Road sign "cyclists dismount"

[Steve O'C]

Hi
I came across this sign on Avenue Road, North of Regents Park London.

There was some building work going on in one of the houses that obstructed the pavement so pedestrians had been diverted on to the cycle path.

What is the legal status of this? Surely I would be entitled to ride on the main part of the road?

Should the sign not have said "motorists take care and give way to cyclists merging in from the left". Or am I living in a fantasy world?

[gaz]

The "Red Book", is the go to document for those installing new holes in the highway or conducting similar works. It has legal force under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991.Somebody on site is expected to be responsible for compliance with the code.

Page 35 covers cycling generally, "Cyclists Dismount" is a last resort and hardly seems appropriate for the situation pictured in the OP.

However that was probably the sign they had in the back of the van. Stick it up and tick the "warning sign erected" box on the safety checklist. The thought process rarely goes further.

[mjr]

Legal status for cyclists: a request, may be ignored.

Legal status for those undertaking the road works: use of incorrect sign, failure to comply with the current "code of practice on safety at street works", so therefore failure to act legally under the New Roads and Street Works Act 1991.

Probability of the highway authority bothering to enforce the Act: neglible but you might as well scream into the abyss at http://www.fixmystreet.com so other cyclists can see someone did.

[gaz]

It can be done right, just takes a bit of effort.

Roadworks1.jpg

Roadworks2.jpg

Roadworks3.jpg

[531colin]

Something similar appeared down the road from me just the other day. I'll photograph it if I remember.
I don't think there is a "please", its just "cyclists dismount here" or some such.
Big hole occupies one half of the road, traffic lights control the other half of the road.
Obviously Mr Toad in his car (beep beep) can't be expected to share his half of the road with those pesky cyclists, make them get off!
Quite where we are expected to go isn't clear....perhaps the pavement, although that may be obstructed one side.
I didn't comply with the instruction, because the chances of it having been properly implemented are remote.....
The bottom image shows the "dismount" instruction at least near the lights, although I'm not clear where I should go after dismounting, part of the pavement is taken over by fencing. (the lights were out all morning)
The top photo shows that the roadworks and traffic lights have been extended, and the "dismount" sign hasn't been moved. I got off the bike and went looking for it, you would do well to see it from being stopped at the lights.

[Jamesh]

Last summer I was cycling in Suffolk on a road that became a dual carriageway signs said no cycling do I took to the cycleway and through a housing estate and then a caravan park where I was promptly knocked of my bike by a woman driving her family into the park for the first time with such excitement that she didn't see me!!

Fortunately I bounced back off her bonnet with coming to serious harm and the front wheel being buckled.

Had I ignored the sign I probably wouldn't have been mowed down. However more cyclists would have been mowed down on the dual with much more serious consequences.....

Cheers James

[Barks]

If cycle lane is closed I’d just cycle on the road where the cars go - is that actually illegal in any circumstances (other than motorway)?

[gxaustin]

In this case I don't see how you can be taken off the road. I often eschew cycle lanes which are half overgrown or weave through awkward obstacles and stay on the road anyway. For instance, in Evesham there is a "cyclelane" which cuts off a roundabout. It is about 2 feet wide by 50 yards long and is lined on both sides by normal kerbs (so don't look round or wobble). It's full of detritus and then you have to re-enter the traffic flow. Much easier to stay on the road (and arguable safer). I believe that is my right.
I try not to dismount if space is tight because me pushing my bike is wider than me on it. Instead I practice riding slowly.

[rjb]

Came across this sign on Stephensons Menai Bridge recently. Does this mean cyclists can overtake cars or that cars can overtake cyclist?????

https://goo.gl/maps/nTF5iwuZNuNkLD5N8

confused.

[gaz]

Sign to diagram 632 "no overtaking" with an exemption plate to show that bicycles can overtake other bicycles.

Demonstrably wheelist attitude since unicycles, trikes and quads are not similarly exempted .

[Mike Sales]

Came across this sign on Stephensons Menai Bridge recently. Does this mean cyclists can overtake cars or that cars can overtake cyclist?????

https://goo.gl/maps/nTF5iwuZNuNkLD5N8

confused.

In all the many times I have crossed this bridge I never had any doubt what the sign meant but lest any driver was confused I always took care to "take the road." You might think the arches are obviously too narrow to allow a car to overtake but I did hear of one attempt.
I confess to crossing in less orthodox fashion.
I have often passed under the bridge too, via the Swellies.
Altogether this picture takes me back to many happy days. I could bore you rigid with stories.

It's Telford's bridge actually. Stephenson built the other, the first, tubular version anyway.