Can anyone state that in her/his country this traffic_sign is official
and not made up by some people ?
Not my country, but in the UK it's listed here:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2002/3113/schedule/5/made
Some countries have a blanket allowance for using a text only sign when no
The Dutch example is based on a local (municipal) ordinance which regulates
whether you are allowed to walk your bicycle in this pedestrian zone. So, it is
a real regulation (but it is not an example of a bicycle dismount
regulation).
Bicycles are not allowed at all, so a bicycle=no tag could
Hey
I wonder if it is useful to tag bicycle=dismount on ways.
At least in Germany there is no official traffic sign despite of the
existence of some.
You are allowed to push your bike on every footway/pedestrian plus ways
with vehicle=no. E.g. it is useless. Either you are allowed to ride
2013/10/7 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com
You are allowed to push your bike on every footway/pedestrian plus ways
with vehicle=no. E.g. it is useless. Either you are allowed to ride
(bicycle=yes/designated) or not (bicycle=no or vehicle=no)
I agree that bicycle=dismount seems useless, at
On 10/7/13 12:18 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2013/10/7 fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com
mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com
You are allowed to push your bike on every footway/pedestrian plus
ways
with vehicle=no. E.g. it is useless. Either you are allowed to ride
On 07.10.2013 18:27, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
2013/10/7 Richard Welty rwe...@averillpark.net
mailto:rwe...@averillpark.net
it has implications for routing of bicycles. bicycle=no will mean that
it will never be used on a bicycle route. bicycle=dismount would
indicate
On 10/7/2013 12:27 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
bicycle=no indicates that you cannot (legally) ride your bicycle there.
If you dismount and push you become a pedestrian, so you are not riding
a bicycle and bicycle=no has no effect on you.
There are wilderness trails where no wheels are
On 07.10.2013 18:48, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On some bridges that have a relatively narrow footway, I have seen signs
indicating that bicyclists must dismount. So, I think that it is useful
as a way of telling someone planning a cycle route you will have to
move at walking speed on this
On 10/07/2013 11:59 AM, fly wrote:
On 07.10.2013 18:48, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On some bridges that have a relatively narrow footway, I have seen signs
indicating that bicyclists must dismount. So, I think that it is useful
as a way of telling someone planning a cycle route you will have to
On 07.10.2013 19:08, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On 10/07/2013 11:59 AM, fly wrote:
On 07.10.2013 18:48, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On some bridges that have a relatively narrow footway, I have seen signs
indicating that bicyclists must dismount. So, I think that it is useful
as a way of telling
On Oct 7, 2013 7:00 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 07.10.2013 18:48, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On some bridges that have a relatively narrow footway, I have seen signs
indicating that bicyclists must dismount. So, I think that it is useful
as a way of telling someone planning a
On 07.10.2013 19:33, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
On Oct 7, 2013 7:00 PM, fly lowfligh...@googlemail.com
mailto:lowfligh...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 07.10.2013 18:48, John F. Eldredge wrote:
On some bridges that have a relatively narrow footway, I have seen signs
indicating that bicyclists must
dieterdreist wrote:
bicycle=no indicates that you cannot (legally) ride your bicycle there.
If you dismount and push you become a pedestrian, so you are not
riding a bicycle and bicycle=no has no effect on you.
That may not be the case in the UK.
The law allows walkers and their usual
On 07/10/2013 21:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
dieterdreist wrote:
bicycle=no indicates that you cannot (legally) ride your bicycle there.
If you dismount and push you become a pedestrian, so you are not
riding a bicycle and bicycle=no has no effect on you.
That may not be the case in the UK.
2013/10/7 Matthijs Melissen i...@matthijsmelissen.nl
Just to be clear: do you mean that you always have to dismount on
footpaths, even without the sign, or do you mean that you don't need to
dismount, despite the presence of the sign?
you will always have to dismount, so the sign has no
2013/10/7 Ole Nielsen on-...@xs4all.nl
At least in the Netherlands you have to distinguish between bicycle=no and
bicycle=dismount. Some pedestrian streets are explicitly signed with no
bicycle pushing. In other words you may not bring your bicycle here. Thus
you need bicycle=no in its strict
Martin Koppenhoefer:
Btw.: What about monocycles? Are you alled to carry a monocycle in these
streets?
What would the traffic ticket claim as the offence?
FWIW, our law has a clause that on a footway a pedestrian may not push a bike,
moped, kicksled, ski or skate or carry a big load if it can
2013/10/7 Kytömaa Lauri lauri.kyto...@aalto.fi
FWIW, our law has a clause that on a footway a pedestrian may not push a
bike, moped, kicksled, ski or skate or carry a big load if it can cause
considerable hindrance to others.
This list doesn't contain babystrollers, does the situation
On 07.10.2013 23:06, Ole Nielsen wrote:
On 07/10/2013 21:42, Richard Fairhurst wrote:
dieterdreist wrote:
bicycle=no indicates that you cannot (legally) ride your bicycle there.
If you dismount and push you become a pedestrian, so you are not
riding a bicycle and bicycle=no has no effect on
At least in the Netherlands you have to distinguish between bicycle=no
and bicycle=dismount. Some pedestrian streets are explicitly signed with no
bicycle pushing.
I never heard of that, what sign do you mean? In which contexts is out
used? Do you have a picture by any chance?
-- Matthijs
101 - 120 of 120 matches
Mail list logo
