.

 

[12boy]

Let us not forget the joy of being doored. I heartily support the idea of determing the safest route to go to work and testing it before actually commuting on it. Also good to know where public bathrooms (if any) and an LBS may be found. When I was working I had many different routes which could used depending on how long I could ride, which way the wind was blowing and how much snow and ice was present on side streets.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Not where I live, there are large sections of A55 where cycling is not permitted. However there are no motorways in North Wales.



Reading the link given it seems what I thought is correct, and the signs do tell cycle users as much as other road uses what is or is not permitted or required. The exception is when pushing a cycle.
Walkway could include an unpaved section.
Pavement only means it has a hard surface, i.e. not a simple path across a field.
Pedestrian Zone it seems depends on the sign used, if a simple read circle then no pedal cycles, but with a motorbike and car in the centre of the circle it seems push bikes are permitted. I suppose since we use our feet to move the push bikes then they are pedestrian in a way.

I love English, to cycle you need to use the crank, so a scooter is not classed as a cycle, however the old thing has always been, let the courts decide, so if a court has stated that you can or can't do something even if the English seems to say different then what the court says goes. So thank you for the link, however if a court case shows that link is wrong, then it would be good to know.

They say that route is open to you to ride on your bike. That does not make them mandatory you are free to use alternate roads or stay on the road if such signs are on a share use path either side.

 

[chriscross1966]

Two way for cycles and one way for motorised traffic.

Yep and a nightmare sometimes cos car drivers think you are riding the wrong way up a oneway street, which is what it is for them..

 

[ericmark]

They say that route is open to you to ride on your bike. That does not make them mandatory you are free to use alternate roads or stay on the road if such signs are on a share use path either side.

In the main there is nothing to say what the sign refers to, so you are right, there is an option for the county council to put qualifying plates under the sign, in some cases you see "Cyclists give way to pedestrians" but signs for motorised traffic are on same alignment as signs for non motorised so although it may be obvious what it refers to, it would be hard to prove.

 

[Kempstonian]

Some cyclists seem determined to give the others a bad name. Yesterday I was coming home on the bus and at one point three cyclists came past riding on the pavement and weaving in and out of pedestrians. On the other side of the road there is a bus lane AND a bike lane on the pavement - either of which they could have been using (as other cyclists were already doing).

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Eh, only people they were giving a bad name was themselves.

 

[Kempstonian]

Eh, only people they were giving a bad name was themselves.

Views of the non-cycling public are influenced by what they see and any cyclist acting like a dick reflects badly on the rest of us in their eyes. Same applies to the idiots who ride through the 'pedestians only' centre of Bedford. They know they aren't supposed to do it but they do it anyway.

 

[mjr]

Views of the non-cycling public are influenced by what they see and any cyclist acting like a dick reflects badly on the rest of us in their eyes. Same applies to the idiots who ride through the 'pedestians only' centre of Bedford. They know they aren't supposed to do it but they do it anyway.

Reject such lumping together please, rather than perpetuate it.

And Bedford borough council should implement what's been national policy since 1987 and allow cycling in the pedestrian areas. They are daffodils for still not doing so.

 

[bladderhead]

I ride in pedestrian places sometimes. I hate pushing a bike. A bike that is being pushed is pointless. But both my bikes are recumbent and I do get some odd reactions from pedestrians. Like rabbits in the headlights sometimes. I do not remember this when I rode diamond frame. I go to my left and the pedestrian goes to their right, or vice-versa. This happens a lot. I went to my left. He went right. I went left. He went right. In the end I was riding along the kerbstones. He went into the road. The pavement was wide enough for a tank.

 

[Ming the Merciless]

Yes I sometime drive my tank along the pavement.