What defines a cyclepath.

David Martin wrote:
On 15/11/04 10:31 am, in article
, "MartinM"
wrote:


Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Sun, 14 Nov 2004 11:09:51 GMT, "John Pitcock"
wrote in message
:

My 1972 edition of the Highway Code says "Cycle lane, compulsory"
but the
word "compulsory" hasn't been in subsequent editions.

According to John Franklin the round sign used to mean compulsory
and
the rectangular sign advisory. The meaning was changed in the
late
70s or early 80s. The round sign retains its compulsory meaning in
most other countries.

Thank You
stoney silence from all the other posters who told me I was talking
b****cks I see ;-)

You were and still are. Compulsory does not mean that you *have* to
use it
(ie it is in a different sense to that one might usually expect.) It
is
compulsory in that it is an exclusion of all but bicycles from that
path.

and mopeds (which are not allowed on current ones)
If it was an exclusion of other vehicles it would have a red circle.

I have e-mailed John Franklin to request clarification, and will also
contact the DfT.

On 15/11/04 12:10 pm, in article
, "MartinM"
wrote:

If it was an exclusion of other vehicles it would have a red circle.


Blue circle. Vehicles permitted.
Red circle. Vehicles excluded.

Simple really (though does require a bit of a broad interpretation of the
pictures on the sign)

...d

David Martin wrote:
On 15/11/04 12:10 pm, in article
, "MartinM"
wrote:

If it was an exclusion of other vehicles it would have a red
circle.


Blue circle. Vehicles permitted.
Red circle. Vehicles excluded.

Simple really (though does require a bit of a broad interpretation of
the
pictures on the sign)

..d

Just had a reply from John, more or less what Guy said, the compulsory
lanes thing seems to be a throwback to the 30's when apparently they
were built.

MartinM Wrote:
David Martin wrote:
On 15/11/04 12:10 pm, in article
, "MartinM"
wrote:

If it was an exclusion of other vehicles it would have a red
circle.


Blue circle. Vehicles permitted.
Red circle. Vehicles excluded.

Simple really (though does require a bit of a broad interpretation
of
the
pictures on the sign)

..d

Just had a reply from John, more or less what Guy said, the compulsory
lanes thing seems to be a throwback to the 30's when apparently they
were built.


Someone with a pathological hatred of manki...

Oh, it said CYCLEPATH!


--
beanfoto2

On 15 Nov 2004 06:08:47 -0800, "MartinM" wrote:

Just had a reply from John, more or less what Guy said, the compulsory
lanes thing seems to be a throwback to the 30's when apparently they
were built.

Told you ;-)

I picked up a bit of the history when I was writing this:
url:http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/images/gchn-5ssfqp/$file/ctc-presentation-handouts.pdf

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On 15 Nov 2004 06:08:47 -0800, "MartinM"
wrote:

Just had a reply from John, more or less what Guy said, the
compulsory
lanes thing seems to be a throwback to the 30's when apparently they
were built.

Told you ;-)

I picked up a bit of the history when I was writing this:

url:http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/images/gchn-5ssfqp/$file/ctc-presentation-handouts.pdf

good article, will read it when I get more time. But the whole point I
am making is that many road users are still labouring under the (wrong)
impression gained from old copies of the Highway code, including
probably our driving instructor. Everyone I have spoken to in the last
few days, all having taken their test during the 60's to early 80's,
think they are still compulsory. Time for a bit of public information
(whatever happened to those films?) methinks.

MartinM wrote:

I'm going back to the 70's here when the only ones that existed were
eg the one on the Severn Bridge, and alongside A roads like the A23
and A217, but I remember the blue circle and in those days that meant
compulsory, eg mimimum speed signs (do you still see them?)

IIRC they have 'em in the Blackwall Tunnel.

--

Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
World Domination?
Just find a world that's into that kind of thing, then chain to the
floor and walk up and down on it in high heels. (Mr. Sunshine)

On 15/11/04 2:21 pm, in article ,
"Just zis Guy, you know?" wrote:

On 15 Nov 2004 06:08:47 -0800, "MartinM" wrote:

Just had a reply from John, more or less what Guy said, the compulsory
lanes thing seems to be a throwback to the 30's when apparently they
were built.

Told you ;-)

I picked up a bit of the history when I was writing this:
url:http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/web/public.nsf/images/gchn-5ssfqp/$file/c
tc-presentation-handouts.pdf

That is not a compulsory cycle path any more than a cycle path by the side
of a motorway is. It is a road closed to bicycles with a parallel cycle
path. As the road is closed to bicycles, the cycle path is not part of the
carriageway.

...d

"John Pitcock" wrote in message
k...
My 1972 edition of the Highway Code says "Cycle lane, compulsory"
but the
word "compulsory" hasn't been in subsequent editions.

A round sign indeed does indicate compulsion, and I think it always
has indicated the same kind of compulsion. However it compels car to
stay **out** of the bike path, not cyclists to stay in.

I believe this has always been the case. To confine cyclists to cycle
tracks has always required other signs forbidding cyclists from using
other parts of the hgihway.

A good many official explanations have not been as clear about this
as they might have been, and this is still the case in a number of
official bike related publications. I am sure this is purely an
accidental oversight, and it would be grossly unfair to assume some
machiavellian scheme to mislead.

Jeremy Parker