CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
Few things make me as angry as cyclists going the wrong way up Salisbury Road. Just about every day I see them, pedalling merrily up the road against oncoming traffic without a care in the world.
Where would I stand legally if, as a pedestrian, I were to clothesline them?
You'd get done. It doesn't sound like it's worth that much fury. I mean, if they're cycling merrily without a care in the world it can't be the most dangerous thing.
That road is a dreadful rat run, which is a good reason not to cycle against the stream. I used to cycle it at least once, often twice a day, often with child on back, and it was unpleasant going with the flow of traffic (Must get ahead...) much less against it.
Also interesting that 90% of the traffic is going straight or left so few cars use the right lane (which has unfortunate effect of squeezing the cyclists who are also usually going straight. if the cars used the centre of the road, it would be worse for contra-slowing cyclists, but they don't.
However, along with those other often cited example - Morrison Street (link) and Tarvit street (also a bad rat run) - it's a classic case of a one way street that is exceedingly inconvenient for cyclists- the alternative routes involve lane changes on busy roads and right hand turns, and take you well out of your way.
I really should write that blogpost about how unnecessarily difficult it is to get to the Commie Pool on bike.
I think the idiots are the planners who devised the moronic one way system. They only considered traffic flow and ignored the needs of cyclists and pedestrians.
There's a one way street near to me which used to be two-way until about a decade ago. There was a persistent problem of vehicles using it as a rat run to avoid the queues at the traffic lights at the top of Easter Road. Making it one way has reduced that misuse of the street, but has encouraged residents to park on both sides, narrowing the carriageway. Also rat running still takes place in a northbound direction, as you cannot turn right into Easter Road from London Road (heading west).
However as it is generally quiet outside peak times, I cycle the wrong way up this street all the time. Not only do avoid the hazard of left turning vehicles at the top of Easter Road, I can also turn left straight into a bus lane heading east. So illegal contraflowing by this cyclist (and others) is far safer than following the law. If a vehicle arrives at the top of the street, I pull over into a gap between parked cars, or as close as I can manage, to let them past. No-one seems to mind in the slightest.
This is such a good cut-through for cyclists compared to the alternative that I'm minded to ask the Council to make it a legal contraflow for cyclists. (I'd go further and argue for the removal of through traffic altogether by judicious use of bollards, but let's be realistic).
So, in short, cyclists who cycle the wrong way up one way streets are not idiots. They are merely demonstrating the idiocy of the way our road network is managed.
They are idiots for choosing to show up road network management issues in such a brainless way.
Maybe I could just shout at them while jumping up and down and waving my fists in the air. Now that I _am_ a cyclist I find myself getting increasingly irritated by others 'letting the side down' with dick moves like going through red lights.
"Clotheslining" a cyclist, whatever he's done wrong, should, imho, end up with a prison sentence.
I don't rlj ... I don't fancy the potential for aggro, neither am I ever in much of a hurry to get anywhere.
Does it annoy me when a cyclist does it? No; I can't see I've ever seen one put himself, or anyone else, in danger by doing so ... and I reckon it's safer for a cyclist rather than being stuck amongst the motorised angsty vehicles waiting for the mass take off when the light goes green. Does it annoy me when motorised vehicles rlj? Damn right, because in most cases they INCREASE their speed to dangerous (to other road users) levels to get through their red, or amber going on red, light.
Oh dear.
The real problem here is the refusal of Edinburgh council to design streets properly and confront the problem of the car.
I suggest reading both of these. In full.
http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.co.uk/2008/09/cyclists-and-one-way-streets.html
http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.co.uk/2012/10/car-centric-norwich-labour-councillors.html
I wouldn't have given you the URL if I'd thought you were going to come along and use daft terms like that.
Permitted tools of interaction are the eyebrows and voice, and not even the latter if the use thereof would breach standard peace-broaching ordnances.
Come to think of it, I've also seen a fair few cyclists heading the 'wrong' way up Salisbury Road: just about any time I've been in the vicinity. I'm not aware of an epidemic of cycling injuries at this point. Maybe someone can point at data which shows this as a dangerous spot? If there is none, I can only assume that the 'salmon' cycling here maybe illegal, it may even be annoying to some, but is perfectly safe.
P.S.:- Indeed, if you look at the map at this link, no serious accidents reported on Salisbury Road in the 5 years up to 2012.
I was only perhaps slightly inadvisably joking about clotheslining people!
@rodti it does happen. has happened within edinburgh in the past 12 months. not something we joke about. sorry.
If there is none, I can only assume that the 'salmon' cycling here maybe illegal, it may even be annoying to some, but is perfectly safe.
So, the large number of drivers who routinely ignore the speed limit, but who have not had any accidents in the last five years are presumably driving illegally, annoyingly to some, but are in fact perfectly safe?
For the purposes of further discussion could you please read 'clothesline' in my original post as 'narrow eyes at'.
Sorry for any offence/upset caused.
My first proper post too.
Good start, eh?
welcome to CCE :-). You can redeem yourself by asking what kind of bike to buy, people here love that
FWIW I read 'clothesline' as 'stick arm out in front of' rather than 'attempt to garotte with a line strung across the road' but others may have taken it differently (neither acceptable of course, although the former slightly more understandable than the latter)
So, the large number of drivers who routinely ignore the speed limit, but who have not had any accidents in the last five years are presumably driving illegally, annoyingly to some, but are in fact perfectly safe?
Apples. Oranges.
Speeding drivers are putting others at risk of injury (potentially); 'Salmon' cyclists are putting themselves at risk of injury (potentially).
Speeding drivers intimidate vulnerable road users; 'salmon' cyclists can hardly be claimed as intimidating to anyone.
Speeding drivers intimidate vulnerable road users; 'salmon' cyclists can hardly be claimed as intimidating to anyone.
I can think of a number of nervous drivers who would feel that a cyclist riding the wrong way up the road towards them would be scary. But, in any case, what has this to do with whether it is safe or not? You seem to have changed your argument. I thought you were implying it was perfectly safe.... to everyone involved, not who was going to get hurt.
@rodti I _always_ narrowed my eyes at such cyclists on Salisbury place whenever I encountered them.
See, you're among friends. Really. :)
"My first proper post too.
Good start, eh?"
Don't worry, you didn't break the "rules".
@stiltskin, based on the available evidence, 'salmon' cycling up Salisbury Road appears to be perfectly safe. You responded with a general comparison to "the large number of drivers who routinely ignore the speed limit", which is a fallacious comparison. All the available evidence points towards, in general, speeding motor vehicles being highly dangerous and placing others at risk of injury or death. Of course, in certain instances, speeding may not result in any collisions, but you were not talking of anything specific, whereas I was. So how did I change my argument?
Because the evidence of one particular road is not sufficient in itself to describe something as safe. The sample size is rather small. In the 9 years I have lived in my house, there has never been an accident outside it. The fact that the speed limit is 20mph, it is a narrow street with cars parked on either side, with a steepish blind downhill bend 50 yards from a school, does not mean that all those people speeding past my house are doing so safely.
Similarly, riding a bike the wrong way up a one way street is a stupid, illegal and potentially dangerous thing to do.
You can't really say that something is safe just because most of the time nothing bad happens. That applies to driving as much as cycling.
Something is safe when it at best reduces or at worst only marginally increases the risk associated with the activity, provided the risk remains at a level that is generally acceptable to those affected by the activity, particularly to those most likely to come to harm if anything untoward happens.
It's on that basis that I conclude that I don't need to wear a helmet (me being the only person likely to come to harm) and also why I think it's generally OK to cycle at a moderate speed on quiet pavements, particularly with children and where riding on the road would be much more dangerous (again, me and the children being the only people likely to come to harm). If the salmoning cyclists are happy with their risks and since the drivers are unlikely to come to harm, even if they're of a nervous disposition (in which case I'd question their being allowed to control that kind of machine) the cyclists may carry on with my blessing. You can work out what I think of other minor violations.
Of course some of these things might be illegal and others may feel that illegality is to be frowned up. You are entitled to frown and the violator should accept any punishment that comes their way but safe and illegal are different things.
I cycled to Clovenstone and back on road including the Barberton roundabout (some mild peril). No helmet.
However perception of risk is stronger than actual risk. I am using risk / safety interchangeably
Thus when you and I do things that other people consider dangerous we add to the in group feeling we are risk takers to be dealt with etc
Paying attention to how other people assess your risks is a waste of time because they generally have no idea what they're talking about and almost always propose solutions that do nothing to reduce either the risks themselves (that a car might hit me) or the outcome (that my head will crack like a watermelon).
When the other people are the in group and you are the out group their views tend to dominate.
My default is therefore the Highway Code. I infringe as most others will do so.
This string started with people whose default if F the Highway Code I am a bandit I will usually let these bandits know my view. I try all angles on this from gentle to assertive and sometImes I give them a shout dependent on how idiotic they are being. Sometimes just do the open arm gesture to the motorist next to me, who tends to agree.
Most people who cycle like this are, I would guess, just following the advice their mother gave them about walking with your face to traffic. A lot of people still think of themselves as pedestrians when on a bike.
I'd cycle to the Commie Pool up Blacket Place - much quieter, no traffic, 2 way, legal - rather than Salisbury Road.
(And then walk the last few yards or cycle through the Pollock Halls grounds)
@cc fine maybe if you're coming up dalkeith rd, but not if you're coming from grange side
@SRD Salisbury Pl -> Upper Gray St -> Duncan St -> Blacket Ave? Or I approach via West Mayfield -> South Gray St then Duncan St again
Depends how you define "Grange".
If you go via Astley Ainslie, this is a nice quiet route.
http://www.cyclestreets.net/journey/42092107
Haven't actually used the Abden House link.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts