The placement of barriers on cycle paths – and their impact on encouraging cycling, along with accessibility for those with non-standard cycles – has long proved a source of discussion and debate on road.cc and around the wider cycling world.
Last March, delivery cyclist and ultra-cycling legend Steve Abraham criticised Milton Keynes Council’s decision to install a growing number of barriers and bollards on the city’s cycleways and shared use routes, which he claimed prevented them being used by delivery riders with large bike trailers – that were themselves supplied by the council.
And in September, a cyclist in Newcastle sent a legal letter to the city’s council to challenge the lawfulness of barriers on a National Cycle Route which prevent him from accessing the path on his recumbent.
> “Oh! Bollards!” Delivery cyclist says council’s new cycle route barriers are too narrow for cargo bike trailers… also supplied by the council
So, it was no surprise then when this attention-grabbing image – of a cycling and walking route in Salford, and its newly-installed barriers – popped up on social media, that it soon divided opinion and left many cyclists scratching their heads.
This, ahem, interesting set of barriers – the design of which seems to have taken inspiration from the marble-dropping kid’s game Kerplunk – are located on the walking and cycling route that connects Boothstown, Walkden, and Worsley to RHS Garden Bridgewater, introduced over the past few weeks to improve traffic-free sustainable travel in Salford.
Not that the path’s layout is encouraging people to ride their bikes to RHS Garden Bridgewater, at least in the eyes of local cyclists.
“Apparently RHS Bridgewater are confused as to why no one is cycling there,” the Walk Ride Central Salford group tweeted at the weekend. “Eight chicanes on one stretch of path. This was not on the design spec.”
“Obviously designed by a motorist,” added Pete, while others called on a similar design to be instead implemented on the road, to slow down motorists.
Noting that the road the path intersects is a “dead-end access road”, Tom asked the rhetorical (but highly likely to have been asked by the planners) question: “Should we do something to slow cars on this tiny dead-end street, or should we do something to slow cycles on the much longer cycle route?”
Others, meanwhile, saw the funny side in the barriers’ rather tricky placement.
“Are they remaking The Krypton Factor?” asked Gaz, while Sam said he “thought this was an equestrian events ground at first glance”.
“What’s it for? Ferret slalom racing? It’s certainly not for cyclists that’s for sure,” added Russ, and Pauline, oddly, reckoned it “looks like a giant scale eighties leg hair remover device”.
“I think you’ll find that’s the official cargo trike Olympic slalom course, new event: Minimum two passengers must be carried at all times, so they can lift the trike over any barriers which have are totally impassable at ground level…” wrote road.cc Podcast guest Kate Ball, from disabled cycling charity Wheels for Wellbeing, providing a serious counterpoint to the impracticality of barriers designed purely, it seems, to slow ‘speeding’ cyclists.
“Do those barriers meet equality standards?” asked Dorinda. “I watched the programme on RHS Bridgewater’s construction, and I’m sure part of the agreement from Salford Council investing was that it would be accessible to the community. It should be easily accessible WITHOUT a car.”
> Why is the 15-minute city attracting so many conspiracy theories? Plus access for disabled cyclists in the latest episode of the road.cc Podcast
However, other social media users – you see where this is going – didn’t seem to have much of a problem with the barriers, believing their job of slowing down cyclists would keep pedestrians using the path safe.
“Imagine having to share it with pedestrians, the utter outrage,” Hilton wrote under Walk Ride Central Salford’s post.
“As a mountain biker can I say WTF ...if a cyclist can’t be arsed to go around that then I doubt they will get on a bike for long anyway. It’s not difficult and it’s not hard,” said Rob.
“If you can’t cycle around them, perhaps you should be on cycle paths or road. They are there for the safety of pedestrians. If you have to slow down, so what,” added Gary.
“Shouldn’t have bikes on public footpaths, well done to the council, people can now walk safely and not have to jump out of the way for unlicensed uninsured untested cyclists!” wrote Si, filling up his anti-cycling bingo card nice and early in the week.
Eh, Joey, is that you?
Add new comment
31 comments
Happy National Pothole Day!!!!
https://twitter.com/WeAreCyclingUK/status/1746834723303780556
Pages