CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

NMW 'spur'

(69 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. SRD
    Moderator

    photo by SRDUK, on Flickr

    Dear cycling officers,

    Please could you explain the logic of the paint in the attached picture of the NMW 'spur'. To me, it seems to do nothing other than induce uncertainty in the minds of cyclists and pedestrians. That might be a very clever strategy (akin to David Cameron's 'nudge' politics?) but I thought that in general we tried to use paint to make routes clearer and reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians.

    SRD

    Posted 10 years ago #
  2. chdot
    Admin

    "I thought that in general we tried to use paint to make routes clearer and reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians."

    Yep, completely clear.

    This is now bikes only!!!

    (Apart from the fact that peds are allowed to walk anywhere - except motorways, the Bypass and WAR.)

    Posted 10 years ago #
  3. chdot
    Admin

    (I thought the photo was to complain about big lorries on soft verges!)

    Posted 10 years ago #
  4. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Entrusting the specification, construction and maintenance of cycle facilities to a roads department leads to nonsense situations where they do what it is they know how to do (maintain roads) and try to paint a shared use path as if it were a two-way street.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  5. jdanielp
    Member

    Does the blue and white arrow on the back of the vehicle indicate that it is safest to pass it to the underneath?

    I shall look forward to being enlightened about how to navigate this stretch of path on my cycle home tonight.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  6. Arellcat
    Moderator

    It actually makes it look more like a bona fide road, with cycle symbols warning drivists to 'look' for cyclists.

    I thought the photo was to complain about big lorries on soft verges!

    Me too, actually. There's a collapsed edge on NMW, vaguely about here, which cannot have been caused other than by a heavy vehicle.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  7. SRD
    Moderator

    the collapsed edge was actually caused by a tree that came down within a few weeks of the pavement being laid.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  8. chdot
    Admin

    "the collapsed edge was actually caused by a tree that came down within a few weeks of the pavement being laid."

    And didn't they 'promise' to fix it ages ago too?

    Posted 10 years ago #
  9. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Fair enough, I didn't know that. But fixing it might help prevent anyone twisting their ankle in the dark.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  10. Coxy
    Member

    Came past there this morning. Among the gaggle of vehicles was a 'highway maintenance' car with a mountain bike on a roofrack.

    Perhaps they are testing things out!

    Chaos at the St Leonards end where the new infra is going in. I'm going to avoid this route for a while.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  11. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Lots going on on NMW just earlier (half-fiveish), roughly in the vicinity of my earlier link. The whole cycle side was blocked by a couple of white vehicles and men in hi-viz with machines making cutting noises. I had to resort to comedy offroading in the torpedo.

    I also tried the new markings in SRD's pic. Same old conflict as in the Valleyfield St cut-through where you have to swap sides halfway along, which confuses the heck out of pedestrians who now don't know where to walk.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  12. SRD
    Moderator

    Looked to me like they were putting in more counters?

    Posted 10 years ago #
  13. Morningsider
    Member

    Lots of new white lining on the steep part of MMW, which wasn't there this morning - including a couple SLOWs. Also a rather odd Give Way line next to the turn off for George Square, which looks like it only apples to people trundling up the hill, rather than speeding down it.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  14. SRD
    Moderator

    Seems to me that if they're going to take the issues at the George square turn seriously (and they had about 6 meetings about it), they need to actually make it look like an intersection with that yellow Tarmac etc. not that most cyclists pay any attention. They all think they have right of way. But it needs designing in, not just paint and signs.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  15. Bigjack
    Member

    I agree with all previous posts. It would be better to have one side marked for bikes and the other for pedestrians like on MMW or NMW as pedestrians are confused as they are at the other narrow Valleyfield link path which has the bike symbol at one side one end and the other side at the other end. it wouldn't be the first time a walker has told me I'm riding on the wrong side when I ring my bell to warn them!

    Posted 10 years ago #
  16. chdot
    Admin

    "But it needs designing in, not just paint and signs."

    Mmm that seems to be one of the themes of the week...

    Posted 10 years ago #
  17. neddie
    Member

    A better thing to do with the George Sq / MMW junction would be to put the diagonal desire lines back in for pedestrians, thereby dispersing the crowd, instead of kettling everyone together between two ludicrous fences and then bringing them into conflict with cyclists

    Posted 10 years ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    I always got the feeling that the fences were to 'protect' the grass!

    Posted 10 years ago #
  19. neddie
    Member

    They need REINFORCED GRASS

    Posted 10 years ago #
  20. ih
    Member

    @srd Have I picked you up correctly? They're putting a Give way in on MMW at George Square? Why oh why would they do that? It's mental.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  21. SRD
    Moderator

    Have you ever seen a cyclist pay attention to a give way on the meadows? At best they slow down. Usually they blast through using bell.

    Trying to cross MMW as a pedestrian at George square can be remarkably difficult. Downhill cyclists pay no attention. It is not uncommon for quite a group of people to build up trying to cross.

    Yes, I know we can also all mention pedestrians who fail to look - including the one who took me out and sent me to hospital. But that doesn't mean that the intersections there work!

    Posted 10 years ago #
  22. chdot
    Admin

    "Have you ever seen a cyclist pay attention to a give way on the meadows? At best they slow down. Usually they blast through using bell."

    So...

    Some nice chicanes...

    Posted 10 years ago #
  23. SRD
    Moderator

    Noooooo!

    Posted 10 years ago #
  24. chdot
    Admin

    Think of the pedestrians...

    Posted 10 years ago #
  25. neddie
    Member

    George Sq / MMW desire lines:

    MMW desirelines S by edd1e_h, on Flickr

    Posted 10 years ago #
  26. ih
    Member

    So I take that as a yes, they are putting a Give Way in for pedestrians to cross. I'm not in Edinburgh at the moment so can't take a look. I suspect it won't make any difference to behaviour.

    I am actually very forgiving of pedestrians and don't expect them to follow any rules - after all they don't have to pass a test to walk around so I cycle considerately among pedestrians. But I do believe that the best way of using these shared use facilities (even when nominally segregated) is to encourage courteous joint use rather than introduce stupid pseudo-road markings that only serve to confuse and introduce an us and them attitude.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  27. SRD
    Moderator

    Honestly, I can't recall what they've done - i just rode over it trying not to be squished by cyclists coming down hill.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  28. davidsonsdave
    Member

    "I thought that in general we tried to use paint to make routes clearer and reduce conflict between cyclists and pedestrians."

    I note that a large number, if not the majority of cyclists turn right onto Melville Drive at the crossing, heading towards Tarvit Street. To minimise conflict with pedestrians I have often seen cyclists form a queue on the right hand side of the path so that they are not turning in front of pedestrians who are crossing.

    The new paint indicates that cyclists should be on the left, which could put cyclists between a rock and a hard place, having to choose between cutting in front of folk crossing, or sitting stationary in the middle of the road when the lights start to change.

    Posted 10 years ago #
  29. SRD
    Moderator

    "The new paint indicates that cyclists should be on the left,"

    likewise when coming from valleyfield towards NMW, but turning right onto melville drive -- the toucan push button and giveaway markings put cyclists on the left, which is sensible because of hedge blocking view on the right AND problem of these cyclists blocking pavement with their bikes, but it only works for cyclists heading straight to NMW, and causes conflicts for those heading onto Melville drive.

    in the scenario notes by davidsonsdave, its worth noting that toucan layout already tried to send cyclists to the left, but most ignored it.

    I've often thought that a sensible deployment of those cyclist foot rests that they have in copenhagen would be a more successful way of encouraging cyclists to stay left there (and right on the other side).

    Posted 10 years ago #
  30. jdanielp
    Member

    Well, I can't say that I have been approaching anything differently since the new markings went down other than perhaps weaving round the multitudinous bicycle symbols for a smoother ride, where it doesn't impede on anybody else of course - I barely saw any other bikes at all on the Meadows this morning at half eight, and the towpath wasn't exactly busy either. Is everyone off work today?

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin