CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Police clampdown on cyclists and maybe other infringers?

(148 posts)
  • Started 12 years ago by gembo
  • Latest reply from Murun Buchstansangur

No tags yet.


123…5

  1. shuggiet
    Member

    I pass that way everyday, usually West to East, but I think there has been a police car/van there a couple of times over the last month. I've seen them pull up the cars using it as short cut to M8, but not cyclists so far. Should we lobby to make the buses-only route available to cyclists too? I'll mention to Edinburgh Park too, as they seem keen to encourage more cycling commuters. (at least lip-service...).

    Also given the shape of the road, it would seem minimal effort to paint a line allowing cyclists access to the one-way bit of Cutlins.. It's a key route to the canal from Edinburgh Park.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  2. chdot
    Admin

    "seems odd to have a 'bus only' section with no cyclist provision to pass"

    Was shared use path on both sides of road.

    Don't know if either are still there.

    At Cultins Road, again, used to be shared use paths. Note direct line to underpass - now cut off by tram works.

    This is further up (west side going south) after dual use stops(?) on way to canal.

    Road has become two-way.

    All very unsatisfactory.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  3. gembo
    Member

    No buses in sight but they are intermittent. I think they are trying to stop bikes going down the road so maybe targeting the area as if the bus is coming down it might be trickier but you would see it and have space on your side. As cones have only recently been removed first time i have gone that way for ages, I will stick to taking the left turn up bankhead ave as not worth the hassle and I like the blue burger van built out from the hillside and propped up on bricks as a landmark on my way to the canal

    Posted 12 years ago #

  4. Dave
    Member

    The idea that there are any roads which are bus only (not bikes) is news to me, and it seems baffling. However, in fairness we can hardly ask for ASLs etc. to be enforced while people on bikes ignoring road regs are ignored.

    Wouldn't it make more sense to campaign for the road layout to be rectified (using some of that 5% cash) than just making the best of a daft job by breaking the law?

    I've already made my scepticism on ASL enforcement known by my bounty of a PY coffee in exchange for a photo of said activity going down...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  5. Dave
    Member

    Of course, the other way you could look at it is that a £30 fine (or whatever it is) for ignoring a road sign represents a small tax on just riding where you like.

    I have this approach to parking, quite often I leave the car in such a way as would result in a ticket, because paying one parking fine in the last 10 years has worked out a lot cheaper than carrying change for ticket machines and buying tickets! (Perhaps this is a lucky streak, but I suspect it's more because I don't need to drive into the places which are warden hotspots)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  6. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "... in exchange for a photo of said activity going down..."

    You never specified a photo before! Damn, my FOIing the results of the clampdown will be worth nothing now. Pah!

    Posted 12 years ago #

  7. wingpig
    Member

    I'm off to Hermiston Gait at lunchtime for a look. Haven't been through there for a few months (when I probably went Canal/Cutlins then walked through the recently-discovered channel beside Tesco).

    I wonder if the Jewel bus-inlet is similarly technically absolutely only buses seeing as there's the cycle-channel cut into the grass to the side of it?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  8. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Nah. The Jewel cut through for cyclists actually starts after the road narrowing which in itself implies that the cyclist has to ride on the bus bit just to access the bike bit. But added to that, I'm 99.999999% certain that either the sign, or the paint on the road, makes it clear it's buses, taxis and cycles.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  9. AKen
    Member

    I use this route a lot - it's one of my various routes to work. Going into to work, I come down Cultins Road and then turn right into Bankhead Drive.

    As regular users will know, the bottom 100m of Cultins Road is one-way, with the right-hand lane marked as a bus-lane. I think (but I will now need to go back and check this) that the signage at the junction states that buses, taxis and bikes can turn right into Bankhead Drive - which is what I do. If this is the case, then it looks like Gembo is being told he can't cycle this section if going west, but the signs say you can do this going east.

    Coming back, I go along Bankhead Drive and turn left up Cultins Road. There used to be shared-use paths on either side of the road but they vanished years ago due to the tram works, so I have been forced to through the no-entry signs and up the short one way section of bus lane. (Have never ever seen a bus on it.) Now, I'm sure this is not legal but if the legal route is temporarily removed with no alternative provided what are you meant to do?

    (I should also note that I've cycled past a waiting police car once while doing this. They ignored me.)

    There's an on-pavement cycle route down Cultins Road and another on-pavement route along Bankhead Drive. Is it now illegal to cycle along the short bit of tarmac that joins these two routes?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  10. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "I'm sure this is not legal but if the legal route is temporarily removed with no alternative provided what are you meant to do?"

    The brief answer is, I guess, get off and walk the section.

    As Dave says, "However, in fairness we can hardly ask for ASLs etc. to be enforced while people on bikes ignoring road regs are ignored." Obviously there are relative harm levels to the actions, but what it boils down to is a little bit of double standards sometimes in the do as I say not as I do stakes when we complain that we are 'forced' to break the law (it's a complaint I've heard from drivers - 20mph zones mean that people behind get frustrated stuck behind you so you are 'forced' to break the speed limit etc.).

    Of more practical use would be the other option of actually campaigning to get the layout or signs changed. Not easy, I'll grant that, but I think it was Kirst that mentioned you just make a nuisance of yourself. Regular contact and eventually they'll cave in just to get rid of you.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  11. Min
    Member

    "(it's a complaint I've heard from drivers - 20mph zones mean that people behind get frustrated stuck behind you so you are 'forced' to break the speed limit etc.)."

    I see (and agree) with your point but I bet drivers very rarely, perhaps never, find their routes completely cut off with no notice, no diversions and no obvious alternatives like we do frequently.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  12. chdot
    Admin

    "
    Cycling Edinburgh @CyclingEdin

    @edinburghtrams @LBP_Police @Edinburgh_CC @southwest_team

    Urgent need for clarification/signs/markings

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=6083&page=2#post-64993 #cycling

    "

    https://twitter.com/CyclingEdin/status/190365333582921728

    We'll see...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  13. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    No, absolutely not. I suppose it's whether you see that as an excuse for breaking the law or not. Extending the theory, if a driver was to head down a route and did find it had been closed off without warning and turning round was difficult, to nigh on impossible due to parked cars, and there weren't diversion signs up, and the driver didn't know the area to find another route, would that driver then be entitled to drive over and along the pavement to bypass the roadworks?

    While drivers don't find routes blocked in this way, drivers also can't easily hop out the car and push past the obstruction. We've got that in our advantage.

    I have to admit, I do find the 'drivers must always obey the law and stay out of ASLs and stay out of cycle lanes (even when legally they actually are allowed in them, go figure) and must never break the speed limit and can never ever have any justification for doing so because that's just excsue making' slightly odd when it is also attached to the 'that provision for cyclists is terrible, it forces me to break the law'.

    Again, relative harm etc etc etc. But steal a Mars Bar or steal £1M, both are illegal, and you can't argue that the Mars Bar is okay because it's not as serious as the £1M (less serious/less harm does not equal therefore effectively legal).

    Maybe I stick to the rules too much.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  14. Baldcyclist
    Member

    Sorry, in this case the Police are absolutely right to stop you, and I hope give a stern telling off!
    Personally if it's me that gets stopped in that situation, I would say "Sorry officer, It was silly of me, <reason for doing>, I won't do it again". You would have been on your way far quicker than debating with them.

    That bit of road has been Bus only for years, even when I drove the M8 years ago is was Bus only and the Police were often parked up waiting for folk coming along there as a rat run. At least you know you were not being singled out for special treatment as a cyclist, but treated the same as all road users who use that bit of road, which IS positive.

    OK, there may be valid arguments for making that bit of road temporarily available to cyclists while the works are going on, and there is no cycle path, but the fact the arrangements are not in place means you have to go up and around the same as every other road user, or walk!

    Again sorry, end of rant.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  15. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Shorter version of the above:

    So, is breaking the law on a bike justified because drivers don't have to put up with what we put up with?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  16. chdot
    Admin

    "Maybe I stick to the rules too much"

    Do you...?

    With your (professional) background you know the law(s) better than most.

    Also, perhaps, know what you 'could get away with' given the realities of policing and the legal process.

    One problem in cases like this is that there can be no guarantee that signs in place and 'invisible' markings have any actual/legal/enforceable meaning.

    'We' know this from The Meadows, Porty Prom, Princes Street etc.

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

    Not believing the signs is no excuse.

    BUT!!

    Posted 12 years ago #

  17. Baldcyclist
    Member

    On the topic of Police clampdown on cyclists...

    Going along Torphichen Street this morning, cyclist just in front pulls off road just at end of the street to park his bike in a bike lock up. There are no spaces so he hops back on and cycles round the corner on the pavement onto Dewar Place where 2 WPCs are walking down towards him, and inevitably he got stopped.

    I did feel a little sorry for him as I presume there are other cycle facilities at the back of his building, but the devil in me couldn't help chuckling as I went past.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  18. Min
    Member

    "So, is breaking the law on a bike justified because drivers don't have to put up with what we put up with?"

    It depends on the circumstances. I don't know this particular spot so can't comment on this case but I can think of plenty of situations where I would feel breaking the law was justified.

    You mention driving on the pavement. I frequently see drivers driving on the pavement so that they can get round another driver who is turning right. Is that justified? No, all they have to do is wait for the other driver to turn. If they were driving on a country road and say, found a tree lying across the road, the only other alternative was a huge detour but they could just drive round it on an empty pavement then yes, why not? Perhaps I would. I'd do the same on my bike too.

    Perhaps I am wrong but I refuse to just quietly put up with my lot and accept being treated like worthless s**t because I ride a bike and do not have a car.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  19. wee folding bike
    Member

    Something going on in the wild west too. Posters on the back of busses say that bus lanes will be enforced from April 28th.

    I came off the ramp beside the Kingston Bridge ski jump on Tuesday heading to Gorbals and there were half a dozen motorcycle cops waiting round the corner. Whatever they were looking for wasn't me. It's a one way street but I can't see any reason for going the wrong way on that one.

    It's got a lot colder this week. Number 2 son is doing an Easter school in town so I drove him in this morning, dumped the wagon and cycled home. I've got numb toes and the thermometer says 4°C. I might wear socks when I go back to pick him up. He met David Hayman yesterday and showed him a DS game.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  20. Min
    Member

    Or to put it another way, if the situation was reversed and it was drivers who had no rights at all I would probably feel sympathy for them using the pavement to drive round, say, a random pile of paving slabs which has been unexpectedly plonked in the middle of the road to provide an upgrade to an adjacent cycle path.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  21. wee folding bike
    Member

    On the pavement thing… every morning I go into school by crossing a pavement at the school gate. It saves a big detour and a bad road surface where the school busses have chewed it up but it's not really a vehicle entrance.

    The local cop shop is two blocks away, my class is at the front of the building and I see the cops do the exact same short cut as I do. One of them even waves to me as he goes by.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  22. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "Perhaps I am wrong but I refuse to just quietly put up with my lot and accept being treated like worthless s**t because I ride a bike and do not have a car"

    I've never suggested that's what people should do - hence the PoP demo; and suggesting that people contact people about the piece of awful infrastructure in the OP. In fact that's the very opposite of 'quietly putting up with my lot'.

    As for it being okay to break the law 'depending on the circumstances' - this is where the problem lies. Which circumstances? Who determines? To Gembo and others the OP section circumstances 'force' or 'justify' breaking the law. To the police it clearly didn't. To a driver in a 20mph zone being tailgated 'forces' or 'justifies' breaking the law. To me and you it doesn't.

    Who is right? The only way to be certain is to actually adhere to the law; and actually speak out against those things that would force us to break the law if so inclined.

    Also "You mention driving on the pavement. I frequently see drivers driving on the pavement so that they can get round another driver who is turning right. Is that justified?" Again, I never said it was, I was using it as a query, which you've answered interestingly. You've admitted that, similarly, in certain circumstances breaking the law in such a way in a car could be justified. That's exactly what the drivers who do it think - the reasoning may be skewed (justified because they need to stop at that house and there's a car already parked on the other side of the road so if they don't park on the pavement then they'll block the road, for example). Now you and I know that you just park slightly further away and walk, but in that driver's mind he's justified.

    So how do you counter that? You tell him he's not justified, in the same way Baldy and I don't think Gembo was justified to ignore the road sign. Who determines who is right?

    Personal opinion surely can't be the determining factor in deciding whether a law should be stuck to or not?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  23. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Hmmmm. I even get off the bike to walk the three yards of pavement from the drop kerb of my driveway to my front gate in a quiet residential area (don't ask me why I access the pavement by the drop kerb rather than just riding to opposite the gate and straight onto the pavement there, it's not as if the kerb is six feet high, but for some reason I do).

    Posted 12 years ago #

  24. Min
    Member

    "Who determines who is right?"

    The Police.

    "Personal opinion surely can't be the determining factor in deciding whether a law should be stuck to or not?"

    You'd think so wouldn't you? Which brings up back to the opening post. Gembo knows he wasn't justified in riding up that road and that it was a fair cop but the attitude of one of the officers is that drivers are always justified in driving into ASLs.

    This is what we are up against. Screw them.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  25. Nelly
    Member

    Anth - ok, but show me a driver or cyclist who has never done an illegal move!!

    Letter of the law says that what gembo did (and I do every day) is illegal.

    However asking for infrastructure to be corrected did not work - see mine above re lights - so I take the "dave parking fine" view on this one -

    i.e. I know its wrong, but I will take my chance.

    Once they fix the path (which may have happened this week) we can all use that legally.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  26. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Ah, so we're talking at cross-purposes.

    "... but the bad cop seemed to suggest they were there for a reason"

    'Seemed to suggest' - I'd be interested to know exactly what the bad cop's words were. It might have been in reference to a car that could be seen there and then who had crossed the first line on green in slow moving traffic and the lights changed meaning that legally and cirrectly he had to stop before the second line and therefore be stuck in the box... Gembo, please come back and tell us what he said!

    "This is what we are up against. Screw them."

    Or engage. Try to change things. See the current campaign about ASLs as an opportunity. Not everyone is out to get us. Not all police (not even the majority) are bad.

    I have to say that, "This is what we are up against. Screw them." does sound a lot like quietly putting up with your lot.... ;)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  27. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "Anth - ok, but show me a driver or cyclist who has never done an illegal move!!"

    Never said no-one does. I've had two speeding tickets. Paid them. Didn't complain.

    "i.e. I know its wrong, but I will take my chance"

    And that's fine, as long as you know there's a chance, and you know you could get busted. I'm not saying 'stop', I'm saying don't complain if you're caught.

    And you also lose the right to complain about bad driving if in a particular circumstance that driver believes their actions were justified. Maybe he knows it's wrong, and he's just taking the chance.

    (I also expect never to hear Dave complain about poorly parked cars!)

    Posted 12 years ago #

  28. Nelly
    Member

    " And you also lose the right to complain about bad driving"

    Really?

    We might not agree about whats 'ok' here, but thats a bit strong.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  29. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    The rest of the selective quote.

    ".. if in a particular circumstance that driver believes their actions were justified. Maybe he knows it's wrong, and he's just taking the chance."

    That driver is simply doing what you're doing on the bike... If he complained about your action you would presumably say it was justified ("What should I do? Get off an walk?"); so if you complain about his action and he has the same sort of excuse why is his any less valid?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  30. Roibeard
    Member

    Couple of points - on the bus only lane, is it really signposted as such, and is the sign official?

    http://ukcyclerules.com/2011/11/22/cycling-bus-lanes/

    Only certain signs are approved for use, and other signs must be individually approved to have legal significance.

    No idea if this is the case here...

    As for cycling on the pavement between areas, it is legally permissible to cycle, or indeed drive, on the pavement directly between two places where cycling or driving is permitted (surely phrased better in the official terms!). That is, it isn't illegal to cross the pavement from the road into your driveway, and similarly not illegal to cross the pavement from the road to a cycle path.

    It might be stretching things a bit to cycle from the road to a cycle rack, even if you can drive across the pavement to a parking space...

    Of course, to avoid hassling pedestrians, I too dismount and walk the bike across the pavement when parking or entering my garden. But not when I'm crossing the pavement into or out of a cycle path!

    Robert

    Posted 12 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

123…5

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin