This really gets my goat - "Cyclists Dismount"

[summerdays]

Actually, this discussion opens up a new proposition.......If a road is blocked for works or for repairs, then a diversion is sign posted and planned as part of the jobWhy should he cycle facility be different... Planning and signed diversions for each closure as opposed to sticking one of these signs up?

I was just perusing the Copenhagenize site and came across this:

http://www.copenhagenize.com/2011/04/accommodating-for-cyclists-during.html (the 4th photo down in particular in relation to the OP photo - shows a slightly different way of doing it).

 

[MontyVeda]

I was just perusing the Copenhagenize site and came across this:

http://www.copenhage...sts-during.html (the 4th photo down in particular in relation to the OP photo - shows a slightly different way of doing it).

Yup... logic at work.

There's a few cyclist dismount signs along the canal where the toe path is also a beer garden... it really pisses me off when cyclist don't dismount.... however there is a couple elsewhere I tend to ignore.

then again... there's a few aspects of the highway code I tend to ignore on occasion.

 

[Dave Davenport]

I avoid having to worry about this by not using cycle lanes.

 

[gaz]

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NUdHwyBccaE[/media]

 

[BlackPanther]

Was there a previous sign, warning that there is a 'cyclists dismount sign' blocking the cycle lane.......could cause a nasty accident that sign could!

 

[Sheepy1209]

Actually, this discussion opens up a new proposition.......If a road is blocked for works or for repairs, then a diversion is sign posted and planned as part of the jobWhy should he cycle facility be different... Planning and signed diversions for each closure as opposed to sticking one of these signs up?

This is exactly what was done in Blackpool when the promenade was reduced to one long narrow lane (and at the moment is completely shut); the diversion for cars is lengthy and slow, whereas one has been signed for cyclists which uses back streets and the pedestrianised town centre - the town centre has been made entirely shared use. It's far from perfect, but a good effort that should be praised.

The downer on that one is that there was lots of publicity about the road closures, but I get the impression the cycle route was only signed when we began to ask for guidance, and it was a week or so into the closures before it was completed.

 

[downfader]

Had the same problem in Southampton, the sign was red and caused a little problem between cyclists and drivers (who both thought it obligatory as it was red). I posted about it on here, the local campaign got involved (thanks to numbnuts emailing them!) and they were removed.

 

[JamesAC]

Yup... logic at work.

There's a few cyclist dismount signs along the canal where the toe path is also a beer garden... it really pisses me off when cyclist don't dismount.... however there is a couple elsewhere I tend to ignore.

then again... there's a few aspects of the highway code I tend to ignore on occasion.

So if I'm towing my barge along with "Old Ned" (my horse) and come to the bit of toe (sic) path that's also a beer garden, what should I do?

Unfasten Old Ned, lead him back down the toe (sic) path a mile or two to the previous road bridge, gain the road, walk him along the road past the beer garden, regain the toe (sic) path a mile or so further along, walk him back along the toe (sic) path to just beyond the beer garden, re-attach harness and plod on?

Methinks a tow path is a tow path is a tow path. Just because a pub has overspilled onto it doesn't make it a beer garden.

 

[Headgardener]

Yup... logic at work.

There's a few cyclist dismount signs along the canal where the toe path is also a beer garden... it really pisses me off when cyclist don't dismount.... however there is a couple elsewhere I tend to ignore.

then again... there's a few aspects of the highway code I tend to ignore on occasion.

Isn't it illegal to obstruct a towing path?

 

[Bromptonaut]

I hate blue signs. They are ambiguous in whether they are mandatory or not. For example joining a dual carriageway from a side road there is a blue arrow meaning you must turn left. Also Bus lane signs are blue and I'm sure bus lanes are mandatory as in general traffic must not enter them.

Yet blue road-side cycle route signs are for information only? Not surprising that the general public thinks cyclists should stick to these routes..

I think in the case of a Bus Lane the restriction is shown by the road markings - solid line, BUS LANE wording in road and contrasting surface. The signs are there to inform by showing exceptions such as bikes & taxis and to describe hours of operation.

 

[jugglingphil]

Cyclist Dismount signs should be illegal.
There should be a temporary sign "beware cyclist" to warn motorists that the cyclists are going to move out, although any motorist who is fit to drive on the roads should already be anticipating this.

The local council/contractor/whoever decides on these signs should be made to cycle along and dismount and see just how unlikely this is ever going to happen.