CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Bus Gate Gate

(11 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. gembo
    Member

    FFS, A PSYCHOLOGIST in Chelmsford has been let off her fine for using the bus gate despite the words BUS GATE being painted in five foot letters.

    The signage is the bus bike and taxi blue circle. It would appear that people driving vehicles, including psychologists, are too stupid to understand any signs apart from No Entry?

    This has been my experience at the top of new st. Driven at many times by very argumentative and stupid people who seem to think I would get out the way when the actual thing that is going to happen is that they are going to have to reverse. Once saved by shopkeeper and then in the really nasty one by the police arriving coincidentally. Since the motorbike jumping the car sign has been replaced by two no entry signs I have had no bother.

    So I conclude people lose their marbles when driving cars.

    Posted 5 years ago #

  2. Klaxon
    Member

    There were too many signs at the top of the cliff so I just had to drive off

    Posted 5 years ago #

  3. gembo
    Member

    I could have reversed over a mini roundabout but that is probably illegal. (more illegal than driving where not allowed?

    You have to conclude the magistrate wanted to let the psychologist off. Her defence was quite lame.

    Posted 5 years ago #

  4. ejstubbs
    Member

    Contrary to the mantra I was taught by my motorcycle instructor, far too many drivers seem to adhere to the maxim: "If in doubt, plough on regardless". Especially if the poor dears don't understand the signage - which in the case of the "flying motorcycle" sign I suspect means the vast majority.

    Posted 5 years ago #

  5. rbrtwtmn
    Member

    https://therantyhighwayman.blogspot.com/2019/02/sign-make-it-better-duke-street.html

    Posted 5 years ago #

  6. jonty
    Member

    I anecdotally find the Princes Street car prohibition is much better observed eastbound (where traffic is funnelled into the two lanes turning off, and to go straight ahead you need to actively decide to position yourself in what is quite obviously a bus lane) than westbound (where it seems quite easy to imagine a tourist might end up in the apparently all-traffic straight-on lane, only spotting the no entry sign as they cross the junction.) A bus lane after Waverley Bridge, with a left-except-buses lane before then would help I think (or, ideally, just moving the prohibition to the Waverley Bridge junction which was probably the original plan and why the markings are now so poor compared to the other end.)

    I tend to agree that drivers should pay more attention to signage, but I also want these prohibitions to actually be observed so unfortunately lowest common denominator signage is a must, even if that means exceeding or deviating from legal standards. It would be nice if, centrally, there was some acceptance that many drivers don't understand lone blue signs and no motor vehicle signs, moving towards just using No Entry. I've never understood why no entry over a blue sign isn't the general standard - it achieves a clear prohibition with a clear, pictorial exception.

    Posted 5 years ago #

  7. gembo
    Member

    In the New Street saga the active travel people fought a dogged campaign with the roads dept. The roads dept insisted they should just use one sign the Evil Kneival one with the motorbike flying over the car. It does mean no motorised vehicles but it is ignored. I think my colleague had to prove they had put up the wrong sign before they relented. The arguement that the sign didn't work was felt not to be their problem. Lot of hassle from Cockburn Society etc over excess signage. The no entry signs with except cyclists do work. Except maybe at the festival but the taxi drivers were taking the pee-pee

    Posted 5 years ago #

  8. ejstubbs
    Member

    @jonty: "I've never understood why no entry over a blue sign isn't the general standard - it achieves a clear prohibition with a clear, pictorial exception."

    But even that clear prohibition is regularly ignored by certain road users - see Atholl Place westbound at the Torphichen Street junction (white van man trying to access Palmerston Place seems to be the most frequent offender here), and the Haymarket tram stop (doubly problematic because there are two light-controlled pedestrian crossings within the tram stop, neither of which has red/amber/green lights for traffic because no traffic is meant to be there, so traffic other than trams going that way doesn't even know to stop).

    No Entry (except for cycles) wouldn't work for South Castle Street* because the prohibition on motor vehicles only applies at certain times. I don't believe that you can have an "except at certain times" blue sign qualifying a No Entry sign - and even if you could, it would mean two blue signs being needed to qualify the No Entry sign (or one big one with two messages on it) i.e proliferation of signage again.

    The main problem as I see it is two-fold:
    a) widespread ignorance of what certain signs mean, and
    b) lack of enforcement.

    * Not that the prohibition on motor vehicles there is ever enforced during the hours when it applies.

    Posted 5 years ago #

  9. Tulyar
    Member

    Plus póor design of signage - Signs direct "Through Traffic" to turn off just before bus gate. These should be "Prohibited Traffic"

    I think diagram 816 is the appropriate sign at the ends, with a supplemental plate, Except Buses Cycles & Taxis

    Posted 5 years ago #

  10. ejstubbs
    Member

    Diagram 816 is an information sign, not a round sign giving an order. Ignoring it would not be an offence. Sticking it up in addition to an enforceable "no motor vehicles" or "no entry except for" sign would add to the clutter and probably encourage even more motorists to attempt the 'confusing signage' defence.

    Regarding the sign on the approach to the bus gate highlighted by the Ranty Highwayman, it seems to me that the simplest way to clarify the restriction on the left turn route would simply be to stick "Only" in a rectangle under the blue circle.

    I would be willing to bet that even fewer road users understand what the round blue sign means than understand the low-flying motorcyle sign. Which is probably why the standalone version of the sign is shown in the Highway Code with an "Only" sign below it:

    Posted 5 years ago #

  11. jonty
    Member

    What is diagram 816?

    EDIT: answered my own question, it's a Dead End sign

    I think as advance signs they'd probably be appropriate? I've never understood why they have those wordy "Access Restricted 50yd ahead" signs on the approaches to Princes Street when a dead end sign with something like 'except bikes and authorised vehicles' would be much clearer.

    http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/362/schedule/11/part/2/made?view=plain

    Posted 5 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin