# Pavement cycling



## alicebimbles (27 Feb 2019)

Hi everyone,

I'm thinking about cycling to work in London and I spoke to my friend who started a couple of months ago said she said she started off cycling the difficult bits on the pavement.

I personally don't like pavement cycling as I know it's illegal, but there are bits of my route which are horrendous so I won't have a choice.

For those who've cycled on the pavement, what are your thoughts? Any tips?

Also, what was getting into cycling like for you? I'm hoping once I get going I'll feel more confident.


----------



## Old jon (27 Feb 2019)

alicebimbles said:


> For those who've cycled on the pavement, what are your thoughts? Any tips?



Hello and welcome to Cycle Chat.

Thoughts in plenty, but few of much use. I tend to take the longer way around, when possible, of any bits of a route I do not feel happy riding.


----------



## dodgy (27 Feb 2019)

Welcome!

I very very rarely feel the need to get on the pavement, I've been riding for many years, but I can completely understand why a novice finds it tempting.
This makes me quite angry really, there must be so many people who would commute by bike if they felt safe 

My only advice is use your discretion, if the police see you, they'll probably turn a blind eye as they, too, can show discretion with these matters. As long as you're not speeding along and posing a threat to pedestrians. Just make sure you take to the roads whenever possible and try to reduce your dependency on the paths over time. 

Finally, if you are challenged by a policeman/woman, make sure to tell them you did it as you felt in danger and you aren't posing a danger to any other path users because there aren't any. And if there are other path users, you're on to a loser.

Have fun.


----------



## Markymark (27 Feb 2019)

Look at different routes. My route is lovely but not the most direct. Plenty of advice and options for picking a route. 

Also, link to a particular bit you don’t want to ride and you should get some advice as to have to navigate it safely.


----------



## vickster (27 Feb 2019)

You could always walk the bike on the pavements if there’s no alternative. Don’t ride on pavements in central London, too many peds.
As above, where are you going from/to?


----------



## annedonnelly (27 Feb 2019)

As others have said if you're careful & considerate to others it shouldn't be a problem. I wouldn't do it in a town centre or residential area. I'd get off and push if I had to.

However, there's a stretch of pavement that I do cycle on - it runs alongside a road with 50 mph limit & the boy racers often use it as a test track. There is also a shared use cycle path running parallel through the dunes. This is very popular with cyclists, walkers, dog walkers, joggers, etc. The actual pavement that I ride is much, much quieter than the shared use path. So I reckon it's more considerate of me to use that. I also leave the footpath & join the road as soon as it enters a 30 mph stretch.


----------



## Slick (27 Feb 2019)

Hi Alice, 

The last 2 commute routes involved cycling a very short distance on a pavement to avoid a particularly dangerous section of dual carriageway and I make no apology for it. Both times the pavement was almost empty and on the odd occasion I came across a pedestrian I just gave them priority. Take it easy, join the pavement when you feel the need and enjoy.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (27 Feb 2019)

Take a look at the quieter roads parallel to the roads you plan to use. Traffic is pretty used to bikes in London. Be wary of riding up the side of large vehicles at junctions. Enjoy your new commute and vary it a little as you get to know the best routes.


----------



## mjr (27 Feb 2019)

If you want to know the instruction issued to police, plus an example of it being ignored, see https://lcc.org.uk/articles/ministe...ter-1057-fines-for-pavement-cycling-in-london

There's one bit of pavement that I ride that's longer than I'd like, to get from the end of a road that's been blocked off for cars at a junction to the nearest drop kerb onto the other road! My habit is to ride at walking pace and not overtake any walkers. It hasn't drawn complaint in 6 years or so.

I am not pushing my bike because some council is too inept to provide a rideable junction.


----------



## ericmark (20 Mar 2019)

Pavement I though means a paved area which would include the road, the walk way and the cycle path, the problem I find in my area is a lack of signs saying when a cycle track, or bridal way stops, however there are some bits where it is clear anyone cycling would very easy hit people leaving shops or stopping to survey what is on offer. We should ride with due consideration for other road used be it be a dirt track or paved. And unless there is a no cycling sign then if due consideration is given then unlikely to get a fine.

It is when cycling at 16 MPH where pedestrians share that paved way when there are likely to be problems, after all at 4 MPH your not allowed to ride a mobility scooter on the pavement for motor vehicles and at 8 MPH you must join the part of carriageway reserved for motor vehicles. So if cycle riders reduce speed to 4 MPH can't see a problem.


----------



## Milzy (20 Mar 2019)

Quick story. A women jumped off the pavement straight in front of my work friend on her BSO. She swore at him lots & said how have you got a license etc.
The air ambulance came down but wasn’t needed. The armed response turned up then left when the regular police arrived. 
She prentended to go all dizzy when all she had was a hair line foot fracture & a grazed knee. The police breath tested the driver but seemed to be on his side. Driver reported the incident to his insurance ASAP but no matter if she fails to claim or claims against him you can bet his insurance will now go up. 
Jumping between path & road constantly is wrong, you can’t have it both ways. Stay on road & adere to the Highway Code.
Our foreman witnessed the incident & said it looked like she jumped off the pavement to avoid a big puddle. Luckily the car was only going very slowly behind a tractor.


----------



## ericmark (20 Mar 2019)

Where the pavement markings move the cyclist from side pavement to main pavement one would hope either a well signed demount or it is safe to do so, I know some times parked cars force one to transfer to the road, but that parked car is as visible to road user as cyclist, however I would not ride off a non dropped curb as there is a chance I could be demounted and fall into the traffic. 

I have watched a video of a pedestrian leaping over a barrier into a bus, some people do some daft tricks, but it seems also the council do daft tricks leading the cyclist from the main carriage way before traffic lights then no pedestrian lights and you can't now see who has priority with the road traffic. I ignore the circular blue sign to use side pavement and stay on the main road.

One has to use common sense, however it seems council workers who put up the signs don't have much common sense, so one if forced to ignore some signs.


----------



## recumbentpanda (21 Mar 2019)

Hi to alicebimbles! A little surprised that no one so far has mentioned that pavement cycling has its own hazards: The two main ones being 1) having to give way constantly when crossing side roads, and 2) vehicles suddenly emerging from driveways to cross the pavement. 

To improve skills of riding on the road, and develop confidence, look for an adult cycle training course.

Hope this helps.


----------



## icowden (21 Mar 2019)

If you let us know your rough start and end point in London or the bits you think are most scary, we can probably help you find a quieter route. It's surprising how many easy backwaters there are in the city. The second thing is that if you are cycling at peak times you will almost certainly find yourself with a crowd of bicycles, which always feels a lot safer.


----------



## LeetleGreyCells (21 Mar 2019)

Hi alicebimbles 

Have you tried a route planner? Here’s some to try that might help you find a quieter and safer route:
cycle.travel
Strava route planner
Komoot
RideWithGPS

These are all free to use. 

If you don’t like those above, there’s lots more. Google Maps (when used on computer and not tablet/phone) will show cycle routes if you go into the menu. 

Hope this helps!


----------



## vickster (21 Mar 2019)

icowden said:


> If you let us know your rough start and end point in London or the bits you think are most scary, we can probably help you find a quieter route. It's surprising how many easy backwaters there are in the city. The second thing is that if you are cycling at peak times you will almost certainly find yourself with a crowd of bicycles, which always feels a lot safer.


Until a knobber cyclist decides to cut across you, catches your front wheel and sends you sprawling. DAMHIKT 

I actually far prefer not to be surrounded by lots of cyclists who can be as erratic and unpredictable as other traffic


----------



## mjr (21 Mar 2019)

vickster said:


> Until a knobber cyclist decides to cut across you, catches your front wheel and sends you sprawling. DAMHIKT


Yeah, usual group riding rules apply: trust no-one, never put your front wheel close besides someone's back wheel, trust no-one, keep the brakes covered and trust no-one. Oh and for good measure, trust no-one. Despite that, freak moves may still take you out  but they are genuinely freakishly rare and bikes generally hurt less than cars  so if there's traffic, I'd prefer to be in a shoal or peloton than not.


----------



## MichaelW2 (21 Mar 2019)

You have to make the decision to cycle on the pavement bearing in mind all the risks, responsibilities and advantages.
1. It is mostly against the law
2. The law does not prioritise the safety of cyclists.
3. Never endanger or startle pedestrians on the pavement
4. Beware of riding down narrow pavements with door or gate exits onto the pavement.
5. Beware of driveways and junctions across which vehicles can turn.

I choose to cycle on empty pavements in industrial zones with no house/shop/parked cars or pedestrians during rush hour commutes.


----------



## vickster (21 Mar 2019)

mjr said:


> Yeah, usual group riding rules apply: trust no-one, never put your front wheel close besides someone's back wheel, trust no-one, keep the brakes covered and trust no-one. Oh and for good measure, trust no-one. Despite that, freak moves may still take you out  but they are genuinely freakishly rare and bikes generally hurt less than cars  so if there's traffic, I'd prefer to be in a shoal or peloton than not.


I was at lights, he cut across from my right to my left. Nothing to do with my wheel positioning. I was going straight on.
I’d rather just have to deal with motorised traffic not a hoard of other cyclists. I don’t ride in groups and don’t expect to when commuting or riding for recreation. Luckily I don’t commute now into London


----------



## icowden (21 Mar 2019)

It's not really optional at peak rush hour now. You'll always find yourself with company from commuters, deliveroo cyclists, messenger/couriers, food delivery on luggage cycles etc. It's a regular circus.


----------



## vickster (21 Mar 2019)

icowden said:


> It's not really optional at peak rush hour now. You'll always find yourself with company from commuters, deliveroo cyclists, messenger/couriers, food delivery on luggage cycles etc. It's a regular circus.


Which is why even when I do work in London, I don’t Cycle except on the very rare occasion. It’s a bit better in summer holidays as less vehicles. Scooter riders are a complete menace too


----------



## icowden (21 Mar 2019)

True. There is a certain breed of red trouser wearing plonker who uses an electric scooter or a brompton (not all brompton riders - but you all know the ones I mean) that are very very annoying.


----------



## mjr (21 Mar 2019)

vickster said:


> I was at lights, he cut across from my right to my left. Nothing to do with my wheel positioning. I was going straight on.


Yeah, like I wrote, sometimes freak moves can still take you down. 



vickster said:


> I’d rather just have to deal with motorised traffic not a hoard of other cyclists. I don’t ride in groups and don’t expect to when commuting or riding for recreation. Luckily I don’t commute now into London


No-one gets private roads for one's whole commute and I couldn't disagree more about wanting the plonkers to be motorised.


----------



## ericmark (21 Mar 2019)

I use a scooter, advantage I can take it on the bus, however with such small wheels it is rather unstable, even at 15 MPH down hill it is rather scary specially as the brakes have a tenancy to over heat when one weighs 22 stone. And as a bearded 68 year old I also get some funny looks. So to walk to summit of Moel Famau with a scooter using it for the down hill sections may be OK, but in a busy city street I think not.


----------



## LeetleGreyCells (21 Mar 2019)

ericmark said:


> I use a scooter, advantage I can take it on the bus, however with such small wheels it is rather unstable, even at 15 MPH down hill it is rather scary specially as the brakes have a tenancy to over heat when one weighs 22 stone. And as a bearded 68 year old I also get some funny looks. So to walk to summit of Moel Famau with a scooter using it for the down hill sections may be OK, but in a busy city street I think not.


I had a full 5 minutes on my son’s scooter the other day. By the time I was done, the leg that I had been using to support my weight on the running board ached and ached. I’ve no idea how he scoots for so long.

And how you go at 15mph I don’t know. The scooter was unstable enough at 4mph.


----------



## ericmark (22 Mar 2019)

15 MPH is down hill both feet on the board one half positioned over the brake ready, used mainly as I have a bus pass and will travel. However the bus stops short of the walks, and there is often some paved down hill sections.



MichaelW2 said:


> 4. Beware of riding down narrow pavements with door or gate exits onto the pavement.


That is a real problem, we do have a duel carriageway 50 MPH limit and signs saying no cycling on main carriageway, and the foot path is officially classed as a cycle path, it is straight so no problem sharing with other users on the path, but there is a thick hedge between house back gardens and the track, so anyone joining the track from one of the houses could easy be hit by a cyclist going down the hill which is steep enough to get to 30 MPH without pedalling. 

However it would seem people are aware as I am not aware of any accidents on that section. And to ride on the road would be really dangerous as it is really a motorway in all but name, joining Holyhead to the M56. 

If some one talks about a particular road, like the A494 Ewlow to Queensferry then those in the area can say there is a back road called Stag lane or Shotton lane which bypasses that section, although to be frank that lane winds and is likely more dangerous than the cycle route, but you can give an alternative, however London, North Wales, Scotland is far to large an area to expect advice on routes to take.

And to me at 68 how steep the hill is, and if it's safe to get off and walk the steep bits are important, also ability to built up speed down hill to get up other side. On the flat cruising along at 8 MPH is great on the cycle paths, and dropping to 4 MPH when loads of pedestrians is not a problem, I have all the time in the world, but if you need to get to work for a set time, I can see 8 MPH does not really cut it. But again at 15 MPH cars can stop in time in a 30 MPH section and pass without one hopes causing danger. It must be far easier to pass a bike to passing a mobility scooter when the latter is limited to 8 MPH.

Why is it called a mobility scooter? I thought the scoot means "go or leave somewhere quickly" those mobility scooters are not quick.


----------



## vickster (22 Mar 2019)

ericmark said:


> 15 MPH is down hill both feet on the board one half positioned over the brake ready, used mainly as I have a bus pass and will travel. However the bus stops short of the walks, and there is often some paved down hill sections.
> 
> 
> That is a real problem, we do have a duel carriageway 50 MPH limit and signs saying no cycling on main carriageway, and the foot path is officially classed as a cycle path, it is straight so no problem sharing with other users on the path, but there is a thick hedge between house back gardens and the track, so anyone joining the track from one of the houses could easy be hit by a cyclist going down the hill which is steep enough to get to 30 MPH without pedalling.
> ...


8mph is plenty quick enough for something designed to be used on pavements or where LEDs might be present like shops. A brisk walking pace is around 4mph, so that's something heavy and solid that can gontwice that speed. Nothing should ever be travelling on a pavement at 15mph where there's even a slight possibility of foot traffic being present or appearing


----------



## ericmark (24 Mar 2019)

Yesterday it was a nice day so took the route Shotton, Ellesmereport, Chester and back to Shotton. It was a mixture of road and side pavement and a mixture of signs. In some cases the blue oblong cycle sign, some round cycle signs, some segregated showing which side the foot and cycle users should take, some areas completely separate to motor traffic others motor traffic was alongside.

While on the enforced cycle route, I saw a bunch of riders riding 3 abreast on the road, with cars having to move to the oncoming lane to pass, when done as an event with warning signs OK, but no warning signs and there was really no reason why they were on the road, never mind 3 abreast, there was a designated cycle track where they could have been 3 abreast for much of the time without affecting motor traffic.

The most likely part of the trip where cycles could have had problems with pedestrians was on the tow path, and this section there is no way you can cycle away from walkers, as one got closer to Ellesmereport so the road crossings got worst, as start there were cycle, pedestrian, horse crossings with high buttons for house riders, then as the traffic got heavier the crossings lights went, still signs to show you were to cross with the blue round cycle signs to show you must use the track, but the crossing was not suitable for children. The last under the motorway on the roundabout was really bad, and signs to show where you needed to cross road to join tow path did not exist.

The surface of the tow path was hard but not suitable for racing cycles, you need a reasonable wide tyre but not requiring mountain bike tyres. It improved just before the return leg where I joined the old railway route, a wider track than better surface to the tow path. The final part can either go over the road on the new Welsh bridge then a second steep climb to Hawarden Bridge station or follow the road and cross duel carriage way at the Burnt out Gateway to Wales hotel which I selected. And one is directed to the cycle track on the right side of the road.

However in a few places that cycle track stops being on the raised pavement and one ends up riding contra flow to motorised traffic which is not really what I wanted, however one can see why, as the cycle track other side of road stops at railway bridge, but again lack of signs to show how one can go through carpark and side roads and join the combined pedestrian/cycle track past the leisure centre.

Because I have local knowledge I crossed main road and joined traffic, however the signs take you right into centre of Shotton where it is clearly not safe to ride on the raised section of pavement once you pass the bike shop and railway station. There are signs as one goes further that say in English only "no cycling on walkway" but lack of international signs or anything to define the walkway, it seems the coastal cycle route 5 keeps disappearing as one cycles towards Greenfield with some really odd directions.

From Queensferry to Shotton there is no end of cycle route signs, and a complete hopscotch of instructions depending on how you enter Shotton. 

So in real terms the main problem is signs, we have contra flow in Queeensferry and Deeside industrial estate in the latter cyclists from the Wirral have to ignore the no entry sign and cycle wrong way down a one way street, I can see why, other route would include a dangerous roundabout, however you can't expect a cyclist to disobey one sign and obey others, where the cycle route is down a no entry or dead end road, there should be at least an except cycles sign.

Pavement means a hard surface, all major roads are paved, with a paver often called barbergreen after the firm who make them, so we can't have a sign saying no riding on pavement as the road is a pavement, all we can have is a no cycling on the walkway, but we still have to define it as a walkway, and signs saying rejoin main carriageway or enforced cycle way are pointless if there is not a suitable drop curb to allow the transfer.

Until the county council get their act together and actually put up signs, it's all a pointless argument, going into Shotton on the left from Queensferry at Shotton Lane cycles rejoin the road way, but on the right side, this does not happen, anyone with a bit of sense can see at the railway bridge the raised pavement has become to narrow, however cyclists would have needed to cross the busy road some 100 yards back at the traffic light controlled crossing, would not take much to put a sign there, however the bike shop may complain, as it is on right just before railway bridge.

Of course common sense would say pedestrian crossing should be at the exists from railway station which would get rid of the problem, however it seems council planners don't have common sense any more.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (24 Mar 2019)

ericmark said:


> Yesterday it was a nice day so took the route Shotton, Ellesmereport, Chester and back to Shotton. It was a mixture of road and side pavement and a mixture of signs. In some cases the blue oblong cycle sign, some round cycle signs, some segregated showing which side the foot and cycle users should take, some areas completely separate to motor traffic others motor traffic was alongside.
> 
> While on the enforced cycle route, I saw a bunch of riders riding 3 abreast on the road, with cars having to move to the oncoming lane to pass, when done as an event with warning signs OK, but no warning signs and there was really no reason why they were on the road, never mind 3 abreast, there was a designated cycle track where they could have been 3 abreast for much of the time without affecting motor traffic.
> 
> ...



No cycling infrastructure is enforced or mandatory. You are entitled to decide whether you want to use it or not.


----------



## ericmark (24 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> No cycling infrastructure is enforced or mandatory. You are entitled to decide whether you want to use it or not.


So you are saying this




does not mean I must cycle on the route so indicated, I am sure if I did not obey it and joined main carriageway in some areas police would stop me, this sign



shows which side is cycles and which is pedestrians, they are round so I thought must be obeyed in the same ways as



these must be obeyed by all road users. what is the point in this



sign if the round ones mean the same?


----------



## Ming the Merciless (24 Mar 2019)

ericmark said:


> So you are saying this
> View attachment 459016
> does not mean I must cycle on the route so indicated, I am sure if I did not obey it and joined main carriageway in some areas police would stop me, this sign
> View attachment 459017
> ...



Non of it is mandatory, that is all you need to know.


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2019)

ericmark said:


> So you are saying this
> View attachment 459016
> does not mean I must cycle on the route so indicated, I am sure if I did not obey it and joined main carriageway in some areas police would stop me, this sign
> View attachment 459017
> ...


The rectangle one indicates a cycle route which may not have any infrastructure at all. It may just be a carriageway. The round ones indicate a cycleway but use is not compulsory. Police may harass you but they really ought not.

In most countries, round sign ones are compulsory and blue rectangle ones indicate optional infrastructure, but not in the UK now.

The governing law is the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions 2016 and the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 if you want to look it up on www.legislation.gov.uk but it's a bit awkward to follow.

The riders riding three abreast on a carriageway have broken no law, no matter whether you consider it wise or not. There are times it may make sense, even though it contradicts the advice in the Highway Code booklet.


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> Non of it is mandatory, that is all you need to know.


I'm pretty sure the turn left/right ones are compulsory unless they have "except cycles" underneath.


----------



## MontyVeda (24 Mar 2019)

This PDF might help @ericmark and others...

know-your-traffic-signs.pdf

...although it is a bit on the ambiguous side in places


----------



## youngoldbloke (24 Mar 2019)

How about this one?




Can't be just advisory, can it? Surely it is mandatory to use the cycle lane as otherwise you'd be riding the wrong way down a one way street? The whole issue of cycling provision signage is a dog's breakfast - exemplified by the notorious 'cyclists dismount' sign.


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2019)

youngoldbloke said:


> How about this one?
> View attachment 459041
> Can't be just advisory, can it? Surely it is mandatory to use the cycle lane as otherwise you'd be riding the wrong way down a one way street? The whole issue of cycling provision signage is a dog's breakfast - exemplified by the notorious 'cyclists dismount' sign.


The only thing mandatory about the lane is that motorists may not use it. Note that the same sign exists without a line and that you'd only see it if you were travelling in the all traffic direction anyway, when you shouldn't use the contraflow cycle lane. Plenty of one way streets in London, Cambridge, Norwich, Lynn, Dunkerque, Bruges, Gent... where you just ride the opposite way to motorists down a one way street.

I agree that UK cycling signs are a mess.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (24 Mar 2019)

mjr said:


> I'm pretty sure the turn left/right ones are compulsory unless they have "except cycles" underneath.



Hadn't noticed the OP had thrown those in, but then they have nothing to do with cycling.


----------



## Ming the Merciless (24 Mar 2019)

youngoldbloke said:


> How about this one?
> View attachment 459041
> Can't be just advisory, can it? Surely it is mandatory to use the cycle lane as otherwise you'd be riding the wrong way down a one way street? The whole issue of cycling provision signage is a dog's breakfast - exemplified by the notorious 'cyclists dismount' sign.



Two way for cycles and one way for motorised traffic.


----------



## youngoldbloke (24 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> Two way for cycles and one way for motorised traffic.


OK - I see it now - it's really a sign for motorists to obey.


----------



## mustang1 (24 Mar 2019)

Went out for a leisure ride with the family today. SO was with us too so we spent time in the sidewalk. 

We soon caught up with another family and then a few other cyclists and since we were all heading in the same direction, there was about 11 of us zig zag going amongst the pedestrians, but going only slightly quicker than walking pace. 

Was kinda fun .


----------



## Ming the Merciless (24 Mar 2019)

mustang1 said:


> Went out for a leisure ride with the family today. SO was with us too so we spent time in the sidewalk.
> 
> We soon caught up with another family and then a few other cyclists and since we were all heading in the same direction, there was about 11 of us zig zag going amongst the pedestrians, but going only slightly quicker than walking pace.
> 
> Was kinda fun .



Sidewalk now there is an American term. You are not an American Werewolf in London are you?


----------



## mjr (24 Mar 2019)

Some people refer to them as sidepaths to avoid calling it a footway when cycling is allowed but to avoid calling it a cycleway because that may legitimise cycling there.


----------



## mustang1 (25 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> Sidewalk now there is an American term. You are not an American Werewolf in London are you?


I get confused with the terms pavement and footpath. I think there are some very minor differences between them and no doubt someone will tell me what they are; I will then forget the differences after 5 minutes. I sometimes use sidewalk to mean the place for people to walk on the side. 

Edit:
There we go: @mrj refers to footway as well. So many terms for such similar places to walk!

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.

Oh, and one more thing: traffic lights. When the lights go from red to amber, it signifies we should get ready to go. But what about those traffic lights that have a left or right green arrow where the main traffic light remains red, but also a smaller green arrow; why does the green arrow bit not have a corresponding yellow arrow to signify we should get ready to go. All these rules mean so much, yet so little.


----------



## icowden (25 Mar 2019)

youngoldbloke said:


> View attachment 459041



Although you could consider it "advisory" for the cyclist, cycling head on into two lanes of traffic coming the other way is likely to greatly shorten your life as a cyclist. We have a lot of these in London .What's frustrating is that quite often you have no choice but to head into the traffic due to illegally parked vehicles, pot-holes etc, and motorists are often startled when the road markings have completely disappeared due to age / roadworks etc.

My least favourite one of these is Concert Hall approach. The lines have all but disappeared and the council decided to make it a level road with block paving that tourists assume is pedestrianised until a black cab or hydrogen bus comes the other way. If that doesn't happen they just look at you like you are mad.


----------



## MontyVeda (25 Mar 2019)

icowden said:


> Although you could consider it "advisory" for the cyclist, cycling head on into two lanes of traffic coming the other way is likely to greatly shorten your life as a cyclist. We have a lot of these in London .What's frustrating is that quite often you have no choice but to head into the traffic *due to illegally parked vehicles*, pot-holes etc, and motorists are often startled when the road markings have completely disappeared due to age / roadworks etc.
> 
> My least favourite one of these is Concert Hall approach. The lines have all but disappeared and the council decided to make it a level road with block paving that tourists assume is pedestrianised until a black cab or hydrogen bus comes the other way. If that doesn't happen they just look at you like you are mad.


They're not illegally parked... all drivers know that a cycle lane is a parking space, regardless of any double yellows.


----------



## icowden (25 Mar 2019)




----------



## bladderhead (25 Mar 2019)

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 (25 Mar 2019)

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 (25 Mar 2019)

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 (25 Mar 2019)

mustang1 said:


> 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.



know-your-traffic-signs.pdf said:


> 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.
> 
> ...



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 (29 Mar 2019)

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 (29 Mar 2019)

ericmark said:


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



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 (30 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> 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 (30 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> 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 (30 Mar 2019)

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 (30 Mar 2019)

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


----------



## Kempstonian (30 Mar 2019)

YukonBoy said:


> 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 (30 Mar 2019)

Kempstonian said:


> 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 (30 Mar 2019)

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 (30 Mar 2019)

Yes I sometime drive my tank along the pavement.


----------



## bladderhead (30 Mar 2019)

Well, the roads are so crowded.


----------



## Kempstonian (31 Mar 2019)

mjr said:


> 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.


Hey its not me doing the'lumping together', its the people who are nearly run over by these inconsiderate fools, weaving in and out of shoppers who think they are safe from traffic. There are also market stalls along the length of the main paved pedestrian area, which isn't very wide. It means you have many pedestrians wandering about. I see plenty of other cyclists walking with their bikes (a journey of maybe 100metres from the road) and they don't seem to mind doing so. Allowing cycling in this area would be dangerous.


----------



## mjr (31 Mar 2019)

Kempstonian said:


> Hey its not me doing the'lumping together',





Kempstonian said:


> Some cyclists seem determined to give the others a bad name.






> its the people who are nearly run over by these inconsiderate fools, weaving in and out of shoppers who think they are safe from traffic.


And they should be as safe. Riding recklessly and buzzing or skimmimg is illegal even where cycling is allowed.



> There are also market stalls along the length of the main paved pedestrian area, which isn't very wide. It means you have many pedestrians wandering about. I see plenty of other cyclists walking with their bikes (a journey of maybe 100metres from the road) and they don't seem to mind doing so. Allowing cycling in this area would be dangerous.


I doubt that. Huntingdon market is similar, cycling is allowed (it's signposted as a link between two national routes) and there are no reported injuries. If space is limited, people walking with bikes are wider, less manoeuvreable and more of a hazard. And not everyone can push a bike easily.

But the guidance could be satisfied by building protected space for cycling on either N-S arm of the A600. Bedford council has failed to do that which makes it entirely predictable that many will ride through.


----------



## youngoldbloke (31 Mar 2019)

mjr said:


> And they should be as safe. Riding recklessly and buzzing or skimmimg is illegal even where cycling is allowed.
> 
> 
> I doubt that. Huntingdon market is similar, cycling is allowed (it's signposted as a link between two national routes) and there are no reported injuries. *If space is limited, people walking with bikes are wider, less manoeuvreable and more of a hazard. And not everyone can push a bike easily.*


THIS^^^ I'm much less dangerous on a bike than when pushing it.


----------



## bladderhead (31 Mar 2019)

THIS^^^

Especially with a recumbent.


----------

