Bike Gates, Bollin Valley

[G3CWI]

...not Bill Gates.

I recently got involved in a discussion with park rangers along the Bollin Valley here in Macclesfield. My contention was that some of the gates along the route were harder than necessary to negotiate with bikes.

Several interesting things emerged:
1) The Bollin Valley is a footpath not a cycle route. I suspect most people who use it will be surprised to hear this - as was I.
2) Cyclists were not consulted in the selection of gates (perhaps due to 1)?

Anyway, they said that the gates they had were the best available to meet these needs:

to stop motorbikes
to allow pedal cycles and pedestrians
to allow disabled access
to keep grazing animals in.

So CycleChatters, I would be interested in examples of really great gates/access methods that meet these needs are are more cycle-friendly that the gate shown.

As I see it the problems are:

The gate is heavy and designed to swing closed.
The area for the bike is only just big enough making it really awkward.
The need to dismount and manhandle the bike.

Ideas?

 

[vernon]

You've answered your own question really. The route is a foot path and giving bikes an easy passage was not high on the list of priorities. There's plenty of routes with 'bike traps' where dismounting is necessary to go through them. It's hardly an inconvenience and a price worth paying to avoid being buzzed by the local reprobates riding motorcycles or even driving cars.

I've ridden along unprotected NCN routes and witnessed scars on the tarmac where cars, presumably stolen, have been abandoned and torched to destroy incriminating evidence and where I've been buzzed by yobs on semi wrecked scrambler motorcycles.

Putting up with the gates/barriers is a price that I'm prepared to pay for a trouble free ride.

 

[Deleted member 23692]

Stock control is always going to be as limiting factor in any access point. Something like this...

...works very well in allowing everything through (bikes with panniers or trailers, push/wheel chairs etc ) but stops motorbikes.

Have a browse of whart else is available and see what takes your fancy - http://www.centrewire.com/index.htm

 

[ComedyPilot]

http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/can-someone-please-explain-something.130840/post-2460797

 

[Arch]

You've answered your own question really. The route is a foot path and giving bikes an easy passage was not high on the list of priorities. There's plenty of routes with 'bike traps' where dismounting is necessary to go through them. It's hardly an inconvenience and a price worth paying to avoid being buzzed by the local reprobates riding motorcycles or even driving cars.

An awful lot of them are very inconvenient if you have certain disabilities. I know people who have problems lifting a bike, or manhandling a bike and gate at the same time, or who need three wheels in order to cycle.

NT and I rode a section of route 55 last week, a disused railway path. There were frequent access points to the path, which would make it a very useful commuting route, if it weren't for the fact that most of these points were steps only, and steep steps at that. Even at points where the route was supposed to join with other cyclepaths alongside roads etc. Where there were ramps, they were often very steep. Also a few points with those shouldered gates pictured above, one of which I couldn't get my handlebars through without lifting the front wheel and waddling the bike through with bars twisted to one side - something I've seen on other routes too. And there were a couple of kissing gates which would be very difficult or impossible on my trike.

We had a nice day out, but its certainly not a route I'd recommend to anyone with mobility problems or a disability, or a trailer, or recumbent, or heavily laden tourer or a tandem, unless I knew they only wanted to enter and exit at one or two specific points over the course of 7 miles or so.

I'd rather take a chance with a few anti social yobs than prevent access for everyone except fit upright cyclists.

 

[vernon]

I'd rather take a chance with a few anti social yobs than prevent access for everyone except fit upright cyclists.

I'm not too sure of that Arch. There's a section of the Walney to Wear route near Bishop Aukland thatb resembles Beirut at its most war ravaged state. It had unfettered access and was littered with the detritus of TWOC cars and motorbikes, fly tipping, and a liberal sprinkling of glass shards for good measure. It was not a nice place to be.

 

[Arch]

I'm not too sure of that Arch. There's a section of the Walney to Wear route near Bishop Aukland thatb resembles Beirut at its most war ravaged state. It had unfettered access and was littered with the detritus of TWOC cars and motorbikes, fly tipping, and a liberal sprinkling of glass shards for good measure. It was not a nice place to be.

Well, at least it was not nice for everyone, as opposed to only nice for people who could access it!

Ok, anti-social behaviour is a problem. But if the answer to anti-social behaviour is to put in measures that exclude perfectly innocent people, then the anti-socials have won anyway.