Wayfinding – Miles or Minutes?
Back in July we attended a subgroup meeting with the Council. One of the hot topics at this session was Wayfinding – how to direct cyclists to where they want to get to and how to best to describe the length of their journey.
Traditional directional signage on our roads usually displays distance (miles). Radically the Council is proposing that destinations are displayed instead in terms of how long it will take you to get there. For example, a sign in Cross Gates pointing towards the City Centre might say 4 miles or 24 minutes. A hybrid option showing both miles and minutes was also discussed, but most of us thought this made the signs look rather cluttered. Both we and the Council had seen examples of “time taken” being used to good effect in other cities. London, with distances given in minutes along some of its major segregated routes, springs to mind.
Campaign members attending weren’t unanimous in their preference and we felt we needed to canvas a wider set of views. So … we decided to run a little survey, choosing as our audience not just our paid-up members, but the somewhat bigger set of our Facebook group members.
During August we ran a simple poll asking for people’s preferences. We asked how people would prefer their cycling destinations to be marked. Out of 72 voters:
91% said they preferred cycling route signs to show distance (in miles)
9% said they preferred cycle route signs to show time taken to reach destination
We also invited comments and got a lot back, both for and against, often with reasons given, including some very nuanced views and one or two left-field comments. Many people also quoted examples of effective signage they had seen abroad.
First here’s a selection of comments in favour of distance:
Distance - I’m a slow cyclist and how would you calculate the time taken? It could be disingenuous.
Regular cyclists will mostly want distance, because they know how far they can go and how long it will take them. The only reason for having times is to encourage people new to cycling, which is a time limited benefit I'd say, except maybe in things that are more designed as 'leisure routes' like Wetherby to Spofforth railway path. So if you're building a good quality network of cycle routes as a long term infrastructure project, then it should be distances.
Distance. Minutes works better for walking times.
Silly idea having the time taken as some people may get that confused with actual miles.
Time to destination is meaningless and probably wrong, given that everyone rides at different speeds.
We cycle with children who very much have their own pace. A sign saying 12 minutes never works out as 12 minutes for them
Time is too dependent on who and what bike you’re riding - e-bikes are faster.
But many also came out at least partially in favour of time taken:
If it truly helps and encourages new riders I'd say just Minutes … Advanced riders will know the miles quite often anyway. Also when I'm bike-packing I find minute indicators quite accurate.
Many people who don't currently walk or cycle overestimate how far a mile or more is. So distance could put them off.
I like time taken because it works for non cyclists and shows how efficient it is. People who don't cycle imagine that it takes an hour to go a mile. Also "5 miles? I couldn't ride that!" As opposed to "30 minutes? I can manage that!".
One of my bosses [in London] ... said "I don't know how you ride 20 miles, I couldn't!" - I pointed out that the previous day he'd ridden into the city and back.....a journey of 10 miles each way!
As a cyclist I would prefer distance but I think you are right about people who don’t identify as cyclists preferring the idea of of time.
Some people thought it didn’t really matter what parameter was used:
Neither distance nor time is really of any practical use when you’re actually on your bike on a day-to-day basis. You’re on the bike, you’re going to the big Asda. Whether Killingbeck is three miles or 10 minutes away makes no difference. If you’re walking to the bus stop, or driving past, that time makes a difference to your future choice - not the distance (which is the same no matter what means of transportation you are using)
Some people wanted even more out of their signage:
Definitely distance, perhaps with the addition of a brief comment about gradient like "Mostly level", or "Mostly gently downhill", or "10m of ascent".
Could we also add an indication of the road surface? If it is uneven you cycle more slowly, on a smooth surface you can race along.
Cycle routes in Vienna had signs to the nearest toilet. I was impressed.
While others thought it was all a bit of a distraction:
Mileage better than minutes, however can't they consult instead on fixing some poorly designed cycle routes and junctions?
I'd rather the money was spent on things like Sheffield stands... Sadly, the signs often get graffiti sprayed or ripped off.
There was general agreement that signs should not be misleading or confusing:
I pass these [signs] on my walk to work. It doesn't say whether it’s cycling minutes, walking minutes (or e-scooter minutes, as they seem to move as fast as cars).
To which someone added: As it’s invariable from the sign in question, distance is a much better measure.
The Council prefaced the subgroup meeting by saying it had already consulted with stakeholders, including other parts of the Council, to gather feedback on existing signage. So their wayfinding proposals were in a largely finished form by the time they were presented to us. Despite our more nuanced response, their strategy - according to reported sightings - is already being implemented.
Summary
If the question is “what do cyclists prefer?” then the answer is resoundingly clear. Amongst the people subscribed to the Leeds Cycling Campaign Facebook group, there was an overwhelming preference for distance signs over signs indicating time. We don’t know for certain, but it is likely that many of these people are regular cyclists.
At the same time many respondents showed an appreciation of how signs in minutes might act as an incentive to novice cyclists to keep on cycling (until they got there). Some thought there was a place for both types of signage, with distance used as the default, but minutes favoured along leisure routes.
November 2024