http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Doing something about chicanes en Mon, 18 May 2026 16:46:10 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13293#post-162376 Sat, 16 Aug 2014 09:56:17 +0000 sallyhinch 162376@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hmm, is there not a bike/pedestrian equivalent of a Traffic Regulation Order? You can't close a road, or even change the speed limit on it, without a TRO. If bikes were seen as a form of transport, rather than a social problem, there would be a similar system... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13293#post-162370 Sat, 16 Aug 2014 08:49:18 +0000 Nelly 162370@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So is there one area in CEC which decides to install these obstacles?</p> <p>Or are we victim of multiple departments following their own guidelines?</p> <p>I don't know the answer, would certainly be easier if there was one focal point within CEC that gave thumbs up/down to infra changes on bike/ped lanes.</p> <p>I suspect its not that simple. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13293#post-162266 Fri, 15 Aug 2014 10:11:40 +0000 chdot 162266@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Too late to get these removed"</p> <p>I don't think that's strictly true, though 'the council' doesn't agree with the point of view that seems to the one of most people on here (and Twitter). </p> <p>Clearly there is 'other pressure' from those with 'different interests'. </p> <p>Of course as 'cyclists', 'we' can be regarded as 'not understanding' (if it suits). </p> <p>It seems to me there are two basic problems -</p> <p>Chicanes aren't fit for the purpose(s) intended - not least because they restrict the space available and *might* lead to conflict. </p> <p>Chicanes (it's unfortunate most recent ones have had to be redone), tactiles (ditto), "cyclists dismount signs (ditto!), shiny "non-slip" surfaces (ditto!!) all <em>suggest</em> that CEC doesn't regard cycling as transport. On roads 'traffic' has the most importance, elsewhere pedestrian 'concerns' are addressed with alacrity. </p> <p>So 'we' as hard-pressed, downtrodden, marginalised, vanguards/representatives of the brave-new-active-travel are getting 'upset' (to varying degrees) when 'we' should be praising the council for its progressive policies and ever-rising % of the transport budget. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13293#post-162258 Fri, 15 Aug 2014 09:23:59 +0000 SRD 162258@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It's pretty clear that most requests for chicanes are coming from community councils and/or neighbourhood partnerships. </p> <p>If you really want to do something about this, I suggest you join your local CC or offer to attend NP transport meetings on behalf of Spokes or Living Streets. </p> <p>Lionfishy represented Spokes on the SWNP transport committee, which is probably responsible for the Balgreen chicane. Don't know if someone else is attending now or not. </p> <p>Too late to get these removed, but you might be able to prevent more. </p> <p>I suggested this in the autumn, when CC's had elections, but there are probably still spaces if you contact them and indicate your interest. </p>