[Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways
lowflight66 at googlemail.com
Mon Oct 7 17:50:25 UTC 2013
On 07.10.2013 19:33, Matthijs Melissen wrote:
> On Oct 7, 2013 7:00 PM, "fly" <lowflight66 at googlemail.com
> <mailto:lowflight66 at 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 cycle route "you will have to
>> > move at walking speed on this section".
>> As said above, I know these signs but I wonder if they are official.
>> In Germany they are not and the have no judicial effect.
> 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?
A highway=footway (same as highway=path, foot=designated, vehicle=no) in
Germany needs always a sign and your are only allowed to push your
bicycle. There exists an additional sign to allow bicycles on these pathes.
Without a sign there are no footways but only pathes. You are allowed to
ride your bicycle on these pathes.
There are some restrictions on pathes in the forest/mountains but that
is a different story and a totally different law.
The extra sign "bicycle dismount" does not mean anything in a judicially
way, that means it does not change anything. Depending on the other
signs you either are allowed to ride or not.
In Germany it gets even more special as you are forced to use official
cycleways and in situations like you describe I would tell people here
to not use the path but the road if possible to be on the save side of
law (official statement of the German Bicycle Club).
More information about the Tagging