Foot bridges for cyclists?

For discussions about bikes and equipment.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by JohnW »

rmurphy195 wrote:
MikeF wrote:Wouldn't it have been so much better for cyclists and pedestrians if there had been underpasses? Why should pedestrians have to walk/cycle all that unnecessary climb and distance. The roads could even have been raised slightly so that pedestrians/cyclists had a level path.


There are differing views on this - prime among them the one that has people objecting to being pushed undergraound by machines (cars). I'm sure I read somewhere that that is partially the reason why our inner ring road in Birmingham has underpassess, but i might have imagined that.

Are the underpasses for motors, or for people - I don't know Birmingham at all but I tell you, the last remaining pedestrian underpasses in Halifax and the pedestrian/cyclist underpasses in neighbouring Bradford are not fit for humans. In some of them in Bradford people prefer to risk their lives and climb railings to cross the main artery intersections in Bradford.................and it's partly because of various aspects of appalling behaviour and partly because of council neglect.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by mjr »

brychan wrote:There are no signs as I said forbidding riding cycles, so if you use common sense ride slowly and only get off and push if there are a lot of pedestrians crossing.

There are several bridges near me with "CYCLISTS DISMOUNT" signs where if I do actually dismount, no pedestrians will be able to get past me. There's even one that I suspect is the bare legal minimum of 0.85m wide, so me and my most-used bike only fit with me walking backwards, straddling the front wheel and pulling the handlebars. These signs are ridiculous and should be discarded like the clutter they are - the main reasons I've not pressed the councils for that is that some idiot may try to ban cycling instead and there are more troublesome problems to work on.

JohnW wrote:We're all different Mike - but personally I'd prefer the bridges as shown to underpasses, given the behaviour of British yoof, the bad effects of alcohol and the neglect of local authorities in their lack of commitment to maintenance and cleaning of underpasses.

Oh don't worry, government can neglect to maintain and clean bridges too. There's no adrenaline rush quite like freewheeling down a bridge ramp in the dark and noticing one of the concrete slabs ahead has crumbled in the latest freeze and basically collapsed, leaving a full-width foot-long gap down to the ground many metres below with only a couple of the thin reinforcing bars still there. :shock: (NCR33's bridge over the railway between Windwhistle Lane and Windwhistle Circle in Weston-super-Mare, if anyone knows it.)
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
AlaninWales
Posts: 1626
Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 1:47pm

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by AlaninWales »

mjr wrote:There's no adrenaline rush quite like freewheeling down a bridge ramp in the dark and noticing one of the concrete slabs ahead has crumbled in the latest freeze and basically collapsed, leaving a full-width foot-long gap down to the ground many metres below with only a couple of the thin reinforcing bars still there. :shock: (NCR33's bridge over the railway between Windwhistle Lane and Windwhistle Circle in Weston-super-Mare, if anyone knows it.)

They obviously want you to get the full Adventure Movie (TM) experience :lol: . So kind of them to construct such a theme park to enliven your cycle trips.

Maybe this can give them some more ideas: http://www.denofgeek.com/movies/17526/a-celebration-of-rickety-bridges-in-movies :wink: . Does anyone know where they have constructed a 'Fellowship of the Ring' bridge for cyclists for example?
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by JohnW »

mjr wrote:...............government can neglect to maintain and clean bridges too. There's no adrenaline rush quite like freewheeling down a bridge ramp in the dark and noticing one of the concrete slabs ahead has crumbled in the latest freeze and basically collapsed, leaving a full-width foot-long gap down to the ground many metres below with only a couple of the thin reinforcing bars still there. :shock: (NCR33's bridge over the railway between Windwhistle Lane and Windwhistle Circle in Weston-super-Mare, if anyone knows it.)


This is going off on a tangent I know, but it may interest some people - for many years there was a pedestrian overbridge over our local Greenway - the bridge was an old railway overbridge, not a modern structure recently constructed. Since the opening of the Greenway, the local yoof progressively demolished the parapets on both sides, onto the Greenway surface, usually in the dark. When they'd finished that they started pelting people passing under the bridge with bricks, half bricks and big stones. I actually saw one hit a little girl.......several hit cyclists passing below...........on another occasion a cyclist was hit in sight of one of our members, and was still unconscious when the ambulance men (couldn't get the ambulance to the site) arrived. Eventually it cost Sustrans to have the bridge removed. 10 out of 10 for Sustrans.
gloomyandy
Posts: 1140
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 10:46pm

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by gloomyandy »

John which greenway was that? Spen Valley by any chance? I've certainly had similar experiences along then (including having glass bottles dropped on me from said bridge).
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by Vorpal »

MikeF wrote:Wouldn't it have been so much better for cyclists and pedestrians if there had been underpasses for the motors? Why should pedestrians have to walk/cycle all that unnecessary climb and distance.

FTFY :lol: :lol:
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by Vorpal »

bovlomov wrote:Neither formalised nor forbidden. Is that an unusual position for a highway authority to take? I mean as a decision rather than something that hasn't been considered.

Isn't it modus operandi? No one can criticise them for the decision that way. :roll:
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by MikeF »

Vorpal wrote:
MikeF wrote:Wouldn't it have been so much better for cyclists and pedestrians if there had been underpasses for the motors? Why should pedestrians have to walk/cycle all that unnecessary climb and distance.

FTFY :lol: :lol:
Yes. That is a good idea, :) but unfortunately the headroom clearance would have to be large ie the height of that bridge. The road would have to dip by that height.

In contrast here is an underpass for cyclists/pedestrians at Tonbridge.
P1080335 reduced.jpg

OK it's under a railway and it's quite low, but has sufficient (minimum necessary?) headroom. The cycle /pedestrian path is level, and the railway is on a slight gradient. It would be quite feasible for many road carriageways to be built so there is a slight climb over the pedestrian/cycle route. On separated carriageways two (or more) road bridges could be provided rather than a continuous tunnel under all carriageways.

This one doesn't seem to have the problems other posters have mentioned.
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by JohnW »

gloomyandy wrote:John which greenway was that? Spen Valley by any chance? I've certainly had similar experiences along then (including having glass bottles dropped on me from said bridge).


That's the one Andy. I live way off (well, about four miles) the top of the Greenway - whereabouts do you live? There is 'yoof' down the bottom end, which do worry riders - but the bad behaviour is directed at walkers as well as us. 'Yoofs' on motorbikes are also an ever-present problem.
gloomyandy
Posts: 1140
Joined: 16 Mar 2012, 10:46pm

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by gloomyandy »

JohnW wrote:That's the one Andy. I live way off (well, about four miles) the top of the Greenway - whereabouts do you live? There is 'yoof' down the bottom end, which do worry riders - but the bad behaviour is directed at walkers as well as us. 'Yoofs' on motorbikes are also an ever-present problem.


Pretty much in the middle near Heckmondwike, so it often forms the start or end of my rides (or both sometimes!). Yes the bottom end seems to have a larger number of iffy characters on it, but the good news is that it is well used so most of the time it feels ok. Unfortunately the surface seems to be deteriorating in a few places (even after the recent repairs), it will be interesting to see how well funded it continues to be. It seems to be valued locally so hopefully that will help.
JohnW
Posts: 6667
Joined: 6 Jan 2007, 9:12pm
Location: Yorkshire

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by JohnW »

gloomyandy wrote:
JohnW wrote:That's the one Andy. I live way off (well, about four miles) the top of the Greenway - whereabouts do you live? There is 'yoof' down the bottom end, which do worry riders - but the bad behaviour is directed at walkers as well as us. 'Yoofs' on motorbikes are also an ever-present problem.


Pretty much in the middle near Heckmondwike, so it often forms the start or end of my rides (or both sometimes!). Yes the bottom end seems to have a larger number of iffy characters on it, but the good news is that it is well used so most of the time it feels ok. Unfortunately the surface seems to be deteriorating in a few places (even after the recent repairs), it will be interesting to see how well funded it continues to be. It seems to be valued locally so hopefully that will help.


I'm up at Shelf - so pass through Heck every ride. I think funding is the key. The SVG is such a boon to so many people. We must have passed each other on our bikes.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Foot bridges for cyclists?

Post by MikeF »

JohnW wrote:
rmurphy195 wrote:
MikeF wrote:Wouldn't it have been so much better for cyclists and pedestrians if there had been underpasses? Why should pedestrians have to walk/cycle all that unnecessary climb and distance. The roads could even have been raised slightly so that pedestrians/cyclists had a level path.


There are differing views on this - prime among them the one that has people objecting to being pushed undergraound by machines (cars). I'm sure I read somewhere that that is partially the reason why our inner ring road in Birmingham has underpassess, but i might have imagined that.

Are the underpasses for motors, or for people - I don't know Birmingham at all but I tell you, the last remaining pedestrian underpasses in Halifax and the pedestrian/cyclist underpasses in neighbouring Bradford are not fit for humans. In some of them in Bradford people prefer to risk their lives and climb railings to cross the main artery intersections in Bradford.................and it's partly because of various aspects of appalling behaviour and partly because of council neglect.
Yes the underpasses are for people as in my example, but in effect they should be road over bridges so people remain on a level route and not have to travel up or down anywhere. They're easy to do on a new road build, but more difficult in other places.
Here's one in Crawley "New Town". A bit more headroom than in my railway picture, but in fact if horse riders aren't going to use it you wouldn't need more headroom than 8 to 10 feet. I don't think there are any "yoof" problems, in spite of nearby housing estates.
If you want to encourage people to walk and cycle the last thing you need to do is make them climb heights and walk long unnecessary distances. :wink:
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
Post Reply