What defines a cyclepath.

David Hansen opined the following...
In the case of the A90 the "cycle friendly" City of Edinburgh
Council wishes to speed up motor vehicle journeys and wants to get
those dammed cyclists out of the way and onto the "alternative"
path.

But it is obvious that while removing cyclists will prevent a repeat of
that tragic death (I believe there was only one), removing cars would
have no effect on the number of driver / passenger casualties and
deaths... er... hang on, I think I've got an idea!

Is there any update on this one David?

Jon

A small correction: the 1972 Highway Code actually says:
"Route for cyclists and moped riders (compulsory)"
Even more intriguing.

"MartinM" wrote in message
oups.com...

John Pitcock wrote:
I too have been confused by the blue circular sign with a white bike.
As a rule blue circle signs indicate compulsion (ie the left turn
only arrow).

My 1972 edition of the Highway Code says "Cycle lane, compulsory" but
the word "compulsory" hasn't been in subsequent editions.

Thanks for that; knew I wasn't imagining it.

A small correction: the 1972 Highway Code actually says:
"Route for cyclists and moped riders (compulsory)"
Even more intriguing.


Not intriguing to me; that is exactly what I have been describing them
as. And they were not the same thing as cycle paths that currently
exist.

On 14 Nov 2004 04:30:23 -0800 someone who may be "MartinM"
wrote this:-

but the blue circle means compulsory for someone or other:

As it says at http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/signs04.shtml, "Signs
with blue circles but no red border mostly give positive
instruction."

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/sign076.shtml is a good example of
this, "Vehicles may pass either side to reach same destination".

I suspect that the Department of Roads was trying to force cyclists
to use cycle lanes at the time, as part of their strategy to get
these dammed cyclists out of the way. They either "accidentally" put
it in the publication, or assumed they would have had their wicked
way by the time it was published.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On 14 Nov 2004 05:58:13 -0800 someone who may be "MartinM"
wrote this:-

Not intriguing to me; that is exactly what I have been describing them
as.

But, one is supposed to keep up with the Highway Code and we know
this wording has not been used for perhaps two decades.

And they were not the same thing as cycle paths that currently
exist.

What were they like them?


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 13:45:50 -0000 someone who may be Jon Senior
jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk wrote this:-

But it is obvious that while removing cyclists will prevent a repeat of
that tragic death (I believe there was only one), removing cars would
have no effect on the number of driver / passenger casualties and
deaths... er... hang on, I think I've got an idea!

Is there any update on this one David?

The Council "justified" the ban on the basis of one death in ten
years.

A month or two ago the Council asked if I wished to discuss it
further. I asked them how many roads they had banned motorists from
because there had been one death in ten years? Since then the
silence has been deafening. Were I to follow this silence up I might
tell them exactly what I think of them.



--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

And they were not the same thing as cycle paths that currently
exist.


What were they like then?

(scratches head) IIRC cordoned off lanes with a kerb. Never actually
used one but saw them from the car on the way up to London. Remember
thinking I would have to use one if my moped ever got that far (no
chance, heap of junk Puch yellow peril!)

And they were not the same thing as cycle paths that currently
exist.


What were they like them?
(scratches head) IIRC cordoned off lanes with a kerb; never used one
as my heap of junk moped would never have got that far.

uk.rec.motorcycles would probably throw up more, be my guest if you
don't mind being called a "tree hugging freeloading ****" (from a
recent thread on the same subject)

MartinM wrote:

IIRC cordoned off lanes with a kerb. Never actually
used one but saw them from the car on the way up to London.

On the A40?

--
Guy