Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Commuting, Day rides, Audax, Incidents, etc.
drossall
Posts: 4868
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby drossall » 4 Jul 2020, 7:47pm

Because of the way that the law works. But, as others have said, it's untested in court. Essentially, the law says you can have a usual accompaniment, which probably doesn't mean a bike, but no-one has ever pushed it so far as to get it to a court case, so it's not entirely clear what would happen.

The public have the right to walk on public footpaths, and to do other reasonable things associated with that, such as stopping to admire the view. I believe that it's equally unclear whether that extends to stopping for a picnic. Again, volunteers willing to risk the costs of a court case to find out are invited, though you'd also need a landowner awkward enough to push the point that far.

arnsider
Posts: 242
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 12:44am

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby arnsider » 5 Jul 2020, 9:35am

Here's the photo I had trouble posting;
20200701_160612(1).jpg
Image Attachments
20200701_160612(1).jpg

drossall
Posts: 4868
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby drossall » 5 Jul 2020, 10:00am

It's one of those double-negative signs, "No no cycling", that mean that you have to ride a bike, isn't it? :lol:

User avatar
RickH
Posts: 5079
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby RickH » 5 Jul 2020, 12:07pm

drossall wrote:It's one of those double-negative signs, "No no cycling", that mean that you have to ride a bike, isn't it? :lol:

The wording says no cycling so you need to stop. But the pictorial sign indicates, if anything, end of no cycling so you are immediately permitted to start riding again. :D

thirdcrank
Posts: 29041
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby thirdcrank » 5 Jul 2020, 12:19pm

I wonder why somebody went to the trouble to make the presumably earlier sign and then to buy or liberate the one that's been attached to it. It hardly looks like the sort of place that's been seeing heavy commuter traffic.

There have been lots of angry/frightened locals during lockdown trying to keep people away. They are hardly likely to be satisfied by putting up a sign then leaving it at that. If two or three hefty locals ask "Can't you read?" then a short lecture on rights of way and the Highways Acts is unlikely to go down well. Ditto TSRGD.

The assumption that a sign must by its mere presence be a definitive statement of the legal situation is widespread. Police and crime commissioners are responsive to the opinions of their electorate rather than those passing through. We've had examples over the years of fixed penalties being issued wrongly.

User avatar
RickH
Posts: 5079
Joined: 5 Mar 2012, 6:39pm
Location: Horwich, Lancs.

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby RickH » 5 Jul 2020, 1:00pm

On the subject of pushing a bike on a footpath. I can only ever remember one comment being made & that was near our house and was positive noting that I was pushing rather than riding. It is a FP used quite often as a cut through by local mountain bikers. (I personally would support it becoming a bridleway).

I sometimes lead walks & will use train & bike as a means to access routes to recce (I tend to try to make up routes in places I've not been before) prior to taking the group walking them. In that case I will do a fair bit of pushing along FPs & then riding any bridleway & road sections.

Then there are the discrepancies where path cross administrative boundaries & change between footpath & bridleway. Tarmac roads that are footpaths, so not officially allowed to ride (there is one close to here that I've been riding regularly, probably at least once every month, for nearly 40 years) & a bridleway with over 100 steep steps (that I've never tried to ride, but wouldn't surprise me if someone has done it).

arnsider
Posts: 242
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 12:44am

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby arnsider » 5 Jul 2020, 5:08pm

Running almost parallel to the A65, from Ingleton to the Roman road crossing a mile or so North West of Cowan bridge is the disused Ingleton-Lowgill railway which was a twin track line.
This would be an obvious route for a safe cycleway.
The former railway extends east from the viaduct at Ingleton to the former junction at Clapham and the whole stretch totals some seven and a half miles.
It is galling that a strategic route between two National Parks and bypassing such a dangerous road has not for whatever reason been re constructed as a cycleway.
You very often see fully laden cycle tourers Lakeland bound, struggling along the edge of this busy and fast trunk road.

thirdcrank
Posts: 29041
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby thirdcrank » 6 Jul 2020, 2:11pm

This epitomises what's wrong with all these hollow policies to promote cycling. (Apart from the fact that they are hollow.)

The general line of the A65 is the natural way to get from around here - West Yorkshire - to anywhere up there - Kendal and beyond.

It's been gradually "improved" by the Ministry of Transport, Highways Agency and, more recently Highways England without any thought for the needs of cyclists, other than to marginalise them. Any token provision for cyclists is of the lowest common denominator kind, even when there's the possibility of decent alternatives.

Cyril Haearn
Posts: 13737
Joined: 30 Nov 2013, 11:26am
Location: Leafy suburbia

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby Cyril Haearn » 6 Jul 2020, 2:33pm

Right again tc

A cycleway alongside such trunk roads could easily be added, it does not have to carry 40 tonnes, can be built inexpensively. Indeed, many trunk roads are too wide, they could be narrowed and a cycleway added easily enough, it just needs to be seperated from the motor carriageway, by a bank and trees, and higher if possible. And with the same easy gradients of course, unlike some afterthought cycleways I know :?

Much better for cycling from a to b than a complicated suss-trams route on yellow roads
Entertainer, intellectual, idealist, PoB, 60097
Cycling-of course, but it is far better on a Gillott
We love safety cameras, we hate bullies

drossall
Posts: 4868
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby drossall » 6 Jul 2020, 5:45pm

Even then, cycleways that are as efficient as the old road used to be are rare, so that road "improvements" are generally improvements for motorists and worsenings for cyclists in terms of transport effectiveness.

Bonefishblues
Posts: 8107
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby Bonefishblues » 6 Jul 2020, 5:58pm

Cyril Haearn wrote:Right again tc

A cycleway alongside such trunk roads could easily be added, it does not have to carry 40 tonnes, can be built inexpensively. Indeed, many trunk roads are too wide, they could be narrowed and a cycleway added easily enough, it just needs to be seperated from the motor carriageway, by a bank and trees, and higher if possible. And with the same easy gradients of course, unlike some afterthought cycleways I know :?

Much better for cycling from a to b than a complicated suss-trams route on yellow roads

Consider the words "can be built inexpensively" emboldened please. :wink:

I very much doubt that. There is a local stretch of very little distance (30 metres or so). To create a cycle path with shared use over that distance, extending an existing pathway parallel with a carriageway was assessed at approaching £100,000. There are no particular site issues.

pwa
Posts: 12480
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby pwa » 6 Jul 2020, 6:36pm

drossall wrote:Even then, cycleways that are as efficient as the old road used to be are rare, so that road "improvements" are generally improvements for motorists and worsenings for cyclists in terms of transport effectiveness.

Actually, today I had reason to drive down the A4226 "Five Mile Lane" north of Barry, S.Wales, and as a driver I appreciated the work that has been done recently to straighten the road out, making fast cruising easy. But I also observed the wide cycle path that, as part of the same works, has been created parallel to, but set back from the road. The old road, prior to improvement was widely regarded as dangerous to cycle or drive on (due to nutters of course) and lots of local cyclists avoided it. The overall package of improvements has actually made a viable cycle route where one didn't really exist before. So it can be done.

I can't find a good pic but this release gives a hint of it.
https://www.valeofglamorgan.gov.uk/en/o ... pened.aspx

drossall
Posts: 4868
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby drossall » 6 Jul 2020, 6:46pm

The image at the bottom appears to show a path that would be slow, compared with a road, for travelling any distance, but good for leisure? Not trying to be over-awkward here, I just can't see riding that all day as being how to get somewhere?

Unless that's the bridleway for horses, and the adjacent road is the old one that's now available to cyclists?

pwa
Posts: 12480
Joined: 2 Oct 2011, 8:55pm

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby pwa » 6 Jul 2020, 8:53pm

drossall wrote:The image at the bottom appears to show a path that would be slow, compared with a road, for travelling any distance, but good for leisure? Not trying to be over-awkward here, I just can't see riding that all day as being how to get somewhere?

Unless that's the bridleway for horses, and the adjacent road is the old one that's now available to cyclists?

I was driving along the road and obviously not spending too much time looking left and right, but from the glimpses of cycle track I could see (and it does depart from the proximity of the new road in places, presumably to use the remaining bits of the old road) it is mostly smooth tarmac at the same level as the new road. The bit you are looking at rises, I think, to form a junction with a minor lane, so from the cyclist's point of view the climb has a purpose. The new road passes under a bridge at that point and has no direct junction with the minor lane.

(I must make a point of going over there with a camera some time to see what the details are like. I had the impression work was still going on with stuff like tree planting and fence construction so perhaps I should wait a few weeks. But from the bits I saw it looks like a major road improvement with a significant sum spent on the creation of an attractive shared use path as an alternative for those on foot or on a bike, and it just might have been done well.)

drossall
Posts: 4868
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 10:01pm
Location: North Hertfordshire

Re: Footbridge crossing Leck Beck

Postby drossall » 7 Jul 2020, 8:33am

I think it's an interesting example. I'm still wondering about it. As I understand it, at some overbridges, the cycle route, on a lesser surface, rises to meet (and probably give way at) the side road, while the road passes underneath.
  • As a matter of principle, traffic on the main route has priority at junctions, and bikes are being asked to make an "unnecessary" climb in order to cede that priority
  • More important is practicality. It's a major route, likely to be sought by those trying to travel distances. If I'm trying to get somewhere, and therefore at the limit of what I can manage owing to either fitness or time, repeatedly encountering that kind of thing makes a real difference.
  • It's also a statement of priorities. Roads are for people, and what they use to travel on them is secondary. That doesn't rule out cycle facilities any more than it does motorways, but try building a motorway that gave way at every B road while the parallel A road sailed through.
  • What happens where the main road does have a turning? Do cyclists have to give way there as well?
I'm not anti-cycle-facility in principle. On some rides, I'll use one facility and not another. And sometimes there's a swings and (sorry) roundabouts effect, where cyclists sail through some other junction in an underpass while motorists have to give way. But I don't think we'll ever get anywhere (literally) while facilities expect cyclists, who, as above, are travellers on the main route with notional priority to match, to give way at every minor road.