No, because the road traffic order allows for driving. Unless the road traffic order has been changed to allow that pavement to be used as a cycleway as well, then cycling on that pavement remains illegal.mattheus wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 2:56pmI had a near-miss and verbal abuse from a motorist recently - can we ban driving on that road?
Why do they do it?
-
- Posts: 3572
- Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm
Re: Why do they do it?
Re: Why do they do it?
I never said anything contrary to the above part and it seems a bit naughty to imply otherwise.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 8:48pmThat's not right. In local government the term 'highway' has always included any footpaths as these are adopted by the local authority along with the road.mjr wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 4:01pmBecause the footway is now the whole highway and not alongside a carriageway, the usual law making footway riding a criminal offence (Highways Act 1835) does not apply. It may be like a footpath: no right to ride but no specific offence is committed without some other law applying.
However using this term, in this way does not affect the legal status of the pavement
Here's where I disagree. The law only prohibits riding "upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot passengers". However, that footpath is currently the entire legally-usable road, not by the side of one. I believe it is the same legal situation as a standalone footpath (also a highway, as you say), which Cycling UK explain at https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/cycli ... e-off-road and related pages.which is to the side of the road and is defined by the raised kerb. The law will see this as a pavement and unless the road traffic order has been changed to allow it, the law will always view it as a pavement and therefore it is a breach of this law to ride your bicycle along it.
No such assumption: no matter who carries the works out, enforcing compliance with the code of practice is the duty of the highways department, whether or not they think about cycling, or think to do so at all.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 8:57pmThere's an assumption that these road works are carried out by the highways team, however it could be carried out by a number of contractors with licences to work on the road. The sign is perfectly clear. If certain people ignore it that would be their choice to do so.mjr wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 1:54pm Yes, those signs, as well as "ROAD CLOSED" used when the "EXCEPT CYCLES" variant should, have gotten so far into disrepute as to be useless. If there is a hazard, sign the hazard. If it's so bad that there is a real need to ban cycling temporarily beyond roadmender inconsiderateness and highways department thoughtlessness, use the appropriate red-circle sign.
The sign may be perfectly clear, but it's almost always used incorrectly.
Oh, I expect some regard parish councillors as one step down from cycling campaigners. This country is rotten with examples of people having contempt for others who should be allies.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 9:00pm Do you really want to know what most of the road repair teams and highway engineers think of parish councillors?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
-
- Posts: 3572
- Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm
Re: Why do they do it?
In my reply -
i) the first was a direct quote from yourself in response to a third party enquiry. I have not altered it in any way.
ii) the raised kerb is the feature 'which sets the footway apart' from the rest of the road and would be seen by law as such. Further to this the dropped kerb in the photograph shows where an application has been made in order for a license to 'cross the footway' has been made.
Having checked the link I believe you are confusing the two situations - an adopted footpath across private land differs from that of a footway along an adopted highway.
iv) The signage was placed there in answering a request from the public, following an incident. Had that incident not occurred the sign would not have to be there. Whether you believe it to be lawful or otherwise it exists due to the breech of the law.
iii) Most local councillors are seen as self serving and only interested in serving their own narrow vision of the world, as they see it, as well as attempting to twist those rules to suit their own purposes
i) the first was a direct quote from yourself in response to a third party enquiry. I have not altered it in any way.
ii) the raised kerb is the feature 'which sets the footway apart' from the rest of the road and would be seen by law as such. Further to this the dropped kerb in the photograph shows where an application has been made in order for a license to 'cross the footway' has been made.
Having checked the link I believe you are confusing the two situations - an adopted footpath across private land differs from that of a footway along an adopted highway.
iv) The signage was placed there in answering a request from the public, following an incident. Had that incident not occurred the sign would not have to be there. Whether you believe it to be lawful or otherwise it exists due to the breech of the law.
iii) Most local councillors are seen as self serving and only interested in serving their own narrow vision of the world, as they see it, as well as attempting to twist those rules to suit their own purposes
Last edited by cycle tramp on 3 Aug 2022, 10:01pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 2199
- Joined: 20 May 2011, 11:23am
- Location: South Birmingham
Re: Why do they do it?
Not sure what the fuss is about.
Road is blocked for whatever reason, cyclists are instructed to get off theier bikes and walk along the footpath.
What's the problem?
Road is blocked for whatever reason, cyclists are instructed to get off theier bikes and walk along the footpath.
What's the problem?
Brompton, Condor Heritage, creaky joints and thinning white (formerly grey) hair
""You know you're getting old when it's easier to ride a bike than to get on and off it" - quote from observant jogger !
""You know you're getting old when it's easier to ride a bike than to get on and off it" - quote from observant jogger !
-
- Posts: 1626
- Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 1:47pm
Re: Why do they do it?
Well part of the problem is that the signs seen here are informational and NOT instructions.rmurphy195 wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:01pm Not sure what the fuss is about.
Road is blocked for whatever reason, cyclists are instructed to get off theier bikes and walk along the footpath.
What's the problem?
Another part of the problem is that some people don't know the difference between the two (despite it being part of the test for a driving licence which many of those ignorant of the difference seemingly hold).
Others who certainly should know the difference (such knowledge being an integral part of their profession) put up signs like this, leaving other ignorant people to assume this is an instruction.
Re: Why do they do it?
I’d like to know.rmurphy195 wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:01pm Not sure what the fuss is about.
Road is blocked for whatever reason, cyclists are instructed to get off theier bikes and walk along the footpath.
What's the problem?
Would you get off and walk?
If you answer yes then, What is your reason?
Whatever I am, wherever I am, this is me. This is my life
https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
https://stcleve.wordpress.com/category/lejog/
E2E info
-
- Posts: 3572
- Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm
Re: Why do they do it?
That signage was placed there, as a reasonable precaution, so if someone riding a bicycle choses to ignore it, smacks into a young mother pushing a pram, whose baby then falls out and gets a bleed on the brain, the person riding that bike can be sued for damages and perhaps face criminal action.
Strangely the world doesn't actually revolve around people riding bikes.
Strangely the world doesn't actually revolve around people riding bikes.
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: 24 Feb 2019, 5:37pm
Re: Why do they do it?
If you're a councillor and you worry about upsetting people who are failing to discharge their responsibilities, then you're not doing your job properly.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 9:00pmDo you really want to know what most of the road repair teams and highway engineers think of parish councillors?
-
- Posts: 3572
- Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm
Re: Why do they do it?
Yes.. firstly, whatever I do I am an ambassador for it. So getting off and walking my bike along the actual pavement makes me look good, and it might change the way that some people view cyclists..Paulatic wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:27pmI’d like to know.rmurphy195 wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:01pm Not sure what the fuss is about.
Road is blocked for whatever reason, cyclists are instructed to get off theier bikes and walk along the footpath.
What's the problem?
Would you get off and walk?
If you answer yes then, What is your reason?
Secondly I pose more of a risk by cycling along the footpath than walking even at the same speed. When I walk I can stop in the next stride, if I cycle I have to wait a second or two before the brakes function, that could be another 2 or 3 feet, by which time I could be on top of them...
Thirdly, footpaths are used by all manner of people including the infirm, the blind and the deaf, not to mention people with mobility or balance problems - is it so important that you have to ride everyday inch of your journey that you have to inconvenience those who are already inconvenienced on a daily basis?
Fourth, risk - if I do everything I can do to make my journey as safe as possible for myself and those around me then I am less likely to be sued or pulled up in front of a court, if through chance I end up injuring someone.
Fifth, strangely enough respect for the law.. if its okay to break a little law like riding on the pavement, not out of concern for my only safety, but out of my convenience and selfishness, where do I stop, light theft? A bit of embezzlement perhaps? Drug dealing? Cannibalism?
Sixth, common sense - that road closure is less than 5 or 6 fence panels deep, I could have got off my bike, walked along the pavement and got back on again in less time than it would have taken you to read this
Last edited by cycle tramp on 3 Aug 2022, 10:54pm, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 3572
- Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm
Re: Why do they do it?
When I was doing roads and transport lines I used to talk to councillors on a weekly basis - councillors never got close to upsetting anyone on any level at any timeDaveReading wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:38pmIf you're a councillor and you worry about upsetting people who are failing to discharge their responsibilities, then you're not doing your job properly.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 9:00pmDo you really want to know what most of the road repair teams and highway engineers think of parish councillors?
-
- Posts: 3572
- Joined: 5 Aug 2009, 7:22pm
Re: Why do they do it?
..and that was the other thing about councillors - the idea that if someone was in the public sector, but that if their performance fell, they could be replaced by someone better...
..here's the thing that councillors failed to grasp.. that there may be noone better, because to be honest no one wanted that job in the first place.. that the people doing the job right now are the best that the council can afford or find or even keep....
..a local council not a million miles away from me is having trouble holding onto staff who work finding accommodation for the homeless. It's a stressful job, and they are not appreciated.. by anyone- burn out time for these staff is about one to two years- sometimes one gets long term stress. .. its the same with tenancy officers for social housing areas - a bloody awful job with nothing but angry customers and upset budget holders...
..how many people leave school with a burning desire to dig up the roads, to ensure the contents of your toilet is carried away from your house very time you flush.. and you've got Internet connection so you can complain about first world issues? No-one. That's who. No one wants to spend their only existence digging up roads...
And yet those people who have to do it, and keep everyone's world turning get moaned about because they dared to put up a sign to remind people that actually cycling on a pavement might not be the best idea in the world.
Are we really such princesses that we can't walk a couple of metres pushing our bikes - and we wonder everyone hates us?
..here's the thing that councillors failed to grasp.. that there may be noone better, because to be honest no one wanted that job in the first place.. that the people doing the job right now are the best that the council can afford or find or even keep....
..a local council not a million miles away from me is having trouble holding onto staff who work finding accommodation for the homeless. It's a stressful job, and they are not appreciated.. by anyone- burn out time for these staff is about one to two years- sometimes one gets long term stress. .. its the same with tenancy officers for social housing areas - a bloody awful job with nothing but angry customers and upset budget holders...
..how many people leave school with a burning desire to dig up the roads, to ensure the contents of your toilet is carried away from your house very time you flush.. and you've got Internet connection so you can complain about first world issues? No-one. That's who. No one wants to spend their only existence digging up roads...
And yet those people who have to do it, and keep everyone's world turning get moaned about because they dared to put up a sign to remind people that actually cycling on a pavement might not be the best idea in the world.
Are we really such princesses that we can't walk a couple of metres pushing our bikes - and we wonder everyone hates us?
Re: Why do they do it?
A sign is not required to sue a careless or reckless cyclist for damages and perhaps to prosecute them, so that was not the reason for it. It's bikelash, more than anything.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:28pm That signage was placed there, as a reasonable precaution, so if someone riding a bicycle choses to ignore it, smacks into a young mother pushing a pram, whose baby then falls out and gets a bleed on the brain, the person riding that bike can be sued for damages and perhaps face criminal action.
Strangely the world doesn't actually revolve around people riding bikes.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Re: Why do they do it?
Good luck with that(!) No-one notices people behaving well as much as they notice the ninjas jumping off the pavements into traffic.cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:46pmYes.. firstly, whatever I do I am an ambassador for it. So getting off and walking my bike along the actual pavement makes me look good, and it might change the way that some people view cyclists..Paulatic wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:27pmI’d like to know.rmurphy195 wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 10:01pm Not sure what the fuss is about.
Road is blocked for whatever reason, cyclists are instructed to get off theier bikes and walk along the footpath.
What's the problem?
Would you get off and walk?
If you answer yes then, What is your reason?
I can't stop next stride (if I try, I will probably fall over, especially if I am leaning on a bike instead of a walking stick) and you really should fix your brakes if they really take two seconds to function. That's bordering on having ineffective brakes, which is illegal.Secondly I pose more of a risk by cycling along the footpath than walking even at the same speed. When I walk I can stop in the next stride, if I cycle I have to wait a second or two before the brakes function, that could be another 2 or 3 feet, by which time I could be on top of them...
Can you explain how it is more inconvenient for a walker to pass a seated cyclist giving way to them than to pass a cyclist standing next to their steed? If I was walking, I'd consider it much more convenient to pass the narrower seated cyclist.Thirdly, footpaths are used by all manner of people including the infirm, the blind and the deaf, not to mention people with mobility or balance problems - is it so important that you have to ride everyday inch of your journey that you have to inconvenience those who are already inconvenienced on a daily basis?
I feel that I am more likely to injure someone with the far-side pedal or bar end when wheeling wobblyly than when I can sit on the bike, but I see that our risk assessments might be different. You might be wobblier riding than walking, but know exactly where the far pedal is at all times.Fourth, risk - if I do everything I can do to make my journey as safe as possible for myself and those around me then I am less likely to be sued or pulled up in front of a court, if through chance I end up injuring someone.
As mentioned earlier, I do not believe that I am breaking the law on riding on the pavement, because there is no road while it's dug up.Fifth, strangely enough respect for the law.. if its okay to break a little law like riding on the pavement, not out of concern for my only safety, but out of my convenience and selfishness, where do I stop, light theft? A bit of embezzlement perhaps? Drug dealing? Cannibalism?
If the road closure is as short as you say, why can't we see the "narrow downhill blind bend" which was originally suggested as the reason for the sign?Sixth, common sense - that road closure is less than 5 or 6 fence panels deep, I could have got off my bike, walked along the pavement and got back on again in less time than it would have taken you to read this
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
Re: Why do they do it?
No, but you followed it with "that's not right" and an explanation of the meaning of "highway" which is both not disputed by my post and irrelevant (not mentioned in that law).cycle tramp wrote: ↑3 Aug 2022, 9:50pm In my reply -
i) the first was a direct quote from yourself in response to a third party enquiry. I have not altered it in any way.
I am not confusing them but I think the situation is similar, in that no offence is committed by riding along a footway which is the entire open highway, because the linked law does not apply to it.ii) the raised kerb is the feature 'which sets the footway apart' from the rest of the road and would be seen by law as such. [...] Having checked the link I believe you are confusing the two situations - an adopted footpath across private land differs from that of a footway along an adopted highway.
Who/what are you quoting with "which sets the footway apart"?
What evidence is there that the incident actually occurred, or occurred as described?iv) The signage was placed there in answering a request from the public, following an incident. Had that incident not occurred the sign would not have to be there. Whether you believe it to be lawful or otherwise it exists due to the breech of the law.
Also, how could anyone seeing the sign know there had been an incident? Tons of dismount information signs have been erected with no incident or request ever being made.
Well, it's very sad if "most of the road repair teams and highway engineers" view the elected representatives like that. I don't share that negative view of "most" councillors, and I'm not currently one, so I'll leave your accusation to those who are.iii) Most local councillors are seen as self serving and only interested in serving their own narrow vision of the world, as they see it, as well as attempting to twist those rules to suit their own purposes
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
-
- Posts: 36781
- Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm
Re: Why do they do it?
I hope you won't be discouraged from keeping us updated with this, although I also hope that the roadworks will be completed soon.
Perhaps the next step will be that somebody requests that a PCSO should enforce this. (At one stage our perish council was financing half a PCSO to deal with local concerns.
Obviously, it is the case that the Highways Act offence only applies to what we now call "footways" rather than public footpaths and there must be occasions when alterations to the road layout mean that the footway offence is no longer applicable but I'd be surprised if the fact of a road being temporarily closed through roadworks was included in that. Is there a TRO in force here? If so, what does it say? While typing this I've remembered that Leeds City Council TROs once routinely included an exception for "pedal cycles pushed by hand."
Perhaps some hardy soul will volunteer to get their name on a decided case - although it's possible that this has been to court before, of course.
If somebody gets a fixed penalty notice and decides to contest it, the procedure would be to argue "no case to answer" on the grounds that this location isn't covered by the HA 1835. Whichever way the court decided, an aggrieved party could then ask the court to "state a case." ie decide whether the magistrates' court's interpretation of the law was correct.
================================================================
PS The power to create temporary TROs for roadworks etc is in s 14 of The Road traffic Regulation Act 1984
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1984/27/section/14
That includes
(3) When considering the making of an order or the issue of a notice under the foregoing provisions an authority shall have regard to the existence of alternative routes suitable for the traffic which will be affected by the order or notice.