Nice idea but...

David Martin said:

As part of the redevelopment of Dundee Riverside and the expansion of
the science/media/arts park, a shiny new bike path has been laid.

<snip>

Duh. Where exactly is this one David? I shall fire up my word
processor and moan at the Council once I've seen it for real.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

David Martin said:

As part of the redevelopment of Dundee Riverside and the expansion of
the science/media/arts park, a shiny new bike path has been laid.

<snip>

Duh. Where exactly is this one David? I shall fire up my word
processor and moan at the Council once I've seen it for real.

It starts by Sensation (Greenmarket) and ends at the car park at the
bottom end of Roseangle.

http://multimap.com/map/browse.cgi?client=public&X=339750&Y=729500&width=700&height=400&gride=&gridn=&srec=0&coordsys=gb&db=GB&addr1=&addr2=&addr3=&pc=&advanced=&local=&localinfosel=&kw=&inmap=&table=&ovtype=&keepicon=&zm=1&scale=10000

As other peeps can see, it does make a nice traffic free link. Getting
up to the Perth Road requires a significant climb.

It would have been cheaper and easier to use a bollard, much like that
which has been used here:

http://www.martin-family.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/zpath2.jpg (one of my
favourite bits of NCN 1, especially at high tide in a strong wind.)

...d

David Martin said:

pic at http://www.martin-family.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/zpath.jpg - there
is a fence adjacent to the path.

Good stuff! A nice picture in daylight could be a candidate for the
Warrington FOTM.

I just can't understand the thought process behind this sort of thing.
"We'll divide the path and keep cyclists to one side. Then we'll put in
a barrier that forces them to cross to the other side. Better update
the Highway Code too, to make sure the ungrateful buggers use it."

--
Dave...

David Martin said:

pic at http://www.martin-family.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/zpath.jpg - there
is a fence adjacent to the path.

That needs a daylight picture to Pete Owens at the Warrington Cycle
Campaign for his Facility of the Month award.
http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/

Its clearly designed so that, being unable to proceed further, you slot
your front wheel in the vertical slots of the cycle stand provided
across the path while you continue on foot.

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

Tony Raven said:

David Martin said:

pic at http://www.martin-family.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/zpath.jpg - there
is a fence adjacent to the path.

That needs a daylight picture to Pete Owens at the Warrington Cycle
Campaign for his Facility of the Month award.
http://www.warringtoncyclecampaign.co.uk/

Its clearly designed so that, being unable to proceed further, you slot
your front wheel in the vertical slots of the cycle stand provided
across the path while you continue on foot.

It is well known that if you put cyclists on a long straight smooth
path they fall asleep. This is why it is essential to have potholes,
cars, or in this case barriers across the path. These barriers cost
money so we c need to ensure a ready supply of fixed penalty notices
for riding on the wrong side of the path in order to pay for it.

It is just down the road from me now so I might pop down at lunch
time.

...d

David Martin said:

It would have been cheaper and easier to use a bollard, much like that
which has been used here:

Bollards don't impede motorbikes or scooters at all - which chicanes
do much more to discourage using.

Jim.

Jim Ley said:

Bollards don't impede motorbikes or scooters at all - which chicanes
do much more to discourage using.

But the basic point here is that the chicane will also discourage pedal
cyclists. I will use the road rather than use that, which fundamentally
destroys the point of putting it there to start with (and that
particular example, being in Dundee, has been paid for in part with *my*
money for *my* benefit as a Dundee cyclist).

Preventing access by people who shouldn't be there is *far* less
important than optimising access for those that should be.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Jim Ley said:

Bollards don't impede motorbikes or scooters at all - which chicanes
do much more to discourage using.

But the basic point here is that the chicane will also discourage pedal
cyclists. I will use the road rather than use that, which fundamentally
destroys the point of putting it there to start with

Not really, you're free to use the road - just like a car user would
be more likely to use the bypass than go through the town, alternative
routes are fine - some people who are slower than you (so time lost
transitting the chicane), or more nervous in traffic etc. would still
take the cycle path. That's fine - I assume there was a real problem
with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was, blocking them which does discourage bikes is better than making
it pedestrian only.

Jim.

Jim Ley said:

Peter Clinch said:

Jim Ley said:

Bollards don't impede motorbikes or scooters at all - which chicanes
do much more to discourage using.

But the basic point here is that the chicane will also discourage pedal
cyclists. I will use the road rather than use that, which fundamentally
destroys the point of putting it there to start with

Not really, you're free to use the road - just like a car user would
be more likely to use the bypass than go through the town, alternative
routes are fine - some people who are slower than you (so time lost
transitting the chicane), or more nervous in traffic etc. would still
take the cycle path. That's fine - I assume there was a real problem
with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was, blocking them which does discourage bikes is better than making
it pedestrian only.

The point was that if you use it as intended you are breaking the law.
It is a useful link and I am considering it as a route to the
station/sensation/leisure centre when taking my kids. At 7 and 9 they
are not really up to my normal route which is the main road and two
large and one enormous roundabout. In this situation it is easy to ride
a scooter through these chicanes. It might be quite hard to get the
tandem through fully loaded (haven't tried yet).

...d

Jim Ley said:

Not really, you're free to use the road - just like a car user would
be more likely to use the bypass than go through the town, alternative
routes are fine - some people who are slower than you (so time lost
transitting the chicane), or more nervous in traffic etc. would still
take the cycle path.

But if, for example, they're on a fully laden tandem or a hand tricycle
then it makes it /substantially/ more difficult to use.

Quoted message said:

That's fine - I assume there was a real problem
with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was

It's a brand new track, so there cannot have been a problem, thus it is
silly. I've yet to meet any motorbikes.scooters on other Dundee cycle
tracks, so there doesn't seem to be a particular problem elsewhere.
Indeed, the docks cycletrack which has manned security posts at each end
so no motorcyclists could expect to get onto the track, still has these
chicanes and "Cyclists Dismount" signs.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email hidden] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

Peter Clinch said:

Jim Ley said:

That's fine - I assume there was a real problem
with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was

It's a brand new track, so there cannot have been a problem, thus it is
silly. I've yet to meet any motorbikes.scooters on other Dundee cycle
tracks, so there doesn't seem to be a particular problem elsewhere.
Indeed, the docks cycletrack which has manned security posts at each end
so no motorcyclists could expect to get onto the track, still has these
chicanes and "Cyclists Dismount" signs.

Then it's very silly...

Jim.

David Martin said:

As other peeps can see, it does make a nice traffic free link. Getting
up to the Perth Road requires a significant climb.

Now what would be nice is a shortcut from this part into the Riverside
Tesco, though they may have to dig a cyclists tunnel under the railway

Roos

David Martin wrote:
I assume there was a real problem

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was, blocking them which does discourage bikes is better than making

Over here the average yoof on a moped is quite capable of finding out
that you can bypass the obstruction by driving around it through the grass.

Are yours different?

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

Roos Eisma said:

David Martin said:

As other peeps can see, it does make a nice traffic free link. Getting
up to the Perth Road requires a significant climb.

Now what would be nice is a shortcut from this part into the Riverside
Tesco, though they may have to dig a cyclists tunnel under the railway

Write to your councillor and moan..

The shortcut is to go to the end, over the railway, under the railway
and back along the main road or the pavement.

The lighting on the path is pretty good so the lack of any edge
markings next to the drops into the mud are not really too much of a
problem. I'll write to my councillor and moan about the barriers
anyway, might contrive a tandem and trailer to make the point.

...d

M-gineering said:

Over here the average yoof on a moped is quite capable of finding out that
you can bypass the obstruction by driving around it through the grass.

Cagers too:

http://www.syslog.com/~jwilson/pics-i-like/kurios119.jpg

Mike

M-gineering said:

David Martin wrote:
I assume there was a real problem

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was, blocking them which does discourage bikes is better than making

Over here the average yoof on a moped is quite capable of finding out
that you can bypass the obstruction by driving around it through the grass.

Are yours different?

The photo doesn't show it but there is a fence right next to the cycle
side and a similarly awkward bit to get round the other. It should be
easy enough to get a moped through though without having to go round.
Be a bugger with a trailer though.

...d

Quoted message said:

--
---
Marten Gerritsen

INFOapestaartjeM-GINEERINGpuntNL
www.m-gineering.nl

M-gineering said:

David Martin wrote:
I assume there was a real problem

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

with motorbikes/scooters otherwise it would be silly yes, but if there
was, blocking them which does discourage bikes is better than making

Over here the average yoof on a moped is quite capable of finding out
that you can bypass the obstruction by driving around it through the grass.

Like this?
http://www.17beechroad.freeserve.co.uk/WarringtonCycleCampaign/facility-of-the-month/February2003.htm

--
Tony

"The best way I know of to win an argument is to start by being in the
right."
- Lord Hailsham

"David Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

As cyclists are obviously unable to either read or look where they are
going, a chicane has been installed at the end. What's the big deal?
Well, it is not a shared use, but a divided path. It has a white line
down the middle and pedestrians have exclusive use of one side and
cyclists must stay on the other. The chicane completely blocks the
cycle side so a cyclist must either break the law by pedalling or
wheeling his cycle around the barrier, jump the barrier, or carry the
cycle. The latter two would be fine for a fit and healthy person, but
kids in a trailer? A tandem?

Appalling! Check the width between the railings, and then check the minimum
distance allowed between such objects according to disability legislation,
1.2m I think, but don't take that as gospel. If it's any less, and it
sounds as if it may be, threaten action for failing to meet requirements in
disabled legislation.

In article <[email hidden]>, Peter Clinch
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

But the basic point here is that the chicane will also discourage pedal
cyclists.

At the little park 50 yards down my road the council has installed
turnstile gates at every exit. Great for slowing down cyclists who might
want to use the park as a short cut to get to the local shops - those
determined enough simply wheel their bikes through and ride on - but
also great for making life difficult for mums with buggies - and there
are lots, the infirm and people in wheelchairs.

The gates are lockable, but aren't, as it would otherwise cut off
residents in my end of the cul-de-sac from quick access to shops and
transport. Also, the adjoining railings are only about a metre high and
could easily be vaulted by even the most lethargic teenager looking for
a quiet spot for some snogging, pot smoking or underage drinking.

--
congokid
Eating out in London? Read my tips...
http://congokid.com