- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
No cycling, High Wycombe (via StreetView).jpgNo cycling sign... on Buckinghamshire shared use path
Messages don’t come much more mixed than a sign telling people they can’t cycle on a designated cycle path. The Bucks Free Press reports that just such a thing has been spotted in High Wycombe.
The ‘no cycling’ sign appears at the junction of Arch Way and Premier Way, at a point where a painted cycle lane on the road becomes a shared use path.
The sign has apparently been there for some time. Transport for Bucks suggest that it may have been tampered with and turned to point the wrong way. However, despite it being reported several weeks ago, it has still not been addressed.
In 2011, ‘no cycling’ signs were placed immediately above National Cycle Network (NCN) route signs by Birmingham City Council. In that instance, a third sign attempting to clarify things read: “The cycle route here follows the roadway. Please DO NOT ride on the footway.”
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) joined Sustrans in asking for the Birmingham signs to be removed.
“To be effective, signage needs to be clear and consistent,” said Kevin Clinton, the charity’s head of road safety. “These two signs could easily confuse cyclists because they appear to be giving conflicting messages.”
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Boopop 26 min 25 sec ago
Great stuff. Maybe you could contact FlightFreeUK and take a lifetime pledge as a company. I'm pretty sure the founder cycles too
- Sriracha 52 min 50 sec ago
Looks more like it is designed to keep the bike thieves in rather than out. That might in fact be a better solution.
- Sriracha 56 min 47 sec ago
Shimano were castigated for not bringing on new factories to meet pandemic demand, thus gumming up the supply chain. Their argument at the time was...
- Romanp 1 hour 6 min ago
I figured out a reason of that squeaking noise. I have xpresso 2 and 7, and also xpro 10 pedals, and that squeaking isn't present only at Xpresso 2...
- MichaelWinnerRIP 2 hours 7 min ago
Italian tourist and pussycat in Portugal.
- David9694 2 hours 55 min ago
Yep, it's official - reds under the, er, bonnet...
- Rendel Harris 3 hours 34 min ago
Indeed, I was drawing from personal experience – I don't use it that often but it's such a nice bit of infrastructure that I sometimes go out of my...
- paulgardener@gmail.com 3 hours 38 min ago
Except socialism doesn't work like that in real life. It's the capitals countries that try to look after those in need, and the average person's...
Add new comment
10 comments
The tactile paving suggests pedestrian only: agrees with the sign being the wrong way round.
There is a ramp down to another shared path behind the wall.
https://goo.gl/maps/MmUshJnBbt12
And this happened with speed signs being turned around by pranksters, yet this makes a story for some reason?
The only thing coming out of this is yet another dreadful cycle lane design being shown.
Streetview from Nov 2015 shows the sign in the same position, one side shows a no cycling sign with a shared use path sign on the opposite side.
http://tinyurl.com/h2pp9g5
I just like the comment that the council "think someone may have turned the sign around". You'd think they would know really. I assume someone signed the work off as complete?
Me too. You'd think that maybe, just maybe, after the council thinking that someone may have turned the sign around. They give some serious consideration (or maybe a bit more thinking) to turning the sign back around the correct way? Obviously a risk assessment would have to be carried out before any work could be undertaken, and a full scale review into local traffic disruption whilst the roads closed for several weeks in order to mend the problem. But hey look at the bright side, at some point in the future they'll be a shared cycle route with the appropriate signage. Won't that be glorious!
Depressing waste of money there. The sign, the post, the paint is just stuff being put on the street that will never be used and is fundamentally useless. By the time you add up all the bits its probably about £2-5000 being wasted on something with no function.
OK I don't know the road at all, and am only going on one picture, but why would you want to direct bikes onto that path anyway? If there was someone with a buggy / wheelchair / bags of shopping coming the other way there isn't exactly space is there? And I doubt they would be expecting to face a bike coming round the corner.
I am all for infrastructure, but just painting a bike on a pavement doesn't cut it!
Oh, and the sign.......
A most useful cyclepath between the skate/bmx park and the McDonald's. No real benefit though as you would just have been directed to cross the road where cars are sweeping off the dual carriageway (normally without indicating) might as well stay on the road as the cars are slowing to turn into either mcdonalds or sainsbury.
Someone kicked over a traffic cone down my street last week.
Would you like some counselling? Not councilling though.