http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Dalmeny Residents & Staff already p*ssed off at cyclists en Wed, 13 May 2026 02:49:37 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111845 Fri, 24 May 2013 19:06:03 +0000 chdot 111845@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>New thread -</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10267" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10267</a></p> <p>This one is now closed. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111844 Fri, 24 May 2013 19:04:46 +0000 chdot 111844@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>If anyone is wondering why this thread has calmed down a bit, it's because I took temporary moderating action earlier. </p> <p>This was started as a serious thread in response to a real problem. </p> <p>It then turned into a debate about what signs were intended to mean and what they may or may not mean in practice. </p> <p>There are people with points of view that seem impossible to reconcile. </p> <p>Sometimes there are 'discussions' on here where the participants know each other in 'real life' and can contain mutually understandable 'shorthand' which means that some comments might be more tongue in cheek than the casual reader might appreciate. </p> <p>I get the impression that this is not the case here. </p> <p>I have decided to close this thread - not something I do very often (usually to stop parallel threads developing. </p> <p>I am starting a new one for people to mention actual incidents and any responses they may get from the Dalmeny Estate. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111826 Fri, 24 May 2013 14:12:15 +0000 minus six 111826@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>What you're saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that aggressive drivers in Dalmeny will, because there are no signs telling them to beware of cyclists, deliberately run over cyclists</em></p> <p>No... what I'm saying is that drivers on the estate are noting the signage and inferring that the burden of responsibility obviously lies fully with the cyclist to "beware", ie. <em>get out of the way, of me</em>, me who is the "local estate traffic".</p> <p>These drivers already feel that cyclists are not particularly welcome, and will not typically recognise their own duty of care to slow down around vulnerable road users. </p> <p>Since they can plainly see that there are a number of signs telling the cyclists to "beware" of them, the native traffic -- they are further enabled in this view. So why slow down even a little? Why not aggressively make the point that they aren't particuarly welcome?</p> <p><em>could it be that [...] a sign telling an aggressive driver to beware cyclists would have naff all impact on that aggressive driver</em></p> <p>Possibly, but it least it would be clearly recognised as specifically out of order. </p> <p>Just as it would be for a cyclist to take a blind summit or corner at speed, without considering there might be a lamb or two hanging around. Or even a land rover.</p> <p>This diversion remains in place for two months, possibly more. </p> <p>Questionable driving has been noted from the outset -- how long before the stakes are raised, on a miserable monday morning, and some innocent cyclist is run off the road entirely, to their injury, a situation enabled because the signs all point only to the non-native cyclist's obligations around native traffic?</p> <p>That the estate recognises the equitable rights of all road users is being held in some quarters to be self-evident.</p> <p>I'm saying that it is anything but self-evident.</p> <p>By the way I've no idea who put all the diversion and beware signs up. I'm not assuming it was definitely the estate.</p> <p>Regardless, there should be advisory signs for all road users, not just one class of user. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111821 Fri, 24 May 2013 13:39:02 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 111821@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>i've made it clear that this is the inadvertent message that's being sent to estate traffic via these signs.</p> <p>an aggressive driver is already on record as saying that we have "access" but not "right of way".</em>"</p> <p>The fact it's 'inadvertent' or not is neither here nor there really. What you're saying (and correct me if I'm wrong) is that aggressive drivers in Dalmeny will, because there are no signs telling them to beware of cyclists, deliberately run over cyclists (with the added reasoning that because one driver said that cyclists only have 'access' that 'access' also means drivers can run over cyclists?).</p> <p>Or, could it be that an aggressive driver is an aggressive driver and a sign telling an aggressive driver to beware cyclists would have naff all impact on that aggressive driver? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111809 Fri, 24 May 2013 13:05:17 +0000 Smudge 111809@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Cool. Thank you for the edit. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111802 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:39:25 +0000 minus six 111802@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>i am discussing things, smudge. quite clearly. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111801 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:35:54 +0000 Smudge 111801@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>o_O sorry but you're trolling now, and deliberately trying to antagonise people. Please don't.<br /> This is on the whole a pleasant and polite forum where everyone is free to (politely) express their opinions, it's one of the great strengths of this place.<br /> If you want to argue the internet is full of places where that is acceptable, feel free to do so there. If you want to *discuss* things, then please do here.</p> <p>All the above imho. I am not a moderator, site owner or anything else, just a cyclist.<br /> S </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111800 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:32:12 +0000 minus six 111800@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>Can't help but feel that you are in a rather small minority in your interpretation of this</em></p> <p>i'm quite comfortable with that, stiltskin !</p> <p>excessive homogeny would make this forum a boring place. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111799 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:32:06 +0000 wingpig 111799@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Maybe, just maybe, shouldn't != didn't. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111796 Fri, 24 May 2013 12:22:22 +0000 minus six 111796@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>REALLY?!??!??!</em></p> <p>yeah, <strong>really</strong>.</p> <p>i make no apology for my interpretation of the situation. </p> <p>i've made it clear that this is the <strong>inadvertent</strong> message that's being sent to estate traffic via these signs.</p> <p>an aggressive driver is already on record as saying that we have "access" but not "right of way". </p> <p>ie. get out of my way.</p> <p>there <strong>are</strong> issues with vehicle speed around vulnerable road users on the estate, and i think these one sided signs are amplifying that.</p> <p>there's long been signage for people to take care around lambs on the estate.</p> <p>cyclists and pedestrians aren't lambs, but someone could well get hurt because of aggressive driving that is being enabled via one sided BEWARE signage.</p> <p>@focus*</p> <p><em>At no point did I say the estate workers didn't need signs</em></p> <p>you pretty much did, in your opening remark, which you set up as a contrast to my message.</p> <p>*edited, with apologies, to remove gratuitously antagonistic use of the word "son" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111790 Fri, 24 May 2013 11:35:19 +0000 stiltskin 111790@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Can't help but feel that you are in a rather small minority in your interpretation of this o_0 </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238&page=2#post-111779 Fri, 24 May 2013 11:03:42 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 111779@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>What these signs inadvertently say to the "local estate traffic" is this:</p> <p>Just put your foot down, the cyclists will just have take their chances and get out of your way, they've been warned.</em>"</p> <p>Really?</p> <p>I mean....</p> <p>REALLY??!</p> <p>So much I want to write, have typed a number of things and deleted, because it all just boils down to...</p> <p><strong>REALLY?!??!??!</strong> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111728 Thu, 23 May 2013 23:40:26 +0000 Focus 111728@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>wingpig</strong>, <strong>PS</strong> and possibly <strong>Instography</strong> (depending on the level of sarcasm in use!)</p> <p>I think you're seeing things from the same angle I am. There will be cyclists otherwise unaware of the traffic potential. Perhaps anyone who wishes signs for drivers should just ask the estate office to put some up. It maybe didn't occur to them, who knows? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111727 Thu, 23 May 2013 23:32:07 +0000 Focus 111727@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>o_0</strong></p> <p>I'm not your son. </p> <p>At no point did I say the estate workers didn't need signs. I said they <em>shouldn't</em> as they <em>ought</em> to be aware of the situation.</p> <p>And finally, I posted the video as a light-hearted way of ending the needless to-and-fro. Seems you don't share my particular sense of humour. Oh well. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111724 Thu, 23 May 2013 22:57:11 +0000 PS 111724@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Fair play to them. There is a drop to a blind left handed that it is very easy as a cyclist to hit 30mph on only to find a Land Rover / tractor / sheep coming the other way. Plenty of other opportunities for road users to be non-excellent to each other. No harm in warning cyclists to tek care on that or indeed any other section. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111718 Thu, 23 May 2013 21:46:50 +0000 DaveC 111718@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The signs appeared over the weekdend as the diversion was in force from Monday 20th May.</p> <p>The signs are only on the main drag past the golf links, which is also part of the route of the 76 cycle path. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111706 Thu, 23 May 2013 21:00:33 +0000 Smudge 111706@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>+1 for Insto's interpretation. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111702 Thu, 23 May 2013 20:47:17 +0000 Instography 111702@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>How naive of me. I read them as a truncated version of something along the lines of, "hey all you new people who've never been here before, welcome but bear in mind that this is a working farm and when you come shooting down that big joyous hill there might be estate vehicles around". But I might be wrong. They might well be a subtle nod and wink to drivers that they can flatten anyone who gets in their way. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111701 Thu, 23 May 2013 20:43:23 +0000 wingpig 111701@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Perhaps some of the estate workers are aware that some of the vehicle-using estate workers are likely to start getting unnecessarily stroppy about the temporarily-increased volume of cyclists and are kindly warning the temporarily-increased volume of cyclists to not expect to be able to trundle about their business without being unnecessarily stropped at. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111700 Thu, 23 May 2013 20:14:20 +0000 minus six 111700@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>How long have they been there?</em></p> <p>dunno, i only went through today, not been before.</p> <p>admittedly i'm exaggerating about "dozens", but there's more than half a dozen. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111698 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:59:20 +0000 minus six 111698@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>You got yourself into it, son.</p> <p>You reckon the estate workers shouldn't need signage.</p> <p>They obviously do.</p> <p>A cheap youtube embed doesn't change that. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111697 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:58:42 +0000 chdot 111697@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>dozens of big yellow and black signs proclaiming:</p> <p>BEWARE LOCAL ESTATE TRAFFIC</p> <p>"</p> <p>How long have they been there? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111696 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:56:10 +0000 Focus 111696@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I didn't come here for the argument, 5 minutes <em>or</em> full half hour. May I refer you to <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y">Room 12A</a>? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111695 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:52:13 +0000 minus six 111695@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Perhaps you miss my point, focus.</p> <p>Some motorists are <em>currently</em> behaving inappropriately around vulnerable road users on the estate.</p> <p>Operational conditions are such that repeated signage only advises one class of road user to beware of the other.</p> <p>I'm stating that this skewed imbalance is liable to further enable the inappropriate behaviour.</p> <p>You suggest that a <em>simple update</em> <em>ought to suffice</em>, and they <em>shouldn't need signage</em>, but that is irrelevant to what is actually happening.</p> <p>I've no history of using the interior of the estate myself, but over a few years passing by, i've had various altercations at the entrance junctions, where motorists either emerging from the estate or going into it, have cut me up aggressively, when i've got right of way out on the main road. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111691 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:28:40 +0000 Focus 111691@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>You're looking for a disagreement where none exists. All I'm saying is that those who work on the estate should already know and be aware of the fact cyclists use the road in the estate and a simple update that the numbers will increase during the path closure <em>ought</em> to suffice.</p> <p>On the other hand, there will be an increase in cyclists using the estate for the first time so they clearly <em>should</em> have helpful warnings of the potential danger.</p> <p>I'm getting the feeling that had the signage been warning of cyclists, and not about warning of vehicles, nobody would have batted an eyelid even though that would only have addressed one side of things too. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111690 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:20:02 +0000 minus six 111690@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So cyclists need reminding with a BEWARE sign every few yards, but local estate workers, who <em>might</em> have been advised <em>something</em>, somewhere, at sometime, themselves need no reminding whatsoever of their obligations around vulnerable road users?</p> <p>Just who is it that needs to BEWARE?</p> <p>Who is likely to cause damage in a collision? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111688 Thu, 23 May 2013 19:03:34 +0000 Focus 111688@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Or maybe, just maybe*, the estate workers have been made aware of the situation and shouldn't need signage? The visitors on the other hand certainly <em>would</em> benefit from reminding, but then they should be warned of being aware of cyclists at <em>all</em> times!</p> <p>(* I have no idea if they were specifically informed). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111681 Thu, 23 May 2013 18:20:44 +0000 minus six 111681@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Just back from Deutschland today, and having keenly followed this thread while over there, i thought i'd try out the fancy new diversion on my way back to the Kingdom.</p> <p>What immediately became apparent were the dozens of big yellow and black signs proclaiming:</p> <p>BEWARE LOCAL ESTATE TRAFFIC</p> <p>It certainly put me in mind of being in a safari park.. watch out for exotic wild dangerous creatures roaming about.</p> <p>So.. where be the signs advising the "local estate traffic" to slow down around a temporary influx of vulnerable road users?</p> <p>Well... there are none. And so the very same signs act as a major enabler.</p> <p>What these signs inadvertently say to the "local estate traffic" is this:</p> <p><em>Just put your foot down, the cyclists will just have take their chances and get out of your way, they've been warned.</em></p> <p>I've no doubt at all that these signs are the reason i was passed at speed by a land rover with a big trailer, or the previous silver nissan shenanigans experienced by others. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111373 Tue, 21 May 2013 17:32:46 +0000 Focus 111373@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Just to add, I'm not sure it's wise to suggest to someone they should complain and have the route changed. As it's private land wouldn't there be a risk of that actually happening and we lose part of the NCN?</p> <p>I'm not sure how it all works as the estate is part of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inventory_of_Gardens_and_Designed_Landscapes_in_Scotland">Inventory of Gardens and Designed Landscapes in Scotland</a>. Whether that means the government is able to enforce public access or not, I'm unsure. The estate certainly blocks access to "unauthorised motor vehicles" when they wish to, so maybe could do the same to cyclists?</p> <p>Somebody up on access law in Scotland would need to answer that one. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=10238#post-111371 Tue, 21 May 2013 17:25:46 +0000 Focus 111371@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Generally speaking, those who I interpret as working on the estate are sensible and sometimes even polite towards me when I cycle thorough. I sometimes encounter one of the farmers on his quad bike with his dog and we exchange a wave and a greeting. I did once have a problem with an employee driving a Land Rover IIRC when he wanted to heard some pheasants <em>on the steepest part of the Widow Maker</em>. He expected me to stop on the slope and blocked my path when he could easily have let me slip past without disturbing the birds, considering the speed I'd (not) be doing going uphill. He wasn't pleased when I managed it but that's the only such incident I've had.</p> <p><em>Visitors</em> on the other hand are a mixed bunch and a number disobey the 20mph signs. No, they won't be enforceable by law but they are there for a reason, and driving at 30+ in the middle of the road when there is a bike in front of you is dumb. If they want to go faster when the road is clear (and no animals are there), fine - I often go faster down the 'maker myself when I can see the route is entirely clear. Thankfully it's not very often that happens and most are more sensible. It's still much safer in the estate than on the open road, by a long way. </p>