> What i meant to say was is
> that the sign you are talking about used for Cycle only paths? I cycle
> thousands of miles a year and have never seen one of those in the UK.
> It appears you have, so i assume they are used in certain localities?
When Transport for London compiled the TfLCID database in 2017, there
were 2380 TSRGD diagram 955 signs in Greater London. Another 8 years of
cycle infrastructure construction by TfL, the 32 London Borough Councils
and the City of London will have added to that. They're *really* common.
> It's hard to imagine a cycle path that is not used by pedestrians.
It's very easy. Cycle tracks and modal filters where the pedestrian
infrastructure is separate are extremely common in Greater London.
Here's an example of one at a modal filter from the first TfLCID I
looked at:
https://cycleassetimages.data.tfl.gov.uk/RWG000994_2.jpg
On 08/02/2026 13:28, Chris Smith wrote:
Sorry, the first email sent accidentally. What i meant to say was is
that the sign you are talking about used for Cycle only paths? I cycle
thousands of miles a year and have never seen one of those in the UK. It
appears you have, so i assume they are used in certain localities?
Why do you think discouraged would work better than a simple No?
Chris
Allotmentcyclist
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: *Chris Smith* <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2026, 13:21
Subject: Re: [Talk-GB] foot=* access tagging on signed cycle "only" ways
To: Talk Gb <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
On Sun, 8 Feb 2026 at 05:58, Robert Skedgell (OSM)
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
(Posted to the OSM Community Forum at
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/foot-access-tagging-on-signed-
cycle-only-ways-in-the-uk/141329 <https://
community.openstreetmap.org/t/foot-access-tagging-on-signed-cycle-
only-ways-in-the-uk/141329>
)
Where we have highway=cycleway ways explicitly signed as being for
cycles only, tagging of foot access in practice and the wiki are a
little inconsistent.
The signs used are blue circular regulatory signs, but are not
enforceable in the same way as many other regulatory signs as s.36 RTA
1988 does not apply.
Tagging as foot=no conveys the intent, but as it isn’t really a
meaningful prohibition some people remove it or even replace it with a
potentially unhelpful foot=yes. I would like to suggest replacing it
with foot=discouraged and updating the wiki if the UK community are
happy with this.
The most common sign in use here is, TSRGD diagram 955 “Route for
use by
pedal cycles and electric scooters being used in a trial, only (not
intended for pedestrians)”. It is commonly used on dedicated cycle
“only” tracks.
The other sign used is TSRGD diagram 957 “Route comprising two ways for
use by pedal cycles and electric scooters being used in a trial, only
and by pedestrians only, with those ways separated by a solid white
line, or by physical means”. Where the ways are separated by more than
just paint, they are often mapped as separate ways in OSM.
What would be the preferred option for the highway=cycleway?
--
Robert Skedgell <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb <https://
lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb>
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
--
Robert Skedgell (rskedgell)
_______________________________________________
Talk-GB mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
