for telling a young girl off for cycling on the pavement??

[lottiejenkins]

I went shopping in our local market town this morning with my ds Wilf (profoundly deaf). We stopped at the florists where my cousin works and as we were leaving Wilf went out of the front door ahead of me. He then suddenly stepped back and i saw that girl (aged about ten) had nearly knocked him over as she cycled past on the pavement!! I called after her and said that Wilf was deaf and that is one of the many reasons why she shouldnt be cycling on the pavement. I didnt see any parent with her. Surely if shes that nervous of traffic she shouldnt be out on her own???

I do find it absolutely extraordinary that adults seriously suggest that children of 10 should cycle on the road. When these laws were devised, there were a fraction of the number of cars on the road that we see today, and there is no comparison between the risk to pedestrians (of any age or size) from children cycling on the pavement and the risk to children from cycling on the road. It is no wonder that we have so many obese children and so many children with so few freedoms.

Space can be shared by tolerant people, and children should be taught about safe cycling, tolerance and consideration through example.

Avocets - yes, and i am wondering whether the 'it's illegal' comment will become as irrelevant to this issue as it is to e.g. playing football on Sunday (can't remember whether that one was repealed in a recent mop-up of out of date and irrelevant legislation, but certainly Sunday football was cheerfully going ahead for many years while still being technically on the statute book as illegal).

What matters is not so much the technical illegality, but how the law is implemented in reality - which previous posters have indicated would be no action at all below the age of 10 and no meaningful sanction / fine until the age of 16.

A common sense approach would suggest that except in very safe areas, cycling on the pavement should be acceptable for primary-age children AS LONG AS basic courtesy and priority to pedestrians is maintained and that no cycling areas e.g. pedestrianised shopping streets with specific bye-laws are created and policed sensibly.

I dont like cyclists being in the pavement. A man was cycling on the pavement recently and his bike skidded on some wet leaves. I had already stepped out of his way as he was coming fast and had had to step next to the road but still on teh pavement. As he lost control his bike skidded towards me and very nearly knocked me into a busy road. I was too shocked to say anything as it was such a near miss. No apology from him. He just seemed annoyed he'd been slowed down.

No cyclists young or old should be on pedestrian walkways. If roads are not an option, then they should go to local parks for a ride.

No excuses.

bemybebe,

But I and my children use bicycles as transport, not as recreation - the park is sadly not en route to anywhere we need to go. What should we do?

And rainbow,

As I have said above, I entirely agree that adults - in fact I would argue secondary school children, who are old enough to have been trained in road cycling and have the developmental maturity to judge traffic speed and conditions - should not cycle on pavements. The discussion here has been about children of primary school age, especially while they are being trained as cyclists and acquiring the skills which will eventually allow them to cycles safely on the roads. It's about reaching a balance between pedestrian safety and cyclist safety which doesn't replace (rare) accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists with (sadly only too common) accidents involving cyclists and cars.

bemybebe,

I should have elaborated a little. If you had have read my post above, you will know that I am training my children to become competent solo road cyclists by the time they leave primary school. At the moment, they are old enough and competent enough to ride with an adult on the road but not to ride on the road unaccompanied.

However, to reach this stage, while they did start off in parks when they were 4 and 5 years old, they have since progressed through cycling on the pavement with me (to real places, to carry out real journeys to get to places we neeed to get to ... you may see bikes as 'toys' but they are a great mode of transport), to cycling on the pavement while I cycle on the road, to cycling on the road accompanied.

Through that training, they will become safe road cyclists. In your proposal, children would progress straight from cycling in parks (how would they get to the park??) to cycling on the road - do you think that this is safe??

Only read the first 2 pages but YAB totally U!

teacher - maybe you are one of this rare breed of pavement cyclists that are considerate to pedestrians, but 99% of others are not like you, sadly

I don't think you should have to hold your son's hand all the time when you are out, but it is always a good idea to have a quick check when you step out of a shop. I once was very nearly hit by a lorry as I came out of a shop - he had mounted the pavement to manouver around a parked car and was going way to fast, his wing mirror literally grazed my nose.

I don't have a problem with kids cycling on pavements though as long as they are taught to do it consideratley and dismount when appropriate etc.

bemybebe - my point is, is it easier, better and safer to teach young children to cycle with consideration to pedestrians on pavements, or to just throw them out onto the roads?

Umm I think yabu to an extent- I live ia big busy city and I'm afraid I'd rather my kids ( teens) cycled on the pavement on the vile bits of road. However this isn't on the whole where people will be standing outside shops etc. They also are very aware to take great care round people. She shouldn't have been cycling like a loony post pedestrians/shops.

However I agree with the posters above - don't know how old Wilfred is- if small he should be ( like all small kids who are a bit unpredictable ) firmly held by the hand, and I'd he's bigger, and I'm assuming he has no intellectual impairment, he needs to learn that he doesn't have the usual cues for danger when out and about, and needs to use great care and use his intact senses all, the time. there are always old folk blundering about here with trolleys or silent mobility scooters.

teacher -yes, for parents concerned only
for everyone else it is a potential hazard. pavements are for the people on foot... sorry if this is a surprise

what about disabled people with visual impairments or those who cannot get out in time due to mobility problems or elderly? have you thought of them whilst allowing your children including teens zoom up and down the pavements?

bemybebe,

Do you think that it is desirable - for health reasons, as well as 'green' issues and as an efficient form of transport for older children and adults to get to where they want to go - for children to learn to ride bicycles?

If so, how do you propose that they learn - and how do you propose that they learn not only the physical basics of pedalling a bike but also the 'road awareness' that they need to join all the other vehicles on the road?

I do not allow my children to 'zoom up and down the pavements'. As part of their training as cyclists, between the ages of 4 (when they learned to physically pedal) and c 6-7 (when their ability to judge traffic conditions became sufficiently good, and their training as cyclists sufficiently advanced, to be able to cycle on the road when accompanied by an adult) I allowed them to cycle, supervised, on the pavement as long as they were ALWAYS either walking their bikes or stationary when passing ANY pedestrian travelling in either direction.

You, and all the others on this thread who continue to state that all cyclists - even 4 and 5 year olds - should cycle on the road if they wish to use their bicycles for transport, or even to get to and from the park to play, can, of course, influence my choice.

If you agree to drive in an absolutely cycle-friendly way (ie to stick to the letter of YOUR part of the Highway Code) then I and other cycling parents will agree to abide by the letter of the law on bicycles on pavements. Please could you:

• Always leave sufficient space when driving past a cyclist, remembering the width of your wing mirror and the fact that many larger cars create a significant degree of air turbulence in their wake.

• If there is not sufficient space to drive past a cyclist, then keep your speed low, leave the cyclist space to cycle ahead and choose a moment when there is sufficient space and time in the traffic to pass the cyclist safely. This is a courtesy that you extend to other cars - please do so to cyclists also.

• When passing a cyclist, remember that they might be accompanied by children on bikes ahead of them - do not cut straight back in, and remember to check that you have passed all members of the party safely, exactly as you would do for a row of cars.

• When turning left, please check that there is no cyclist on your left who is carrying on straight ahead before you do so. The Highway code states that they have the right of way, you do not.

• In particular, when turning left at a crossroads or traffic light, remember that a cyclist (or group of cyclists) may be travelling straight on. look carefully before turning, the cyclist is a vehicle and therefore has as many rights as you do.

• Allow cyclists who have indicated that they wish to turn right the space to move out to the centre of the road to do so. Do not attempt to pass them on their right. If there is not space to pass them on their left, then you must wait for them to complete their right turn.

• When turning out of a side road, remember to look for cyclists. They have the right of way if travelling straight on - you do not have the right of way just because you are bigger.

• If you are travelling down a narrow road e.g. with cars parked on both sides, and you meet a cyclist going the other way, please wait to ensure that the cyclist has been able to stop safely (as you would do for a car) before driving on. Failing to do so gives the cyclist an unwelcome choice between ploughing into a parked car and crashing into your bonnet. You do not have automatic precedence over the bicycle just because your car is bigger.

• When you park, or stop to let a passenger out of your car, please check carefully for passing cyclists before opening your door. They have the right to proceed along their route instead of having doors flung open in their face.

If everybody drove according to the Highway Code, then the roads would be sufficiently safe for cyclists for us not to have to face the choice of teaching our children to cycle on the pavement in a pedestrian -friendly way or risking their lives on the roads where nobopdy drives in a cycle-friendly way. Certainly where I live, the police offer the advice to cycling parents that they should cycle with their younger children on the pavements.

teacher - I absolute agree with you, I have posted extensively before on sharing our space between car drivers and cyclists. your points above are spot on and it is absolute scandal that some drivers get away with dangerous driving. i have once even reported a car that overtook a cyclist so carelessly and dangerously that the poor chap was nearly pushed off the road.

does not invalidate my belief that even 4-5 year olds can and do inflict sufficient damage on disabled adults let alone disabled children and really should not cycle on pavements. especially when those pavements are narrow and in the crowded conditions.

also, sorry, i did not mean your own children zoom 'up and down', i meant to direct this comment at you as a defender of pavement cycling in principle, which i still do not believe is appropriate.

until kids are not able to judge the road conditions they should not really use the road of course, but it does not mean they should climb the pavements instead.

i also wonder where you live. where i live (in Surrey) one gets a on the spot fine for cycling on the pavement.

We are in Suffolk, we were in a market town.

I consulted at the police station when we moved here (large town, we live in its 'suburbs' on a main road) once the kids could both cycle.

The response was 'When you're with the children, we would advise you to cycle on the pavement in these areas (gestures around main suburban area), but if we find you on the pavement in the pedestrainised area in the centre, or past the shops in this area (gestures) then we will be having serious words with you'.

I agree that it does depend where you live, what the pavements are like, the age of the children etc. I would never defend cycling on a pavement in a shopping street, nor on a narrow pavement with many pedestrians, nor by children or adults beyond primary age, nor in a pedestrianised shopping area. In that sense, I don't think OP was at all unreasonable - the girl should not have been cycling on a pavement past shops, where there were pedestrians around. Where I diverged was when posters started suggesting that all cyclists, however young and on whatever road, should always cycle on the road.

Where we have cycled on pavements it has been on wide pavements in suburban areas (quite main roads though) with limited numbers of pedestrains who we stop for. And as I say, now the children are old enough to cycle on the road accompanied by an adult, we never ride on pavements.

Just to sum up. Some laws are stupid. Break the stupid ones.

haha - interesting take on the law, bubblebrain, I am sure you would have found a lot of support around Ealing Monday a week ago