The new streetlights at the corner of Seafield / Seafield Rd East (the railway bridge) have been reinstalled in a way that continues to narrow that section of path to unreasonable levels.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
"LEITH TO PORTOBELLO CYCLE ROUTE IMPROVEMENTS"
(231 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
But aren't they moving barrier and widening pavement?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Not so far. The outside of the curve around the chevronfest sports a trench in which some new fat metal lampposts have been put. The inside of the curve has not been touched.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Saturday
Posted 10 years ago # -
So (2nd pic) they are widening path on both sides and compromising potential width?
Must be moving crash barrier(?)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@chdot yes they are widening the path, but then taking some of it back with new position of lamp post! If the bridge isn't "fixed" and left in its current condition it will probably become unusable for anyone on a bike / with a pram / wheelchair / mobility scooter. PS and I had to go portee and carry our bikes through this section.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Just worked out that the kids together weigh 2/3 my body weight (not including rucksack and bike). I really need to get more exercise.
Oops. Wrong thread.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Yeah, looks pretty narrow. Avast to Twitter and pester LAHinds et al before the contractors finish?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Just noticed -
"
Three From Leith (@threefromleith)
21/04/2014 22:29
@harts_cyclery @SRDorman @CllrChasBooth @gavincorbett @nigelbagshaw @melaniemain Simple solution - involve cycling community in designing!"
"Lesley Hinds (@LAHinds)
21/04/2014 23:26
@threefromleith agree!"
Posted 10 years ago # -
Position of pin kerbs already haunched to take path base and surfacing shows lamp standards intruding in to path width.
Would be a laughing stock if this was done to a road carriageway for road signs, and similar. also fails on the 'clear space either side of path surface' specification (0.5m minimum) with dual extreme hazards of abrupt individual intrusions in and beyond that clearance zone (clip one of those barrier supports and....)
Surely that road is so wide there (and not that busy) that taking 1.5-2m of the width and setting it out as a cycle lane with perhaps a small extension of the road width would deliver the required route.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Just waiting for the 'cyclists dismount' sign....
Posted 10 years ago # -
Surely that road is so wide there (and not that busy)
Yes and yes. They could also be so brave as to remove the pavement on the "other" side to provide additional width and provide a pedestrian crossing, given there's no real reason to need to be on that side of the bridge there
Posted 10 years ago # -
no real reason to need to be on that side of the bridge there
Unless you are going to Matalan? Or the recycling centre? I'd imagine most folk drive to both, but still...
A pelican crossing there would help to slow down traffic too on the approach to that 'tricky' bend where the bridge is, thus enhancing safety for all. But no, we can't have that - inconveniencing motorists? Shame on us for even suggesting it.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Unless you are going to Matalan? Or the recycling centre? I'd imagine most folk drive to both, but still...
Aye but that's 400m up the road, what I meant was at the bridge there's nothing on that side of the road that is "served" by the south pavement within considerable walking distance.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Greyhound sanctuary?
There should be a crossing somewhere there anyway - after those around the McDonalds/Halfords junction there's nothing but Keep Left islands until King's Road. Fillyside Road's exit would be a good place seeing as people sometimes walk down it attempting to head Promwards, only to find that only 1 in 100 cars is prepared to stop, even if you're pushing a pram and dragging a toddler.Posted 10 years ago # -
Just had a tweet from sustrans Scotland to say they've discussed with CEC. Tactiles and chicanes wrongly installed will be fixed.
I still don't think it's suitable for shared use.
Posted 10 years ago # -
So. Visiting all cycling "roadworks" and chalking all the errors of the contractors' (and designers') ways around them should be something we do more regularly?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Not a sign of a workperson there this morning!
It is shared use so any sort of bike related tactiles are wrong(?)
Also large amount of brown earth desiring to be tarmaced right in front of school.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@kappers, absolutely! Unless it's raining of course.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"
Sustrans Scotland (@SustransScot)
23/04/2014 12:30
@SRDorman We've discussed this with @Edinburgh_CC. The chicane&tactile pavers were wrongly installed. CEC will rectify&install correctly."
Surely a lot more c/should be done with the whole area in front of the school - not just things that slow down/discourage bikes??
Posted 10 years ago # -
Those chicanes look really ugly against the decorative Victorian(?) gate!
Why couldn't they have 'looped' the cycle path out a bit (say by 20 yards) around the school entrance, where the grass is, leaving the existing path free for peds/school kids. No need to make the place look ugly with metalwork.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Ask Lesley...
Posted 10 years ago # -
One of the more silly aspects of the design is that it directs cyclists through the chicanes and brings them closer to the school gate in doing so, the natural reaction should be to move further away from it to avoid anyone coming out of the gates, or waiting at them.
Considering the school gates will be largely used only 2 or 3 times a day, 96% of the time (23 hours) there will be no conflict here and the arrangement should reflect this.
It would be sensible and better for all users to have the wall-side section of the fencing (to the left in photo above) retained and the kerbside (right in photo) replaced with a central bollard and some high-viz covering on the path outside the gates to warn all users to expect eachother. That will provide a "shielded" area on the wall side for children and waiting parents, and channel cyclists and through-pedestrians to the outside, where there will be less conflict. The bollard and surface colour will highlight the potential conflict and naturally slow you as you approach.
Any unqualified fool* can see this to be the case.
* = Clearly not.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Why couldn't they have 'looped' the cycle path out a bit (say by 20 yards) around the school entrance, "
Probably because no one responded to initial consultation suggesting that this was a bad design, which could easily be improved?
Posted 10 years ago # -
"Probably because no one responded to initial consultation suggesting that this was a bad design, which could easily be improved?"
But, 'general public' not doing this every day and paid to know/understand rules/guidelines/policies etc.
As noted before, involvement of Sustrans doesn't seem to have helped - they have 'expertise' based on 'Safe Routes to School' right across the UK.
And CEC is a council that WANTS to encourage walking and cycling!!!!!!!
Posted 10 years ago # -
I found this drawing of plan for the Seafield Skew Bridge. Hopefully it means they will remove the Armco Concrete barriers to widen the shared-use there straight after the current section is finished, rather than leave a passage & sightline bottleneck.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@le_soigneur the plan only says "Feasibility for replacing the safety barrier is being carried out".
I'm not optimistic...
Posted 10 years ago # -
the barriers at the school gates are an awful design. Tandems/trikes/recumbents should avoid at all costs - you'll get stuck!
The contractors have been away for a number of days now - looks like the "tactiles" are on back order as the barrier points are still fenced off and awaiting the installation of the rumble-tiles.Posted 10 years ago # -
Even after it's all completed at whatever cost most cyclists will still choose to veer onto the grass/mud to avoid the almost pointless barriers.
Posted 10 years ago # -
School - fails on a basic design tenet from the Sustrans design manual I used in 1980's
A cycle path should NEVER be taken directly across a 'blind' junction but the route (or users) if the area is paved) should be deflected out from the walls, buildings or hedge. This was occasionally done with the behaviour reinforcing detail of bollards or hoops to let emerging traffic (on foot or cycle) to see through traffic and vice verse.
Ideally there should be no 'square' junctions, and here the detail might be better served by a deflection barrier, a low wall to match the school walls, or a bed of low growing shrubs (safer to crash into) so that the flow from the school gates turns left or right to merge with the flows along the path. At the points where the tactile tiles have been laid a matching bed or island of low growing shrubs pushing traffic on the path out from the wall, reinforced by an edge white line that swings out and round the 'obstruction' at the gateway.
And tactiles - not required by any design manuals.
NB having the path laid right up to the wall is also not recommended design in LTN 2/08 (South of Border) and related design guidance all require path set away from any wall face by at least 0.5m.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
