Spokes had an initial meeting with ESJ developers re York Place cycleway. Can't disclose details, but likelihood is continuation of a 2-way cycleway on the South side. This could mean quite a height difference between the cycleway and the road (300mm) so a continuous guardrail is being considered along the lines of the ones at the top of Dublin Street.
Any guidance or examples of a good guardrail installation alongside a cycleway?
Another location is alongside the A90.
There would be some kerbed separation from the guardrail and a gap between the guardrail and also the carriageway to allow for overhanging mirrors etc.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
CCWEL - York Place - Guardrail for cycleway
(32 posts)-
Posted 6 years ago #
-
Don’t even humour this discussion and seek an alternative. Continuous guardrail with level separation is worse than what’s just been removed from Leith St
Posted 6 years ago # -
For clarity, is this the spot: Street View link?
So the footway is remaining much as it is, and the cycleway is going roughly where the steps are?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Chocolate guard rail?
Posted 6 years ago # -
So, rather than take away space from motor vehicles by building a segregated cycleway on the north side of York Place, the developers propose a far more complex, expensive and inferior "solution" on the south side - which takes away space from pedestrians and happily also means cyclists have to cross the tram tracks at a shallow angle on North St Andrew Street (or further up in St Andrew Square).
I'm loving how the Council is preparing the infrastructure for the forthcoming "transformative change".
Posted 6 years ago # -
What Morningsider said, not forgetting the inconvenient & slow 2-stage crossing of Elder St
Posted 6 years ago # -
@Morningsider, in fairness to the developers the plans for this cycle lane were drawn up by CEC a few years ago as part of the East-West cycle link. So while ESJ are delivering this, presumably as part of the GAM deal for "enabling works" at Picardy Place etc. it's not clear that they can be exclusively blamed for the decision on the positioning of this cycle lane.
On the guardrail issue, if at all possible this should be strenuously resisted.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@frenchy That street view is further West. That section (from Elder Street to South Saint Andrew Street (SSAS) and on to South Saint David Street (SSDS), will be subsequent developments led by the Active Travel Team (ATT).
The South side will link to James Craig Walk and Picardy Place cycleways so seems favourable to a cycleway on the North side that would entail crossing over and back again and as Crowriver says, this is as proposed by CCWEL project.
The useable pavement width is being retained -approx3.6m.
There will be a small kerb separation from the footway to a lower cycleway. The problem is the large drop from the cycleway to the carriageway - 300mm and even more up by SSAS. I wouldn't fancy cycling beside such a drop.
Really looking for examples of similar situations where they have made this work as they will be planning to deliver this quite soon and ahead of the tram extension developments (against which it is "proofed") and the ATT project from Elder St to SSDS.Posted 6 years ago # -
Well the only example I can think of that has a similar or larger drop along the cycle path is sections of the A90 path as recently refurbished. A barrier is in place there. However not convinced this would work in an urban context, as it restricts informal opportunities to cross the road in what is after all a 20mph urban street, not a high speed semi-rural dual carriageway.
Folk may hate me for this but what about something similar to the raised, angled curbs/build-outs between the cycleway and the road that have been installed on Leith Street? In that case they are presumably intended to deter motor vehicles from encroaching the cycleway, but could similar work to deter cycles from unwittingly rolling over a 30cm drop?
Posted 6 years ago # -
I'm struggling to see why there is a 30cm drop then, since currently there's just a normal kerb. Are they lowering the carriageway for some reason?
Posted 6 years ago # -
The problem is the large drop from the cycleway to the carriageway - 300mm and even more up by SSAS. I wouldn't fancy cycling beside such a drop.
Yes, that wouldn't be particularly comfortable, especially if the cycleway is two-way and isn't very wide (what's the anticipated width?). I'm not a fan of cycling next to railings either, but it may be the lesser of two evils here. Do under-pavement cellars prevent the cycleway being lowered to near road height?
What are the plans for James Craig Walk? is that going to be a segregated route that allows Leith Street to be avoided?
Posted 6 years ago # -
@Frency, yeah looking at the Street View, there's really not much of a drop. So surely this must be about the section from St Andrew's Square to the bus station exit?
Posted 6 years ago # -
I suggested using the north side of York Place as it avoids building a cycle track over this.
Seriously - after all the problems at Haymarket, the Mound, Princes Street does anyone think this is a good idea? It also avoids all this different level nonsense.
Yes, I appreciate that this is probably all due to some plans that are apparently carved in stone - but do we really have to support this? There must come a point when the proposals are so poor that it is better to say "We cannot support this because it poses a serious danger" than suggesting types of guardrail to guide us onto the tram lines.
EDIT - also, a north-side cycle lane means cyclists don't have to cross the entry road to the bus station, an obvious danger point.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“There must come a point when the proposals are so poor that it is better to say "We cannot support this because it poses a serious danger" than suggesting types of guardrail to guide us onto the tram lines.”
Yep.
AND say it VERY publicly.
Posted 6 years ago # -
I fail to see how a guardrail (at approx saddle height) is going to prevent a cyclist going over the edge of the drop.
If a cyclist makes a mistake, all that's going to happen is the rider will become separated from bike (with bike nicely mangled in guardrail) and land head-first on the carriageway anyway.
Personally, I rather take my chances on my mountain bike skills going down the 30cm drop, to recover the situation, than crashing straight into metalwork.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Posted 6 years ago # -
With regard to unidirectional cycleways on both sides:
At least when the council come to realise that bidirectional cycleways are a very bad idea, we'll have a decent width unidirectional cycleway on the South side, ready for when they build an equivalent width one on the North side.
Right first time? Na, never...
Posted 6 years ago # -
Who is it that thinks they are a good idea? The only advantage they may have is that with "double" the amount of cycle traffic, pedestrians might keep off them.
Posted 6 years ago # -
No idea if these are ‘Festival pedestrians’ or whether they have been programmed by traffic-free Leith Street.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Good quality bidirectional (no less than 3m, I think Blackfriars bridge is 4.5m) fits in well with the existing uk traffic law set as we don't have "turn left on red" laws. This means to do unidirectional lanes you either need vast road space for general traffic left turn filter lanes or you give up protection at junctions and dump cyclists into left hook danger.
Bi-directional lanes also adapt nicely to morning/evening flows that for commuter routes will be strongly directional.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“Bi-directional lanes also adapt nicely to morning/evening flows that for commuter routes will be strongly directional.”
Not sure about that.
Fine for the majority, maybe.
Posted 6 years ago # -
to do unidirectional lanes you either need vast road space for general traffic left turn filter lanes or you give up protection at junctions and dump cyclists into left hook danger.
I suspect other options are available, including a cycle phase at the traffic signal.
And, unfortunately, bidirectional routes are possibly more of a risk for drivers not giving way to cyclists, as the driver needs to look both ways before crossing the cycleway, particularly if the driver is crossing the cycleway at the ideal 90 degree approach.
However, I'd guess that the optimal selection of unidirectional or bidirectional will be situation specific - e.g. a bidirectional cycleroute along a road with junctions only (or predominately) on a single side will be much preferable to one with a pair of unidirectional routes, but unidirectional routes mean cyclists don't have to cross the road to join it, etc...
What I didn't like in the Netherlands (mostly because I didn't understand the signage) was the abrupt switch from bidirectional to unidirectional, requiring crossing the road.
Robert
Posted 6 years ago # -
no less than 3m
2.4m is what we are getting
Posted 6 years ago # -
IIRC when the consulted on the last stretch of the A90 path they mentioned that a barrier reduces the effective width of a path by 50cm. So if the path is 2.4m from barrier to kerb then what they are essentially building is a 1.9m path.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The 2.4m does not include the guardrail or buffer zone. Still sub-standard though
Posted 6 years ago # -
The RSO for the stretch along Queen St from North St David Street to Elder Street has been published here: http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/download/2715/rso1815_-_queen_street_and_york_place
This includes the crossing of the tramlines at North St Andrew Street/York Place. The crossing angle of the tramlines is 45 degrees.
This seems to be the very limit of what can be achieved with the cycleway on the south side of the road (and they want it on the south side to best link to Picardy Place).
Posted 6 years ago # -
The Council's own advice on crossing trams lines is "You should cross at least at 45 degrees, 60 if possible. If you can't, you should consider getting off your bike."
This design, which forms part of the flagship east-west cycle route, is dangerous.
Not wanting to be flippant, but it would be the equivalent of Transport Scotland inserting a hairpin bend in the middle of the new section of the M8.
Posted 6 years ago # -
To be fair, this is better than I expected. Nearly all the space for the cycle track is being taken from carriageway, which is A Good Thing. The only bits of footway pinched appear to be the "horse and carriage" steps beloved of New Town grandees of old. No big loss for people on foot, which is also A Good Thing.
Can't see any guardrail on the plans?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Can't see any guardrail on the plans?
I think that's further east. Sorry for confusion, I just used the first semi-relevant thread I found.
Posted 6 years ago # -
From my reading of the plans, the cycle path on York Place is on the tarmac surface of the road and not on the narrow ledge between raised pavement and road. Is that right? If so, good result, I'd say.
Posted 6 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
