Cycle paths unsafe?

[Steady rider]

If it was not possible to provide to this standard for some reason then it would be a sub-standard path and signed for low speed and care, narrow path - care.

Having a standard would provide the basis for designers to follow, rather than guidelines.

Designers would try to avoid providing something they had to sign as below standard.

Possible motions for the CTC AGM 2011, mentions providing a standard but no one has offered to second the motions so far. To save the trouble of looking it up;

4

That ‘standards’ for cycling facilities (not guidelines) should be implemented by 2012 or as soon as possible.

Reason

Standards would provide a legal basis to install high quality facilities to suitable design specifications, unlike guidelines allowing for lower requirements. Junction requirements forming part of standards. Safety for cyclists would be improved.

[LANDSURFER74]

Even if there is, and it is adopted, why would that lead to closure of non-compliant paths? (We can, of course, buy non-BS-compliant lights.)[/quote]
Lets see ... Health and Safety guidlines, litagation fears, cost of bringing pathways and junctions up to a standard. ....
" Our child fell off his bike on the cycle path , does it meet the required standard, no ... were suing!!!" It will happen.

No standards, no minimum requirements, "let the user beware" (sic).