Donate using PayPal

Photo listing : general sign/notices (problem)

The most recent photos are listed first. See also photomap view.

This listing only shows photos within Cambridge.
Go to the national CycleStreets photo listings for photos beyond.

Non highways compliant signs near a private school.

St Faith’s is a school. If they want to introduce a one-way system they should apply to Cambridgeshire Highway Authority and that will be considered by the democratic process.

Anti ‘gentrification’ poster which shows the fading yarn bombed railings on Mill Road bridge with text overlaid: Make Romsey Shit again but see #102589.

Very odd to have a Closed to Through Traffic sign at the closed end of a dead-end road - there's access for bikes, but the road isn't closed to them anyway.

No, Cranmer Road is not closed - this is the only access to a dead-end road, and there's plenty of room for bikes and indeed cars too.

Rant at ‘cyclists’ who are ‘blocking’ the ‘entire pavement’ and a request to use racks 300 yards away. The challenge here is to change some of the residents' parking spaces to accommodate cycles.

Rant at ‘cyclists’ who are ‘blocking’ the ‘entire pavement’ and a request to use racks 300 yards away. The challenge here is to change some of the residents' parking spaces to accommodate cycles. See detail of the poster a ... [more]

No Entry Except Buses sign should also read 'and Cycles', of course.

Is this a new sign over-ruling the No Entry marking because the road is now two-way for cycling? Very unclear.

Sign for a cycleway coupled with bonkers sign required by lawyers telling people they've no right to be near the busway. Get rid of it!

No comment.

Yellow signs threatening seizure and extending into the distance, including apparently on the footway.

This should be a through route for cycling (ideally with a link across St Matthew's Piece from York St), if anyone at the city council or Anglia Ruskin University had actually thought about the clousre at the far end.

After bikes being here as long as anyone can remember the new racks nearby #95242 have given this church the opportunity to ban them.

Is it one decade or two since the Kite area was closed to through traffic? And the council still hasn't managed to add an Except Cycles plate to this sign. I do wonder why Cambridge has a reputation for being cycle-friendly.

A plethora of signs in Eddington - whenever pedestrians might cross the cycletrack the signage changes from 'segregated shared use' to 'unsegregated shared use' and then back again. There must be a simpler way - very few people will know or ... [more]

Rutland Cycles have suddenly closed the lockers in the Grand Arcade cycle park.

No visitor would guess that many of these buses actually go to the city centre, leading to unnecessary use of taxis - complete user interface failure

Misleadingly implies bikes not permitted

At least the sign mentions that cycling is allowed, but the road markings are still claiming Bus Only access to Cambridge station.

Timetable for a service that no longer runs.

These "No Entry" signs appeared whilst Wilton Terrace was being demolished and there was restricted access at the other end. However, that's long over and there's plenty of space now. So are these signs still up to dissuade people cycli ... [more]

Should be a cycle left filter here, as there is a cycle lane so merging with traffic is not applicable

Making it hard for cyclists to cover the last few metres to the cycle racks - why?

I take issue with this. Whilst I'd accept that on the side nearest the Market Square room is limited, on the side opposite the bookshop there is plenty of room for bikes and pedestrians. I would hope for a more balanced approach to this. ... [more]

Yet another unnecessary Cyclists Dismount sign - the contraflow cycle lane ends and there's a shared-use sign hidden under the tree ahead before cyclists join the road beyond.

Odd sign, when the left-hand lane is clearly marked as car park access.

Yet another annoying Cyclists Dismount sign. Why not some positive guidance instead?

Clearly no local council officers care about nonsense such as this - Cycleway/End of Cycleway. Which is it?

Does anyone understand why Addenbrooke's are so set against cyclists turning left onto the cycle path to Hills Road? There's even a barrier to block it.

"You're parking up the wrong tree" - well so were the developers of CB1 when they failed to provide adequate visible cycle parking for this area.

UPDATE AT END. New sign asking "Cyclists please dismount". This has been a cycle cut through for the 27 years I've lived here. Note it's a private sign and not official, but this is a private estate. However, when estate planned, was it ... [more]

Appalling signage from the developers of CB2 - No Buses signs that supposedly mean Buses Only, and no mention of cycles although these are quite entitled to reach the front of the station this way.

Silly to retain these lights while the works are going on

Silly to retain these lights while the works are going on

When locking your bike to street furniture first make sure it is firmly fixed to the ground! This dangerously loose post was laid flat and reported to the County Council. https://highwaysreporting.cambridgeshire.gov.uk/?id=00256126

I suspect that the signage on Fison Road is wrong. I'm pretty sure cars should be allowed here.

No Cycling sign on what seems to be new shared-use provision

Contradictory signs!

Downing College is all about cars, with pedestrians and cyclists at the bottom of the hierarchy

This could be a useful route if Downing College was not so anti-cycling.

Ignored unenforced signage.

I appreciate that these were emergency repairs on a burst water main, but it would be helpful if road signs could acknowledge non-motorised forms of transport (to which the road was not blocked).

Signage on the cycle route through Fawcett school not very clear (and it really should be in a school!) and now out of date after recent developments. I do appreciate the desire to avoid putting up new signs and posts, but these two mis ... [more]

No ball games notice and anti-skateboard lugs on the wall top.

Cyclists asked to dismount - but driving permitted

New 'Keep Clear' signs created, but instead the previous hashed box should be reinstated

Prohibited right turn. This has not really been an issue until now as for many years this was a false one way street. Meaning that traffic could not enter from the Trumpington Street end. In 2015 it has become a two way street for cyc ... [more]

No left turn into Fitzwilliam Street. That street is now two way for cycles and so there should be an 'Except cycles' sub panel here. Same sign as 12 years ago: #2568.

Cambridge Assessment seem to think it makes sense for cyclists not to use the main gate to the car park at their new (presumably temporary) offices but to dismount and walk through a narrow alley instead.

Cambridge Assessment seem to think it makes sense for cyclists not to use this huge gap at their new (presumably temporary) offices but to dismount and walk through a narrow alley instead.

This post has been replaced facing the wrong direction.

University now strongly discouraging cycling through the Hauser Forum, which was the main cycle access to this end of the West Cambridge Site from the south.

So the obvious thing to do (imo) would be, provide more bike racks. Not directly outside this restaurant as the pavement is narrow here, but nearby.

Clearly the presence of a van blocking visibility has no effect on safety, resulting in a sign being needed

The sign explaining the cameras is way too high and with too small lettering to read. I hope the cameras are compiling a good record of the criminal motor vehicle storage that goes on in this car dominated neighbourhood.

The location of this leaning sign appears to be at the legal edge of the footway - but to all intents and purposes it is in the middle of the footway. Really stupid and annoying, but I suspect if the council wanted to replace this sign and ... [more]

See #65107.

See #63242.

One way street arrows remain on Ross Street, despite the appearance of Except Cycles at the northern entrance. See #65111.

At last some signs have gone up to confirm that the section of Ross Street north of this junction is two-way for cycling. But the problem here is that the sign is the wrong way around - this side of the sign should be visible from the other ... [more]

At last some signs have gone up to confirm that the section of Ross Street north of this junction is two-way for cycling. But the problem here is that the sign is the wrong way around! Ie. only the grey back side of the sign is visible cent ... [more]

Why put these signs on the cycle stands? Normal for the car-focussed cycle-blind society we live in.

The yellow sign on the side of this Bunzl lorry screams: WARNING PEDESTRIANS KEEP A SAFE DISTANCE FROM THIS VEHICLE AT ALL TIMES Such messages betray a fundamentally broken chain of thought - of course it is the driver who is re ... [more]

Ross Street: The rules have changed recently to permit two-way cycling in this street (see #63237). There is nothing here to inform road users that oncoming cycles are now legal and this one way sign on the left suggests otherwise. This is ... [more]

The rules have changed recently to permit two-way cycling in this street. The cycle symbol and arrow have been added on the ground and the word NO has also been refreshed (compare to #39547). (Note also that the mini is facing the 'wrong' d ... [more]

The NO ENTRY dominates leaving it unclear whether you can legally reach the contraflow section.

Ludicrous sign - pedestrians have no need to 'turn back'

Pavement blocked by sign

Kelly Communications putting a Cyclists stay back sign on a tiny van - these signs are intended to warn about left hooks by long lorries with poor visibility. This sign here simply represents victim blaming.

No Entry Signs Incorrectly Located. Just behind the sign on the right is a shared-use path where cycling is permitted in both directions. Either locate this sign 3 yards further on, or exclude cycling on the "no entry" sign.

Whingeing signs on the Ravenswoth Gardens development is proof of a failed design process which has ignored the need to provide adequate cycle parking. There are three such signs visible in this shot - the third is before the lampost at ... [more]

The sign threatens: "Bikes attached to anything but the facilities provide will be removed without notice." Its hard to spot any 'factilities' in this part of the development. Failure to cater for cycle parking leads to mean spirited notice ... [more]

Yet another imbecilic contractor who thinks that cyclists can't use the road.

Idiot Cambridge cyclist entering Bridge Street though No Entry Signs.

Sign blocking the pavement

BEWARE PEOPLE CROSSING the sign screams at drivers. Shame the designers of this building didn't think about that when they decided it was OK to force walkers into the path of oncoming vehicles by blocking the footway! Very pedestrian ... [more]

Road sign heavily leaning over on Thompson's Lane.

Remains of shared-use marking to the left (and there are no blue/white signs either). And surely that should be a broken white line if cyclists are permitted to stay on the footway to the left?

Remains of shared-use marking (and there are no blue/white signs either).

Remains of shared-use marking (and there are no blue/white signs either).

Addenbrooke's have changed one of their idiotic non-standard road signs for an equally idiotic non-standard sign - the road is open to cycles and motor vehicles going away from the camera, and for cycling towards the camera.

The yellow sign warns of the closure of Green Dragon Bridge. I'd suggest a better location for this would be #55970 where riders have a chance to turn left rather than go straight on.

Well done if you spot the yellow sign alerting to the closure of the Green Dragon Bridge! I'd suggest a better location is #55974

If you're cycling this way that yellow sign on the fence on the left is meant to warn you that the Green Dragon bridge (reached by going straight on here) is closed for maintenance. Very hard to see in that position - a better location w ... [more]

A bendy bollard has appeared in Park Street Cycle Park. This seems to be the latest bit of paranoia about making sure drivers turn rather than driving into this previously really hard-to-see wall. I thought it was odd that it had been ... [more]

The sign warning of the cyclists ahead is barely visible - having been turned and covered in dirt.

Signage at Addenbrooke's is getting ever more idiosyncratic and non-standard - it's not illegal, these are private roads. It seems this is a patched version of #17050.

A sensible diversion, except for the fact that there's no need to dismount to use the crossing - it has green cycle lights. And it's a shame that two BT Openreach vans were parked right on the cycle route dropped kerbs just around the corn ... [more]

It seems the city rangers are still concerned about access for rubbish trucks being impeded by parked bikes.

"No cycling" sign on this exit from the West Cambridge site.

Typically arbitrary British signage - instead of an End of Cycle Route sign it should be indicated that cyclists should use the path to the left and pedestrians the one to the right.

It's hard to see how 'habitat and access improvements' require Lammas Land to be closed for almost two months (from early October, in fact).

Caught this sign out of the corner of my eye as I came from the other direction. There is no similar sign at the other end and a number of paths are cycleable locally. A lot of this area is plagued by lack of info about where offroad cy ... [more]

This is the start of the shared use cycleway/pavement on Campkin Road near the junction with Northfield Avenue. The cycle sign which should be on the post is not present and the markings on the ground have deteriorated to such a state t ... [more]

The unenforceable sign reads: DO NOT RIDE CYCLE ON THIS FOOTPATH - unenforceable because it is the incorrect sign. If cycling were genuinely not permitted the official round red bordered NO CYCLING sign would be used.

The sign shouts: DO NOT RIDE CYCLES ON THIS FOOTPATH but because the official 'No Cycling' sign (ie. Round with red border showing black cycle on white background) has not been used then that probably means that cycling is not acut ... [more]

The sign shouts: DO NOT RIDE CYCLES ON THIS FOOTPATH but because the official 'No Cycling' sign (ie. Round with red border showing black cycle on white background) has not been used then that probably means that cycling is not acut ... [more]

Given that this is about 200m from Cambridge station, why were Microsoft surprised that people wanted to lock their bikes here? - as the metalwork's only purpose is to protect the tree, it would have been far better to have designed it for ... [more]

Entrance to Rutherford Road from Long Road. This is NOT a cul-de-sac for cyclists and pedestrians but a safe, convenient and important route to the city centre.

We welcome your feedback, especially to report bugs or give us route feedback.

My comments relate to: *






Your comments: *
URL of page: * https://cambridge.cyclestreets.net/photos/signs/bad/
How did you find out about CycleStreets?:
Your name:
Our ref: Please leave blank - anti-spam measure

* Items marked with an asterisk [*] are required fields and must be fully completed.