Such a great debate.
It seems to be there are three types of cycle signage
-
Dedicated discovery trails (Heritage trails - dedicated exercise routes - mountain bike tracks etc)
-
Cycleways - so like the M40 this way to Oxford (UK example). And these vary but seem to be signage to show best routes for a cyclist to go from a to b
-
This bit of road/footpath is for cyclists too or dedicated to cyclists
I find the first one the “trail” ones easier to accept if evidence of trail given (website/map etc)
2 - the this way to signage I find harder to accept as I don’t see how it is different to M40 to oxford navigational signage… But I can be swayed depending on evidence and quality of nomination
And the third one is a no straight off for me
But I see a lot of 2 and 3 and less of 1 these days as nominations
Thanks for raising. As reading this thread is firming up my views
I understand your point in relation to it being no different to Road routes. But I would take the following into consideration in why they are not the same.
- National Cycle Routes already exist and are acceptable. Motorways and other roads are not.
- CycleWay Routes (and potentially including National Cycle Routes) can be seen as encouraging exploring, socialising and exercise.
- The Footpathes are not dedicated to cyclists in this case. They will still share paths with pedestrians. Unlike Motorways and Roads, which gives way to Road users first.
- They are similar to Capital Ring Routes and similar, as these will encourage exploration that isn’t the same as Roads.
I won’t debate on the safety aspect on CycleWays / NCN’s, but I will assume they are as safe as things like Capital Ring Routes.
1 Like
My view point is steered also by my experience in other countries and right now Australia…I do tend to skip UK reviews of these as they confuse me and I fail to understand why/how to accept. A recent trip to London I could literally make multiple waypoints from one position looking at the large number of navigational signs, cycle route sign, dedicated section of road sign, stickers on poles…and so on. It is no wonder it is confusing!!!
In regional and remote areas it is easy to “accept” as I give more leeway there. But in metro areas I avoid/skip these unless I can tell a slamdunk it - because I do find it confusing. The nuances are often quite fine! And unless you know your cycle signs then it is hard and unless supporting information is really clear it is hard. So yeah I avoid. NOT my area of expertise
Decided to take a punt and see what happens. I am not going to be overly upset if it gets rejected. I am working on the basis that it is an official Cycle Network sponsored by Transport for London and carries similar weight to National Cycle Networks.
I would edit out “new” as you should avoid such phrases as they get dated.
I am expecting this to be rejected within the hour…
And was it? I’d probably vote for that, although IMO the title is a bit wordy - you could just make it “Cycleway C40, Ruislip Road East”.
Surprisingly still in voting. The title can be fixed if approved.
