60 Cyclists To Sue Edinburgh Council

Tilt

Hmm. Didn't we have trams way back from the dawn of time right up to the late 50's when we also had cyclists? How did it work then I wonder?

custardy

brat wrote: »

The new kid on the block is the tram, so the onus is on them to resolve the problem to the satisfaction of all users in line with the long term planning directives for the city centre.

Whatever happened with the congestion charging plans Custardy?

The populous voted no.
So we all pay £1 Billion for a tram

Johno100

Tilt wrote: »

Hmm. Didn't we have trams way back from the dawn of time right up to the late 50's when we also had cyclists? How did it work then I wonder?

It worked fine, they didn't have 'no win no fee' lawyers then though.

Tilt

Johno100 wrote: »

It worked fine, they didn't have 'no win no fee' lawyers then though.

Presumably they didn't have as good road markings, warning signs, traffic signals, street lighting etc etc back then either.

suicidebob

Altarf wrote: »

Because the answer is the same each time. If you are incapable of understanding the basic principles, perhaps that is why you find the discussion boring.

Yeah, your answer every time is 'ban it'. As principles go, it is fairly basic.

I don't find the discussion boring, just your contribution. I don't know how you managed to get confused as I couldn't have made my point any more obvious!

suicidebob

custardy wrote: »

Or key in cyclists when designing roads and public transport networks?


Crazy stuff......

Nah, too tricky. He can't get his head around such logic.

Altarf

custardy wrote: »

Or key in cyclists when designing roads and public transport networks?

And that is exactly what I am suggesting.

At the first stage the trams were suggested it should have been made clear that trams and cyclists don't mix, so you have to design it so they don't

That didn't happen, hence the claims.

What they need to do now is make the cyclists safe.

Can you guarantee that cyclists won't ride somewhere they are legally allowed to do, even though it is dangerous. Clearly you cannot, so the only fail safe solution is to design the roads and public transport so they don't.

The trams can't be moved, so the cyclists have to be banned.

custardy wrote: »

Crazy stuff......

Crazy that cyclists don't want road designs that protect cyclists.

Tilt

Altarf wrote: »

And that is exactly what I am suggesting.

At the first stage the trams were suggested it should have been made clear that trams and cyclists don't mix, so you have to design it so they don't

That didn't happen, hence the claims.

What they need to do now is make the cyclists safe.

Can you guarantee that cyclists won't ride somewhere they are legally allowed to do, even though it is dangerous. Clearly you cannot, so the only fail safe solution is to design the roads and public transport so they don't.

The trams can't be moved, so the cyclists have to be banned.



Crazy that cyclists don't want road designs that protect cyclists.

Err would you like to scroll up and read my previous posts?

Altarf

Tilt wrote: »

Err would you like to scroll up and read my previous posts?

This one?

Tilt wrote: »

Hmm. Didn't we have trams way back from the dawn of time right up to the late 50's when we also had cyclists? How did it work then I wonder?

or this one?

Tilt wrote: »

Presumably they didn't have as good road markings, warning signs, traffic signals, street lighting etc etc back then either.

Road markings, warning signs, etc are not fail safe. If a cyclist is legally allowed to cycle there, they will, will injure themselves, and then sue.

No-win no-fee lawyers mean costly to defend, even if the cyclists was in the 'wrong' by cycling somewhere where they were permitted.

So only way to achieve certainty is ban the cyclists from the whole road that has a tram track.

You know it makes sense.

brat

Trams and cyclists can coexist quite successfully, it simply needs better thought than has been given here. Carving tram tracks through cycle lanes is sheer lunacy, and the planners are now being asked to pay the price of that folly.

It will be interesting to see how it develops.