wrong to cycle on sidewalk?

[Brandane]

I thought it came from the Highway Code and presumably the relevant acts behind it? I'm sure the Highway Code refers to a bicycle as a vehicle as the No Vehicles sign applies to bikes.

Most Road Traffic legislation refers to "motor vehicles" though. It is a bit of a minefield as to where a bicycle sits in all of this. You obviously don't want very young children on bicycles being told that they can't use the pavement. Common sense has to play a part in enforcement, whatever the law says, but unfortunately there are law enforcers with very limited amounts of common sense; just the same as there are cyclists who can't differentiate between cycling on a deserted pavement running alongside a trunk road out in the middle of nowhere with no pedestrians - and a busy city centre pavement at rush hour!

 

[summerdays]

I've asked policemen in the past about cycling on the pavement and with regards to children, and the replies that I have got generally say, below 16 can't fine, however depending on the manner in which they are cycling they might have a word with them. At the younger ages they would start to talk to parents and if a persistent problem them it might be a family in need of the help of other agencies to deal with various problems.

The bits where it says motor vehicles obviously doesn't refer to cyclists, and so the speed limits don't apply for example.

I don't know when an electic bike might become a scooter though.

 

[Sara_H]

No, I'm not, looked at their website, is their forum any good?
Unfortunately there isn't an alternative to penistone road for me, apparently it should be complete in the spring, just checked and the section I mentioned (Leppings Lane to the leisure centre) will become a shared use path. I just hope they signpost it well, the kids at Hillsborough college seem to have no idea what a cycle path is

The forum is not too busy, though you will usually get one or two helpfull replies if you post a query. There's a Facebook page and Twitter page too.
The chairperson, Mick (also runs the sheffield Friday night ride) has been very supportive following my hit and run, restored my faith in human kind.

 

[Drago]

My safety is more important than the views of a few ignorant mortards, whose views are likely well formed long before they see me pottering benignly on the footway.

It's not benign to the increasingly vocal cycle hate brigade. To them it's another example of what a bunch of nun raping, kitten murdering, non road tax paying monsters we are.

The few ignorant chumps can really rain on our parade, hence two UKIP MPs from two.consecutive by elections. If this trend continues then powerless the Star readers of this world will not remain for long at all. The un thinking chump is on the the political ascendence and are liable to have real influence and clout before long, and all unlawful cycling does is send them off cackling with righteously indignant glee. If we ever do get shafted with adverse legislation it will be because the bad example set by a few have motivated a small but highly vocal band of twots to push for them with ever more shrill of hysteria.

Just because they're idiots doesn't mean they can't f**k us up good.

 

[summerdays]

I've just been reminded about a footway I cycle on. It's a steep narrow winding hill (10%). I cycle on the path and aim not to let my speed drop under 4 mph. Cars find it impossible to overtake cyclists and half the ones I see going up are on the path. The only thing is I'm bot completely sure the path is that safe, just passed (in the car), yet another accident where a car obviously took the worst bend too fast and ends up on the wrong side of the road crossing the path and in the ditch, which is lucky as they normally hit the trees. One ambulance was already there and met another and a police car shortly after.

I have never heard a motorist complain at seeing a bike on the path there and I have been passed by police cars.

 

[Sara_H]

I've just been reminded about a footway I cycle on. It's a steep narrow winding hill (10%). I cycle on the path and aim not to let my speed drop under 4 mph. Cars find it impossible to overtake cyclists and half the ones I see going up are on the path. The only thing is I'm bot completely sure the path is that safe, just passed (in the car), yet another accident where a car obviously took the worst bend too fast and ends up on the wrong side of the road crossing the path and in the ditch, which is lucky as they normally hit the trees. One ambulance was already there and met another and a police car shortly after.

I have never heard a motorist complain at seeing a bike on the path there and I have been passed by police cars.

I've a similar hill on my route, steep, windy, narrow, one way in places. I've had some horrid close passes here, so primary it is _ at about 5mph. The pavement is deserted for the most part, so much better for me and drivers if I'm on the pavement. On the odd occasion I come into conflict with a pedestrian I just stop and wait for them to go by.

 

[Profpointy]

I've just been reminded about a footway I cycle on. It's a steep narrow winding hill (10%). I cycle on the path and aim not to let my speed drop under 4 mph. Cars find it impossible to overtake cyclists and half the ones I see going up are on the path. The only thing is I'm bot completely sure the path is that safe, just passed (in the car), yet another accident where a car obviously took the worst bend too fast and ends up on the wrong side of the road crossing the path and in the ditch, which is lucky as they normally hit the trees. One ambulance was already there and met another and a police car shortly after.

I have never heard a motorist complain at seeing a bike on the path there and I have been passed by police cars.

Bridge valley road?

 

[Drago]

[QUOTE 3413515, member: 45"]Rubbish.[/QUOTE]

Rubbish, eh? That's why it's on the verge of happening...

http://road.cc/content/news/138066-...centre-bike-ban-after-pensioner-suffers-brain

Remember, logic and common sense go out the window when politicos want to legislate against us. Dismissing that which is clearly happening all around us as rubbish does nothing to a address the issue.

We're all pretty used to your impulsive one word rejoinders being a bit, er, rubbish, but for you to be proven wrong so quickly is breathtaking by even your standards.

 

[Racing roadkill]

I was talking to a Trafpol about this recently. He said that (dependant on exact circumstances) they would probably turn a blind eye. It's better to have a bike on the path, by a dodgy bit of road, than have to deal with an incident on the road, involving the bike and a vehicle, was how he put it. They would take appropriate action, if the cyclist was doing something wreckless, or if the circumstances really didn't warrant a bike being on the path, however.

 

[MontyVeda]

Rubbish, eh? That's why it's on the verge of happening...

http://road.cc/content/news/138066-...centre-bike-ban-after-pensioner-suffers-brain

Remember, logic and common sense go out the window when politicos want to legislate against us. Dismissing that which is clearly happening all around us as rubbish does nothing to a address the issue.

We're all pretty used to your impulsive one word rejoinders being a bit, er, rubbish, but for you to be proven wrong so quickly is breathtaking by even your standards.

who the feck wrote that article?

Some councillors in Darlington have suggested a ban on cycling in the town centre following an incident in which a pensioner was left with life changing brain injuries following a fall from his bike.

Brian Coates, 74, was walking in the town centre in September when he fell on to his head. Witnesses suggested he may have been startled by a group of young boys on bikes who were seen in the area.

....and for the record... it's hardly conclusive proof of anything

 

[summerdays]

Bridge valley road?

No outside Bristol, Alveston Hill.

 

[andyfraser]

I was talking to a Trafpol about this recently. He said that (dependant on exact circumstances) they would probably turn a blind eye. It's better to have a bike on the path, by a dodgy bit of road, than have to deal with an incident on the road, involving the bike and a vehicle, was how he put it. They would take appropriate action, if the cyclist was doing something wreckless, or if the circumstances really didn't warrant a bike being on the path, however.

That is too vague and probably why we're having this debate. What would the circumstances be that don't warrant riding on the path? I may feel that the road is too bad for me to ride on so use a footway only to get stopped because a police officer thinks the circumstances don't warrant cycling on the footway.

 

[ufkacbln]

Rubbish, eh? That's why it's on the verge of happening...

http://road.cc/content/news/138066-...centre-bike-ban-after-pensioner-suffers-brain

Remember, logic and common sense go out the window when politicos want to legislate against us. Dismissing that which is clearly happening all around us as rubbish does nothing to a address the issue.

We're all pretty used to your impulsive one word rejoinders being a bit, er, rubbish, but for you to be proven wrong so quickly is breathtaking by even your standards.

The article misses the point entirely

These were not "cyclists" (if that part of the article is correct) but "yoofs" on bikes, with all the stupidity and foolishness that entails

In a couple of years they will be driving equally stupidly and with an equal lack of care in a Chavriolet

The difference is that they will not be classed as "motorists" and when they knock someone down in their car there will not be a call for cars to be banned