Central government weighs in to ban cycling on Eastbourne sea front

The "correct sign" is only legally required if banning cycles from a right of way they would usually have, under a TRO. Is the promenade a highway, byway or bridleway?

Obviously even without the diagonal the sign pictured would not be compliant with the TSRGD.

If we're being all legal about this, probably worth reffering to the actual bylaw- which it should be noted is not a TRO

Here's a new sign on me from the Gov.uk highway code pages - no cars witha bonfire on the roof (no vehicles carrying explosives) - anyone seen one of these in the wild?:

Is the signage in the photo at the top of the story the actual signs in use?

The correct signage for 'no bicycles' is a bike in a red circle (no diagonal) -- you may want to take independent legal advice, but doesn't that mean the restriction is unenforceable?

Correct 'no cycling' sign:

This particular situation would be better without rules. There is a long shared use path on the seafront to Sovereign Harbour with a great big white line down the middle, peds one side bikes the other. Where do all the dog walkers, skaters and walkers go... In the bike lane. Very few people take notice of these rules and fewer enforce them, it's pointless nonsense.

Where this ban is, I've never seen a problem with bikes. It's obviously the imaginary phantom hoodlums on bikes that spoil it for everyone.

What an idiotic decision.I live in Eastbourne and frequently cycle along the front that is the part you are allowed to cycle along and if I do want to go along the part your not allowed to cycle I walk my bike mainly as it suits me to enjoy looking out to sea.

But for those that do want to cycle particularly at this time of year why can't they. There is enough room for both pedestrians and cyclists and in my opinion the only time there should be a ban is during the Summer season. When it is probably too crowded.

Are we really saying that young children are not even allowed to cycle whereas skaters Roller Bladers , Runners and elderly people in motorised scooters can use the promenade.Ridiculous.

It seems to me that we need the tactics London cyclists use in having mass demonstrations to oppose this decision.

A sensible approach at last from the Conservatives. Get proper infrastructure in place rather than cause conflict between pedestrians and cyclists whilst drivers get away scot free.

I imagine the prom in question will be chocka over the summer so any cycling would be of a minimum in any case.

I thought we were supposed to be *decentralising* planning decisions?

The idea that cyclists and vulnerable people are mutually exclusive needs to go. Increasingly people unable to walk or walk far,are using bikes. Are they supposed to wear a special sign exempting them, or just stay home?

i think the gov is right ,in that there needs to be a broad inclusove plan, but pretending people are only one category at a time does not enable that...the sooner it happens, the sooner the percieved risk from Cycling will go, at the moment the age range is artificially narrow. Thus older and otherwise vulnerable peds feel at riskfrom'speeding young people' whether the rider is or not...

I dont really see the problem in the summer.

You can cycle on the road, and if you want to go for a slow trip along the promenade with all the summer tourists, you can lock your bike up and walk!

In the winter, it wont be so busy, and seeing how wide it is, there should be no problem. It's much the same with bans on dogs from beaches, or with bans on 4x4's from byways.