Insto - point taken, but have rows of bricks been design tested for this purpose?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
NEPN, Craigleith Junction upgrade. Have your say
(223 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
"You sound like drivers complaining about speed bumps on residential streets."
Yes(ish) - but 'normal' road humps might be more acceptable as it's clear how they work and are likely to be OK and predictable in most weather conditions and also likely to last.
The stuff here gives some people the fears that tram lines induce!
They might 'wear' as well as the obstructions in Leamington Walk.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Tuesday:
Wodin's day:
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ SRD
"I don't believe it. They've put blister tiles there? They're supposed to warn about carriageway.
How can they consistently get it wrong? ( if I'm misreading the pic please tell me now before I start engaging in correspondence)."
No, you're reading it right! The blisters are nowhere near the edge of the road, perhaps 10-12 feet away from it! I'd thought that myself about their placement. Just what message are they sending to a visually-impaired person? They neither warn you that you're about to step onto a road nor even that you're at the edge of the perpendicular cycle path - they're in limbo.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ Instography
"You sound like drivers complaining about speed bumps on residential streets."
Except that drivers complain they've lost the "right" to drive at their choice of speed (i.e. faster) whereas personally I'm complaining that they've merely made a perfectly reasonable part of the path, which only needed some flood protection, less comfortable. Additionally, they've 'solved' a problem which didn't really exist in the first place, namely slowing down speeding cyclists.
This is the part of the NEPN I use most often and I've never seen any situation that made me think, "Oh, some reworking of the surface will stop that in its tracks!" The occasional selfish and overly-fast rider will not be slowed by the rumble strips if they don't want to be, whilst the rest of us have some extra unfriendly bumps in the route to deal with.
The daft thing is that the topography of the location means that the best place for any Give Way markings (if they had to be there at all), would be on the east-west strip between the roads as it's on a slope, and the southern part of the Silverknowes lane as it acts like a slip road onto the Roseburn path. Yet both those areas appear to be getting now markings.
When I first saw the "Path Improvements" sign I posted to start this thread, I imagined resurfacing, better signage, drainage and perhaps some flowers and/or sculpture to brighten it up. What I wasn't expecting was traffic calming!
Posted 10 years ago # -
I see. Because unnecessary works added to improvements that impede normal safe speeds, adding discomfort and dangers to unknown others only to ineffectively address a small problem caused by occasional selfish and overly fast others is not at all what drivers would say.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ Insto I think you are discounting the speed/mass/danger of motor vehicles.
It's not as though most roads/junctions are getting traffic calmed.
One reason for traffic calming in residential area is to reduce rat-running - ie discourage traffic. If that's what's happening here I look forward to PROPER cycle provision on nearby main roads.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that any kind of calming is unnecessary because bikes crashing into each other or into pedestrians or dogs doesn't hurt so much?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Also, I'm not suggesting in any way that you, or your fellow Fifeshire commuterists are (any part of) 'the problem', but the reality is that as well as 'shared use', such paths are 'mixed use'.
People rushing to work, people meandering on bike and foot with or without dogs/children.
Plus 'transport walkers' visiting nearby palaces of groceries.
Is it a good idea to 'vehiclise' the network introducing (or reinforcing) road style rights and responsibilities?
The present free for all (sic) relies on 'responsible use' - there's even legislation to that effect.
There used to be a lot of pram and pedal traps all over the network. That was mainly to discourage a few anti-social (and illegal) motorbike users.
That tiny minority caused overreaction and inconvenience for the masses.
'We' won that argument - helped by the access legislation, which defeated the "community safety" arguments of the police and a small section of the council.
Perhaps someone directly affected by this can contact the council and ask -
"Why?"
"Is it an experiment" that can be reversed?"
"Are there plans to do this elsewhere?"
Also ask -
"Have there been many complaints - presumably from pedestrians?"
It's possible that there have been real (frequent) issues that 'we' are unaware of or have a different view on their significance.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying that any kind of calming is unnecessary because bikes crashing into each other or into pedestrians or dogs doesn't hurt so much?"
Er, no.
Is that happening a lot?
Will these measure reduce such happenings?
Are they the best way of dealing with 'a problem'?
Will they create more problems? (Presumably too early to tell).
Posted 10 years ago # -
I can't say I really thought of NEPN as a road before now, and it seems to me that applying road signage is a sword that cuts both ways. The only place you now need to give way on the whole network is at that junction, and only in certain directions.
For instance, I certainly *don't* have to give way if I'm cutting across a path which *does* have give way markings, as in the case of a rider who swoops from the Fife arm of NEPN to cross directly to the shopping centre. They only have to give way to people travelling from the shops to the houses on the other side, and once they're on that middle section, have priority over all the cyclists on other arms.
I'm not sure the council has considered that once a cyclist crosses onto the central span of the path, they don't have a give way line to reach any other arm of the path. What happens if a ped (or a dog) crosses from one arm of the path into the central zone and is hit by a cyclist who doesn't themselves have a give way line?
On the road network that ped (or dog owner) is SOL, so presumably likewise on NEPN. We can hardly argue the cyclist is being careless when they're following the law set down for that explicit road marking.
Is that actually what we want? The comparison with motorists who want anarchy seems hard to make. The problem with those speed bumps is that they are shit, if they'd just installed speed pillows from the road design manual, I wouldn't have a problem with them.
Posted 10 years ago # -
The design specs (see link on previous page) specified a "rumble strip" not "speed bumps".
To me, the sort of thing you get on roads (3D paint, I think) would have been perfectly acceptable. It alerts the dozy cyclist to the junction ahead, while push- and wheel-chairs can still get across relatively smoothly, and cyclists are not thrown from their line to wobble into oncoming "traffic". The design specs block paving as the rumble strip, but the bricks they've used seem definitely inappropriate for the path and users.
Posted 10 years ago # -
The triple rumble action seems like overkill.
A single rumble strip of similar overall length as the three individual strips would have been as effective and less of a slap in the face.
Not that anyone intended it as such, its just a paper exercise to appease community complaints that's been poorly executed.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Yes, but a single strip of bricks can be bunny-hopped by a cyclist who knows it is there. I've seen Boyfriend bunny-hop his road bike over some nasty on road humps which reduced me to a crawl. I think the triples are too big to bunny hop (but I could be wrong - especially for mountainbikes).
Yes, I'd like to know what was broken about this junction that needed to be fixed...
Posted 10 years ago # -
"I'd like to know what was broken about this junction that needed to be fixed"
I thought I'd said that originally - that the bit that needs fixed is the access to the ped crossing and the other side of the road. But can't find it on previous thread. http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11293
Posted 10 years ago # -
If I was an elderly infirm local, traversing this junction to get to the shops, I would have a problem with the junction as it was. A hypothetical problem mostly, but a concern nonetheless.
However the solution being implemented is a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I rode over these last night, altogether unimpressed as the red brick of the bumps is pretty much invisible against the grey of the tarmac under night-time lighting conditions.
If you're determined and know they are there, there's nothing to stop you plowing over these thigns at speed, if you're willing to accept a bit of a bump as you do so.
At best they're a pest and at worst a hazard to the casual user of these paths.
To the person who approaches a junction with care and caution then they seem pointless and waste of money.
For anyone determined to blast through junctions then they will continue to do so relatively unincumbered by these bricks.
Let's just get back to the good old days of 10-15 years ago when nearly every single bit of "cycle path" had a complex metalwork chicane and kissing gates that were nearly impossible to cycle through "protecting" it.
The most cost-effective and in my opinion useful implementation of speed control is the big painted "CYCLISTS SLOW" in Roseburn Park. I think you could cut the cost even further by just painting "SLOW" on the path. Lines and "Give Ways" give a false and unenforcable sense that one party or the other has some sort of priority over the other.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ fimm
"I think the triples are too big to bunny hop (but I could be wrong - especially for mountainbikes)."
Not trying to boast here (there are far more skilled riders in the world!) but I can bunny hop the cattle grids in Dalmeny Estate on my road bike (more gentle on the tyres if done properly) so yes, these strips could be hopped over. I wouldn't be trying it on my road-going mountain bike though, it's a good bit heavier and I'd probably unseat my pannier(s) anyway!
Posted 10 years ago # -
I doubt you'd even notice them with 1.5" tyres. I know with my mtb the roads seem nearly smooth.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ kaputnik
"... the red brick of the bumps is pretty much invisible against the grey of the tarmac under night-time lighting conditions.
If you're determined and know they are there, there's nothing to stop you plowing over these things at speed, if you're willing to accept a bit of a bump as you do so.
At best they're a pest and at worst a hazard to the casual user of these paths..." etc.
You've pretty much echoed my thoughts from the photos above. As I say, they are not exactly obvious in low light, especially approaching from Roseburn (I haven't tried from the Silverknowes/Fife or Drylaw/Telford directions).
And they'll not slow someone determined to go fast, merely further slow those who are already ambling along quite nicely.
Posted 10 years ago # -
+1 that is the problem. They don't slow you down. They just cause an annoying bump at whatever speed you go at.
Posted 10 years ago # -
This is the plan -
Click for PDF
Posted 10 years ago # -
I imagine the bumping is actually worse if you slow down, rather than just skimming over them. Another awkward difference between bikes and cars that hasn't been taken into consideration.
In fairness as far as safety goes it could be worse (they could be the tram-track style flagstones from North Meadows path), but whereas you can avoid those by crossing onto the pedestrian side, not so much on NEPN.
The question is more what are they going to be like covered in slippy leaf mulch with every second brick missing by freeze-thaw or council van or misspent youths.
A shame as NEPN was the one facility in Edinburgh which was actually *right* (for cycling). I can't think of one single example anywhere else in the city that isn't somehow compromised.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I imagine the bumping is actually worse if you slow down, rather than just skimming over them. Another awkward difference between bikes and cars that hasn't been taken into consideration.
Interesting; I think it's the same for bikes and cars in this scenario.
For those who have not see them yet, I went that way today for the first time this week, and this is what they look / feel like. I'll be honest, from the descriptions above, I was expecting them to be a lot worse. I think they're fine!
Posted 10 years ago # -
Now they're actually installed they are, in fairness, considerably better than they seemed they were going to be earlier in the week.
It might just be that they'll settle out of the way and my fears of freeze / truck induced wreckage is pure pessimism!
That, or the edge could be taken off with a little bit of community chisel work...
Posted 10 years ago # -
Definitely flatter than yesterday. Wonder if they've been hammered-down a little or if the rain has let them settle a bit on top of their sand... northernmost strip still just a sand-trench with a badly-placed plastic thing at one end this evening.
As mkns's video shows, the reason they've used bricks appears to be so that they could use the same bricks as are being used for the kerb on the central kerbed bit.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Bricks round the central reservation !, so that's gone as an emergency runoff :(
Posted 10 years ago # -
As the bloke who stopped to ask what was happening with the thing as I went through pointed out, whatever they're doing with the drainage had better be pretty good if it's to cope with the removal of a mature tree's transpirational abilities.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"As mkns's video shows, the reason they've used bricks appears to be so that they could use the same bricks as are being used for the kerb on the central kerbed bit."
That's how the planning officer explained it to me this afternoon when I asked why they'd gone for the bricks...
Posted 10 years ago # -
After chattering my teeth crossing those speed bumps in a rather slow 20” front wheeled trike. I did a search to find this forum. Anyone got a Wacker?
I cycle this route every day, yet managed to completely miss the posters, soliciting opinions!
In particular I am concerned about the width of the opening at Maidencraig Crescent. Although I go all the way to Tesco at D Mains in the mornings, I am usually cycling home after 11pm and having had a few scary / abusive experiences at the northern end of the track, I cycle on the main Queensferry Road down to Maidencraig before cycling south on the track to Russell Road.
Would anyone know the width or know someone who does?
Too late now but I would have spent the money tarmacking the bog between the track and the back of Tesco.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
