Foot bridges for cyclists?

[brychan]

Hi

Although there are no signs forbidding cyclists to ride over this bridge using the ramps, does anyone know what the law says regarding so.

Thanks

[meic]

We would really have to know which bridge it is.
If there are no signs forbidding cyclists then I would assume that you are intended to cycle over it.
Looks likely as a method of keeping cyclists from getting splatted on the main road below.

[PH]

Can you legally cycle to and from it? I suspect it has the same classification as the footways it connects, but am just guessing. If the paths either side are shared use I'd consider it a continuation of those.
I regularly cycle over a couple of bridges that I have no idea if I'm entitled to or not, on the rare occasion I greet a pedestrian I'm happy to give way to them and there's never been an issue.

[bovlomov]

The only time I've fallen off my bike, as an adult, was on one of those bridges. Actually, it's a pedestrian and horse bridge, so has a broader path. I was turning from the first to the second ramp, going up, when my wheel slid on wet horse poo - an amazing lubricant, it turns out.

There used to be signs telling horse riders to dismount, presumably to prevent the horse unseating them onto the A1 below, but I can't see anything now on streetview. And nothing about cyclists.

As long as you give way to pedestrians, I can't see a problem.

[bovlomov]

This, on the other hand, has a Cyclists Dismount sign (as well as a NO PARKING FOR LORRIES one). It's a long bridge, and I don't expect many cyclists would take any notice of that advice*. The straight, single ramp on the other side has a chicane half way down, to keep the disobedient from getting up too much speed.

*EDIT: Wouldn't there be this sign if it was actually restricted?

[Gattonero]

is the "no parking for lorries" a joke??

[bovlomov]

is the "no parking for lorries" a joke??

I don't know. There's the short dead end stub of the High Street, up to the dual carriageway. I wonder whether lorries were parking there overnight, and one of the residents put up a home made sign in an attempt to stop them. Though surely they could have found a better situated pole to attach it onto.

I've just seen, there's another at the end.

[brychan]

Thanks all

I have alway ridden across the bridge at a slow pace and being careful of pedestrians. The pavement each side are for both pedestrians & cyclists.

This morning I was returning from a ride and there was 1 guy crossing the bridge. I rung my bell before approaching him he moved to the side and commented that I should push my bike bike across. I did reply that my bike & I need to cross the bridge so what’s the difference if I push it or ride it, you wouldn’t expect someone to get out of a mobility scooter to get out and push.

There are no signs as I said forbidding riding cycles, so if you use common sense ride slowly and only get off and push if there are a lot of pedestrians crossing.

[bovlomov]

This morning I was returning from a ride and there was 1 guy crossing the bridge. I rung my bell before approaching him he moved to the side and commented that I should push my bike bike across.

I've had similar comments from people walking on dedicated cycle paths. As discussed elsewhere, you're just as likely to get hostile reaction, whether you ring a bell or say 'excuse me'. Sometimes I'm tempted to ride past faster, just so I don't have to listen to the moaning.

You're a cyclists, and some people will hate you for it.

[meic]

and commented that I should push my bike bike across

Was that a statement of law, the highway code or their personal expectation?
Was it founded on knowledge of the actual rules on that bridge, bridges in general or just something they heard from a mate, read in the Daily Mail or just made up from thin air.

I reckon it is most likely just something they made up or no more than their personal expectation of ideal conduct. However I dont know the rules on that bridge and am no better informed than I am imagining they are.

[thirdcrank]

It's quite a long time ago now but something similar came up in Leeds in connection with the infamous Armley Gyratory. There are pedestrian walkways around part of it which have always been used by local utility riders. Otherwise, it's probably one of those roundabouts that Cycle-friendly Infrastructure says experienced riders avoid. Anyway, the brainwave was to formalise the use of these walkways by cyclists, although, IIRC, there was nothing formally in place to prohibit cycling, except for the bits which were alongside the carriageway. (This was pre-Blunkett and PCSO's but I can't imagine anybody taking action against a rider using these walkways and testing the legal situation.) My own point was that by "permitting" riders to do something they were doing already, all they would achieve would be to undermine the position of anybody who chose to ride on the carriageway. Memory of the details a bit vague, but I think the decider was that nobody at the highway authority was prepared officially to sanction cycling there because of the danger to the riders caused by the steep gradients of some of the ramps.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.79258 ... 312!8i6656

[bovlomov]

Memory of the details a bit vague, but I think the decider was that nobody at the highway authority was prepared officially to sanction cycling there because of the danger to the riders caused by the steep gradients of some of the ramps.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.79258 ... 312!8i6656

Neither formalised nor forbidden. Is that an unusual position for a highway authority to take? I mean as a decision rather than something that hasn't been considered.

Anyway, anyone notice the kit on the back of the lorry (in the streetview link)? They must have been confident it wasn't going to rain that day, to carry a lathe and milling machine on an open truck.

[JohnW]

This, on the other hand, has a Cyclists Dismount sign (as well as a NO PARKING FOR LORRIES one). It's a long bridge, and I don't expect many cyclists would take any notice of that advice*. The straight, single ramp on the other side has a chicane half way down, to keep the disobedient from getting up too much speed.

*EDIT: Wouldn't there be this sign if it was actually restricted?

Nah - those pictures are faked - where do you really see footpaths not blocked by parked motor vehicles?

[landsurfer]

Isn't the give away in the name of the bridge perchance ?

[bovlomov]

Nah - those pictures are faked - where do you really see footpaths not blocked by parked motor vehicles?

Turn streetview around about 180 degrees, and you'll see a perfect example of footpath blocking.