CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Commuting

Moving signs out of bike lanes

(49 posts)
  • Started 10 years ago by Wilmington's Cow
  • Latest reply from robyvecchio

No tags yet.


12

  1. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    I've not managed the one on the Mound yet if it's still there (I plan to make a diversion sign, attach it to a pole, and attach that to the railings, if I have time for all of that).

    But this morning there was a new sign in the westbound bike lane on Melville Drive (slightly east of centre). I'd ridden by then thought, 'sod it', turned round and shifted the sign onto the grass to the left of the narrow pavement there. Still perfectly visible, and not blocking anyone's use of anything - might have me doing it on the cam on the bike. I'm going to start doing this more (the police even went past as I was walking towards the sign, but in for a penny....)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  2. fimm
    Member

    Oh yes, I forgot. I shifted a roadworks sign and a cone out of the eastbound bike lane on Melville Drive last night. There's a bunch of small roadworks on the westbound side but nothing eastbound (or have I got my easts and wests mixed up?) I was heading to the Commonweath Pool when I moved the sign, but don't remember a sign that I thought could/should be moved on the way back - doesn't mean there wasn't one, though.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  3. robyvecchio
    Member

    I would have moved the mound diversion sign in front of the Bank of Scotland. It would be still very visible for traffic going north.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  4. chdot
    Admin

    Here's one I hope has been kicked back in line (perhaps by traffic!)

    Blur is because I was moving (Leith Street to Broughton Street). Of course that barrier has been restricting that lane for a while - outside the two lanes into York Place - nasty layout.

    Cone seems to be for new(?) Island.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  5. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    I once got dog's abuse for moving a cone so I could park a bus to drop someone in a wheelchair off at the Botanics. Go for it though.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  6. PS
    Member

    I've been shifting yellow cones off the already narrow pavement onto the road on Glenogle Road most evenings when I've been out for a run. Unfortunately, there's so many of them that I haven't been able to make much of an impression.

    There's some maintenance work going on there, but for whatever reason the cones are on the pavement. Surely if they are designed to stop parking they should be on the road?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  7. ARobComp
    Member

    WC I saw that sign last night and would have stopped to move it however I was in a kerfuffle with a car that "HAD TO GET PAST" at every possible place despite me going ask fast as, and there being reds all the time. I ended up riding past him one final time after he blasted past me at the sainsbury's as I turned left to goto the innocent and he was in a queue of 10 cars turning right up towards the homebase. I gave him a big thumbs up.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  8. crowriver
    Member

    Well it's a start. Next we should do something about the "I'll only be a minute", flashing hazard blinkies, illegally parked vehicles in the bike lanes: even more annoying than signs and cones!

    Posted 10 years ago #

  9. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Bit more difficult to lift those up and move them out though. We need Geoff Capes onna bike!

    Posted 10 years ago #

  10. Focus
    Member

    Re: Hazrd warning lights. I really begin to wonder if knowledge and compliance of the Highway Code is part of the learning procedure and test.

    "116

    Hazard warning lights. These may be used when your vehicle is stationary, to warn that it is temporarily obstructing traffic. Never use them as an excuse for dangerous or illegal parking..." 99% of the time I see hazards being used it's when someone is dangerously or illegally parked or (in the case of taxis of course) just parked!

    Seriously, who is it that tells taxi drivers that hazards are an alternative to checking mirrors, indicating and then pulling over when safe to do so?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  11. cb
    Member

    "99% of the time I see hazards being used it's when someone is dangerously or illegally parked"

    And the other 1% is cars being towed (i.e. also illegal).

    Posted 10 years ago #

  12. Focus
    Member

    Well, 0.99%.

    Somebody must use them correctly! ;-)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  13. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "You MUST NOT use hazard warning lights while driving or being towed unless you are on a motorway or unrestricted dual carriageway and you need to warn drivers behind you of a hazard or obstruction ahead."

    I have to admit, I use them as a thank you to people, which would be illegal...

    Posted 10 years ago #

  14. Smudge
    Member

    Mrs Smudge had a very trying time calling from the side of the motorway a few years back when her Hillman Imp broke down (unusual before there are any quips!).
    Woman on the other end of the phone kept insisting that Mrs S put her hazard warning lights on and couldn't understand the idea that the car was not fitted with them..

    Posted 10 years ago #

  15. crowriver
    Member

    Somebody beeped at me on the A199 in the dark the other day, then as (I presume he) passed put the flashers on briefly.

    Maybe this was a way of objecting that I had my (red) flashing lights on? Impossible to know for sure, but I suspect it was (of course it was also de facto saying 'get off the road you f*****g cyclist').

    A bit ironic though that they (illegally) sounded the horn and (illegally) put the hazards on to protest me (legally) cycling with flashing red tail lights...

    Posted 10 years ago #

  16. Arellcat
    Moderator

    I use them as a thank you to people, which would be illegal...

    The correct signal to indicate 'thank you', especially on motorways—and used particularly by truckers and coach drivers—is left-right-left with the indicators.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  17. wee folding bike
    Member

    And left-right flashing is easier to do than the emergency lights.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  18. Focus
    Member

    When you say "correct" signal, I assume that's totally unofficial? I have never seen it in writing that indicators are ever used to show anything other than a wish to change direction (or to warn of hazards).

    I've seen the left hand indicator (on British roads) flashed as an indication that it's safe (in the mind of that driver at least) to overtake on the right. But again, I only know that to be one of those unwritten rules of the road, therefore "at your own risk".

    Posted 10 years ago #

  19. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Yes, 'correct'. Happy?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  20. Focus
    Member

    Not sure why the "Happy?". I'm just interested in you saying it's the "correct" signal when I'm not aware of it being an officially-recognised one, that's all.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  21. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    [+] Embed the video | Video DownloadGet the Flash Videos

    Posted 10 years ago #

  22. Focus
    Member

    Rebel with a cause!

    Posted 10 years ago #

  23. steveo
    Member

    Just to play devils advocate here... Since these are non mandatory bike lanes, they're actually just putting the signs at the side of the road; coincidently the bike lane is also at the side of the road.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  24. Snowy
    Member

    Good work WC. I have succumbed a couple of times to doing the same thing but it's silly how it feels slightly illicit at the time.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  25. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "Just to play devils advocate here... Since these are non mandatory bike lanes, they're actually just putting the signs at the side of the road; coincidently the bike lane is also at the side of the road."

    Absolutely, and that seems to be the mindset, when, in reality because there is a bike lane there (whether mandatory or not) they are putting the signs in a space that has allegedly been given over to cyclists for their safety and if (and this was the main point of the video) the council actually IS serious about cycling, it's not something they would allow to happen (contractors would be informed on placement of roadworks signs properly).

    Posted 10 years ago #

  26. Focus
    Member

    It's a tricky one, depending how you look at it. If we as cyclists were fortunate enough to have multiple lanes, we possibly wouldn't feel hard done by if one lane was blocked to warn of impending roadworks. After all, it's common to see exactly the same sign placement on roads without cycle lanes. That's presumably what goes through the minds of the workmen (and probably the council too).

    The next place to put the sign is on the footpath, but again that inconveniences someone. SO, as WC has done, the last option is on the grass which is presumably considered too far from the carriageway.

    So perhaps it should be placed in the "vehicle lane" and let the motorists go round it? Seems fair enough to me (and absolutely no sarcasm involved). But somehow I don't think that would be very popular with the masses.

    As for that specific sign, what is it warning of? At the moment, it's only the footpath being dug up. Or are they actually just putting it there so they can stick a few barriers in the road as a "temporary footpath", despite the options of taking to the grass or just using the parallel path?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  27. Charterhall
    Member

    "So perhaps it should be placed in the "vehicle lane" and let the motorists go round it? "

    Yes but then you'll need another sign in front of it to warn of the obstruction it's causing. The inconsistent standard at work here is the expectation that peds and cyclists need to use their eyes to spot hazards in front of them but motorists need to have them signalled by signs. Fair enough on a 70mph road but not in town, imo.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  28. fimm
    Member

    I don't remember that sign, or I might have moved it! I think the one I did move is visible at about 1:07 - 1:08 on the other side of the road (there's certainly a cone there).

    Confession - I put it on the pavement...

    Posted 10 years ago #

  29. steveo
    Member

    it's not something they would allow to happen (contractors would be informed on placement of roadworks signs properly).

    TBH I see this as the least of the problems the council has with contractors. Pedestrian crossings being the main one, but there are others. There was a lot grassroots work to get the MMW one reinstated but this happens all over the city.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  30. cb
    Member

    "The correct signal to indicate 'thank you', especially on motorways—and used particularly by truckers and coach drivers—is left-right-left with the indicators."

    That's becoming more difficult as many new cars have the annoying flash-three-times feature if you tap the indicator.

    I think it's supposed to make it easier to do pointless, far-too-late and as-good-as-useless lane change indications on the motorway.

    According to my Golf manual you can get the feature turned off, but my local garage can't do it.

    (And that reminds me of another thing....

    Instead of flashing the full beams to say 'thanks' (yeah, also illegal), I prefer at night to drop to the side lights then back to dipped as it's less blinding for others. But the automatic headlight feature makes this impossible, or at least not very practical.)

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin