Yes, a new chicane has been installed today at the foot of the ramp up to the tram stop from Balgreen Road.
Another lovely bit of path spoiled.....sigh
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
New chicane on Balgreen path
(92 posts)-
Posted 9 years ago #
-
Yup, was pretty appalled by this
Particularly the way the bollards and the chicane completely fail to match up, effectively halving the available space to cycle through. Note that pedestrians have already sorted out a desire line to the right of the lamp post...
Combined with the fact that the black posts are not reflective, I seriously worry someone will come a cropper when it gets dark, expecting that the space next to the chicane is, you know, clear.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Should be easy to open the 'gates'!
Posted 9 years ago # -
Note that pedestrians have already sorted out a desire line to the right of the lamp post
That'll reduce potential ped/cyclist conflict then \o/
Posted 9 years ago # -
Why?
Posted 9 years ago # -
Oh FFS. This is getting too much. The Council really needs to have a long hard look at itself. Does it honestly believe it's encouraging cycling when it invariably compromises every single cycling facility?
Posted 9 years ago # -
There is a traffic light just beyond the gates that allows cyclists to stay on their bikes so it might not be that bad.? Not been down that way since the chicane went in to check. Does seem quite belt and braces?
Posted 9 years ago # -
TIE
Posted 9 years ago # -
gembo: the crossing is a pelican not a toucan so, although there are signs directing cyclists to use it, *legally* they should dismount. I think the signs are a tacit acknowledgement by the council that they screwed up when they put the lights in.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Oi vey I have been breaking the law unknowingly. Once over the crossing of course you are on a pavement with no path to anywhere?
Posted 9 years ago # -
Me too. And every other cyclist I've seen using it. I've even cycled over right in front of a police car stopped at the lights and they didn't care.
Posted 9 years ago # -
So, what is the chicane purpose?
Is it to "protect" cyclists from going straight on to the road?
I can't fathom any other reason????
Has anyone queried it, not a route I ordinarily ride.
Posted 9 years ago # -
that pelican is scheduled for conversion to toucan
Posted 9 years ago # -
@nelly that is my working hypothesis. When I used that route before the summer I slowed down after the descent without much bother. It is a busy road for cars but very few pedestrians around when I was using it.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"Is it to "protect" cyclists from going straight on to the road?"
It would be nice to believe that the council would be so concerned about cyclist safety.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I guess it is to slow cyclists down who may be perceived to be going too fast down the hill, and turning left (north). The chicane looks like it is deliberately situated to ensure cyclists turning left have to slow down to negotiate the chicane. If the gates were the other way around, they would not have to slow down so much.
I'm assuming the post has been left there accidentally. Surely they will remove it?
Posted 9 years ago # -
But they forgot to do the tactile nonsense.
Ssssh!
Doh!
Posted 9 years ago # -
I took a ride out to see what they have done this time...
Chicane Balgreen by HankChief, on Flickr
Chicane Balgreen by HankChief, on FlickrSo the gap to the left of the bollard is 100cm wide, my trailer is 90cm wide. It took me 4 goes to get through without having to get off an manually move either my bike or the trailer.
There is 300cm between the 2 barriers but why put it so close to the bollards. In fact why put it in at all when the bollards already give you something to slow down for.
You can also see that the desire line BenN pointed out - it's going to get awfully muddy.
And while we are on the subject of chicanes, I thought I'd see how CEC are getting on with getting the Paddockholm chicane corrected by the contractors. No change
Paddockholm Chicane by HankChief, on FlickrAnd the Broomhall/Dovecot chicane is still impassable by trailers - it's not like it is on the Route 9 'Family' network or anything.
Broomhall Chicane by HankChief, on Flickr
Posted 9 years ago # -
The gap needs to be a minimum of 1.5 m wide to be at all accessible for most adapted bikes.
Posted 9 years ago # -
It is 1.5m wide from the barrier to edge of path. It is just the bollards that make it awkward/impassable.
Paddockholm & Broomhall/Dovecot are only 100cm though - and that is when they have cut back the undergrowth.
Posted 9 years ago # -
I think this is just to slow cyclists down at the bottom of the incline. The problem is that the desire line approach is hidden by the fence and unfortunately some pedestrians don't look where they are going. This is part of my commute and some time ago there always seemed to be a women's jogging group lying it wait to spread across the width of the path when they appeared.
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
Cllr. Andrew D Burns (@AndrewDBurns)
12/08/2014 21:59
@hank_chief @SRDorman @trapprain @CyclingEdin Thanks for photo - I will follow this up as soon as possible, Andrew."
Posted 9 years ago # -
"
Stephan Matthiesen (@St_Matthiesen)
12/08/2014 22:49
@hank_chief @AndrewDBurns @SRDorman @trapprain @CyclingEdin Coming from continent, it's noticeable how UK has barriers everywhere"
Posted 9 years ago # -
CEC says -
"
The gates are a replacement for the bollards - the latter will be removed soon (the gates were supposed to be left open until this happened but either this was not done or they have been closed by others). Reflective panels / signs will be also be added.
The chicance has been requested from two different sources - primarily parents of school children concerned about them scooting / cycling / running out on to Balgreen Road but also complaints about cycle speeds down the ramp.
"
Posted 9 years ago # -
Does make me think that as a society we have become so accustomed to seeing barriers everywhere that we assume we must need them.
There is a risk of cars driving down a similar slope (say Drum Brae South) with gravity likely to take them over the speed limit and a risk of them overshooting the stop line, but we don't put chicanes in those situations.
At least here once the bollards are removed they appear to meet standards with a 3m gap between them and 1.5m each side.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Does make me think that as a society we have become so accustomed to seeing barriers everywhere that we assume we must need them.
I can't help but fall into old duffer mode with this and say it's a nonsense driven by excessive Council sensitivity towards over-protective parenting. And then they choose the line of least resistance in an effort to sort it. A more productive response would be to reduce or calm the traffic, which would also be consistent with loads of other Council objectives (health, active travel, quality of life etc).
Posted 9 years ago # -
"Does make me think that as a society we have become so accustomed to seeing barriers everywhere that we assume we must need them."
"A more productive response would be to reduce or calm the traffic, which would also be consistent with loads of other Council objectives (health, active travel, quality of life etc)."
Yep.
What is concerning is the implicit 'demonising' of people on bikes (by a council that 'wants' more of them) and the (apparent) 'acceptance' that you can't do much about roadspace/traffic/hierarchies etc.
Posted 9 years ago # -
If only they'd put in a cycle overbridge next to the tram bridge when they built the trams...
and they could have even joined it up to the WoL via the path between the houses and the tram track, parallel to Baird Dr.
JOINED. UP. THINKING.
Posted 9 years ago # -
Well I had a look at it today. I actually approached it from the Balgreen end and then turned around, because I wasn't for cycling from Stenhouse and then having to go all the way back in case it didn't work out. It's not an appealing sight from a
height'lowt' of about three feet:I had to take it as wide as possible from the nearside kerb, with full steering lock applied:
The torpedo is 2.8 metres long and the turning circle is 11 metres (which is wider than many suburban roads). This is why the spacing between the gates is critical. Any closer and the entire path would be rendered unusuable to a velomobilist wanting to get away from the traffic. The trick, of course, is now to avoid scraping the bodyshell on the bollard and/or on the wall.
It turns out you can just fit the torpedo through the chicane—but only just! And all the while one has to look out for pedestrians and other cyclists, while creeping through the infra at a speed of "dead slow".
Posted 9 years ago # -
Did you spot the key safe on the wall? Maybe they could give the code to velomoblists and others needing more space...
Posted 9 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
