Closure of shared path between Marazion and Penzance

[peetee]

A couple of months ago I rode over the bridge from the north. I don’t remember seeing the ‘no cycling’ sign (I know it’s there now)
In my defence (a poor one, I admit) I had no idea where I was going and was following a ride leader. I do remember It was rather narrow and I had to bump the bike off the pavement at the south end. I have to say that, given its width, it being footpath only makes perfect sense but it was rather short-sighted of the planners not to install something wider. It’s a very useful link that provides a much safer join-up between the lovely routes of inland Penwith and the south coast towards Marazion and Lizard.
On a related subject, the bridge at the A30 Camborne west interchange is a curious one. The wide pavement section is a designated cycle lane that is barely longer than the bridge itself but the signage instructs cyclists to dismount! I can only assume this is because of the low parapet fencing. Nevertheless, it was hardly worth designating it as cycle lane given that the more hazardous slip-road beyond has no priority provision for cycles to cross.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
I wouldn't worry too much about it, if you see a pedestrian coming just lean against the railings and let them walk past.
Taking the safest route without inconveniencing other people in any way that's got to be the best defence in any respect.

[Mick F]

^^^^
Spot on.

[thirdcrank]

AFAIK, those responsible for new roads especially motorways which cut existing roads only make provision to maintain the old R-o-W when they cannot avoid it. Building and maintaining bridges is expensive and building and maintaining big bridges is more expensive than little ones.

Then, if that "NO CYCLING" sign is lawfully erected, it's based on a local byelaw or possibly a TRO prohibiting cycling ie cycling on there is a criminal offence. That compares with public footpaths more generally where cycling is merely (civil) trespass.

[peetee]

I worked in a road construction design office in the early 90’s. Provision for cyclists was in its infancy and only just becoming a government-backed pre-requisite consideration. The vast majority of designers in the office had been working for years without including such things as cycle lanes and cycle ‘friendly‘ road layouts and their knowledge of what was required was not supported by a standard design framework, they had no experience of life from a cyclists perspective and, most telling of all, no financial set-aside to allow its inclusion.
The A30 Longrock bypass was constructed in the 90’s so the design probably dates back to the 80’s. Whichever decade it originates it’s almost certainly before cycling infrastructure became a mainstream, government-sanctioned inclusion. I am certain such a scheme would have included a wider overbridge in this location had it been a few years later.

[RodT]

When I started this thread, I didn’t anticipate the footbridge over the A30 becoming such a topic. I just cycle over it. It’s the best way to access the hinterland from Long Rock, and as has been noted, there’s no ‘No Cycling’ sign at the seaward end. I’ve only ever seen two walkers using the bridge.
Horses use it, though. There’s an outfit called Cornwall Swimming Horses, with stables on the Gulval-Ludgvan road. The horses are led over the bridge to the beach, where they go swimming. Quite a spectacle.
What’s the rule about horses on footpaths? Not that I think they shouldn’t use the bridge. There were horses long before there was an A30.

[Cyril Haearn]

Horses swimming, just for fun?
Fun for people, or horses, or both?

[RodT]

Well, it looks like fun. The horses are big cobby creatures and they’re ridden onto the beach and into the sea, sometimes with swimmers hanging onto their tails. Everybody seems to enjoy it, including the horses.

[thirdcrank]

... What’s the rule about horses on footpaths? Not that I think they shouldn’t use the bridge. ...

This depends on what you mean by footpaths.

If it's a "public footpath" ie a right of way on foot over land then equestrians are trespassers.

If it's along the side of a road (officially called a "footway" to make the difference) then willfully riding or leading a horse is a criminal offence

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Wi ... section/72

The status of this bridge is not clarified by the signs in the images.

[peetee]

When I started this thread, I didn’t anticipate the footbridge over the A30 becoming such a topic. I just cycle over it. It’s the best way to access the hinterland from Long Rock, and as has been noted, there’s no ‘No Cycling’ sign at the seaward end. I’ve only ever seen two walkers using the bridge.
Horses use it, though. There’s an outfit called Cornwall Swimming Horses, with stables on the Gulval-Ludgvan road. The horses are led over the bridge to the beach, where they go swimming. Quite a spectacle.
What’s the rule about horses on footpaths? Not that I think they shouldn’t use the bridge. There were horses long before there was an A30.

In the case of this particular right of way the options for horses and riders are not particularly attractive:

Had the stables been present prior to the construction of the bypass the owners would have had the opportunity to state their case at the public enquiry for the road scheme.
One can only hope that they were not and it wasn’t that they were ignored. Had I been in the receiving end of such a budget-conscious verdict I would ride my horse over the bridge and contest any legal consequences to my dying breath.

[thirdcrank]

Neigh, lad. It's only an internet forum and for all I know, the NO CYCLING sign may be to stop cyclists frightening the horses

[RodT]

Looks like Cormac are about to start work on the path. Pictures show the work site and two samples of the existing track. Things can only improve.

[mjr]

So wheel your bike across it .... Really !!!

That is probably what I would do if I really wanted to use that route.

Substandard provision must be opposed. You never see this on a carriageway:

[thirdcrank]

To be fair, the sign displayed here isn't CYCLISTS DISMOUNT.

[peetee]

182 days. Whew! Even allowing for weather disruption that’s one heck of a schedule. What are they resurfacing with, Romanesque mosaic?