CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
Another day, another bizarrity.
Path is 'open' - but I'm assuming unfinished.
Based on all the previous posts I'm assuming - AGAIN - these are the wrong sort of tactiles -
('Cos they are the same flat-tops on both sides.)
I also assume that the shared use white lines are still to be painted.
BUT
Even then, surely tactiles just in front of chicanes can't be right!!(?)
ALSO
I assume the alignment of the chicanes has still to be corrected -
Even then, some people will probably go round them!
'Wrong sort of tactiles'?
Nope. I think they are right (as far as that goes).
The round topped ones are for use at hazards, like at the top of a flight of steps or a railway platform.
On the Seafield Road section, LOVELY new tarmac -
BUT
The bridge is still 'shut' -
But, but
(when coming from Porty/Seafield Prom) there are no temporary pedestrian lights until after the bridge!!
Apparently there is another set east of the coastal route from Porty - which is clearly not satisfactory!
So continue on the path (by pushing the plastic barrier aside) I found this -
In spite of comments (upthread) that 'nothing was being done' to the crashbarrier and chevrons, I didn't (want to) believe it.
Past the bridge is a less moveable barrier and the lights for those who used the previous lights to cross over to the other pavement -
IT'S THE WEEKEND.
Presumably no more work until Monday.
Surely there is no need for the barriers each side of the bridge??
"Nope. I think they are right"
OK so this is more confusing.
I thought the 'discussion' (particularly on Broomhouse Path) 'concluded' that they should be diff profile on cycle and ped side (with a central divider)(??)
Have they really blanked out those (relatively recently installed) 30 mph speed limit signs? So is it national speed limit now on Seafield Road East?
"Have they really blanked out those (relatively recently installed) 30 mph"
Don't know.
Something is blanked.
I assumed it was a shared use sign that 'wasn't ready' - or a segregated one waiting for the median paint.
If was a 30, presumably someone had decided it's not legal(?)
Chdot, if my understanding of what SRD and others have posted is correct, you are right. That is to say, I think there should be different kinds of tactiles on each side of the path. But North Meadow Walk is just like your photo. I get the feeling that so long as "we" get the flat-topped tactiles "we" don't really care what the pedestrian half is like...
"I get the feeling that so long as "we" get the flat-topped tactiles "we" don't really care what the pedestrian half is like..."
Probably, not sure any of 'us' are convinced (most of) it is necessary - even when done 'correctly'.
Even less convinced about chicanes.
I am well aware that 'we' shouldn't want (or be imagined to want) 'no restrictions' so we can just 'plough through pedestrians', but in general much of this seems to be (not) solving a problem that problem that barely exists and increases (potential) conflict, confusion and bad feeling(s).
@chdot "Surely there is no need for the barriers each side of the bridge??"
They are only half-barriers now ;-)
"They are only half-barriers now ;-)"
Glad to hear it!
Can you explain the eastern lights?
Never saw them coming up from the prom.
What sort of tools does one need to lift one of those tactiles? Once you get one up it surely can't be that hard to spin the others around so they're all perpendicular to direction of travel?
Assume they're as lightly attached to the substrate as all the others they've installed i.e. not at all
@chdot I came up the Seafield prom, the barrier was half open so I assumed it was at both ends (wrong). I didn't take any notice of the eastern lights.
"I didn't take any notice of the eastern lights."
You mean you didn't see them either!
(Or any signs saying 'turn left and cross the road'!!)
@chdot, they were definitely '30' signs. The very recent (just Feb/March I think?) shared use signs are blue.
I can only assume it is something to do with the TRO governing the path widening? Maybe the signs are now 'too far back' from the road to be legal? If so why didn't they remove the posts? Or do they have to put bigger signs in? Someone will know...
Maybe they'll drop the limit to 20mph? #inyerdreams
"Maybe they'll drop the limit to 20mph? #inyerdreams"
Fairly soon* all of the neighbourhood partnerships will be holding consultations on moving 'residential and shopping' streets with 'high footfall' to 20mph. Suspect you may struggle to make a case for the inclusion of this road, but you will get a chance to do so.
*decision to be made at next transport committee meeting.
Think the blanked off speed limit is where the A199 changes to 40mph, but blanked out because of temporary 30mph speed limit through the roadworks. It is 40 from about there to Brunstane, then 50 out to the bypass.
Definitely used to say 30. Possibly 30 on the east-facing side, 40 on the west-facing?
@ chdot
"On the Seafield Road section, LOVELY new tarmac -"
So how long before they dig it up?
It's still 30 on the east-facing side.
Narrowest point (between lamp-post and lumpy concrete at base of setting of chevron-holder) is just under 1.2m.
"this video is unavailable"
The path was open this morning, lovely smooth tarmac, jet black with the sheen of rain on it. The crossing lights were still in pace at the Porty end and the cones are still on the road. I guess they still have re-do the road markings.
They've applied a 300mm strip of Shellgrip (or similar) on the edge of the path next to the road.
When I got the the temporary crossing at the Leith end, just after the bridge, the barrier was still in place but it has been reversed to close the section between there and the 'Halfords' junction - there's another barrier at the lights there. The road has been coned between too, no idea what they're planning there, more Shellgrip perhaps.
Links chicanes navigable with a trailer, just:
Rode the Seafield Road path a few times in the past couple of days.
It's much, much better than it was. Mostly very good, in fact. Smooth, wide. Even part of the bridge seems to have improved slightly.
They do need to sort out the railway bridge properly though. Really they do.
So, am I right in thinking that the slabs in chdot's photo of the Links path tell visually impaired people to walk into the chicane?
The 'go around them' desire line is certainly becoming apparent in the grass, so the fences are doing their job at keeping bikes away from the School....
"so the fences are doing their job at keeping bikes away from the School...."
That's fine.
But presumably by accident more than 'positive' design!
Will it get more people to cycle?
Will it show that 'cyclists' are anything more than a 'problem'??
Will it improve the perception and/or reality of 'shared use'???
Of course not. It stinks and I resent the fact it's called a 'cycle path' it every time I've been past.
"I resent the fact it's called a 'cycle path' it every time I've been past"
Yes!
Hard to believe that Sustrans was involved.
Sadly, perhaps not...
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts