How long before someone ends up in the canal

reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by reohn2 »

Vorpal wrote: .....Someone above made the analogy of speed bump. Speed bumps are not unreasonable things in the right location, but they also do not prevent legitimate users from using the road. Nor should anything on a towpath... .


But there's no evidence the chicane/fences in the OP prevents people on bikes or in wheelchairs using the towpath.


Infrastructure can't fix idiocy

Whilst I agree,it's better than nothing.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
thirdcrank
Posts: 36776
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 2:44pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by thirdcrank »

With apologies if somebody has already done so, can anybody point to the actual motivation for barriers. I'm not looking for clever responses but the origin of barriers. As an example of what I mean, it's often the case where some sort of ginnel emerges onto a footway by a main road that there's a guard rail along the kerb. I presume - without really knowing - that the intention is to stop children running straight out into the road. They didn't simply spring up.

Now, what's caused the barriers on towpaths?
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by reohn2 »

thirdcrank wrote: ......Now, what's caused the barriers on towpaths?

I think we know :wink:
The problem AFAICS isn't so much that there are barriers but badly designed one's that are the problem.
That said a barrier by definition must have some impact on legitimate users of any particular path whilst deterring illegal users,as I posted up thread they're a compromise in the absence of other methods and deterrents.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
pete75
Posts: 16370
Joined: 24 Jul 2007, 2:37pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by pete75 »

Tangled Metal wrote:
pete75 wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:Can the only person to say he's ridden that path say whether he's seen any disabled users there or tandemists or any other user type that might possibly have an issue getting through such a point?

People seem to be arguing from the point of what if scenarios not what actually happens. So I'll put in a what if scenario. If they changed that chicane what effect would that have on disabled users? It seems me that it won't entice many down there because I reckon if local they'll know the rest of it is impassable to disabled users. Instead of encouraging disabled access, which I'm certainly for, it is unlikely to do so but allow problem users to become a problem to all who do actually use it.

It seems people argue for best practice but there simply isn't the money, inclination or political will to actually do that. Instead the best possible outcome is to make it useable to as many who can. I feel this barrier does that no matter how bad the design is for minority, potential users.

PS think of us poor recumbent riders. Nobody has thought of us. Do you realise how difficult it is to negotiate those barriers. Oh wait, it's muddy, got steep bridges to negotiate, steps, etc? Ok I'm sticking to the road. I'll enjoy it more. :lol:



If the people mentioned can't get through that point they won't go there will they?

It's a new installation someone said so I assumed there is a good chance the only person to have been there would know if disabled or tandemists or others who struggle through such obstructions used it before the addition. If they went there before but not after installation then there's a good point made. If not then there's less of a problem and it's possibly more of a solution to other problems that could be more pressing. Surely you'll agree reducing incidents of cyclist or trail biker speed injuring pedestrians is a good thing.


All that does is reduce speed for a few metres though.
'Give me my bike, a bit of sunshine - and a stop-off for a lunchtime pint - and I'm a happy man.' - Reg Baker
Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 20700
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by Vorpal »

Tangled Metal wrote:Imho a barrier is an inconvenience only when passing through it. Once through you're back into happy cycling. I personally just get on with it. Even if that means unloading my touring recumbent, carrying bike and bags over or through obstruction then loading up again. It's annoying but hardly life or death or threatening injury. Unless you're going too fast and may cause injury to yourself or others.

Twice, when I came across barriers like this, I was faced with situations that could, indeed, have been dangerous. Not just to me, but to my little ones.

One time, I encountered chicane type fences on a shared use facility, on both sides of a road. The path was my only alternative to a 70 mph A road. I didn't think that I could get through with the tandem and trailer together, so I pulled off to the side, Mini V, who was 5 at the time was stoker. I disconnected tandem and trailer, and took the trailer (with Littlest, aged 2 inside) across the road with Mini V & left the trailer there, with her in charge. I told her just to hold onto the trailer and wait, while I went to get the tandem. While I was waiting, someone came along with a large dog on an extendable lead & let the dog approach my children. Mini V suddenly had a rather large dog right in her face & started yelling. I could do nothing because there was a car on the crossing, but I went as soon as I could. The dog started barking, the owner pulled it away. When I got there with the tandem, the dog owner starting effing and cursing me because I left my kids 'unattended'. Not only was it a horrible experience for me, it took Mini V years to not be afraid of dogs. And what if the dog had reacted badly to either Mini V yelling, or it's owners aggressiveness towards me?

The other time, such barriers caused me a problem, they were actually set too narrow for my trailer to fit through, so I had to get Littlest out of the trailer, and lift it over. Mini V was supposed to hold his hand & make sure he stayed in place, but she got distracted and he followed me. I was aware of it, and just solved it by making my kids go back and forth with me as I moved first trailer, then tandem. But it was difficult & stressful to have a toddler and 5 year old unrestrained, potentially in the presence of traffic, dogs, cyclists, etc., especially after my previous experience with such barriers.

I learned to avoid routes with barriers as much as possible, but there were a couple of places where my choices were horrid barriers or horrid road.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by reohn2 »

TBH if the OP wanted to make a song and dance about barriers and their effect on cyclists and wheelchair users he'd have drawn the forum's attention to the towpath bridge over the Bridgewater canal where it joins the Trent & Mersey canal at Preston Brook .A steep sided arched bridge,uneven underfoot with brickbats poking out a pointed angles and a slalom/chicane barrier of concrete posts and steel rails on one side of the steep approach
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
Bmblbzzz
Posts: 6261
Joined: 18 May 2012, 7:56pm
Location: From here to there.

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by Bmblbzzz »

There are many such slalom barriers on towpaths. Some cyclists, even walkers, take the easy, straight route, between barrier edge and water.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 20308
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by mjr »

Tangled Metal wrote:My point was that, as was described by someone who has ridden it, the route sounds like it's not easily passable in many places by the groups you and others claimed this barrier disadvantaged. Such that it's quite possible they never used it before the barrier was put in. No disability issues solely by this addition when among other features bridges in the route are stepped/steep are stopping disabled too. No point changing this barrier when that will not change anything but make it easier for irresponsible bikers to ride irresponsibly.

Firstly, there's nothing to say that this ableist barrier blocks exactly the same people as other types of ableist obstructions later on.

Secondly, if the route is ever made accessible, this is yet another thing that will need fixing.

Thirdly, the above reads rather like "the disabled are [rude word removed] by this route anyway, so what's another thrust?"

More widely, I'm quite irritated by the suggestion that these barriers are compromises. They are not. They are descriminatory, most likely to injure the people most likely to use motor-free routes. If it's a compromise, what exactly do you think is being given to those cyclists who are being condemned to leave blood and bike parts on the ground in collisions? The fast agile cyclists benefitting from quieter routes once all the "wobblies and gimps" are excluded seem to be getting everything and giving nothing.
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.
mumbojumbo
Posts: 1525
Joined: 1 Aug 2018, 8:18pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by mumbojumbo »

mumbojumbo wrote:
As I see it no horses can be seen towing.There are people who walk but as they are not footpaths they are open to all and sundry,even horse-riders.It is up to the various users to apply sense and negotiate.I would perfer to see canals drained,filled with refuse,and topped with gravel for cyclist.These leaves tow-paths for walkers and the odd horse.

And pigs might fly.
That's a very selfish attitude to have if it's a serious post.


Selfish-my suggestion opens up canals for multiple uses-they are man-made anachronisms,and when built aroused much hostilty.The |Bridgewater Canal caused hardship for road-carriers of coal and miners in more remote collieries.
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by Bonefishblues »

mjr wrote:
Tangled Metal wrote:My point was that, as was described by someone who has ridden it, the route sounds like it's not easily passable in many places by the groups you and others claimed this barrier disadvantaged. Such that it's quite possible they never used it before the barrier was put in. No disability issues solely by this addition when among other features bridges in the route are stepped/steep are stopping disabled too. No point changing this barrier when that will not change anything but make it easier for irresponsible bikers to ride irresponsibly.

Firstly, there's nothing to say that this ableist barrier blocks exactly the same people as other types of ableist obstructions later on.

Secondly, if the route is ever made accessible, this is yet another thing that will need fixing.

Thirdly, the above reads rather like "the disabled are [rude word removed] by this route anyway, so what's another thrust?"

More widely, I'm quite irritated by the suggestion that these barriers are compromises. They are not. They are descriminatory, most likely to injure the people most likely to use motor-free routes. If it's a compromise, what exactly do you think is being given to those cyclists who are being condemned to leave blood and bike parts on the ground in collisions? The fast agile cyclists benefitting from quieter routes once all the "wobblies and gimps" are excluded seem to be getting everything and giving nothing.

It's a couple of barriers that are navigable, pretty much by all, judging by the contributions from those who ride 'non-standard' machinery, not locked gates. I think that your reply may be losing that perspective, slightly.
Richard Fairhurst
Posts: 2030
Joined: 2 Mar 2008, 4:57pm
Location: Charlbury, Oxfordshire

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by Richard Fairhurst »

mumbojumbo wrote:I would perfer to see canals drained,filled with refuse,and topped with gravel for cyclist.


I tend to think the British cycling experience would be made better by focusing on the 260,000 miles of road rather than the 2,000 miles of canal, but what do I know.
cycle.travel - maps, journey-planner, route guides and city guides
reohn2
Posts: 45158
Joined: 26 Jun 2009, 8:21pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by reohn2 »

mumbojumbo wrote:
mumbojumbo wrote:
As I see it no horses can be seen towing.There are people who walk but as they are not footpaths they are open to all and sundry,even horse-riders.It is up to the various users to apply sense and negotiate.I would perfer to see canals drained,filled with refuse,and topped with gravel for cyclist.These leaves tow-paths for walkers and the odd horse.

And pigs might fly.
That's a very selfish attitude to have if it's a serious post.


Selfish-my suggestion opens up canals for multiple uses-they are man-made anachronisms,and when built aroused much hostilty.The |Bridgewater Canal caused hardship for road-carriers of coal and miners in more remote collieries.

Those pigs a struggling with flight.....

EDIT:- Here's a thought,I've lived within a stones throw of the Bridgewater arm of the L&L canal all my life.
In that time it's gone from a putrid polluted practically open sewer,to a pleasant waterway teeming with course fish and wildlife,where I regularly see Kingfishers along it's banks and wave to pleasant narrowboat owners and chat with canoeists.
Where there were once all manner of canalside industry spewing gawd knows what into it now there's marinas and canalside apartmemts and housing.
You would now fill that in with refuse and tarmac over it?
One of the nuttiest ideas I ever heard of.
Last edited by reohn2 on 8 Dec 2020, 4:55pm, edited 2 times in total.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"All we are not stares back at what we are"
W H Auden
mumbojumbo
Posts: 1525
Joined: 1 Aug 2018, 8:18pm

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by mumbojumbo »

mumbojumbo wrote:
I would perfer to see canals drained,filled with refuse,and topped with gravel for cyclist.


I tend to think the British cycling experience would be made better by focusing on the 260,000 miles of road rather than the 2,000 miles of canal, but what do I know.


A mile of canal is worth 130 miles of road? :?:
Bonefishblues
Posts: 11010
Joined: 7 Jul 2014, 9:45pm
Location: Near Bicester Oxon

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by Bonefishblues »

Richard Fairhurst wrote:
mumbojumbo wrote:I would perfer to see canals drained,filled with refuse,and topped with gravel for cyclist.


I tend to think the British cycling experience would be made better by focusing on the 260,000 miles of road rather than the 2,000 miles of canal, but what do I know.

Yes but no but but once those barges were motorised properly and wheels fitted they'd fair zoom along that new hard-surfaced canalway. Be a dangerous place to cycle, mind :D
Stevek76
Posts: 2085
Joined: 28 Jul 2015, 11:23am

Re: How long before someone ends up in the canal

Post by Stevek76 »

reohn2 wrote:It's a deterrent a bit like a locked door is,if someone on an illegal motor cycle can be slowed to walking pace or needs to get off and push it'll most likely deter them enough not to use the path,especially if they're local and may be recognised.

My opinion is that it's better than nothing YVV,but do you have any evidence that no barriers at all would be any better?


That's a request to prove the negative. The onus is on proving the barriers are actually effective. Is there any evidence where barriers that are not so restrictive as to still allow the passage of handbikes/the cycle design vehicle have reduced incidences of anti social behaviour?

I'm certainly not aware of any, and that's a fairly big factor on why LTN1/20 takes such a dim view of them.
The contents of this post, unless otherwise stated, are opinions of the author and may actually be complete codswallop
Post Reply