gaz wrote:The Monsal Trail (NCN680) appears on Sustrans mapping without any link to Bakewell, local cycle routes and facilities are usually shown. IMO "Cyclists Dismount" and "(wheeled route)"are intended to inform you that the route should not be cycled.
That's odd. It looks like Bakewell Station and Station Road is a good link, although I can't spot where the pictured sign was. Have I misunderstood?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
jochta wrote:I disagree. If you are cycling towards the sign from behind the camera it's telling you the route continues left but you are supposed to dismount to continue that way as it is a wheeled route, i.e. you are supposed to wheel your bike and not ride it. The sign is facing the approaching cyclists.
As it does not indicate a direction, I would understand the sign as applying to if I pass beyond the sign. By turning left, I wouldn't pass beyond it and I'd probably believe that I could continue riding. If I obeyed every sign that was merely facing me, the roads would probably become unusable. After all, there's a 7.5t weight limit sign facing me beyond a nearby crossroads and that doesn't mean mean lorries can't turn left before the limit.
If they wished to convey the dismount as applying to the left turn, I feel it should be a blue patch on the left-pointing sign... or better to omit both the dismount sign and the white bike symbol and put a no-cycling red/white circle as a patch on the brown background.
I never said it was right but I'm sure that's what they intended when they put the sign there. BTW they shouldn't use a No Cycling sign at the end of a cycle facility...
Attachments
Last edited by jochta on 9 Nov 2015, 10:26pm, edited 1 time in total.
rmurphy195 wrote:I simply couldn't understand this one, coming off the Monsal trail into Bakewell
As I said above they are trying to tell cyclists that there is a break in the cycle route here and they should dismount and continue left on foot to reach the town centre. This signpost only relates to the Monsal trail. It's not trying to tell you anything about going straight on or any other direction. I don't actually think it's that ambiguous...
...Unless you can see the signs in context. I made assumptions that there was a straight ahead route that the sign referred to, or whether it is the continuation of the cycle route to the left that it applies to (or whether indeed it is a global instruction or simply a statement of fact ).
Rick.
Former member of the Cult of the Polystyrene Head Carbuncle.
gaz wrote:The Monsal Trail (NCN680) appears on Sustrans mapping without any link to Bakewell, local cycle routes and facilities are usually shown. IMO "Cyclists Dismount" and "(wheeled route)"are intended to inform you that the route should not be cycled.
That's odd. It looks like Bakewell Station and Station Road is a good link, although I can't spot where the pictured sign was. Have I misunderstood?
Bakewell NCN680.jpg
Sustrans mapping does not show any cycle routes between Bakewell and the Monsal Trail. Clearly there are roads and the "(wheeled route)" public footpath but there are no recommended routes shown.
High on a cocktail of flossy teacakes and marmalade
You just mean that Sustrans has a route but no network in that area (again)? That is, there are cyclable routes but sustrans doesn't recognise them?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
jochta wrote:As I said above they are trying to tell cyclists that there is a break in the cycle route here and they should dismount and continue left on foot to reach the town centre.
Is this like that ludicrous situation in Padstow where a converted railway foot/cycle path enters the town and comes to a dead end at the edge of a car park with signs requiring cyclists to dismount and walk through the car park to gain access to the town's road network? Another isolated cycle route not linking to the local roads at one end?
Why can't they do the same with some motorways - have them end at a car park with no route onward? Blackpool has a feature a little like that, but there is an exit a mile or so before the car park.
Northumberland CC seem to have got the idea that we cannot handle any of their cattle grids. Every grid between Carrycotts and Kirkwhelpington has our favourite blue sign either side of it. How much did this cost? The red triangle is warning enough for those who are not confident or in wet weather. Grids in good nick, but a bigger hazard on this road are the drifts of gravel at the bottom of the hills.
(Away from here there is a stretch of road near Dalkeith which has 5 such instructions in little more than a kilometre.)
I contacted my local councillor and the Highways Dept at Northumberland Council, to ask why the Cyclist Dismount signs were being used at cattle grids. No reply was received from either. This is a little irritating.
A few designs of cattle grids exist, tubes, RHS tubes (rectangular hollow section), spacing may vary a little perhaps. Is there a UK standard for cattle grids?
I doubt if the decision to put up these signs is determined by the type or condition of the individual grid. Inglestone Common, north of Chipping Sodbury, has four cattle grids but only one has a Cyclists Dismount sign. All four are in type and this one is in better condition than others. The only thing that might determine it is its position, at the bottom of a steep hill; audax riders might know the climb to the Somerset Monument. But the road has actually flattened out at that point; besides, it's actually much easier, comfortable and more stable to go over a cattle grid with a bit of speed -- I'd say 15 to 20mph is good, even up to 25mph. Under 10 is far worse.
).
