Anti-Cyclist Barrier

[mgarl10024]

Hi all,

On my commute through Bradley Stoke in Bristol, I had to run an errand, so I changed my route.

I needed to nip to Wheatfield Drive, and I looked on this map and thought that joining the cycletrack from it should be a doddle.

However, when I got there, I was met with these barriers.

It looks like you should be able to get a bike through them, and is even deceptive when riding towards them, however the gap almost feels designed so as to prevent bikes getting through, and I couldn't get mine past them.
However, I don't understand it. I'm allowed to ride on the road of Wheatfield Drive, and this bit would access one of the newest routes there is. Behind Wheatfield Drive, is Patchway Common, also part of some new routes.
I accept that they want to protect the road from say, motorbikes, but this seems rather anti-cycle. I'd imagine it was also a nightmare for pedestrians.
I must admit to seeing red at the time and being determined - so I lifted my bike (fully loaded with panniers) over the lower railings, making the sort of sound that the competitors in a Worlds Strongest Man do when lifting a giant tyre.

I just wondered:
1. Is this sort of obstruction common, and what normally drives it?
2. Would this little stretch be classed as a public right of way, and does this include bikes? - can I challenge it?

Thanks,

MG

 

[mgarl10024]

Thanks to whoever moved this from CycleChat Cafe to Commuting. I'm not sure this is commuting related, but I'll bow to your judgement.

 

[addictfreak]

We have many barriers like those around here. Its a bit tricky but a bike can be manoeuvred through, might need to stand it on its back wheel.

The pic you show looks like a footpath, is it cycle permissible?

 

[MacB]

We have many barriers like those around here. Its a bit tricky but a bike can be manoeuvred through, might need to stand it on its back wheel.

The pic you show looks like a footpath, is it cycle permissible?

the cycle paths that run through Southwood/Farnborough seem to have similar to these everywhere, but not a low one, these are all higher. You can get a bike through but need to get off to do so. I'm told it's to stop motorbikes/scooters but it does feel like traffic calming measures for cyclists. As for parents with pushchairs, it's like running an assault course.

 

[HLaB]

I have seen that type of barrier before but not often but as you say its all about a barrier awkward enough for motorcycle but allows push bikes; sounds like whoever designed it has got their balance wrong. I don't think there is anything to challenge, you are allowed through there it's just they've got the design wrong; you might have success contact your local cycling officer in the council to get them changed (or contacting your local campaign group).

 

[mgarl10024]

Hi Addictfreak,

Thanks for the quick reply.

If you look at the first map (the overhead one), Wheatfield Drive is to the left. To the right, running north-ish along the road, is a Shared Cycle/Foot path.
The path has been in place for a few years to my knowledge. Recently (last 12mths) the council spent a lot of money widening the path so it's now double or triple the size that Streetview shows it, and they've also spent a lot of money promoting the new routes.
These barriers just seem to go against the above.

Hope that's a little clearer,

MG

 

[ComedyPilot]

There are similar barriers on a long distance cycle route running through Kingston Upon Hull. here

A skinny racer might get through, but a fully-laden touring bike (for which the route is designed?) cannot get through.

Would the same planners put bollards on roads to stop cars getting through?

No?

Then why do it to bikes?

Oh yes, the people making those decisions don't ride bkes.

 

[HLaB]

The pic you show looks like a footpath, is it cycle permissible?

I might be wrong but I thought it was part of a signposted cycle route but I can't quite make out the post on the right.

 

[adds21]

Then why do it to bikes?

My understand has always been that they're to stop people on bikes from riding straight out onto the road - They force you to stop.

Obviously for pretty much everyone who reads this forum, they're not needed, and just a nuisance, but there are a lot of kids on bikes who might not have the same road sense.

I maybe wrong, but that's always been my assumption.

 

[Glow worm]

Hi MG. I wonder if it might be worth having a chat with this lot Bristol Cycling Campaign
If they are half as impressive as the Cambridge equivalent, they'll have good links with the local authority and may be able to pressure them into doing something about it. It does seem a crazy barrier and the chances are they may well be on the case already. Local Authorities often have little pockets of underspend at this time of year for works like this (before the end of the financial year) so it might be good timing.

Edit: The Bristol Cycle Campaign site has a 'Gallery of poor cycle facilities' - sounds like a good place to start. Scroll down a bit Here

 

[subaqua]

they are generally put in where there has been a problem with the occasional idiot cyclist riding through at great speed and injuring a pedestrian , be they children or parents with pushchairs.

you find them where there is reduced visibility.

in the picture in the post above the wall to the right could stop a ped seeing the cyclist and Vice versa

its not a conspiracy against cyclists its a fairly sensible safety measure.

but if people wish to continue a "them and us " mentality thats fine by me

 

[mgarl10024]

Hi all,

Thanks for your replies.

I found: http://www.betterbybike.info/sites/default/files/attachments/Cycling around Bradley Stoke.pdf
If you look on P3, find where it says "Bradley Stoke" in blue, directly above that you'll find Wheatfield Drive. The purple route running up Bradley Stoke Way is the shared cycle path I'm trying to reach, and where the orange line meets the purple line is where the barrier is.

I just called the number on Pg1 - CycleForum and spoke to Mark Parry. He seemed very helpful and I described where the problem was and what it looked like. He explained that funding was becoming an issue as Bristol's Cycle City funding is stopping, but that I should bear with them as they've "put a lot of new routes in, and now need to connect them all up". He's added it to the "remedial" pile and will ask someone to have a look.

For those in Bristol, he asked about my route to work and when I mentioned about the barriers under the A38 underpass by Patchway Hill School also being a nuisance he said he'd flag that up too.

He did add that often barriers prevented disabled access and caused more issues than they solved which has led to their removal in a number of cases. He did stress that there was a difference between barriers that were designed to slow you down, and barriers that necessitated you getting off your bike (indicating that the former were ok, but that the latter were unacceptable).

I know councils can be slow, and that things wont happen overnight, but I'm taking this as a positive. I was half expecting someone who didn't cycle (as suggested above), but this chap seemed very keen to get things usable.

Thanks for all your comments,

MG

 

[summerdays]

The pic you show looks like a footpath, is it cycle permissible?

As it was I was checking the legality of a different path and had the sustrans map open so looked on there and it shows an access point to Dewfalls Road (and it looks as if the council's map backs that up.

I go with the lift the front wheel up - but it can be a right pain with loaded panniers - it also looks very narrow - would it allow a wheelchair? or other users who require a wider access.

 

[DrSquirrel]

Generally these are designed to (as well as the motorcycle issue) designed to stop people coming out of their at speed, a chicane of sorts.

Just seems like someone has gotten the spacing all wrong.


It actually looks like you could push a bike under the tall narrow bars on the left - maybe that is what they are intended for?

 

[Mad at urage]

they are generally put in where there has been a problem with the occasional idiot cyclist riding through at great speed and injuring a pedestrian , be they children or parents with pushchairs.

you find them where there is reduced visibility.

in the picture in the post above the wall to the right could stop a ped seeing the cyclist and Vice versa

its not a conspiracy against cyclists its a fairly sensible safety measure.

but if people wish to continue a "them and us " mentality thats fine by me

I don't detect a "them and us " mentality at all here . Apparently the barriers have been put too close together to get a 'bike through without at least hind-wheeling it, and (for the OP) potentially lifting it over: That is obviously (as others have said) a miscalculation when the original intention presumably is as you say "the occasional idiot cyclist riding through at great speed and injuring a pedestrian" - or indeed riding straight out into the road without looking.

Again as others have pointed out, barriers aligned such that a bike cannot be wheeled through them are also a (impassable possibly but certainly inconvenient) barrier to push-chairs, wheelchairs and shopping trollies. Rather than "Them and us" thinking, this thread has cyclists observing how inconvenient these barriers are for all of "us" .