Pavement cycling

This is related to the page on cyclist behaviour.

Cyclists have been known to ride on the pavement and this occasionally brings them into conflict with pedestrians. This conflict has been known to cause injury and even, in very rare cases, death. Pavement cycling is therefore another of the motorist's list of cyclist infractions, used to self-justify a lack of care towards cyclists on the road. So let's have a look at pavement cycling and the real danger it poses, starting by quantifying how dangerous bikes are to pedestrians. Per mile travelled a car driver is five times as likely to injure or kill a pedestrian as a cyclist (RAGB). And over half of all car mileage is on major roads which have negligible levels of pedestrian traffic, so the real level of danger per unit exposure is probably more like ten times that of cycling. Now factor in the fact that annual UK bike mileage is about 1% of the mileage for cars (Transtat - caution, sampling errors). Putting it in perspective, then, cyclists pose some danger to pedestrians, but it is at least two and probably nearer three orders of magnitude lower than that posed by cars. In statistical terms, allowing for sampling errors and the confidence levels of the figures, cyclist danger to pedestrians is negligible. OK, that's clearly unacceptable - we know it's dangerous because Common Sense tells us so. So let's look at the specific issue of cyclists on pavements. Here, surely, the figures show that there is dangerous and irresponsible behaviour going on. Beware the Cyclist Menace. Er, not quite. During the 3-year period 1998-2000 out of a total of 2,630 pedestrians killed on the roads, 185 were killed by vehicles on footways. Of these 185, one was killed by a bicycle and the remaining 184 were killed by motor vehicles. So you are nearly 200 times more likely to be killed on the pavement by a motor vehicle as by a bicycle. You are nearly 3,000 times more likely to die as a result of some other road traffic incident, such as a driver failing to yield right of way on a crossing. There are, in short, much bigger things to worry about. But surely Common Sense can't be wrong? Surely pavement cycling is a menace? Granted, it certainly has some nuisance value, and it does cause a degree of alarm particularly in older pedestrians who tend not to hear the bikes coming. But then, you have to ask yourself why the cyclists are on the pavement in the first place. What is it about the road which persuades cyclists to ride on the pavement, despite the attendant inconveniences of having to yield at every side turning, coming into conflict with pedestrians and street furniture and so on? What could be scaring these cyclists off the roads? It couldn't possibly be the way cars are driven, could it? Note: cycling on the footway is illegal unless the footway has been specifically designated for shared use. So is driving on the footway for that matter, and that includes the bit of driving necessary to get your wheels on the kerb by 2" in order to pretend you're not obstructing the road. Cycling on the footway is also more dangerous than cycling on the road, and causes distress to pedestrians. So don't do it.