@gembo - oh don't get me wrong, I always do. But find pedestrians often wait anyway - confusing. Should I wait and let them cross (and have a dicey encounter with the person behind me who will probably just overtake anyway) or just take it and go? My usual philosophy with most road use is that pointless politeness just delays everyone, so I tend to take it (slowly.) But zebra crossings would help formalise things a bit I think - and I agree Snowy, highlight more that it is a crossing to walking people.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Edinburgh Uni works on Middle Meadow Walk
(121 posts)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
Just thought I’d comment that that’s me in neddie’s first picture - so photo spotted...
I’d just slowed to let someone cross to George Square, although a great many cyclists don’t seem to do this. I like the idea of a zebra - I think it would be useful as there is a lot of foot traffic between MMW and GS.
Posted 4 years ago # -
So that's Edinburgh's new cycling infrastructure for 2019 installed. Roll on 2020...when the white lines of an ASL in Colinton Mains get repainted.
(Yes, yes - Meadows-Canal coming soon. I'll believe it when I see it).
Posted 4 years ago # -
Ironically the best cycling infrastructure this year will come from the Picardy Place works!
Posted 4 years ago # -
Are you using “best” ironically??
Posted 4 years ago # -
Certainly best in terms of metres of segregated lane built (and opened!)
Posted 4 years ago # -
@chdot Well, no? Obviously the concept of the gyratory is deeply flawed but the cycle provision is actually pretty good. More so once CCWEL/Tram project is finished (if ever).
Posted 4 years ago # -
Ok,
Still remains to be seen what actually appears on the ground - and how much gets used by pedestrians...
Posted 4 years ago # -
We’ll have a sweet spot of a few years where the central island is deserted before tram pax start getting in the way!
Posted 4 years ago # -
I've been cycling up MMW every day this week - thinking every time I cross the route over to George Square "why isn't this a zebra". Would be much clearer, even if not everyone took notice it would at least tell some people they were crossing something. At the moment a stranger walking there (from George Square)has little or no indication that they have just walked onto a space for cycling.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Since, stupidly/dangerously, pedestrians can wander anywhere over the 'cycle lane', any zebra crossing should be accompanied by an order making the cycle lane a cycle lane, with 'cycles only' signs
Posted 4 years ago # -
I wouldn't support a MMW zebra crossing unless 'properly' specced ie amber beacons etc for night visibility. I'm sick of the council graffiti-ing what little bike infrastructure exists with 'fake' and shoddy hieroglyphics that probably have no legal standing due to their non-road location and substandard spec.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I agree with Muran.
The more road-like you make the bike path, the more conflict it introduces.
Posted 4 years ago # -
'fake' and shoddy hieroglyphics
Nice phrase :-) Personally I think the existing give-way paintings fall into that category. Shouldn't we aim for a balance of least intrusive / most effective? That's why I think zebra markings would be better than the give-way markings: my thinking is that only the cyclists notice the give-way markings, but both cyclists and pedestrians would notice zebra markings?Posted 4 years ago # -
Any actual suggestions then as to how the conflict can be reduced?
I can ask about this if we have a positive and achievable end point that the council can deliver.
The active travel people work hard to get the roads people to instal signs that reduce conflict. So for two years we fought at the top of new street to change the sign from a red circle with a motor cycle flying over a car to NO ENTRY and Except Cycles. We won eventually as the employees of the council are in general pro-car so we have to win hearts and minds.
Do we want a zebra with belisha beacons
Wont be for the new intake of students
Or are we saying if we take on the presumed liability there is no need for signs/paint
or is there no consensus in which case we have no chance
Posted 4 years ago # -
I think MMW is some of the most stupid provision in the city. A steepish hill where on the downhill section you can reach some pretty high speeds and yet there is nothing but a couple of bits of paint to warn unwary pedestrians of cyclists. We dont have it on any roads in the city where the pavement is just marked out by paint, so why here?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Ok, my line could be - have there ever been any collisions
Or has there been a worse collision than usual causing recent paint
Posted 4 years ago # -
If you walk it at any time of year, you'll see near misses (this is not hyperbole of the 'all cyclists go through red lights variety'). If you cycle it, you'll have to go round somone who doesnt understand the white line and picture of bike sign etc. Its just a route designed (or rather not designed) to create conflict.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Any actual suggestions then as to how the conflict can be reduced?
Remove the stupid guard-rail that was added to the crossing to/from George Sq that funnels all pedestrians into a narrow and single point.
Add footpaths along the diagonal desire-lines across the grass into George Sq.
Pedestrians can cross the bike route informally anywhere.
No need for any stupid paint apart from the separating centreline (which should actually be raised for compatibility with the tactiles).
Posted 4 years ago # -
That's a clever idea - the junction at the bottom is much wider and theoretically more chaotic but seems to work fine as there's lots of room to figure out what people's intentions are and manoeuvre around them. Would need folk to chill out coming down the hill but I think it could work.
@mgj: what sort of punishments would you have for pedestrians who miss bike signs and cross the white line? Would it be the same thing as motorway legislation for bikes with similar punishment or more like littering? How would crossings work?
Posted 4 years ago # -
“If you cycle it, you'll have to go round somone who doesnt understand the white line and picture of bike sign etc.”
Part of the problem here (as I understand it) is that actually pedestrians have every right to be on the ‘cycle lane’.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Pedestrians also have the right to be in the road, but we do expect them not to walk down the middle of the road without looking behind at all...
I don't think there are any simple solutions. You see the films of cyclists going every which way in the Netherlands and that's great but I'd hate to have to try and negotiate that sort of set up if I couldn't see what was going on, for example.
Posted 4 years ago # -
ooooh, guard rail might have been the university?
Posted 4 years ago # -
I dont think it needs punishments; it needs to be understandable to a visitor and local. Pavements are at different heights to roads; pedestrians can understand that pretty easily. So, rather than the white line, raise the non-cycle side by six inches.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I think pedestrians having 'every right' to be on the cycle lane is a red herring - as fimm says they have just as much 'right' to be on the road. The way humans interact with infrastructure is far more to do with intuition and desire than 'rights' and 'rules'.
@mgj: You posted while I was writing this but I think we're largely in agreement. The cycle path should be clearly distinct and then behaviour will change - don't know why it didn't get red chip when it was resurfaced, for example.
I actually think at the variety of times I've cycled MMW recently the lane has been pretty well observed. (To the point that I've looked at how busy and congested the pedestrian side is and though 'if this were a road, I'd probably be demanding it be closed so pedestrians had more space'...)
Posted 4 years ago # -
There has definitely been at least one collision between a person on a bicycle and a person on foot at the crossing point on MMW. I don't think I have witnessed one yet, but girlfriend of jdanielp once reported the aftermath of one.
I suppose a 'punishment' for wandering into the bike lane without looking is the possibility of being collided with.
I have had more near misses on the non-crossing sections.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@jonty - yes, I'd close it probably during the festival to cyclists but then it isnt on my current commute.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I actually think at the variety of times I've cycled MMW recently the lane has been pretty well observed.
Usually. Afternoons during the Festival can have people wandering all over the place so caution is required.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I go through MMW at least twice a day on weekdays. At the moment it is my least favourite part of the commute as pedestrians really just take no notice and jump out. I inevitably find I end up going very slowly and ringing the bell all the time. Thankfully, only one more day to go...
Posted 4 years ago # -
Controversial idea perhaps but a traffic light junction at the bottom of MMW? They do have traffic-light controlled bicycle/pedestrian junctions in Copenhagen and it would reduce conflict and might be interesting as a social experiment to see if the "cyclists are a bunch of red-light jumping anarchists" trope holds any water.
A solid white line means "do not cross" according to the Highway code but some sort of low-level physical segregation like raised brickwork along the boundary wouldn't go amiss.
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
