Cyclepath barriers partial success

Danny Colyer said:

Some of you may remember that I've been trying for several years to get
3 RADAR gates removed from the Bath-Bristol cyclepath.

The good news is that two of them have been removed today (6 months
later than I was initially told they'd be removed, but hey).

Congrats on you success and your speedy council. Scottish Water told
me 8 months ago that they would remove in due course "No Cycling"
signs at a local reservoir which had no legal force.(the byelaws
having been superceded by the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003). The
signs are still there. I sent a follow up letter this week suggesting
that if the new design of signs are going to take much longer to
source and erect they could perhaps paint over the "No Cycling"
lettering in the existing signs meantime.
My local council took over two months to reply (after a
reminder) to an e-mail pointing out a dangerous doorzone cycle lane.
Even then their reply was that everything in the garden is rosy and no
alterations to the "traffic management scheme" were being considered.
I have sent a 3rd e-mail to them asking that they (as I requested)
give a view on whether or not they consider the existing lane
dangerous and whether they agree that any cyclist injured using it
might have a claim against the council given that the dangers of the
layout have been drawn to the councils attention. I have yet to get a
reply but live in hope.
Iain

Danny Colyer said:

Some of you may remember that I've been trying for several years to get
3 RADAR gates removed from the Bath-Bristol cyclepath.

The good news is that two of them have been removed today

I was pleasantly surprised yesterday to find that all those irritating
gates that are supposed to keep motorbikes out had been removed from
my towpath commute. They sometimes take them down when they're doing
work so I hope they don't reappear.

I did wonder why those annoying 'gates' had been partially removed
from the Taff trail, well at least from the Bute Park - Tongwynlais
section. I did think surely this will encourage idiots on cyclo-cross
bikes. It had never occurred to me that it also prevented mum/dad
cyclists towing youngster in a trailer. Now I know.

iarocu said:

My local council took over two months to reply (after a
reminder) to an e-mail pointing out a dangerous doorzone cycle lane.
Even then their reply was that everything in the garden is rosy and no
alterations to the "traffic management scheme" were being considered.

Those type of on-road cycling lanes are not put in for the benefit of
cyclists. They are put in to make the road seem narrower to drivers, so
as to virtually narrow it to one-way in either direction, the intent
being to slow traffic.
Shows the contempt in which cyclists are held.

nobody760 said:

I did wonder why those annoying 'gates' had been partially removed
from the Taff trail, well at least from the Bute Park - Tongwynlais
section. I did think surely this will encourage idiots on cyclo-cross
bikes. It had never occurred to me that it also prevented mum/dad
cyclists towing youngster in a trailer. Now I know.

As I've said many times on this newsgroup, you can drive your 150mph
supercar Ferrari from the tip of Lands End to John O' Groats without so
much as passing over a two inch step.

Think of any typical town centre, and the obstacle course which parents
with buggies and wheelchair users have to negotiate every day.

Think of the outcry in the press if the precious Ferrari had to drop
down a pavement to get to their destination.

On Fri, 02 Mar 2007 14:24:21 +0000, John Hearns <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Think of any typical town centre, and the obstacle course which parents
with buggies and wheelchair users have to negotiate every day.

That seems to be improving rapidly, especially in London. It is now
quite rare for pedestrains to have to drop down a kerb while walking
along an 'A' road in the Capital.

I said:

Some of you may remember that I've been trying for several years to get
3 RADAR gates removed from the Bath-Bristol cyclepath.

The good news is that two of them have been removed today (6 months
later than I was initially told they'd be removed, but hey).

The bad news is that a bollard has been installed about a yard from
where one of the gates used to be (I haven't taken a picture yet) and I
suspect the council has forgotten about the third gate.

It appears that the reason a bollard wasn't installed yesterday by where
the second gate used to be was lack of time, as I realised when I
encountered two workmen this morning polishing a freshly installed bollard.

When I rang my bell, one of them got stroppy and insisted that cyclists
aren't allowed to use the gap that has been left, as it's for disabled
people. He pointed to the barrier on the other side of the path
(impossible to negotiate on the Street Machine) and said "That's the
cyclists' bit"!

No photos yet. I had intended to take some this evening, but didn't
fancy stopping and getting my camera out in the rain. This is what it
looked like before, though:
<url:http://www.colyer.plus.com/z-bollards/gate01.jpg>

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

nobody760 said:

I did wonder why those annoying 'gates' had been partially removed
from the Taff trail, well at least from the Bute Park - Tongwynlais
section. I did think surely this will encourage idiots on cyclo-cross
bikes. It had never occurred to me that it also prevented mum/dad
cyclists towing youngster in a trailer. Now I know.

If you're referring to P bars, I think you'll find that they are being
removed by councils around the country, due to the fact that they
present a problem for those who are in wheel chairs.

In article <[email hidden]>, nobody760
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

I did wonder why those annoying 'gates' had been partially removed
from the Taff trail, well at least from the Bute Park - Tongwynlais
section. I did think surely this will encourage idiots on cyclo-cross
bikes.

I think you mean motocross, not cyclocross. :-)

I've got some pictures now:
http://www.colyer.plus.com/temp/z-0703031330a.jpg
http://www.colyer.plus.com/temp/z-0703031330c.jpg
http://www.colyer.plus.com/temp/z-0703031331a.jpg
http://www.colyer.plus.com/temp/z-0703031331b.jpg
http://www.colyer.plus.com/temp/z-0703031331c.jpg

I rode to Bitton Station with the kids to test how much of a problem the
bollards would be with the trailer. Even with the bollards, it's a huge
improvement on what was there before.

The bollards didn't pose any real problem when travelling towards Bath
(the direction shown in the 3rd and 5th pictures). When travelling
towards Bristol (pictures 1, 2 & 3) it was something of a challenge to
get past the first bollard, get to the dropped kerb for the crossing,
then get from the crossing to a position where I could get past the
second bollard, but at least I was able to do it without having to
dismount and detach the trailer, as I've had to do in the past.

Now I need to continue hassling the council to get rid of the gate at
Bitton Station:
http://www.colyer.plus.com/temp/z-0703031343.jpg

I'd like to get the bollards removed as well, but it would almost
certainly be more trouble than it's worth.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Ooops - yes of course I did - motorcross motorbikes.

John Hearns said:

iarocu said:

[...] dangerous doorzone cycle lane. [...]

Those type of on-road cycling lanes are not put in for the benefit of
cyclists. They are put in to make the road seem narrower to drivers, so
as to virtually narrow it to one-way in either direction, the intent
being to slow traffic.
Shows the contempt in which cyclists are held.

I really think it's stupidity more than conspiracy in most cases. In a
surprising reversal in Weston-super-Mare (where there's a cycling officer
who actually cycles the area!), the left-hand lanes over Hildesheim Bridge
are being widened to stop small cars clipping cyclists when overtaking
in-lane. (I was wrong about Drove Road forming the town link, it seems.)

Now, that's not as good as sitting a few police in place to catch drivers
doing stupid things like overtaking in-lane, but it's probably the most
helpful thing the local council can do there.

If you have elections coming up in May, keep asking the politicians
whether they cycle, what they will do about a cycling [censored] near you
and so on. It's one of the few times a wake-up call might work.
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Webmaster/web developer, statistician, sysadmin, online shop maker,
developer of koha, debian, gobo, gnustep, various mail and web s/w.
Workers co-op @ Weston-super-Mare, Somerset http://www.ttllp.co.uk/

Danny Colyer of Home in Bristol said:

I'd like to get the bollards removed as well, but it would almost
certainly be more trouble than it's worth.

I am wondering what on earth the bollards are supposed to achieve. Would
it be possible to get a small car in if the bollards weren't there? If so
then I doubt very much that you will persuade the council to remove the
bollards.
--
Steph Peters
Chorlton Wanderers Cycling Group
Monthly slow and easy rides from South Manchester
http://www.sandbenders.demon.co.uk/cycling/chwan.htm

Steph Peters said:

Danny Colyer of Home in Bristol said:

I'd like to get the bollards removed as well, but it would almost
certainly be more trouble than it's worth.

I am wondering what on earth the bollards are supposed to achieve. Would
it be possible to get a small car in if the bollards weren't there? If so
then I doubt very much that you will persuade the council to remove the
bollards.
--
Steph Peters
Chorlton Wanderers Cycling Group
Monthly slow and easy rides from South Manchester
http://www.sandbenders.demon.co.uk/cycling/chwan.htm

indeed tipping and burning out cars is a unforntant problem as with
motor bikes for such things as cycle paths at least unhabbited.

roger

nobody760 said:

Ooops - yes of course I did - motorcross motorbikes.

Ah, that makes sense. I was vaguely wondering what this cyclo-cross
menace was all about. :-)

--
Dave...

In article <[email hidden]>,
dkahn400
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

nobody760 said:

Ooops - yes of course I did - motorcross motorbikes.

Ah, that makes sense. I was vaguely wondering what this cyclo-cross
menace was all about. :-)

It's a muddy bloke who runs at you up a slippery hill with a bike over
his shoulder and an insane grin/grimace.

Steph Peters said:

I am wondering what on earth the bollards are supposed to achieve. Would
it be possible to get a small car in if the bollards weren't there? If so
then I doubt very much that you will persuade the council to remove the
bollards.

I hadn't thought so before measuring the gap this evening, but the space
between gateposts is 176cm and according to
<url:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_500> a Fiat 500 (the smallest car
I could think of) is only 132cm wide.

--
Danny Colyer <URL:http://www.colyer.plus.com/danny/>
Reply address is valid, but that on my website is checked more often
"He who dares not offend cannot be honest." - Thomas Paine

Rob Morley said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
dkahn400
[email hidden] says...

Quoted message said:

nobody760 said:

Ooops - yes of course I did - motorcross motorbikes.

Ah, that makes sense. I was vaguely wondering what this cyclo-cross
menace was all about. :-)

It's a muddy bloke who runs at you up a slippery hill with a bike over
his shoulder and an insane grin/grimace.

Talking of which I was flicking round the TV channels this evening and
hit the tail end of The Gadget Show on 5 as it completing an article
comparing various outdoor products. They had a race between 3 bikes ...
http://preview.tinyurl.com/322xhg
or
http://gadgetshow.five.tv/jsp/5gsmain.jsp?lnk=401&featureid=307&pageid=673&show=s6e4&section=Features

--
Don Whybrow

Sequi Bonum Non Time

"I've noticed that the press tends to be quite accurate, except
when they're writing on a subject I know something about."
(Keith F. Lynch)