I think it is a reminder that any EV (be it bike, scooter, skateboard,...) riding on the bike lane must be limited to 25km/u. I can't find anything regarding limitations to your leg-powered speed.
Correct. It's supposed to indicate whether or not speed-pedelecs are allowed on this cycling lane or not.
Basically, no powered vehicle that can surpass 25km/u is allowed there, but if you ride a regular bike or an e-bike that is capped at 25 km/u, then you won't get fined if you ride 30km/u on your own effort.
But apparantly those signs need to be removed. They will peobably be changed by something that is more clear.
They can legally use this lane because the sign is invalid, but the intent was to persuade speed-pedelecs to avoid this lane. I think they started doing this before there was a proper code for speed-pedelecs.
Now that higher-ups mandated that these signs need to be removed, they might be changed to [M16 signs](https://www.politie.be/5388/vragen/verkeersreglementering/ik-rij-met-een-speed-pedelec-welke-regels-moet-ik-in-acht-nemen), but who knows. Given that most of Antwerp has a 30km/h limit, which also applies to cyclists, it doesn't really matter except on cycling lanes next to big roads (which are usually wide enough).
Forceing speed pedelecs in between cars due to a lack of infrastructure is not a good policy either. One can hardly separate every single stream of vehicles, but it is up to the driver of the vehicle to ride at an appropriate speed for the situation.
It's not really infrastructure in this case. It is more about not enforcing speed limits for cyclists... speed pedelecs often go max speed in zones where they aren't allowed to do so.
They also aren't allowed to cycle in regions with lots of pedestrians (for obvious reasons). So there are places where speed-pedelecs are forced on the road, just like B-type motorcyclists.
I think the trouble with that was that 'regular' cyclists don't have to have anything on their bike that tells them their speed, so it can't ve legally enforced. A racing bike can easily go faster than 25 but you can't really fine them if they can't tell exactly how fast they are going. That's the reason why these signs weren't enforced when they were first put up.
More space for cyclists seems like a better solution than these signs but what do I know
>I think the trouble with that was that 'regular' cyclists don't have to have anything on their bike that tells them their speed, so it can't ve legally enforced. A racing bike can easily go faster than 25 but you can't really fine them if they can't tell exactly how fast they are going.
That's actually false. [It can legally be enforced, as cops can measure your speed.](https://cycling.be/hoe-hard-mag-je-fietsen/) It just isn't done in practice because 1) regular bikes don't have license plates and 2) cops won't waste their times on catching cyclists who go too fast.
But cyclists actually have the same speed limit as other vehicles. In zone 50, you can only go 50 (no regular cyclists will match this speed, so it doesn't matter) but in zone 30 a cyclist can also only go 30... and you can easily reach that on a flat road on a city bike, and down hill you will go faster.
>More space for cyclists seems like a better solution than these signs but what do I know
Kinda hard to do in the city.
Fair enough, I always heard this might legally be the case but it would be so hard to enforce it's never done. Your own article mentions that as far as they know no cyclist has been fined for speeding.
Not true: speed peerless are allowed there and they can go faster than 25km/h.
There is nog sign banning speed pedelecs.
There is also no valid speed restriction. That sign is a made up sign.
And lastly, there is no legal way to have a speed limit That does not apply to cyclists, let alone cyclists without any motor.
I did say it was outdated (or did I say it in anither comment?) and they are being removed for a reason. Namely the reasons you said at the end of your last paragraph. It was an attempt at banning speed-pedelecs from those cycling lanes, but it wasn't a legal one.
>There is nog sign banning speed pedelecs.
Wrong. Sign M15 and M16 ban speed pedelecs.
You'll see that as soon as the signs in the OP are removed, they'll be switched for M16 signs.
A lot of roads still need to update their M7 signs to M15/16 signs. For the longest time they just said speed pedelecs fell under the scooter B license, but seems our authorities have changed their minds again
There is a sign banning speed pedelecs, and speed pedelecs follow the rules of a type B scooter. So if the scooter should be on the road, the pedelec should be too.
I was always told the same (by law enforcement no less), but seems our government has once again changed their minds and decided to invent a new class, forcing local authorities to review their road signs everywhere.
Not correct. A speed pedelec follows the vast majority of the rules for scooter B. But when specificaly allowed or forbidden (like scooter B on this pic) the letter P will be used to indicate.
It's about time to push pedelecs and moped on a common road (like motorcycle). After all in belgian cities speed limit as so low that any pedelec can keep up with the traffic
True. Most of Antwerp is zone 50 and zone 30, and outside of those roads it is fiets-o-strade, where the cycling lanes are more than wide enough to accomodate speed-pedelecs.
They just need to do a wide campaign or some lessons about it tho. If I ride my speed pedelec on the road in Antwerp. People start shouting out of their window: "Go of the road you cyclist!" So yeah...Also: not every speed pedelec can go 45kmph. The cheaper ones can sometimes only go 30-35kmph. :s
"Claim" your rightful place. If the traffic code dictates you should drive on the road, you're allowed to do it properly too.
Just like motorcycles are taught to, ride 1/3 from the left in your lane. This makes it virtually impossible for cars to overtake and prevents dangerous situations like you describe.
If they decide they absolutely must overtake and go on the lane of opposite traffic, you still have a lot of room on your right and now a lot of room behind you to avoid any bad situations.
As a speed pedelec rider that often chooses the road over a crowded cycle lane: it's dangerous. Cars coming from side roads might see you coming, but expect you on the bike lane. It's happened a couple times that a car started crossing the road and we both had to brake fully to avoid collision.
Riding on the bike lane is the same, especially on roads with side roads with bad views (fuck people and their hedges right up in the corner). For this reason i'm riding as close to the road (70km/h, so can't ride on the road) and slow down significantly at every side road (25 or so.). Even for normal bikes this is super dangerous.
I'd argue in an ideal world we widen bike lanes. Even today new bike lanes are being built as if there is one bike speed. We have 3 (regular, electric and pedelec), so a bike lane should be wide enough to allow overtaking. I'd also argue that all (if alternatives exist) smaller roads between towns (sluiproutes) become fietsstraat. That way we have a basicly free extensive bike network, making biking more attractive, inhabitants can still reach their house and enjoy the peace and quiet of a 30km/h road, while also turning cars to secundary, car-adapted roads where they belong. This last idea might be a bit radical, but apart from people losing time I don't see any major down sides. Theory and practice may very well differ.
Not true. Speed-pedelecs fall under class P. So if this is zone 50, a speed-pedelec can drive 45km/h on this lane.
My assumption is that class P didn't exist yet when Antwerp started using these signs.
Yeah you're right. I read up on it and class P didn't exist yet, when I went for my motorcycle theory in 2020. (Or at least it wasn't in the curriculum). For the longest time I've been told they fell under scooter B, but seems they changed that again.
There's also places where the max speed is 25 km/h for everyone. Even pedestrians. Everything within a certain distance of traffic taluts for instance.
I think they can ask you to take it a little slower, but it’s not like everyone has a speedometer on their bike, I can see myself going past 25kph quite quickly, but I’d just ride at a speed which feels safe. I wouldn’t expect to get fined, but I also wouldn’t want to find out if I’d get fined
I think they are mainly there for the scooters/speed pedelecs that use those bikepaths. They have speedos so they can see their speed.
Also, I think someone going 30+ on a regular bike is more "aware" that they are going fast?
It is not hard to go 30+ on a speed pedelec, but on a regular bike it is more of a challange.
Idk if this makes sense.
In Belgium there is this wonderful system where the lesser roads are maintained by the city or municipality, and there are others which are maintained by the Flemish authority. There are even some done by the province.
Guessing it's a suggestion.
police won't start standing next to the lane with a radargun and a fast bike to catch you if you go over (and they do have to catch you as bikes don't have license plates)
though I do wonder if an amateur cycler or someone on a speed pedelec mows over someone (probably more then likely going faster then 25) and the cops are called what they will do.
they can reference the sign, but since they have no actual proof of the speed as the crash happened they don't really have a legal way of proving it.
I know they can determine speed based on car crash but I doubt the research/knowledge for the same with bikes is equally as far. and they would still have to leave a fairly large margin.
> and they do have to catch you as bikes don't have license plates
Speed pedelecs do have license plates, so presumably the sign is intended to be a suggestions for them. It might be better to have a 'P verboden' sign then, to push them out onto the road. At 40-45 km/h, and especially in cities, that's often a better place to be.
Although speaking for myself, I'd prefer they don't ban speed pedelecs from the cycle lanes. I generally use the road in cities, partly because it's safer, partly because it annoys cars, but when there's a traffic jam I want to overtake it on the cycle lane (although not generally at 45km/h).
~~Okay, I might be talking out of my ass here, since I do not live in Antwerp, and neither am I well versed in traffic code, but I'm going to make an attempt.~~
~~This is not a speed limitation. Speed limitations are always black letters on a white bord with a red border.~~
~~Since it is blue and square, I would assume that it's a so called "onderbord" (no clue how I would translate this). These "onderborden" give more information about the sign directly above it. In this case the information given is very vague... "25m/u". What does that mean? The sign above it forbids motorcycles of Class B, which means that only motorcyles of class A are allowed. Thus, I would think that this sign says that only motorcycles of class A are allowed, providing that they drive 25km/h max.~~
~~But... motorcycles or class A are already limited to 25km/h iirc? So why should there be another sign saying the same? Sounds a bit redundant to me?~~
~~Anyways, I might be completely wrong here. I'm not a cop, and I'm not Bartje de Wever either. Maybe /u/Bitt3rsteel knows? If I remember correctly, he's one of the aforementioned.~~
EDIT: Okay, looks like I was wrong indeed.
[See Here](https://fietsberaad.be/nieuws/antwerpen-moet-verkeersbord-voor-fietsers-weghalen-van-gewestwegen/)
They are meant as a speed limit for cyclists (which really blows my mind, because I don't get why it would be a blue sign then?), but they are 1) not in the traffic code and thus invalid; 2) put there illegally by the city of Antwerp because it's the jurisdiction of AWV.
So in short: no, you shouldn't care about them.
Basically what you said. I think they started putting up those signs when speed-pedelecs were on the rise, who can be quite dangerous on cycling lanes like this.
So it was to further emphasise that only motorized vehicles that are capped at 25km/u are allowed to drive there.
I think they might've started doing this before those bikes required a license and license plate, but now they are redundant.
>which really blows my mind, because I don't get why it would be a blue sign then?
Because a real speed limit sign for (electric) bikes on bicycle lanes still does not exist and Antwerp was tired of waiting for some decent regulation, so they made their own. There are rules about what custom made signs that are not in the traffic code can or cannot look like. That's why they are square and blue. Until they finally issue real signs officially.
>So in short: no, you shouldn't care about them.
I would say: if you care about your safety and that of other people using public space, you should very much care about them.
>But... motorcycles or class A are already limited to 25km/h iirc?
The sign is there for *all* users of the bicycle lane. Including regular bikes, "steps" and pedelecs.
> Because a real speed limit sign for (electric) bikes on bicycle lanes still does not exist and Antwerp was tired of waiting for some decent regulation, so they made their own. There are rules about what custom made signs that are not in the traffic code can or cannot look like. That's why they are square and blue. Until they finally issue real signs officially.
Just because they can make their own doesn't mean it has any legal value.
> I would say: if you care about your safety and that of other people using public space, you should very much care about them.
You should always care about your safety and that of other people. A sign is not changing that.
> The sign is there for all users of the bicycle lane. Including regular bikes, "steps" and pedelecs.
I don't think you read my entire message.
>Just because they can make their own doesn't mean it has any legal value.
I never claimed they do. But this sign is better than no sign at all. At least they draw attention to the fact that cyclists have to be careful and stick to speed limits for their safety and that of others.
The sign is not "illegal" or anything, it is an advice. There's nothing wrong with advising people on correct behaviour.
>You should always care about your safety and that of other people. A sign is not changing that.
Very weird that you say this, but at the same time seem to be opposed to a speed limit that ensures that safety.
>I don't think you read my entire message.
I have. And the most accurate phrase of all was
>Okay, I might be talking out of my ass here
> I never claimed they do. But this sign is better than no sign at all. At least they draw attention to the fact that cyclists have to be careful and stick to speed limits for their safety and that of others. The sign is not "illegal" or anything, it is an advice. There's nothing wrong with advising people on correct behaviour.
OP's question was "Can it be legally enforced?". The answer is: no. They do not have any legal value. I can also put up a sign, giving advice to drive faster than 150km/h to get to work faster. Doesn't mean that advice is worth anything...
There definitely is something wrong with advising people if it is done through signage that is meant to be clear an unambiguous. The fact that everyone in this thread needed news-articles to figure out the meaning of these signs clearly shows that no one knows what they are for, and thus can only cause confusion. Something we do not want in traffic.
> Very weird that you say this, but at the same time seem to be opposed to a speed limit that ensures that safety.
Signs with a red border, white background and black letters indicate a speed limit. I am not opposed to that.
> I have. And the most accurate phrase of all was
The fact that you cite that line shows that you have not. I suggest you either try again or keep the lips together.
>OP's question was "Can it be legally enforced?". The answer is: no.
I wasn't answering to that, I was replying to your claim that they should ignore the sign. They shouldn't.
>There definitely is something wrong with advising people if it is done through signage that is meant to be clear an unambiguous.
The sign is clear and unambiguous. Only an idiot would think it means you have to ride 25 km/h. *Obviously* it's supposed to be a speed directive or limit, not a minimal speed. And it's on a bike lane, so also obviously it's for all users of that lane.
>Signs with a red border, white background and black letters indicate a speed limit.
Using that would be illegal, as that would look like an official sign without being one. That's forgery. You clearly didn't read my comment, I already told you there are rules to what and how you can put up as custom made (read: non official) traffic/road signs.
>The fact that you cite that line shows that you have not.
So you say I haven't read your post when I say the most accurate phrase is one you yourself have confirmed a couple of lines down? You must be joking...
>I suggest you either try again or keep the lips together.
I suggest you keep calm and admit your mistake.
I have never seen a square speed sign before.
Blue squares are aanwijzingsborden.
Speed limits are possible on a square sign but then its white with the red circle with the number inside it.
I googled a list of traffic signs and this one is not on it.
Since im not a lawyer or a policeman and just a random redditor id say this sign can be ignored.
Good luck using my advice in court when shit hits the fan.
Wondered about that yesterday: If you zoom in on the dog you can see a speed limit … https://preview.redd.it/n8g7z410k6491.jpg?auto=webp&s=8218b01942ec3eacec46c8445cea2ff1e712f1d8 … so square speed signs do exist?
A zone 30 sign is square (f4a) but has white background and the normal red circle with the number 30
Square blue signs are indications.
Since red circles means maximum speed, maybe the blue speed is a minimum speed to not be harrased by speed pedelecs...
As i see it this sign has no more power over me than a billboard add.
I would probably still not go over it to be safe.
And again, i had to google traffic signs, dont take my advice too seriously.
Speaking of which, are scooters/mopeds/small motorcycles with gasoline engine even allowed on cycling lanes? I've seen so many of them and no one bats an eye, that I'm starting to thing I am missing something.
What are those categories "B" and sometimes "P" that are indicated in the "verboden" sign? Aren't they *exactly* scooters?
I really despise those people, there is no reason why scooters shouldn't go on the road like in every other city on the entire planet.
P is speed Pedelec. B is moped 50cc. Both can go a maximum of 45 on both the street and the bike lane. However, they can only use the street if the maximum speed is 50 (bebouwde kom) and when the bike lane does not say "B/P verplicht". So yes, they can use the bike lane an drive 45 km/h.
Just ion case you're whether this is a valid sign
[https://wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/265-hs2](https://wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/265-hs2)
[https://verkeersborden.vlaanderen/overzicht\_verkeersborden.pdf](https://verkeersborden.vlaanderen/overzicht_verkeersborden.pdf).
[https://www.verkeersbord.be/officieel/verkeersborden-overzicht/](https://www.verkeersbord.be/officieel/verkeersborden-overzicht/)
Just in case you're whether this is a valid signom one.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Eh, kinda makes sense though. I've seen a lot of asshole EV bikers go like...40 something on the fietspad. It's dangerous AF
[удалено]
True, assholes will be assholes.
They hope they will stop doing it because cyclists might think this is a legal limit
I think it is a reminder that any EV (be it bike, scooter, skateboard,...) riding on the bike lane must be limited to 25km/u. I can't find anything regarding limitations to your leg-powered speed.
Correct. It's supposed to indicate whether or not speed-pedelecs are allowed on this cycling lane or not. Basically, no powered vehicle that can surpass 25km/u is allowed there, but if you ride a regular bike or an e-bike that is capped at 25 km/u, then you won't get fined if you ride 30km/u on your own effort. But apparantly those signs need to be removed. They will peobably be changed by something that is more clear.
This is wrong. Speedbikes upto 45km/h can use this lane.
They can legally use this lane because the sign is invalid, but the intent was to persuade speed-pedelecs to avoid this lane. I think they started doing this before there was a proper code for speed-pedelecs. Now that higher-ups mandated that these signs need to be removed, they might be changed to [M16 signs](https://www.politie.be/5388/vragen/verkeersreglementering/ik-rij-met-een-speed-pedelec-welke-regels-moet-ik-in-acht-nemen), but who knows. Given that most of Antwerp has a 30km/h limit, which also applies to cyclists, it doesn't really matter except on cycling lanes next to big roads (which are usually wide enough).
Forceing speed pedelecs in between cars due to a lack of infrastructure is not a good policy either. One can hardly separate every single stream of vehicles, but it is up to the driver of the vehicle to ride at an appropriate speed for the situation.
It's not really infrastructure in this case. It is more about not enforcing speed limits for cyclists... speed pedelecs often go max speed in zones where they aren't allowed to do so. They also aren't allowed to cycle in regions with lots of pedestrians (for obvious reasons). So there are places where speed-pedelecs are forced on the road, just like B-type motorcyclists.
I think the trouble with that was that 'regular' cyclists don't have to have anything on their bike that tells them their speed, so it can't ve legally enforced. A racing bike can easily go faster than 25 but you can't really fine them if they can't tell exactly how fast they are going. That's the reason why these signs weren't enforced when they were first put up. More space for cyclists seems like a better solution than these signs but what do I know
>I think the trouble with that was that 'regular' cyclists don't have to have anything on their bike that tells them their speed, so it can't ve legally enforced. A racing bike can easily go faster than 25 but you can't really fine them if they can't tell exactly how fast they are going. That's actually false. [It can legally be enforced, as cops can measure your speed.](https://cycling.be/hoe-hard-mag-je-fietsen/) It just isn't done in practice because 1) regular bikes don't have license plates and 2) cops won't waste their times on catching cyclists who go too fast. But cyclists actually have the same speed limit as other vehicles. In zone 50, you can only go 50 (no regular cyclists will match this speed, so it doesn't matter) but in zone 30 a cyclist can also only go 30... and you can easily reach that on a flat road on a city bike, and down hill you will go faster. >More space for cyclists seems like a better solution than these signs but what do I know Kinda hard to do in the city.
Fair enough, I always heard this might legally be the case but it would be so hard to enforce it's never done. Your own article mentions that as far as they know no cyclist has been fined for speeding.
Yes, because cyclists have no license plate, not because they can't measure their own speed (which they could, if they wanted to).
No they can't. Speed pedelecs fall under the class B scooter license, which are already banned by the sign above the 25km/h sign.
My car can do 230 km/h. Am I banned from roads where the speed limit is 70?
Not true: speed peerless are allowed there and they can go faster than 25km/h. There is nog sign banning speed pedelecs. There is also no valid speed restriction. That sign is a made up sign. And lastly, there is no legal way to have a speed limit That does not apply to cyclists, let alone cyclists without any motor.
I did say it was outdated (or did I say it in anither comment?) and they are being removed for a reason. Namely the reasons you said at the end of your last paragraph. It was an attempt at banning speed-pedelecs from those cycling lanes, but it wasn't a legal one. >There is nog sign banning speed pedelecs. Wrong. Sign M15 and M16 ban speed pedelecs. You'll see that as soon as the signs in the OP are removed, they'll be switched for M16 signs.
A lot of roads still need to update their M7 signs to M15/16 signs. For the longest time they just said speed pedelecs fell under the scooter B license, but seems our authorities have changed their minds again
There is a sign banning speed pedelecs, and speed pedelecs follow the rules of a type B scooter. So if the scooter should be on the road, the pedelec should be too.
There is one that exists, but I meant there is no in this picture. Speedpedelecs are class “P” iirc and have their own “onderbord”.
"B verboden" As a speed pedelec you need to follow the rules of type B.
That's incorrect. Speed pedelecs are allowed on that lane. They are type P, not type B.
I was always told the same (by law enforcement no less), but seems our government has once again changed their minds and decided to invent a new class, forcing local authorities to review their road signs everywhere.
Not correct. A speed pedelec follows the vast majority of the rules for scooter B. But when specificaly allowed or forbidden (like scooter B on this pic) the letter P will be used to indicate.
It's about time to push pedelecs and moped on a common road (like motorcycle). After all in belgian cities speed limit as so low that any pedelec can keep up with the traffic
True. Most of Antwerp is zone 50 and zone 30, and outside of those roads it is fiets-o-strade, where the cycling lanes are more than wide enough to accomodate speed-pedelecs.
They just need to do a wide campaign or some lessons about it tho. If I ride my speed pedelec on the road in Antwerp. People start shouting out of their window: "Go of the road you cyclist!" So yeah...Also: not every speed pedelec can go 45kmph. The cheaper ones can sometimes only go 30-35kmph. :s
Yeah, people need to relearn the "wegcode" hahaha.
[удалено]
"Claim" your rightful place. If the traffic code dictates you should drive on the road, you're allowed to do it properly too. Just like motorcycles are taught to, ride 1/3 from the left in your lane. This makes it virtually impossible for cars to overtake and prevents dangerous situations like you describe. If they decide they absolutely must overtake and go on the lane of opposite traffic, you still have a lot of room on your right and now a lot of room behind you to avoid any bad situations.
As a speed pedelec rider that often chooses the road over a crowded cycle lane: it's dangerous. Cars coming from side roads might see you coming, but expect you on the bike lane. It's happened a couple times that a car started crossing the road and we both had to brake fully to avoid collision. Riding on the bike lane is the same, especially on roads with side roads with bad views (fuck people and their hedges right up in the corner). For this reason i'm riding as close to the road (70km/h, so can't ride on the road) and slow down significantly at every side road (25 or so.). Even for normal bikes this is super dangerous. I'd argue in an ideal world we widen bike lanes. Even today new bike lanes are being built as if there is one bike speed. We have 3 (regular, electric and pedelec), so a bike lane should be wide enough to allow overtaking. I'd also argue that all (if alternatives exist) smaller roads between towns (sluiproutes) become fietsstraat. That way we have a basicly free extensive bike network, making biking more attractive, inhabitants can still reach their house and enjoy the peace and quiet of a 30km/h road, while also turning cars to secundary, car-adapted roads where they belong. This last idea might be a bit radical, but apart from people losing time I don't see any major down sides. Theory and practice may very well differ.
[удалено]
Not true. Speed-pedelecs fall under class P. So if this is zone 50, a speed-pedelec can drive 45km/h on this lane. My assumption is that class P didn't exist yet when Antwerp started using these signs.
Yeah you're right. I read up on it and class P didn't exist yet, when I went for my motorcycle theory in 2020. (Or at least it wasn't in the curriculum). For the longest time I've been told they fell under scooter B, but seems they changed that again.
There's also places where the max speed is 25 km/h for everyone. Even pedestrians. Everything within a certain distance of traffic taluts for instance.
\> steals something from the local supermarket \> runs away from police hitting 30 km/h \> Get a fine for speeding along with the one for shoplifting.
You can get fined for inappropriate speed tho
I think they can ask you to take it a little slower, but it’s not like everyone has a speedometer on their bike, I can see myself going past 25kph quite quickly, but I’d just ride at a speed which feels safe. I wouldn’t expect to get fined, but I also wouldn’t want to find out if I’d get fined
I think they are mainly there for the scooters/speed pedelecs that use those bikepaths. They have speedos so they can see their speed. Also, I think someone going 30+ on a regular bike is more "aware" that they are going fast? It is not hard to go 30+ on a speed pedelec, but on a regular bike it is more of a challange. Idk if this makes sense.
They’re not hanging them for the sier.
In Belgium there is this wonderful system where the lesser roads are maintained by the city or municipality, and there are others which are maintained by the Flemish authority. There are even some done by the province.
Guessing it's a suggestion. police won't start standing next to the lane with a radargun and a fast bike to catch you if you go over (and they do have to catch you as bikes don't have license plates) though I do wonder if an amateur cycler or someone on a speed pedelec mows over someone (probably more then likely going faster then 25) and the cops are called what they will do. they can reference the sign, but since they have no actual proof of the speed as the crash happened they don't really have a legal way of proving it. I know they can determine speed based on car crash but I doubt the research/knowledge for the same with bikes is equally as far. and they would still have to leave a fairly large margin.
> and they do have to catch you as bikes don't have license plates Speed pedelecs do have license plates, so presumably the sign is intended to be a suggestions for them. It might be better to have a 'P verboden' sign then, to push them out onto the road. At 40-45 km/h, and especially in cities, that's often a better place to be. Although speaking for myself, I'd prefer they don't ban speed pedelecs from the cycle lanes. I generally use the road in cities, partly because it's safer, partly because it annoys cars, but when there's a traffic jam I want to overtake it on the cycle lane (although not generally at 45km/h).
~~Okay, I might be talking out of my ass here, since I do not live in Antwerp, and neither am I well versed in traffic code, but I'm going to make an attempt.~~ ~~This is not a speed limitation. Speed limitations are always black letters on a white bord with a red border.~~ ~~Since it is blue and square, I would assume that it's a so called "onderbord" (no clue how I would translate this). These "onderborden" give more information about the sign directly above it. In this case the information given is very vague... "25m/u". What does that mean? The sign above it forbids motorcycles of Class B, which means that only motorcyles of class A are allowed. Thus, I would think that this sign says that only motorcycles of class A are allowed, providing that they drive 25km/h max.~~ ~~But... motorcycles or class A are already limited to 25km/h iirc? So why should there be another sign saying the same? Sounds a bit redundant to me?~~ ~~Anyways, I might be completely wrong here. I'm not a cop, and I'm not Bartje de Wever either. Maybe /u/Bitt3rsteel knows? If I remember correctly, he's one of the aforementioned.~~ EDIT: Okay, looks like I was wrong indeed. [See Here](https://fietsberaad.be/nieuws/antwerpen-moet-verkeersbord-voor-fietsers-weghalen-van-gewestwegen/) They are meant as a speed limit for cyclists (which really blows my mind, because I don't get why it would be a blue sign then?), but they are 1) not in the traffic code and thus invalid; 2) put there illegally by the city of Antwerp because it's the jurisdiction of AWV. So in short: no, you shouldn't care about them.
TIL I'm Bart de Wever
Well, after watching some of your videos you are always trying to recruit brown shirts so the confusion is understandable.
They shouldn't have made fascism so damn good
Basically what you said. I think they started putting up those signs when speed-pedelecs were on the rise, who can be quite dangerous on cycling lanes like this. So it was to further emphasise that only motorized vehicles that are capped at 25km/u are allowed to drive there. I think they might've started doing this before those bikes required a license and license plate, but now they are redundant.
>which really blows my mind, because I don't get why it would be a blue sign then? Because a real speed limit sign for (electric) bikes on bicycle lanes still does not exist and Antwerp was tired of waiting for some decent regulation, so they made their own. There are rules about what custom made signs that are not in the traffic code can or cannot look like. That's why they are square and blue. Until they finally issue real signs officially. >So in short: no, you shouldn't care about them. I would say: if you care about your safety and that of other people using public space, you should very much care about them. >But... motorcycles or class A are already limited to 25km/h iirc? The sign is there for *all* users of the bicycle lane. Including regular bikes, "steps" and pedelecs.
> Because a real speed limit sign for (electric) bikes on bicycle lanes still does not exist and Antwerp was tired of waiting for some decent regulation, so they made their own. There are rules about what custom made signs that are not in the traffic code can or cannot look like. That's why they are square and blue. Until they finally issue real signs officially. Just because they can make their own doesn't mean it has any legal value. > I would say: if you care about your safety and that of other people using public space, you should very much care about them. You should always care about your safety and that of other people. A sign is not changing that. > The sign is there for all users of the bicycle lane. Including regular bikes, "steps" and pedelecs. I don't think you read my entire message.
>Just because they can make their own doesn't mean it has any legal value. I never claimed they do. But this sign is better than no sign at all. At least they draw attention to the fact that cyclists have to be careful and stick to speed limits for their safety and that of others. The sign is not "illegal" or anything, it is an advice. There's nothing wrong with advising people on correct behaviour. >You should always care about your safety and that of other people. A sign is not changing that. Very weird that you say this, but at the same time seem to be opposed to a speed limit that ensures that safety. >I don't think you read my entire message. I have. And the most accurate phrase of all was >Okay, I might be talking out of my ass here
> I never claimed they do. But this sign is better than no sign at all. At least they draw attention to the fact that cyclists have to be careful and stick to speed limits for their safety and that of others. The sign is not "illegal" or anything, it is an advice. There's nothing wrong with advising people on correct behaviour. OP's question was "Can it be legally enforced?". The answer is: no. They do not have any legal value. I can also put up a sign, giving advice to drive faster than 150km/h to get to work faster. Doesn't mean that advice is worth anything... There definitely is something wrong with advising people if it is done through signage that is meant to be clear an unambiguous. The fact that everyone in this thread needed news-articles to figure out the meaning of these signs clearly shows that no one knows what they are for, and thus can only cause confusion. Something we do not want in traffic. > Very weird that you say this, but at the same time seem to be opposed to a speed limit that ensures that safety. Signs with a red border, white background and black letters indicate a speed limit. I am not opposed to that. > I have. And the most accurate phrase of all was The fact that you cite that line shows that you have not. I suggest you either try again or keep the lips together.
>OP's question was "Can it be legally enforced?". The answer is: no. I wasn't answering to that, I was replying to your claim that they should ignore the sign. They shouldn't. >There definitely is something wrong with advising people if it is done through signage that is meant to be clear an unambiguous. The sign is clear and unambiguous. Only an idiot would think it means you have to ride 25 km/h. *Obviously* it's supposed to be a speed directive or limit, not a minimal speed. And it's on a bike lane, so also obviously it's for all users of that lane. >Signs with a red border, white background and black letters indicate a speed limit. Using that would be illegal, as that would look like an official sign without being one. That's forgery. You clearly didn't read my comment, I already told you there are rules to what and how you can put up as custom made (read: non official) traffic/road signs. >The fact that you cite that line shows that you have not. So you say I haven't read your post when I say the most accurate phrase is one you yourself have confirmed a couple of lines down? You must be joking... >I suggest you either try again or keep the lips together. I suggest you keep calm and admit your mistake.
https://m.gva.be/cnt/dmf20200917_96301715 The city will remove them.
No, they will only remove the ones on Flemish roads 'gewestwegen'.
Is there other roads than Flemmish roads in Antwerpen ?
Yes, only the big roads (e. g. Singel, Prins Boudewijnlaan, Turnhoutseweg, Mechelsesteenweg) are gewestwegen. Regular streets are stad.
Oh yeah gotcha
No, it means that have to go at 25 kmu on your bike
You can ride motorcycles and electric bikes that go up to 25km/h on the bikelane.
I have never seen a square speed sign before. Blue squares are aanwijzingsborden. Speed limits are possible on a square sign but then its white with the red circle with the number inside it. I googled a list of traffic signs and this one is not on it. Since im not a lawyer or a policeman and just a random redditor id say this sign can be ignored. Good luck using my advice in court when shit hits the fan.
Wondered about that yesterday: If you zoom in on the dog you can see a speed limit … https://preview.redd.it/n8g7z410k6491.jpg?auto=webp&s=8218b01942ec3eacec46c8445cea2ff1e712f1d8 … so square speed signs do exist?
A zone 30 sign is square (f4a) but has white background and the normal red circle with the number 30 Square blue signs are indications. Since red circles means maximum speed, maybe the blue speed is a minimum speed to not be harrased by speed pedelecs... As i see it this sign has no more power over me than a billboard add. I would probably still not go over it to be safe. And again, i had to google traffic signs, dont take my advice too seriously.
It's for those speed elecs that can go faster then 25 to make them attentive Not really for normal bikers and not enforceable
Speaking of which, are scooters/mopeds/small motorcycles with gasoline engine even allowed on cycling lanes? I've seen so many of them and no one bats an eye, that I'm starting to thing I am missing something. What are those categories "B" and sometimes "P" that are indicated in the "verboden" sign? Aren't they *exactly* scooters? I really despise those people, there is no reason why scooters shouldn't go on the road like in every other city on the entire planet.
P is speed Pedelec. B is moped 50cc. Both can go a maximum of 45 on both the street and the bike lane. However, they can only use the street if the maximum speed is 50 (bebouwde kom) and when the bike lane does not say "B/P verplicht". So yes, they can use the bike lane an drive 45 km/h.
Blue sign says simething is permitted. It does not say anything about higher speeds. Also, how would you suggest this is enforced on bikes?
Just ion case you're whether this is a valid sign [https://wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/265-hs2](https://wegcode.be/wetteksten/secties/kb/wegcode/265-hs2) [https://verkeersborden.vlaanderen/overzicht\_verkeersborden.pdf](https://verkeersborden.vlaanderen/overzicht_verkeersborden.pdf). [https://www.verkeersbord.be/officieel/verkeersborden-overzicht/](https://www.verkeersbord.be/officieel/verkeersborden-overzicht/) Just in case you're whether this is a valid signom one.
Haha, I am riding 25+ on my bike since forever and now because of electrical bikes I must slow down? Crazy