CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Marchmont Road cycle lane - proposal

(12 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. SRD
    Moderator

    Our fearless moderator has often posted pictures of the decrepit cycle lane on Marchmont Road. I cycled that way on Sunday and it occurred to me that it would be an ideal candidate for a Copenhagen-style path, with the lane next to the pavement, and cars parked between the cycle lane and the flow of traffic. Is there any chance that the KB-Meadows route (there's some technical name for it) would include such modifications?

    This would be particularly handy for those of us cycling with small kids on bikes [on pavement], who can be hard to see over the parked cars!

    Posted 13 years ago #

  2. chdot
    Admin

    "occurred to me that it would be an ideal candidate for a Copenhagen-style path, with the lane next to the pavement"

    This was a proposal from the council before the current (unmaintained) lanes were added.

    I think Spokes was one of the objectors. The general feeling was 'it wouldn't work in Edinburgh' - plus various views about 'segregation'.

    NOW, some years on, AND with lots of experience from elsewhere the idea might be worth re-visiting.

    Of course "there's no money"...

    Posted 13 years ago #

  3. Dave
    Member

    I'm not convinced, the main problem is riding next to car doors and this would just be the same, only on the other side (at least drivers *sometimes* look before opening their doors. Do passengers?)

    My preferred solution would be to have no cycle lane northbound, down the hill, and use the space to reinforce the southbound (climbing) one, especially at the traffic island pinch points. We could have white hatching painted next to the parked cars to discourage people from riding too close to the death zone.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  4. Min
    Member

    What would happen crossing junctions? If you are riding down the left of parked cars them presumably the moving variety wouldn't be able to see you nor you them?

    Posted 13 years ago #

  5. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Well in Copenhagen (given we're talking about Copenhagen style lanes) the cycle lanes have priority over junctions and driver, get this, it's weird, look out for cyclists before turning into side streets.

    The first time it happened there I was flummoxed. A car had gone past and was turning right in front of us (us riding on the right of course). Indicators on, a good 20 yards ahead by now, I feathered the brake expecting to be turned across only to see the driver looking back directly at us waiting for us to go past before he turned.

    Model. Cycling. City.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  6. Min
    Member

    In that case I can't help but anticipate a minor problem with having Copenhagen style bike lanes in Edinburgh then. :-/

    Posted 13 years ago #

  7. wingpig
    Member

    As long as people demand the right to park within two feet of their gate or the shop they want to go to the 'need' for cars along either side is always going to squeeze things. Would car drivers/passengers moving from the road-side parking-spot across the segregatory door-zone-blocking pavement then crossing the segregated path be any less of a pain? In {insert advanced cycle-friendly European city} does the kerb at each side of a segregated path (do they have kerbs at the sides of the segregated paths?) make people notice them more when they come to cross them?

    Would either the shoppy bit at the south end or the park-side portion at the north be possible places for those free-for-all naked streets?

    Posted 13 years ago #

  8. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Well [in Copenhagen] the cycle lanes have priority over junctions and driver look out for cyclists before turning into side streets.

    Bits of the Lakeshore Boulevard East cycle path in Toronto work that way too. You can tool along at 30mph and need slow only to give car drivers time to react and stop. Even better, the cycle path is pretty much level, while the road bumps up and down at the intersections, and there aren't silly signposts or bus stops plonked in the middle of a lane, or huge tree roots cracking up the surface, or parking spaces. Or houses, for that matter.

    But that path is flat, and I prefer Dave's idea for hilly terrain. Leith Walk is another prime example as anyone predisposed to argue against the proposed tram provisions will attest.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  9. chdot
    Admin

    "
    Where do I stand on the issue of segregated cycle facilities? You could say I’m middle of the road.  But not in a wishy-washy sense.

    I love roads. I want to keep riding on them. And I want others to join me, and ride safely."

    http://quickrelease.tv/?p=1351

    Posted 13 years ago #

  10. LaidBack
    Member

    wingpig In {insert advanced cycle-friendly European city} does the kerb at each side of a segregated path (do they have kerbs at the sides of the segregated paths?) make people notice them more when they come to cross them?

    With Amsterdam fresh in mind the standard of path did change from being segregated in suburbs to recessed in pavement with monoblock / flagstones as it came alongside shops on Haarlemmerweg. I was aware of cars parked on my left and expected conflict but there was none. People don't walk on these paths but cycling at over 15mph would not be expected. (Although of course many 'fietspads' are used by noisy faster scooters). At intersections you get bike jams as people queue to turn. Because you are a dominant form of traffic you tend to adapt the average speed there and work together.

    Other thing is that many Dutch segregated cyclways seem to be two way at each side of road so bikes can come from anywhere!

    I only saw one near miss between a 3 ton delivery truck trying to squeeze a woman off at canal bridge near Prinsengracht . She gave him quite a mouthful . He was a Dutch deliver driver. Bike path there was white lined but not painted red as they are at many junctions. Not that had anything to do with it as bike (or any other vehicle) had priority.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  11. SRD
    Moderator

    I don't think this would be suitable everywhere, but I do still think it would be worth a try. The road itself is wide, most of it has a wide footpath, and the few intersections have v. good visibility. Also cars are parallel parked (although this does make the door issue more prominent). And the road intersects at the north end with several cycle-paths, making the questions about priority much less of a issue.

    I don't see how it could be worse than the current situation, although obviously those who oppose any road markings/segregation etc would not like it!

    Posted 13 years ago #

  12. chdot
    Admin

    "I don't see how it could be worse than the current situation"

    Let's not go there!

    There are (obviously) arguments on both sides.

    I think it would be worth trying to address the 'it wouldn't work in Edinburgh because of driver attitudes' arguments.

    BUT

    Edinburgh is financial broke - and perhaps bankrupt in other ways!

    If the city was rolling in money (perhaps because of a congestion charge) and wanted to take a rational look at mobility/transport with, perhaps, sensible tram routes, lower emission buses, much better pavements/crossings/road surfaces etc. a major 're-fit' of Marchmont Road might be worthwhile.

    An 'easier' option would be much wider cycle lanes (on-road) by removing parking from one (or both) side(s).

    Oh for the political leadership.

    Parked cars are owned by voters, bicycles are not - or something.

    Posted 13 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin