"Advisory cycle track", or Snark?

[qigong chimp]

Could someone who knows about this stuff help with a query?


1)To meet the definition in DfT Local Transport Note 1/12, September 2012, Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists, “10.5 Cycle Track: A way constituting or comprised in a highway, being a way over which the public have the following but no other, rights of way, that is to say, a right of way on pedal cycles (other than pedal cycles which are motor vehicles within the meaning of the Road Traffic Act 1988) with or without a right of way on foot [section 329(1) Highways Act 1980]...”, and consequently to enjoy the protection of the Road Traffic Act 1988: “21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks.(1)Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [F1mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence...”, MUST a shared use cycle track converted from a footway adjacent to a carriageway be subject to a Traffic Restriction Order?

2)What is the legal status of such a shared use facility in the absence of a TRO?

3)What distinguishes a nominal cycle track lacking TRO from a footway/pavement?

4)Is there such a thing as an "advisory cycle track"?

 

[jonesy]

I believe the answers are:
1- Yes, a footway cannot be converted to a shared use cycle track without a TRO.
2- Nothing- a footway that has not been formally converted to a cycle track remains a footway and cyclists are therefore not permitted to ride on it.
3- No. The 'advisory' or 'mandatory' status of an advisory cycle lane defines whether other vehicles can drive on it; there isn't any direct comparison with a cycle track, which will by definition be segregated from other traffic and its legal status defines the right of cyclists to use it.

 

[jonesy]

Yes, you are right. I'd thought a TRO was required for the process of conversion from a footway, but here is the relevant text from Local Transport Note 1/12 Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists:



Cycle track creation procedures

10.22 Apart from cycle track conversions carried out under the Cycle Tracks Act 1984,
public consultation is not a legal requirement. Nevertheless, in all cases it is strongly
recommended that extensive consultation is carried out.

10.23 Converting a footway to a cycle track: The recommended way of converting all
(or part) of a footway to a cycle track is through the Highways Act 1980. The
appropriate part of the footway is ‘removed’ under the powers in section 66(4) of the
Highways Act 1980, and a cycle track is ‘constructed’ under section 65(1). The
process need not necessarily involve physical construction work other than the
erection of suitable signs, but there needs to be clear evidence that the local
highway authority has exercised its powers. This can be provided by a resolution of
the appropriate committee or portfolio holder etc. to ensure that a clear audit trail
has been established.

56 Shared Use Routes for Pedestrians and Cyclists
10.24 Public consultation is not a mandatory requirement. By virtue of the Road Traffic Act
1988, it is generally an offence to use a motor vehicle on a cycle track. A Traffic
Regulation Order is therefore not required to control such use. However, if vehicular
rights for private access existed on a route prior to conversion, these rights are not
necessarily extinguished upon creation of the cycle track.

 

[Richard Mann]

I believe the answers are:
1- Yes, a footway cannot be converted to a shared use cycle track without a TRO.
2- Nothing- a footway that has not been formally converted to a cycle track remains a footway and cyclists are therefore not permitted to ride on it.
3- No. The 'advisory' or 'mandatory' status of an advisory cycle lane defines whether other vehicles can drive on it; there isn't any direct comparison with a cycle track, which will by definition be segregated from other traffic and its legal status defines the right of cyclists to use it.

Are we talking about alongside-road or away-from-road?

Alongside road - cycles can be permitted by a decision of the appropriate committee. No TRO required. No obligation on HA to maintain it in a fit condition for cycling.
Away from road - cycles are permitted unless there's a byelaw; the landowner can object on grounds of nuisance and/or trespass. Again no obligation to maintain.

The main virtue of making anything into a formal cycle track is the maintenance obligation that comes with it.

 

[qigong chimp]

Thanks all. And this from the CTC, bless 'em.

Thanks for your email.

The definition of a ‘Cycle Track’ includes at least two different legal structures:

a) a cycle track created under the Cycle Tracks Act 1984 from a public footpath (that is to say, a path with a right of way on foot only, away from the carriageway). This process is difficult and seldom used because of technical niceties it is probably not worth worrying about. The process is explained in the following briefing: (http://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_public/bridleways-byways-cycle-tracksbrf.pdf )
b) shared use footways, usually created from existing footways (paths for pedestrians by the side of the road) using Sections 65 and 66 of the Highways Act 1980: (https://www.ctc.org.uk/sites/default/files/file_public/public-footpathsbrf.pdf)

Neither of these processes uses Traffic Regulation Orders. You are right that, whereas people may legally park on a footway, they are not permitted to park on a cycle track – so if residents (outside London) are unhappy with pavement parking, they should get their pavements converted to shared use footways – but they’ll still need the police to enforce them!

However, TROs are required in order to restrict traffic on highways, and are therefore necessary to create a mandatory cycle lane, they are also necessary to make one-way streets etc. The Government recently announced that it is prepared to relax this requirement, which should greatly reduce the cost of developing better infrastructure for cyclists.

I’m not sure what you mean by a “nominal” cycle track; a shared use footway (the things that plague the country) has normally been converted using the s65/66 process described above. If it has the blue signs to diagrams 956 or 957 (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/images/uksi_20023113_en_102) then it will have been converted or created using those processes.

There is no such thing as an “advisory cycle track” in the way that you can have an advisory cycle lane on the carriageway. You could, I suppose have a permissive bridleway across private land, but if it is a highway (ie, carriageway, adjacent footway, or right-of-way away from the carriageway) then the rules are clear.

CTC has in the past pushed for greater simplicity for the process of creating cycle tracks, though we also want to make sure that footways converted under the Highways Act are created up to a proper standard of design, with widths, surface quality, sightlines, curve radii and crossings suitable for cyclists to use – these are very different from the requirements of pedestrians.

Next q: are Council Parking Enforcement Officers empowered to enforce prohibitions around driving and/or parking on a formally designated cycle track? Must a TRO be in place for such infrastructure to fall under their remit? Is it elective, a matter of local policy, varying from authority to authority?

 

[qigong chimp]

Can anyone point me to a single example of the police penalising motorised vehicle users for transgressing Road Traffic Act 1988: “21 Prohibition of driving or parking on cycle tracks.(1)Subject to the provisions of this section, any person who, without lawful authority, drives or parks a [F1mechanically propelled] vehicle wholly or partly on a cycle track is guilty of an offence...”?