Passing distance from pavement

[orbit123]

I read of a recent case where a driver was charged/fined with not giving a cyclist enough space when overtaking - something like 2m now required. It made me read up a little on rules for passing pedestrians. The pavement to our kids primary school is partly a 40mph zone and I find it's not just the speeding that's a problem (not unexpected) but the distance drivers keep from those on pavement. The pavement isn't that wide and now and again I can just about feel a wing mirror brush me. It's pretty frightening if driver doing circa 50mph.

Anyway from I can read a driver must keep a 2m distance *if* I was walking on the road but I can't find any guidance on what distance should be if pedestrian is on a narrow pavement (or close to edge of a wide pavement).

Could anyone steer? We have spoken to the  council and managed to get a sign installed but no large change in driver behaviour until they're very close to the school where it steps to 20mph with speed bumps.

Thanks.

[surveyor]

orbit123 said:

I read of a recent case where a driver was charged/fined with not giving a cyclist enough space when overtaking - something like 2m now required. It made me read up a little on rules for passing pedestrians. The pavement to our kids primary school is partly a 40mph zone and I find it's not just the speeding that's a problem (not unexpected) but the distance drivers keep from those on pavement. The pavement isn't that wide and now and again I can just about feel a wing mirror brush me. It's pretty frightening if driver doing circa 50mph.

Anyway from I can read a driver must keep a 2m distance *if* I was walking on the road but I can't find any guidance on what distance should be if pedestrian is on a narrow pavement (or close to edge of a wide pavement).

Could anyone steer? We have spoken to the  council and managed to get a sign installed but no large change in driver behaviour until they're very close to the school where it steps to 20mph with speed bumps.

Thanks.

One of the more ridiculous posts I have seen.

[normalbloke]

Well, if driving an HGV, there are some pavements and users that I won’t pass until I can use some of the other carriageway. Some pedestrians don’t realise how much of their shoulder or a bag that is actually over the kerb line and in the carriageway. Exiting Eastleigh towards Bishopstoke is a good case in point, where the pavement that gets used is too narrow for a pushchair. The proper pavement which is a couple of metres to the left is too far away to use….

[wildoliver]

surveyor said:

orbit123 said:

I read of a recent case where a driver was charged/fined with not giving a cyclist enough space when overtaking - something like 2m now required. It made me read up a little on rules for passing pedestrians. The pavement to our kids primary school is partly a 40mph zone and I find it's not just the speeding that's a problem (not unexpected) but the distance drivers keep from those on pavement. The pavement isn't that wide and now and again I can just about feel a wing mirror brush me. It's pretty frightening if driver doing circa 50mph.

Anyway from I can read a driver must keep a 2m distance *if* I was walking on the road but I can't find any guidance on what distance should be if pedestrian is on a narrow pavement (or close to edge of a wide pavement).

Could anyone steer? We have spoken to the  council and managed to get a sign installed but no large change in driver behaviour until they're very close to the school where it steps to 20mph with speed bumps.

Thanks.

One of the more ridiculous posts I have seen.

But the children! The children!!

[Super Sonic]

I don't think it's necessarily about distance from the pavement, more about distance from any pedestrians. If the pavement is empty, feel free to kerb your rims, but if there are so many people on the pavement they are right up to the edge, you need to give a bit more room. It also depends on how fast you're going. Fwiw there are no hard and fast rules that apply in every instance, just use a bit of common sense and judgement. The rule about giving cyclists room when passing is not new.

[Dingu]

wildoliver said:

But the children! The children!!

Incompetent inconsiderate drivers like you who are incapable of driving correctly for the situation are why we end up needing hard and fast rules like the 2m passing distance for cyclists, or speed limits dropping to the minimum speed for that stretch.

[Boosted LS1]

Dimwit cyclists and pedestrians wearing headphones are probably why the Darwin effect takes place. It's time they took some responsibility for their own safety and stupidity.

[orbit123]

Not expected reaction and seemed a reasonable question given the cyclist case.

To put it another way : is the law that if I walk or cycle just off the pavement (on the road) a driver would legally need to give me 2m but if I'm on the pavement the driver can pass as close as they like.

For added context, I'm talking about a village B road here just before a primary school. The kids are not walking up a dual carriageway.

[wildoliver]

Dingu said:

wildoliver said:

But the children! The children!!

Incompetent inconsiderate drivers like you who are incapable of driving correctly for the situation are why we end up needing hard and fast rules like the 2m passing distance for cyclists, or speed limits dropping to the minimum speed for that stretch.

I don't really have an issue with my competence behind the wheel tbh, I do many miles and manage to avoid hitting people on pavements by making sure all parts of my car including mirrors don't protrude on to the pavement as I drive. Much the same as I give cyclists enough room?

I am however tired of complete wet wipes needing common sense breaking down in to rules on top of rules. It's never been legal to run cyclists down, only bad and distracted drivers did, do you think a 2m rule will change anything? Of course it won't. Likewise if your on a pavement don't hang over the edge in to the road. If you do don't complain that cars get a bit near you. It's like sticking your fingers in a plug socket and complaining it's a bit tingly.

[Dingu]

Boosted LS1 said:

Dimwit cyclists and pedestrians wearing headphones are probably why the Darwin effect takes place. It's time they took some responsibility for their own safety and stupidity.

Did you even read the OP? Those users have a lot more reason to avoid a car than the other way round.

[deeen]

orbit123 said:

Not expected reaction and seemed a reasonable question given the cyclist case.

To put it another way : is the law that if I walk or cycle just off the pavement (on the road) a driver would legally need to give me 2m but if I'm on the pavement the driver can pass as close as they like.

For added context, I'm talking about a village B road here just before a primary school. The kids are not walking up a dual carriageway.

No, it is not the law that if you cycle on the road a driver would legally need to give you 2m.

[Roofless Toothless]

This bit of road is just around the corner from me. I use it quite frequently as it is on the way to the GP surgery. Two cars can pass with care, a larger vehicle and a car not so, although some try it. If a truck rolls along close to the kerb the wing mirrors overhang the pavement, and are inches away from your head is you are walking there. You have to time your passage along the pavement according to the traffic on the road, and it is not uncommon to have to nip onto someone’s front path to get out of the way.

I think the OP’s post is valid, and drivers should be just as aware of people on the pavement as they are of other vehicles on the road.

[surveyor]

Roofless Toothless said:

This bit of road is just around the corner from me. I use it quite frequently as it is on the way to the GP surgery. Two cars can pass with care, a larger vehicle and a car not so, although some try it. If a truck rolls along close to the kerb the wing mirrors overhang the pavement, and are inches away from your head is you are walking there. You have to time your passage along the pavement according to the traffic on the road, and it is not uncommon to have to nip onto someone’s front path to get out of the way.

I think the OP’s post is valid, and drivers should be just as aware of people on the pavement as they are of other vehicles on the road.

Well obviously. But do we need a law saying we should be 2m from the pavement edge?

[Roofless Toothless]

I don’t think the OP was suggesting that. Two metres from a pedestrian wherever they are would do me.

[FiF]

I'd agree the topic raised by the OP is valid and pedestrians etc on the pavement are just as much 'road' users and deserving of appropriate space and attention to passing speed as anyone else.

It's an interesting question now that certain situations have been defined in law and guidance, together with highly publicised prosecutions for particular transgressions.

So here is a particular situation to illustrate the question.

A4133
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QonsSyRB8Z7PWs7H8

Steepish hill up from Holt Fleet bridge over R Severn towards Ombersley. You get cyclists (sorry for mentioning the C-word) toiling up this hill, almost constant stream of traffic especially in afternoon evening coming downhill in opposite direction.

If the cyclist is on the carriageway it is not possible to pass and leave the requisite space to avoid accusation of a close pass, even if differential speed is kept low. Yet if the cyclist hops onto the v narrow pavement, it doesn't really reduce the hazard level by much, if at all, yet folks generally just now pile past. Which feels wrong.

[ingenieur]

Must we have rules and regulations for everything though? Can't we all just rub along trying our best not to hurt or upset one another?

[A500leroy]

Roofless Toothless said:

I don’t think the OP was suggesting that. Two metres from a pedestrian wherever they are would do me.

You do realise that would mean driving in the middle of the road everywhere?

[Roofless Toothless]

A500leroy said:

Roofless Toothless said:

I don’t think the OP was suggesting that. Two metres from a pedestrian wherever they are would do me.

You do realise that would mean driving in the middle of the road everywhere?

I think that’s a bit of an exaggeration.

[Griffith4ever]

wildoliver said:

Dingu said:

wildoliver said:

But the children! The children!!

Incompetent inconsiderate drivers like you who are incapable of driving correctly for the situation are why we end up needing hard and fast rules like the 2m passing distance for cyclists, or speed limits dropping to the minimum speed for that stretch.

I don't really have an issue with my competence behind the wheel tbh, I do many miles and manage to avoid hitting people on pavements by making sure all parts of my car including mirrors don't protrude on to the pavement as I drive. Much the same as I give cyclists enough room?

I am however tired of complete wet wipes needing common sense breaking down in to rules on top of rules. It's never been legal to run cyclists down, only bad and distracted drivers did, do you think a 2m rule will change anything? Of course it won't. Likewise if your on a pavement don't hang over the edge in to the road. If you do don't complain that cars get a bit near you. It's like sticking your fingers in a plug socket and complaining it's a bit tingly.

Here here! This whole "smack me harder with more rues daddy" thing is becoming endemic.

Not all pavements are wide enough. Not all roads are wide enough. It's a compromise.

The A road at the end of my drive has a pavement that is barely wide enough for one, especially when the hedges are in full growth. That kind of pavement where the base of the hedge is blackened from soot and peppered with old crisp packets. On the rare occasion I walk down It I walk single file with the Mrs, and we tuck in when lorries go past at 50.

Do we need a wider pavement? Yes. Is it justified for the small handful that use it every week? Not really. Has anyone ever been hit? Not to my knowledge. Do we need a new "rule". No. Somehow we manage.

[Skyedriver]

Maybe the OP didn't write the post as clearly as they'd hoped. I do agree that there are times when drivers plough on regardless of pedestrians either off or on the road (if there is no footway) irrespective of distance and possible safety. This can be in 30mph area or NSL roads.
Sadly no amount of legislation will make a blind bit of difference to a large percentage of drivers to whom their right of passage is God given. In their comfortable cars (and trucks) insulated from the outside world with eyes focused on the road about 3 metres ahead of them.

Two in my area:

Long straight road (NSL) two cars can just pass, there are passing places for those being courteous or when one vehicle is larger. Footway is about a metre wide. Folk worry about oncoming vehicles but don't tend to think about the pedestrians. (I do tend to move over away from the footway when possible as I walk this road regularly and know what it's like).
The other is the continuation of this road, it becomes virtually single track with no footway. houses on both sides. If there's a vehicle coming, pedestrians have to jump onto the uncut, uneven verge or risk the whack of a door mirror at 40mph. (Again it's NSL but because it's blind no one ever actually reaches that speed).

Have a nice day and give space to all other road users.