Cycle parking in Malvern

The county council is apparently planning to reprint the 2007 edition of Malvern Walking and Cycling Map. Personally I believe that this publication is inaccurate and unhelpful, even dangerously misleading in places, for cyclists or more importantly prospective cyclists.

As I knew there were a few cycle parking facilities around Malvern not included on the map, my seasonal project is a start at an ‘audit’. I’ve written the findings up on the Resources page plus link to photos on Flickr - a GPX file (for use on GPS and online mapping) to come soon.

Your thoughts on the map and local cycle parking (including any racks that I have missed), please. As Cycle Malvern is now in touch with the relevant county staff, hopefully we can get the map improved before it is republished.

Map standards for which cyclists?

There was some intriguing stuff at the cycle campaign conference in Oxford yesterday, but little chance to discuss (or even explore in detail) some of the important issues raised. I’ve added an extra page to this blog giving some web links to particular policy, research and campaigning developments. More here later on ‘twenty is plenty’, ‘permeability’, etc., probably.

The ‘launch’ of a standard for cycling maps in a few minutes before lunch sounded good, but looking at some of the examples already using it (Cheltenham, Kettering), I am not so sure. The basic idea is that every road in an area is classified into one of 5 categories (colour coded), indicating what level of cycling experience is needed to use them. No suggested cycle routes, no highlighting of problematic junctions - although perhaps these could be added over the top, at the risk of information overload. (Simplify is my motto when it comes to communication, even I often fail!)

My problem is that this potentially gives another barrier for any new or returning cyclist to get over - understanding the map and working out your own route for every journey. Suggested routes could make it easier for someone to just hop on a bike, and not see it as a major undertaking.

And why bother with the top two grades, only suitable for really experienced cyclists? People who fit that bill will be quite capable of making such judgements themselves, but others who over-estimate their competence (which is not unusual) might be misled into taking dangerous choices. Or perhaps as the grading is intended to connect with skills levels of the National Cycle Training Standard the maps are only to be issued to those completing such courses?

I’d like to hear that these maps have been road tested with a variety of bicycle users, and not just colleagues of the designers.

Late addition: Cycling England has produced a briefing for councils on cycle maps - pdf, 900kb - which includes Kettering as an example.