Decision points
Once you enter a cycle highway you know you just have to cycle straight forward. A cycle highway route however is not always a straight and self-explaining line of infrastructure between A and B. At certain points cycling straight forward means that you leave the cycle highway. How do you know on time that you have to turn left or right on an intersection? And how do you know you left the cycle highway in the case you made an error? And in the case there are two equivalent options to continue straight forward, how do you know which option is the right one? On these kind of decision points specific guidance is needed to help the cyclist in the right direction.
Self-explaining cycle highways ideally have a clear route-alignment and self-explaining infrastructure that limits the number of decision points and wayfinding tools. But cycle highways are also the backbone of the local cycle network and need to have intersections to improve the connections. On these intersections the cyclist needs tools to help him or her take the right decision.
The ARC principle in Flanders (F3 CHIPS pilot).
The Flemish wayfinding system consists of two sorts of indications:
- Vertical signage
- Horizontal markings (blue F-code-logo on the asphalt)
Both work together to indicate a change of direction to the cyclist. They do this using the 3 steps of the ARC-principle:
A-nnounce before the intersection the decision the cyclist needs to take. Vertical signs at 50 meters of the crossing indicate their will be a change of direction. By using a direction sign that is well visible in advance (before approaching an intersection), users are prepared and do not have to stop to find their way or make surprise maneuvers because they spotted a sign in the last moment. Crossings are often a place of interaction between users, so the cyclist needs to know the direction in advance to be able to signal their intentions and focus on observation of other users.
R-edirect on the decision point. On the spot of the direction change a vertical sign is used to indicates the change of direction. Sometimes an additional horizontal floor marking is used. This wayfinding tool helps the cyclist to take the right decision (f.i. turning left or right after a crossing). This second step is a very common step in all way finding systems. However, if there is no announcement before (step 1), a new cyclist will need more time and effort to make a decision and the chance for errors will increase. The first step improves the efficiency of the second step.
C-onfirm after the decision point that the cyclist is right. After the direction change a horizontal floor marking conforms to the cyclist that he is on the right track. The floor marking in de C-step has a 'pulling effect' on the cyclist. Even if he ignored the vertical signs, he will see the floor marking and cycle towards it.
Confirmation signs after a crossing or intersection might seem redundant, but this confirmation improves the general route identification and can also be part of an error strategy. You know you are wrong when you don't get a confirmation and this early detection of an error enables you to correct fast. Redundancy in signposting is also good for another reason. Users need to get in touch with the identity/brand. Redundancy improves the route identification and makes the wayfinding system more robust. From time to time signs go missing, are obscured by overgrown vegetation, vandalized or turned in the wrong direction.
See also the chapter on signposting.
- Application of CHIPS' recommended ARC-principle. Browse the tool for the different strenghts of this principle.
- Network-branding on a higher scale (state).
- Higher maintenance due to the number of wayfinding tools
Join the discussion