"
This is clearly discrimination against cyclists
"
What is discriminatory about saying "You must not cycle on the pavements"? I thought that was the law?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Guerilla anti cycling signs
(78 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
"So if Police, Council, whoever, have decided to get all touchy feely, and put in Community liaison officers to help with local issues, these are exactly the type of things that will come up."
True but the point here is not so much the complaints, or even the relative 'importance v dogs/mess or road dangers/deaths.
It's about these signs - wording, placement, existence and effectiveness.
If 'we' (probably the law-abiding bit of who they are aimed at) don't understand them...
Posted 11 years ago # -
""
This is clearly discrimination against cyclists
"What is discriminatory about saying "You must not cycle on the pavements"? I thought that was the law?"
If the Daily Wail liked cyclists they'd be saying it was a breach of our human rights.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Devils advocate;
If you are not cycling on the pavement (which you shouldn't be) it is surely not an issue.As for comparing ASL breaches to these signs(and their intent). Two wrongs don't make a right. stop debating this and ask the Police to put up similar signs at key ASL points
Posted 11 years ago # -
I don't believe we should be obliterating the city in signs to remind people of existing laws. Where does it all stop? Should we have signs about everything on every lamppost?
It amounts to nothing more than graffiti.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Posted 11 years ago #
-
stop debating this and ask the Police to put up similar signs at key ASL points
cos they'll clearly be only too happy to do that?
the police are primarily a motoring organisation.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"stop debating this and ask the Police to put up similar signs at key ASL points"
Good point, but the problem is that no-one on here believes there is any chance of that happening - if only because 'we' are clearly not bothering to go to the meetings where the 'priorities' are decided.
There are (almost) no defenders of pavement cycling on here, but (I suspect) most have seen (for instance) far more vehicles in ASLs than we have seen pavement cycling.
If these signs were around Haymarket Station, Lothian Road or Bruntsfield (where I have seen bikes mixing with pedestrians in a high anti-social manner) it would be understandable.
Apparently this is being organised by a Police Sergeant.
Brownie points for being seen to do something however crass/disproportionate - further formenting the 'them and us' problem - which is of course entirely in 'our' heads.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Please identify the police sergeant so we can make a complaint!
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Please identify the police sergeant so we can make a complaint!"
I haven't been told.
Suspect I won't be...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Now, core path legislation...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Has anyone on here contacted the police to find out about these signs
Posted 11 years ago # -
I quite like how the police have responded to the residents complaints here. Rather than actually take any real action they chose to put up a few signs instead. I think this shows how much weight they really give to the residents concerns - i.e. none. However, if any residents ask what was done, the police can point to the signs as proof of action.
The signs don't make it any more or less illegal to cycle on the pavement. The signs don't seem to be attached to any increased enforcement action - action against something CCE-ers are almost unanimous in our criticism of. No need to get hot under the collar on this one, I think.
Posted 11 years ago # -
The problem i have with these signs is that it confirms local prejudice and ignorance.
ie. the signage indicates there is a problem with cycling in this area.
and the UK has a big problem with the idea of cycling, in general.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"No need to get hot under the collar on this one, I think"
Oh I don't know - I think your post has outlined enough reasons...
Posted 11 years ago # -
A nifty fold of the corrugated plastic and the sign would read "Cyclists must cycle on the pavem".
Posted 11 years ago # -
I can't see how residents of Pinkhill would have prompted a sign on that path. In the 10 years I've cycled there, I've never seen a cyclist on that pavement, other than to traverse it to get to the road. And preventing that surely can't be the aim of this sign.
I've seen a few people recently cycling on the pavement at Roseburn - I suspect to avoid the traffic at that junction. I'd have thought the police should concentrate on the dangerous red light runners there.
But really it's all just unnecessary clutter.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"In the 10 years I've cycled there, I've never seen a cyclist on that pavement, other than to traverse it to get to the road."
I never saw anyone cycling on the footway along Shandwick Place until the tramworks introduced unnatural pressures by blocking off the road and generally fiddling about with the routing in the area. Maybe they're about to do something which they perceive to be a potential incentive for footway-cycling for those so inclined, particularly after the Roseburn business where cycling on the footway was permitted when the road was fenced-off for contractor parking and rubbish stockpiling.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Does anyone know what sort of legislation covers such (I assume temporary) signage, when it's not for the highway / carriageway?
As in do the Police have carte blanch to put up signs wherever and whenever they deem fit, and for as long as they deem necessary? Clearly they can't just go making up custom roadsigns whenever they want to, but can they do it for cycle paths?
Posted 11 years ago # -
Work on the principle of "if you don't ask, you won't get"
We complain about the Police not listening, or doing things that we consider unhelpful to cyclists, but we don't ask, we don't challenge. We navel gaze and complain to each other.
Additionally part of the problem is locals have a "community" or constituency, which can be used to leverage a equivalent police action/reaction.
We don't, by our very nature we are spread all over the city and beyond. Consequently websites like this and organisations like Spokes, have to become our local voice.Posted 11 years ago # -
The signs seem to indicate that plugging up the normal end of a main cycle route into town has consequences. I'm sure not all cyclists use the pavement but having been re-routed in very roundabout manner it's not surprising some use the pavement when the road is full and has no cycle lane IIRC.
So these are postive signs showing that despite the Russell Rd shambles people are still cycling.Posted 11 years ago # -
"
So these are postive signs showing that despite the Russell Rd shambles people are still cycling."
Interesting supposition.Probably true!
Posted 11 years ago # -
"We complain about the Police not listening, or doing things that we consider unhelpful to cyclists, but we don't ask, we don't challenge. We navel gaze and complain to each other."
I thnik most of the posts on here have been about finding out information in order to make an informed review of the signs.
So 'is it a pavement/footway/footpath?', 'which part are the signs aimed at?' 'is there a local pavement cycling problem?' before simply launching in to the police with 'why are these signs here they're wrong?!?!' which is surely a better approach....
(and from reading the above it does sound like chdot has spoken to someone about it - and plenty other threads with complaints that could be seen as 'navel gazing' have then had posts from people telling everyone what response they got - I think you're being slightly harsh on the CCE members who do, have, and will continue to, raise matters elsewhere rather than just leaving it to these electronic pages)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Just been given a generic email, no officer's name.
PM me if you would like to send local police a comment/question.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Could we suggest they try chalk stencils onthe pavement itself ? that would be similar to the chalk stencils the council puts around dogmess. and would allow them to specifically target the pavements and not the access to paths?
Posted 11 years ago # -
why bother with chalk or signage ?
maybe they could just brand navel-gazing cyclists instead
some kind of prominent yellow badge
to be worn at all times !
Posted 11 years ago # -
What do you suggest? Perhaps we could organise some kind of protest and get loads cyclist to ride towards the seat of the Scottish government? Might need a catchier title.
Seriously; I get what your trying to say, I think your wrong, but must you express it in such a sanctimonious manner? It might help your cause if you weren't being quite so unpleasant...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Is there any way of pointing the CyclePCs at threads like this one? If my memory serves me correctly, they are on here to "liase with the cycling community" or some such...
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Is there any way of pointing the CyclePCs at threads like"
Maybe...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Ha!
No one is forcing them to reply, of course...
They're watching us... ;-)(Just to be clear, I am of the opinion that police use of a forum such as this to guage the opinions of a particular subset of the public on local issues such as this one is a Good Thing.)
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
