Dangerous bollard?.

[Bmblbzzz]

Prompted by this thread, and MJR I particular, I became “bollard critical” today when I popped out on an errand.

The more I look, the more I’m mystified by some of the ones that I’ve simply navigated round and not thought about before, most particularly, on the approach to bridges.

Several small bridges over streams and rivers on my trip, and they’ve all got at least one bollard bang in the middle of the path at the entry and exit to the bridge. Why? The more I think about it, the less I can see what purpose the serve; it’s quite bizarre. Worst still, one recently re-decked bridge now has the stupid little, half-invisible ones as per the OP, rather than nice, big, yellow ones, which at least are prominent.

Presumably because the bridges are constructed to take the weight of foot and cycle traffic, maybe horses too, definitely not motor vehicles. Yes, I know MVs shouldn't have access to these bridges, but that doesn't mean they actually don't.

As for the design of the bollards themselves, I think in many cases it's a misguided attempt at "blending in with the environs", particularly in rural and/or historic surroundings.

[Nearholmer]

Your last point I think is spot-on. Applies also to some new way-marking posts, which are a tasteful shade of dark green, about 600mm tall, and the diameter of a scaffolding pole, and are sprouting at the edges of paths, just into the grass where they are all but invisible, waiting to break the necks of the unwary.

Anyway, I’ve opened dialogue with the Parks Trust, who own and manage the bits where problems are emerging, about all this, so we shall see how that goes.

[roubaixtuesday]

Prompted by this thread, and MJR I particular, I became “bollard critical” today when I popped out on an errand.

The more I look, the more I’m mystified by some of the ones that I’ve simply navigated round and not thought about before, most particularly, on the approach to bridges.

Several small bridges over streams and rivers on my trip, and they’ve all got at least one bollard bang in the middle of the path at the entry and exit to the bridge. Why? The more I think about it, the less I can see what purpose the serve; it’s quite bizarre. Worst still, one recently re-decked bridge now has the stupid little, half-invisible ones as per the OP, rather than nice, big, yellow ones, which at least are prominent.

Presumably because the bridges are constructed to take the weight of foot and cycle traffic, maybe horses too, definitely not motor vehicles. Yes, I know MVs shouldn't have access to these bridges, but that doesn't mean they actually don't.

As for the design of the bollards themselves, I think in many cases it's a misguided attempt at "blending in with the environs", particularly in rural and/or historic surroundings.

All of these obstructions simply make cycling less convenient. They should all go.

[mjr]

Prompted by this thread, and MJR I particular, I became “bollard critical” today when I popped out on an errand.

The more I look, the more I’m mystified by some of the ones that I’ve simply navigated round and not thought about before, most particularly, on the approach to bridges.

Several small bridges over streams and rivers on my trip, and they’ve all got at least one bollard bang in the middle of the path at the entry and exit to the bridge. Why? The more I think about it, the less I can see what purpose the serve; it’s quite bizarre. Worst still, one recently re-decked bridge now has the stupid little, half-invisible ones as per the OP, rather than nice, big, yellow ones, which at least are prominent.

Presumably because the bridges are constructed to take the weight of foot and cycle traffic, maybe horses too, definitely not motor vehicles. Yes, I know MVs shouldn't have access to these bridges, but that doesn't mean they actually don't.

The bridge end bollards are put in regardless. One bridge near me has them, but if a motorist is determined enough to drive through a metal gate and a tight S bend to the south or at least three substandard tight-spaced bollards (concrete and steel IIRC) to the north, one wood bollard on each end of the bridge won't be a significant obstacle!

Agree about the wrongheaded "blending in" idea being the most likely reason for stealth bollards.

[DaveReading]

I wouldn't have thought it beyond the wit of man to design something that would function as an obstacle to motor vehicles without impeding the passage of cycles. Is it really that difficult?

[Paulatic]

I wouldn't have thought it beyond the wit of man to design something that would function as an obstacle to motor vehicles without impeding the passage of cycles. Is it really that difficult?

and, Your design is?

[Bmblbzzz]

Prompted by this thread, and MJR I particular, I became “bollard critical” today when I popped out on an errand.

The more I look, the more I’m mystified by some of the ones that I’ve simply navigated round and not thought about before, most particularly, on the approach to bridges.

Several small bridges over streams and rivers on my trip, and they’ve all got at least one bollard bang in the middle of the path at the entry and exit to the bridge. Why? The more I think about it, the less I can see what purpose the serve; it’s quite bizarre. Worst still, one recently re-decked bridge now has the stupid little, half-invisible ones as per the OP, rather than nice, big, yellow ones, which at least are prominent.

Presumably because the bridges are constructed to take the weight of foot and cycle traffic, maybe horses too, definitely not motor vehicles. Yes, I know MVs shouldn't have access to these bridges, but that doesn't mean they actually don't.

The bridge end bollards are put in regardless. One bridge near me has them, but if a motorist is determined enough to drive through a metal gate and a tight S bend to the south or at least three substandard tight-spaced bollards (concrete and steel IIRC) to the north, one wood bollard on each end of the bridge won't be a significant obstacle!

It could even be an insurance requirement. Or if not a requirement from insurers, a requirement by council lawyers against the prospect of insurers being wriggly. Either way, some form of buttock covering.

Agree about the wrongheaded "blending in" idea being the most likely reason for stealth bollards.

They haven't anticipated the contrast of the blood stains...

[mjr]

It could even be an insurance requirement. Or if not a requirement from insurers, a requirement by council lawyers against the prospect of insurers being wriggly. Either way, some form of buttock covering.

I doubt that. There are bridges with a greater risk of damage to the bridge or its users that don't have similar bollards, which they would if it was lawyers or insurers because they check all of them against precedent.

I think it's more likely due to some designers or engineers being "well-intentioned sadists" who are well-intentioned because they want to keep motorists off the bridge (despite them already being kept out by tougher obstacles on the bridge approaches), and sadists because they injure the intended users.

Probably the best change would be if council safety auditors, lawyers and insurers realise that these bike traps are a liability waiting to happen and press for the unnecessary ones to be removed at next audit.

[Bmblbzzz]

Sadly, that's probably unlikely to happen until they have expensive claims made against them – which first requires someone to be seriously injured.

Unless a disability access claim can be made – which, under the law as it presently stands, would only apply to that particular bollard, so would require a whole series to be made and won before councils took notice. Doug Paulley? https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p04q606j

[Toffee]

I reckon there is a good case to standardise cycleway bollards though, because provision seems to be utterly random currently, and Sustrans seems to be implicated in some of the less good ones - a bit too tasteful and rustic, and nowhere near visible enough.

Hereabouts (Milton Keynes) there is a standard, and it seems to be a good one, the bollards being about a metre high, 100mm diameter, and a good bright yellow. Everywhere should copy! Especially nearby Buckingham, which has some really stupid low, black ones that are an invitation to a crash, or tripping over.

Most of the MK ones are <i>[inappropriate word removed]</i>. Mrs T came a cropper on one when she clipped the post while crossing a side road. Ended up quite badly hurt and would it have been more serious if a car had come round the corner at the same time.

[Toffee]

If so, that would be a good reason for posts.

I was told once that the council like the posts are it shows where the redways are.

As if being red wasn't enough.

There are quite dangerous and as has already been said all are chipped whee cyclists have hit them.

[Nearholmer]

Do distinguish though, between “are the bollards any good?”, and “are the bollards well positioned?”.

I’d still strongly defend the standard MK bollard as good. It’s simple, presumably cheap, and highly visible. A heck of a lot better than any others I’ve seen (or, in some cases barely seen at all).

Positioning is a whole other subject, and there are well-positioned ones, bizarrely positioned ones, and a tiny few dangerously positioned ones in MK.

The worst of the lot are bollards that are badly designed AND badly positioned, and I guess we can all think of examples that score -10 on both axes.

Now, here’s a really weird hazard to cycling, of which we have a few in MK: a 500mm high solid concrete pyramid, the bollards in this case being there to warn people of its presence as they come round an otherwise blind corner from the right:

I’m not totally sure what these blasted pyramids are, I think some sort of benchmarks to do with surveying, but the ones in the middle of cycleways should be dynamited!

[Toffee]

Do distinguish though, between “are the bollards any good?”, and “are the bollards well positioned?”.

I’d still strongly defend the standard MK bollard as good. It’s simple, presumably cheap, and highly visible. A heck of a lot better than any others I’ve seen (or, in some cases barely seen at all).

Positioning is a whole other subject, and there are well-positioned ones, bizarrely positioned ones, and a tiny few dangerously positioned ones in MK.

The worst of the lot are bollards that are badly designed AND badly positioned, and I guess we can all think of examples that score -10 on both axes.

I think you will find that most fail the good positioning and are not needed.

The laughable ones are those that are removable if you have a key for the padlock. Most you can just drive around.

[Toffee]

Do distinguish though, between “are the bollards any good?”, and “are the bollards well positioned?”.

I’d still strongly defend the standard MK bollard as good. It’s simple, presumably cheap, and highly visible. A heck of a lot better than any others I’ve seen (or, in some cases barely seen at all).

Positioning is a whole other subject, and there are well-positioned ones, bizarrely positioned ones, and a tiny few dangerously positioned ones in MK.

The worst of the lot are bollards that are badly designed AND badly positioned, and I guess we can all think of examples that score -10 on both axes.

Now, here’s a really weird hazard to cycling, of which we have a few in MK: a 500mm high solid concrete pyramid, the bollards in this case being there to warn people of its presence as they come round an otherwise blind corner from the right:

9338C2BE-D6E1-4C27-AABD-1BB14EB54B4A.jpeg

I’m not totally sure what these blasted pyramids are, I think some sort of benchmarks to do with surveying, but the ones in the middle of cycleways should be dynamited!

The pyramids are to stop our travelling friends from driving on to the redways to camp.

They don't work are they just go round the corner and use another access that is not protected or drive straight off the grid roads.

[Nearholmer]

I think you will find that most fail the good positioning and are not needed.

TBH, I actually don’t agree with that, because as I said before I personally value that they mark crossings of roads, both as a cyclist, and as a driver, the latter being important because in many places they’re the only thing to alert you to the possibility of a cyclist popping out “from nowhere” (a hedgerow, an alleyway that you can’t see from the road etc.).