Tony Raven ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :

I guess the question is how many times have you seen someone cycling
on a motorway (Kenyan team at the Manchester Commonwealth Games
excluded) versus how many times have I seen cars and motorbikes driven
on bridleways? Bet my number is bigger than yours.

Are we back to trying to figure out how many wrongs make a right?

People driving cars and riding motorbikes over RoW without a vehicular
right of way are in the wrong. Simple as that. They should not be there.

However, don't forget that some Bridleways are BOATs, though, and that
vehicles don't need an explicit RoW if they have the landowner's
permission.

Most people cycling on Footpaths are in the wrong, too.

Adrian wrote:
Tony Raven ) gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying :


I guess the question is how many times have you seen someone cycling
on a motorway (Kenyan team at the Manchester Commonwealth Games
excluded) versus how many times have I seen cars and motorbikes driven
on bridleways? Bet my number is bigger than yours.


Are we back to trying to figure out how many wrongs make a right?


So I take it the answer is you have never seen someone cycling on a
motorway. So much for your HC ignorant cyclists.

However, don't forget that some Bridleways are BOATs, though, and that
vehicles don't need an explicit RoW if they have the landowner's
permission.

No BOATs and Bridleways are different. Only the fast disappearing RUPPs
have variable access rights for motor vehicles and most of those will be
reclassified as Restricted Byways with no motor vehicle rights.

--
Tony

"I did make a mistake once - I thought I'd made a mistake but I hadn't"
Anon

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 10:21:22 +0100, Adrian wrote:

Jeremy Collins ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

It has some flaws though. When trying to plan a route to take me
from Bard Road, W10 to Bowes Road, W3, the route suggested would take
me along the A40(M) - not a problem in itself, I've, err, done that
stretch of moterway on my bicycle before

Is that legal? I live near the A1(M) and certainly wouldn't cycle on
it

Y'know, I was always under the impression that the Highway Code applied
to
cyclists, and that they were meant to *read* it occasionally...?

shrug
http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/23.htm#227

Would you like to hazard a guess as to what the (M) stands for?

I know perfectly well what the M stands for. I think you misunderstood
my post.

--
jc

Jeremy Collins ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

Would you like to hazard a guess as to what the (M) stands for?

I know perfectly well what the M stands for. I think you misunderstood
my post.

Forgive me. I naively assumed that you asking "Is that legal" in response
to a comment about cycling on the A40(M), then going on to say you didn't
fancy cycling on the A1(M) was along the general lines of you asking if it
was legal to cycle on Motorway-classified roads.

Jeremy Collins wrote:
On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 23:57:32 +0100, Colin wrote:


It has some flaws though. When trying to plan a route to take me from
Bard Road, W10 to Bowes Road, W3, the route suggested would take me along
the A40(M) - not a problem in itself, I've, err, done that stretch of
moterway on my bicycle before

Is that legal? I live near the A1(M) and certainly wouldn't cycle on it
(although I have had to ride on the A1 a couple of times).

the A40 has been declassified on the Westway, no longer a motorway,
though there may still be a cycling ban, will check tomorrow.

On 21 Jul 2005 02:38:58 -0700 someone who may be "MartinM"
wrote this:-

the A40 has been declassified on the Westway, no longer a motorway,

Indeed. According to uk.transport this was part of an anti-motorist
plan by Ken Livingstone. All the little bits of motorway in London
(parts of the plans to destroy London with motorways that were never
carried out) which the road lobby were hoping would eventually be
linked up have been "declassified".

It would be nice to think that they would soon start removing these
roads, but in reality Mr Livingstone wants to build more motorways,
as the so-called Thames Gateway Bridge clearly illustrates.

http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/page.php?pageid=425
http://www.transport2000.org.uk/camp...afficBrief.htm
and
http://www.foe.co.uk/resource/press_..._19082004.html
present an alternative view of this folly to Mr Livingstone's.




--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen wrote:

Indeed. According to uk.transport this was part of an anti-motorist
plan by Ken Livingstone. All the little bits of motorway in London
(parts of the plans to destroy London with motorways that were never
carried out) which the road lobby were hoping would eventually be
linked up have been "declassified".

Yay! Ken Leninspart and his black helichopters terrorise uk.tosspot!

However, in spite of the "downgrading" of the assorted proto-motorways,
AFAIK cycling is still Policely Forbidden thereupon, as it is on certain
other not-now-and-never-have-been-a-motorway roads, such as the tunnel and
flyover sections of the A406.

--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
Stop it! You're scarin' the Hippo...

Dave Larrington wrote:

AFAIK cycling is still Policely Forbidden thereupon, as it is on
certain other not-now-and-never-have-been-a-motorway roads, such
as the tunnel and flyover sections of the A406.

All of them? I've cycled over the flyover bit by the start of the M1 a
few times without noticing a "No Cycling" sign. Oh dear, was I bad?
ISTR there are cycling-free bits up towards Whipps Cross.

--
Dave...

On Thu, 21 Jul 2005 11:41:49 +0100, David Hansen wrote:


Indeed. According to uk.transport this was part of an anti-motorist
plan by Ken Livingstone. All the little bits of motorway in London
(parts of the plans to destroy London with motorways that were never
carried out) which the road lobby were hoping would eventually be linked
up have been "declassified".

No, not 'anti-motorist' at all.
I read on a website that this was due to the roads in question being
given to Transport for London to run. TfL cannot by law run motorways,
so these short stretches had to be declassified.
I may be wrong - and stand to be corrected.
On the short section from Shepherd's Bush up to join the A40 Westway there
is a cycling ban. 50mph limit on that stretch also.

John Hearns wrote:

No, not 'anti-motorist' at all.
I read on a website that this was due to the roads in question being
given to Transport for London to run. TfL cannot by law run motorways,
so these short stretches had to be declassified.
I may be wrong - and stand to be corrected.
On the short section from Shepherd's Bush up to join the A40 Westway
there is a cycling ban. 50mph limit on that stretch also.

That's the story on pathetic.org.uk. My mate Ian was once clobbered riding
on the A102(M) at three in the morning, so he rode up the Old Ford slip
road, waited until the dibbles had cleared off and carried on. Back then
most of it had a 60 mph limit - nowadays it's 40 from the M11 link road all
the way to the Blackwall tunnel.

--
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
Historians' Right To Work Campaign - We Demand A Continuing Supply Of
History!