CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Questions/Support/Help

Cycling on the pavement (or not)

(21 posts)
  • Started 13 years ago by Greenroofer
  • Latest reply from Dave
  • This topic is resolved
  • poll: Should I cycle on the 'pavement'
    Yes, it's not really a pavement at all : (5 votes)
    56 %
    No, get off and push : (4 votes)
    44 %

  1. Greenroofer
    Member

    So, here's my journey home of an evening. It's on Colinton Road, just past Meggetland, heading into town.
    http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&q=craiglockhart+road+edinburgh&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Craiglockhart+Rd,+Edinburgh+EH14,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&ll=55.928144,-3.228985&spn=0.001107,0.004128&t=h&z=19&layer=c&cbll=55.928317,-3.229424&panoid=hzPzXaaRtZBWQDctyB_S-Q&cbp=12,66.86,,0,5

    I come from behind the camera, cross into the road on the right and then (controversial bit) I go up the dropped kerb,just at the right of the picture, across the pavement beside the two cars, and then up the single-track that's accessible in the corner behind the black wheely bin.

    So, my question is, do you think I should be 'cycling on the pavement' here?

    In my defence, your honour, I don't cycle along the pavement, I cycle across it. I then go along the bit with the two cars parked on it, which is not paved the same way as the actual pavement and which I assume may not actually be 'pavement' in the legal sense. If they are going to ticket me, they also need to ticket the vehicles that are regularly parked here.

    Regardless of the legal niceties, do you think I should get off and push for those few yards?

    (...and, if you know the legal niceties, what are they?)

    Posted 13 years ago #
  2. Smudge
    Member

    For me, I don't cycle on the pavement, however looking at that it looks more a quick cross of the pavement, so my own feeling would be ride if it's safe and there are no pedestrians to upset, hop off for a few paces if it's busy or there are small/old/many peds.
    As to the law? I'd say it's pavement and if you're caught riding on it you'll get a lecture (or worse!)

    Posted 13 years ago #
  3. wee folding bike
    Member

    Highway Code might allow it:

    145
    You MUST NOT drive on or over a pavement, footpath or bridleway except to gain lawful access to property, or in the case of an emergency.

    http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/TravelAndTransport/Highwaycode/DG_070309

    I use that rule to save a few hundred meter detour into school as otherwise I'd need to ride past the gate and down to the car entrance.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  4. chdot
    Admin

    You mean the bit of 'pavement' that is a car park!

    I've hardly ever seen any pedestrians here and it's so wide it's not really any sort of problem.

    Fortunately I've never met anyone on the that path either, it's very narrow in places.

    It was years before I 'discovered' it - noticed it on an old map.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  5. Smudge
    Member

    Never been up there, though I pass it every day, where does it go to?

    Posted 13 years ago #
  6. chdot
    Admin

    "where does it go to?"

    http://edinburgh.cyclestreets.net/journey/557268

    Other end.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  7. Its_Me_Knees
    Member

    @WFB... That highway code rule applies to cars I think. The bike rule is a bit more blunt:

    "64

    You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement.

    [Laws HA 1835 sect 72 & R(S)A 1984, sect 129]"

    Odd though, that something appears to be permissible in a car but not on a bike... Personally I think the transit of (at least two) cars across the pavement comprises more of an 'issue' than a (carefully ridden) bike would...

    Posted 13 years ago #
  8. wee folding bike
    Member

    The local bike cops use the same short cut as I do.

    I assumed the rule was to allow people to get a car into a driveway. Perhaps they expect us to dismount.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  9. Its_Me_Knees
    Member

    "Perhaps they expect us to dismount."

    Probably :-(

    Posted 13 years ago #
  10. Dave
    Member

    "It is not an offence under this section to drive a mechanically propelled vehicle on any land within fifteen yards of a road, being a road on which a motor vehicle may lawfully be driven, for the purpose only of parking the vehicle on that land." (RTA 1988 §34)

    However, interestingly, the law for cyclists says it's an offence if anyone "shall wilfully ride upon any footpath or causeway by the side of any road made or set apart for the use or accommodation of foot-passengers or shall wilfully lead or drive any carriage of any description upon any such footpath or causeway."

    I would have thought you could make a case in an instance like this that the land referred to is not "a footpath by the side of a road set apart for foot-passengers" since it's clearly in use as a car park. If this use is uncontested (which it seems to be) then perhaps you're in the clear, although presumably it would require a court to rule on whether the precise land an offender was on counted as a footpath...

    Posted 13 years ago #
  11. SRD
    Moderator

    What's the path surface like? I've noticed it from the Myreside end and assumed it was muddy.

    The continuation through the hospital grounds would make a fab of-road route into morningside...

    Posted 13 years ago #
  12. chdot
    Admin

    "What's the path surface like? I've noticed it from the Myreside end and assumed it was muddy."

    Best described as 'variable' can be slippery when wet. Suggest you experience it from the Myreside end (slightly downhill).

    "The continuation through the hospital grounds would make a fab of-road route into morningside..."

    Yes well, in another land.

    There used to be a pedestrian access into the hospital (long before the current - normally locked - gate). It was shut off more than ten years ago because (I think) of 'vandalism' - or kids drinking/glue sniffing - or some other reason - which meant that a useful, but little known route (used by staff) was removed from public use to/through a publicly owned health institution.

    Such a route is still on various wish lists. The NHS has long wanted to sell off the land, but access from Myreside Road has always been the planning 'problem'.

    Upgrading the path (to make it wide enough for even two buggies to pass in places) that this thread is about would actually cost quite a lot - it's on the edge of a steep embankment to a live railway.

    It would have been much cheaper to produce a path on the other side of the wall when Watson's got planning permission to build houses on the disused tennis courts. But that sort of thing doesn't happen.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  13. chdot
    Admin

    The following came from a source close to the council but of course cannot be used as a defence in the face of a police officer, court of law or irate pedestrian...

    "
    Because the area where the cars are parked is adopted footway it is technically illegal to cycle on it. However, even where there has been a clear need for enforcing the law the LBP have been reluctant to do this and claim that the necessary legislation isn't available!

    Crossing a footway to get to a legal route is also technically illegal but a blind eye is generally turned to this. It could theoretically be used if a cyclist caused an accident and was to be prosecuted.

    "

    Posted 13 years ago #
  14. Greenroofer
    Member

    Well this evening I walked it. There was someone on the pavement, so it seemed only fair in the light of the advice on here.

    @SRD. chdot is over-generous in his description of the track to Myreside as 'variable'. I would say it's frankly appalling. It's got tree roots, rocks and the like sticking out of it, it's very narrow and as soon as it rains it becomes a slippery mud bath. You won't fit a trailer down it. However, it is a quick way through from Myreside to Meggetland.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  15. tarmac jockey
    Member

    I came upon this article in relation to cycling on a pavement. This I would class as a regrettable absolute worst case senario. It does raise an interesting question about cycling and "insurance". I don't know how to upload a Poll but I would be interested to know how many forum regulars have cycling specific insurance? Perhaps someone could load up a Poll to that effect please?
    http://www.trethowans.com/news_resources/news/case_forces_cyclists_to_consider_insurance_options_3784/

    Posted 13 years ago #
  16. wee folding bike
    Member

    Yes, 3rd party insurance comes with CTC membership.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  17. SRD
    Moderator

    However, it is a quick way through from Myreside to Meggetland.

    Thanks both. I can't think of a reason that I would ever want to go that way, but may try it sometime just for fun :)

    Posted 13 years ago #
  18. cb
    Member

    That path, plus a route through the hospital grounds is one of the proposed 'family routes', is it not, mentioned on at least one other thread that I can't find (was a while ago)?

    I've never been through that path - must try it some time.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  19. cb
    Member

    "I've never been through that path - must try it some time."

    I did, yesterday:


    Narrow by ccbb7766, on Flickr


    End in sight by ccbb7766, on Flickr

    Surface wasn't too bad I thought, but it has been dry recently.

    Looking at the railway line from Colinton Road shows how steep the embankment is here:


    Steep sided by ccbb7766, on Flickr

    I also popped round the corner into Craiglockhart Terrace to go here, somewhere I hadn't been before:


    Craiglockhart Nature Trail by ccbb7766, on Flickr

    This provides another off road route through to Craighouse Road/Myreside Road (not bad for bikes) by linking through to this path:


    Path to Craighouse Road by ccbb7766, on Flickr

    Unfortunately linking through more directly to Colinton Road (via Lockharton Crescent) requires negotiating some steps (not sure what happens if you go around the south side of Craiglockhart Pond though).

    Posted 13 years ago #
  20. chdot
    Admin

    "not sure what happens if you go around the south side of Craiglockhart Pond"

    http://edinburgh.cyclestreets.net/journey/566102

    No steps, short sharp hill instead.

    "This provides another off road route through to Craighouse Road/Myreside Road (not bad for bikes)"

    http://edinburgh.cyclestreets.net/journey/566115

    Very pleasant, though requires a certain amount of skill/care of peds/dogs where the path goes round the housing. With 'proper' planning there would be a direct link from Meadowspot.

    Posted 13 years ago #
  21. Dave
    Member

    How many people have house insurance? Almost all such policies include a stock 3rd party liability clause (obviously excluding driving) so a great many cyclists are (unwittingly?) covered for causing vast carnage already.

    I don't think there's an argument for making cyclists carry insurance that isn't also an argument for universal compulsory insurance, which is the first sticking point.

    Secondly, because cyclists virtually never cause any damage, the cost of insuring them (to an insurance company) would be extremely low, and competition in the market would mean the insurance would be absurdly cheap.

    This being the case, I'd think there might be a 'moral hazard' involved, where individual cyclists would be encouraged to cause damage, because they knew the insurance would pay out and the cost of the next policy, even without a no-claims bonus, would be virtually free. (And if not - just don't bother with insurance. 1 out of every 20 cars is illegally on the road, apparently)

    Posted 13 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin