- 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
ANPR protected LTN in LB EalingAlmost a third of drivers think 'no motor vehicles' sign means 'cars and motorcycles only' finds #BikeIsBest poll
A poll conducted by #BikeIsBest has found that 50% of drivers are unfamiliar with the 'no motor vehicles' sign used to signal a Low Traffic Neighbourhood, and 29% actually thought it meant 'cars and motorcycles only, no trucks allowed.' #BikeIsBest says "a more literal and obvious sign" might help to quell drivers' frustrations, while a Hackney Councillor says the large number of fines collected from drivers flouting the rules in London are necessary to discourage rat-running drivers.
> London voters back LTNs and cycle lanes, analysis of mayoral election results reveals
As well as finding that half of drivers didn't understand the 'no motor vehicles' sign even though it has been in use since 1964, the poll, conducted by YouGov for #BikeIsBest, found that 10% didn't believe the sign represented any of the eight options given in a multiple choice question. Geographically, Scotland had the lowest understanding of the sign at 37%, while the highest rate of understanding was Yorkshire & Humber at 53%. Londoners were second-worst with a 39% rate of understanding.
The no motor vehicles sign is used to mark Low Traffic Neighbourhoods, with some councils now using Automatic Number Plate Recognition CCTV to catch drivers entering them instead of physical measures such as planters following incidents of vandalism. Rather than deliberately breaking the rules, the research from #BikeIsBest suggests that some drivers are simply unfamiliar with the signage:
"...some frustrations with Low Traffic Neighbourhoods could relate to the lack of public understanding of the required signage, leading to penalty charge notices. Although road users should keep up to date with the Highway Code, research from 2019 showed that one in five motorists haven't referred to it in a decade", said #BikeIsBest.
"Alternative signs for Low Traffic Neighbourhood restrictions are not currently available. The No Entry sign with an exception for cycles can be used as a contraflow for one-way streets; most streets within LTNs remain two-way and full access is maintained via alternative routes.
"It is not currently possible to put ‘except permit holders’ with a No Entry sign, which low-traffic neighbourhoods may need. The reason the Department for Transport limits exceptions to the No Entry restriction is to preserve the high level of compliance with such a safety-critical sign; the more exceptions a prohibition sign has, then the greater likelihood there is of drivers making an ‘assessment’ to ignore it."
Figures show Hackney Council has raised £2.7 million in fines from drivers entering LTNs since June 2020, issuing over 69,000 penalty charge notices (PCNs). Speaking to Transport Xtra, Hackney councillor Mete Coban said: “LTNs are important because they discourage through-traffic from using neighbourhood streets - where there are fewer pedestrian crossings and roads are less able to handle high volumes of traffic - and encourage people to switch local car journeys for walking and cycling. We know not everyone can make this switch, which is why all addresses in LTNs can still be accessed by car.
“We don’t want to issue anyone a PCN, but unfortunately, a small minority of drivers are continuing to try to use Hackney’s residential streets as rat-runs. This is particularly a problem with vehicles originating from outside the borough - our analysis has found that 8 in 10 of the PCNs issued in LTNs have been to vehicles that aren't registered in Hackney. The number of PCNs demonstrates the scale of the challenge we have in getting through-traffic off our residential roads, and why enforcement using CCTV is necessary.”
Low Traffic Neighbourhoods (LTNs) have proved particularly divisive in London since active travel initiatives in the past year saw a number of new ones appear across the city. As explained by our news editor Simon MacMichael in the first episode of the road.cc podcast, there are numerous indications that suggest LTNs generally have the backing of the public.
Adam Tranter, founder of #BikeIsBest, said: “Low Traffic Neighbourhoods have been positioned as new and controversial but really the idea has been in use for decades. It’s quite worrying that so many road users think the No Motor Vehicle sign, in place since 1964, means the exact opposite.
“It’s easy to say that people should be reading the Highway Code regularly but I think we all know this is unlikely. LTNs are popular, time and time again, in polling so extra clarity in the signage could help bring people on board who are supportive of the concept but personally frustrated at the implementation. Given these measures are
likely to become very commonplace as part of the green recovery, it might be time for a more literal and obvious sign.”
Jack has been writing about cycling and multisport for over a decade, arriving at road.cc via 220 Triathlon Magazine in 2017. He worked across all areas of the website including tech, news and video, and also contributed to eBikeTips before being named Editor of road.cc in 2021 (much to his surprise). Jack has been hooked on cycling since his student days, and currently has a Trek 1.2 for winter riding, a beloved Bickerton folding bike for getting around town and an extra beloved custom Ridley Helium SLX for fantasising about going fast in his stable. Jack has never won a bike race, but does have a master's degree in print journalism and two Guinness World Records for pogo sticking (it's a long story).
Latest Comments
- chrisonabike 6 hours 51 min ago
To be fair the Germans didn't give everyone much notice they were done with the war in November. Could have saved everyone tooling up for the Big...
- Blackthorne 7 hours 32 min ago
I disagree, the lucky few who get to wear one of these will certainly produce more mass.
- Dnnnnnn 8 hours 7 min ago
That wasn't what my original post was about - it was about the NHS as it is now. If you're going to be run over by an ambulance tomorrow, there are...
- imajez 8 hours 31 min ago
I prefer the not haveing to faff with brakes in first place, which is the typical reality for hydraulic systems.
- Backladder 11 hours 35 min ago
I'm sure the met are merely waiting for it to build up to a critical mass and then they'll swoop in and confiscate and crush them all then there...
- qwerty360 13 hours 27 min ago
Reality - I expect most first year lectures have more than 80 students at them; So 80 bicycle spaces is a rounding error on potential demand....
- whosatthewheel 15 hours 6 min ago
Especially that it is a traffic light controlled junction so he must have been completely blinded not to see the red on his left hand side and a...
- biking59boomer 15 hours 37 min ago
Send the details to UK network rail and Transport for Wales as well!
- KDee 16 hours 26 min ago
So that Pulsium from Lapierre has a 415mm wheelbase? I assume it's on 20 inch wheels then!
- ktache 17 hours 22 min ago
It's been one hell of a ride Cav, thanks for letting us share some of it. https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2024/nov/09/mark-cavendish-final-race-...
Add new comment
56 comments
No entry means the road is one way and cannot be accessed in the direction in which you see the sign but is open to traffic in the direction of the one way sign
No flying motor bikes means the road is closed to motor vehicles.
So one allows traffic in a limited way but the other does not allow traffic.
But as others have said we need retests every few years as it is absurd that you can have passed 40-50 years ago and not have to keep up with the highway code.
Not strictly true, no entry could just mean no entry, but once inside the road you can travel in either direction. i.e. residents or visitors can exit by either end, but can only enter from one end.
two ends of the same road
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6342554,-0.7487834,3a,75y,357.85h,75.18t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sqmTe7FqoAn9d1Xf6C2HhRw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
No one way sign here, and note the give way lines for cars coming out.
https://www.google.com/maps/@51.6373629,-0.7478778,3a,75y,173.34h,72.91t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1swGXk1N9bajEeypKjaLe8Pg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192
But no entry at this end.
A half of drivers fully recognise a sign that has been in use for over 60 years. Why on earth is anyone suggesting that a long standing convention recognised by half of drivers should be changed, because some incompetents didn't read the HWC.
A change of the sign will mean confusion, a long period of readjustment, and the incompetent drivers will still be incompetent....
I have certainly seen No Entry signs used in other contexts e.g. https://goo.gl/maps/MB3MVVz4bvVfRGsAA
I don't think it helps that road signs aren't always used especially consistently - for example, compare the above to https://goo.gl/maps/miHKP8r4ifWeLFiw6 which arguably conveys a very similar meaning.
More importantly, my main point was that the subtle differences in the meanings of the sign are irrelevant to the average driver. The No Entry sign is probably the clearest and most widely understood (even if not fully understood). I believe the counter argument is that, like the STOP sign, road designers prefer to reserve it for the most important places in order to avoid the meaning being diluted by "sign fatigue".
Not really seeing any subtlety here. And why should it be irrelevant to the average driver? Do they not have a duty to know these things being in charge of 1.5T + of vehicle and using the roads under licence?
If you take the three signs - the "No Motor Vehicles" at the top of this article, the "No Entry except buses and cyclists" and the "Cycle/Bus/Taxi only" signs as linked above, if you're a normal car driver, they all mean exactly the same thing - don't pass this sign. I like to think of myself as a reasonably well informed road user but I couldn't tell you why you would choose one of those signs and not the others (assuming additional text can be modified to allow whichever classes of vehicles you want to permit in any given location).
There are also some differences for emergency service vehicles (IIRC they are permitted through no vehicle or no motor vehicle signs, but not no entry).
However, if they put a "No Entry" sign, then it'll end up with cyclists getting abused for going through that way and possibly getting hassled by the police too for not following the signs.
If someone has trouble understanding the road signs, then they need to be either cajoled into learning (i.e. fined) or they're not competent enough to be in charge of a motorised vehicle.
No Entry except cycles ought to be pretty clear e.g. https://goo.gl/maps/P1CVNX9BLfv2bkDz7
It's hard to say exactly what the best solution is. Of course we would like all drivers to obey the HWC all the time, but we're a long way from that. If there are alternative signs that can be used, that would increase compliance and result in fewer angry drivers having a vendetta against cyclists then I think that would be, on balance, an improvement.
Probably rising bollards which can be lowered by the emergency services, but stay up the rest of the time. Since it is clear some drivers cannot understand signs, some refuse to obey them and others will actively remove signs they disagree with.
Rising bollards can be a good solution in some locations, but not practical for all of them!
Simply because symbols are more expressive and easier and faster to decode than words, particularly at distance. There's no need to put words up, as the signal says it all. If you have bothered to read your HWC that is (no, I'm not having a dig, I know that you have and you understand it)
The thing is, you don't actually need to know every sign in the highway code to know what this sign means, and we shouldn't give these people the excuse that "I can't be expected to know every sign in the book".
You just need to know that a red circle means the things inside it are prohibited. If you don't know that, and your natural response when faced with a sign you don't understand is to ignore it, then what are you doing on the roads?
I do think that style of sign is poor. I've known a few folk who have never been near the Highway Code think the 'No Cycling' means a cycle path. They maybe have an excuse having been no where near the highway code but drivers who should
I must admit I was in that category when I first moved to the UK. In lots of places, including where I learnt to drive, prohibition signs have lines through them. No line means its especially for you!
Not saying there is any excuse for drivers, 95% of whom will have done the driving test in the UK in the first place, but who should have anyway reviewed the road rules before driving if it was their first time driving in the UK.
Literally the first thing my driving instructor taught me (and this was 35 years ago) was that the shape of signs was significant, and that a red circle meant that whatever was on the sign was not permitted.
True, that will be alien to anyone who has never had to learn the Highway Code, but no driver should be able to get away with "I don't understand the signage", no matter how poorly designed they think they are.
Quite, and "it's a crap design" = "couldn't be arsed to read my HWC"
"It’s quite worrying that so many road users think the No Motor Vehicle sign, in place since 1964, means the exact opposite."
No; it's fu***ng terifying that there are so many drivers who are so incompetent. Regular re-tests for all drivers every five years; no exceptions. Fail and lose your licence for a month, fail twice and lose it for a year, fail three times, and you're out, no licence ever.
They're driving a lethal weapon; should we give shotgun owners who don't know the law the same discretion?
I particularly liked "then the greater likelihood there is of drivers making an ‘assessment’ to ignore it.""
"assessment" i.e. chose to ignore.
Well those vandals who painted the middle of the sign white really haven't got a clue - they've just made the restriction apply to all vehicles (not just the motorised variety). But thankfully, there's still a legal way through via bike...
There is: just ride. What makes a restriction enforceable is not just the sign, it's the TRO that makes the sign applicable (thery both need to be there). Therefore, although the sign now implies (at a squint) that you cannot cycle through, the TRO should still refer to motor vehicles, and no restriction (or, therefore, enforcement) applies to cyclists.
I always thought the sign meant there was a motorbike stunt show taking place further up the road 😀
"Although road users should keep up to date with the Highway Code, research from 2019 showed that one in five motorists haven't referred to it in a decade..."
Even so, it's still not an excuse for most, since the sign and its meaning have not changed since 1964.
"one in five motorists haven't referred to it in a decade"
I guess 80% lied or when they say refer they looked at the fines and points page.
The planters and the number of motons complaining in the local rag is a better clue than the sign to be fair. Once you've had your fine (which is fair enough) you know what the signs mean. Hopefully the proceeds from fining inconsiderate motoring can be out to good use by cash strapped councils.
Pages