Pedalling to the gig this afternoon along the cycleways and roads of Berkshire I was reflecting on an oft encountered sign that really winds me up! The offending notice being "Cyclists dismount!"
Forgive me as I descend into a rabid amalgam of Basil Fawlty and Victor Meldrew but really, what is the point of creating a cycle way that you are then asked not to cycle on???
It is blatantly ridiculous, a bit like the footway baring signage indicating that one must crawl rather than walk for the next 100 yards, thus inadvertently (or I guess vertently) insisting that feet must not be used on the footway.
Reflecting (through gritted teeth) today though I have decided to mellow a little in my approach to this. I have now decided I am prepared to accept this absurd requirement, however there is a caveat! I accept it providing that around half a percentage of the road network carries signs insisting that drivers may not drive, but must instead get out and push their cars along the relevant section.
So Minister of Transport, do we have a deal?
Kinda glad you're NOT the Minister for Transport. With my old car I might have managed to get out and push but not nowadays.
Completely agree, it's why a lot of the time there is no point using a cycle lane on a pavement which stops regularly or swaps sides of the road - it's much quicker and probably safer to stay on the road itself.
Sarah,
If I was minister of transports cycling would get some bigger incentives to invest in routes AND you wouldn't have to get off.
While I'm thinking about it I'll lay out my policies:
Incentives for innovative public transport solutions for communities
Illegal to sell any new car that cannot deliver 50mpg+
Investment in trains
Electric Motor assist limitations abolished for delivery cycles and recumbents
All housing projects would require cycle and public transport access