Wiggly white lines in Clevedon
Discussion
Do I understand correctly that you can park where the cones are (once cones removed)? If so, all of it now makes some semblance of sense. The wiggly line was completely mental.
However, it still seems ill conceived. One interpretation is that the tan area is to create space between cars parked where the cones are, and cyclists. However, another interpretation is that you can park on the tan area up the left edge (extending from the end of the kerb) - you can see tyre prints where cars have parked on the tan area. Parking on the tan area would lead to passenger doors being opened into cyclists who presumably are going quite fast due to the downhill, which imo is a greater risk than cycling with car traffic.
Let us know what happens to the roundabout!
However, it still seems ill conceived. One interpretation is that the tan area is to create space between cars parked where the cones are, and cyclists. However, another interpretation is that you can park on the tan area up the left edge (extending from the end of the kerb) - you can see tyre prints where cars have parked on the tan area. Parking on the tan area would lead to passenger doors being opened into cyclists who presumably are going quite fast due to the downhill, which imo is a greater risk than cycling with car traffic.
Let us know what happens to the roundabout!
Tony33 said:
ny semi serious cyclist is going to bomb down the road to keep up speed for the steep hill, the last thing they want is to have to give way to cars coming from the right at the bottom of the hill! I used to cycle that regularly as a lad.
The intention of cycle lanes is to make cycling not exclusive to serious cyclists. Trif said:
Tony33 said:
ny semi serious cyclist is going to bomb down the road to keep up speed for the steep hill, the last thing they want is to have to give way to cars coming from the right at the bottom of the hill! I used to cycle that regularly as a lad.
The intention of cycle lanes is to make cycling not exclusive to serious cyclists. Grrbang said:
Do I understand correctly that you can park where the cones are (once cones removed)? If so, all of it now makes some semblance of sense. The wiggly line was completely mental.
However, it still seems ill conceived. One interpretation is that the tan area is to create space between cars parked where the cones are, and cyclists. However, another interpretation is that you can park on the tan area up the left edge (extending from the end of the kerb) - you can see tyre prints where cars have parked on the tan area. Parking on the tan area would lead to passenger doors being opened into cyclists who presumably are going quite fast due to the downhill, which imo is a greater risk than cycling with car traffic.
Let us know what happens to the roundabout!
Yes you park on the areas where the cones are. The tan areas seem to cover many things, pedestrian crossings, opening car door areas, bike parking areas, area for access to the sailing club, infill for the wiggly lines, no go areas for parking and i suspect tonight we will have roundabout no 3 in tan.However, it still seems ill conceived. One interpretation is that the tan area is to create space between cars parked where the cones are, and cyclists. However, another interpretation is that you can park on the tan area up the left edge (extending from the end of the kerb) - you can see tyre prints where cars have parked on the tan area. Parking on the tan area would lead to passenger doors being opened into cyclists who presumably are going quite fast due to the downhill, which imo is a greater risk than cycling with car traffic.
Let us know what happens to the roundabout!
Tony33 said:
was referring to the roundabout replacing what was a give way from the right making it worse for cyclists using the road.
https://postlmg.cc/BL5Gd3N1 It looks like an improvement for those coming from behind the photographer going 'right' into the cycle lane? And equal for cyclists coming from the left into the cycle lane, turning left from the photographers position or going right to behind the photographer. Geffg said:
In the above pic why do they even need a roundabout? Coming from the bottom of the pic you can’t go straight on as it’s one way so can only go left, coming from the left side of the pic you could only go right and from the top either straight on or right, or am I missing something. Or are the planners / designers missing something instead.
They set out these schemes to confuse motorists, which in turn makes roads unsafe surely. Then either an accident occurs or they’ll stick a camera to”monitor” it all and fine motorists for any misdemeanour and try and recover the costs of the big fu#k ups they do.
100%, the other week I watched someone drive straight over the roundabout through the no entry signs. If the road must be setup like this then have it go round to the left as you say because there is no decision for 2 of the 3 roundabout entrances about which exit to take.They set out these schemes to confuse motorists, which in turn makes roads unsafe surely. Then either an accident occurs or they’ll stick a camera to”monitor” it all and fine motorists for any misdemeanour and try and recover the costs of the big fu#k ups they do.
My money (well the governments probably) is that someone will campaign in the local elections to change it back to how it was, will win the council vote and it'll all go back to how it was before and we'll all be £2 million worse off.
Trif said:
https://postlmg.cc/BL5Gd3N1 It looks like an improvement for those coming from behind the photographer going 'right' into the cycle lane? And equal for cyclists coming from the left into the cycle lane, turning left from the photographers position or going right to behind the photographer.
The road used to a be a 2 way road so no, so called "improvement " was needed as it was fine before.Trif said:
Tony33 said:
was referring to the roundabout replacing what was a give way from the right making it worse for cyclists using the road.
https://postlmg.cc/BL5Gd3N1 It looks like an improvement for those coming from behind the photographer going 'right' into the cycle lane? And equal for cyclists coming from the left into the cycle lane, turning left from the photographers position or going right to behind the photographer. Tony33 said:
hat doesn't stop it being worse for a cyclist using the road and wanting to go up Marine Parade. Not saying they should have priority but the changes simply make it worse. The cycle lane may be fine for sightseeing but for people commuting or exercising it seems pointless. It is at the bottom of hills either side and way too dangerous to everyone else go at anything other than dawdling speeds.
The cycle lane looks quite nice to bumble along at 15mph, particularly if it is meant to be part of a comprehensive network. I wouldn't care for it much on my nice carbon bike, but my single speed that pootle about town to avoid rubbish journeys in my car, it is a lot better then the one I use along our seafront. Like it or not, the direction of local travel is moving towards bicycles. Trif said:
The cycle lane looks quite nice to bumble along at 15mph, particularly if it is meant to be part of a comprehensive network. I wouldn't care for it much on my nice carbon bike, but my single speed that pootle about town to avoid rubbish journeys in my car, it is a lot better then the one I use along our seafront. Like it or not, the direction of local travel is moving towards bicycles.
I assume it is part of the pier to pier cycle routehttps://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/business/regeneratio...
Red9zero said:
Trif said:
The cycle lane looks quite nice to bumble along at 15mph, particularly if it is meant to be part of a comprehensive network. I wouldn't care for it much on my nice carbon bike, but my single speed that pootle about town to avoid rubbish journeys in my car, it is a lot better then the one I use along our seafront. Like it or not, the direction of local travel is moving towards bicycles.
I assume it is part of the pier to pier cycle routehttps://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/business/regeneratio...
Red9zero said:
Trif said:
The cycle lane looks quite nice to bumble along at 15mph, particularly if it is meant to be part of a comprehensive network. I wouldn't care for it much on my nice carbon bike, but my single speed that pootle about town to avoid rubbish journeys in my car, it is a lot better then the one I use along our seafront. Like it or not, the direction of local travel is moving towards bicycles.
I assume it is part of the pier to pier cycle routehttps://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/business/regeneratio...
markymarkthree said:
Red9zero said:
Trif said:
The cycle lane looks quite nice to bumble along at 15mph, particularly if it is meant to be part of a comprehensive network. I wouldn't care for it much on my nice carbon bike, but my single speed that pootle about town to avoid rubbish journeys in my car, it is a lot better then the one I use along our seafront. Like it or not, the direction of local travel is moving towards bicycles.
I assume it is part of the pier to pier cycle routehttps://www.n-somerset.gov.uk/business/regeneratio...
The show piece has mucked up the sea front for the many who travel from surrounding villages and beyond to go there for a decent walk. It isn't Copenhagen. Clevedon is hilly and the population are on average fifteen years older than the national average. The council wanted to be seen to be doing something to promote active travel and got the attention they wanted for all the wrong reasons by ruining a local landmark with little obvious benefit.
Riley Blue said:
I think the Tourism Manager for Clevedon is a genius; look how successful they've been getting their crazy scheme featured in the media and all for no promotional costs.
Sort of. Unfortunately it has now made Clevedon a national laughing stock. It may well attract visitors coming simply to see for themselves what a chaotic shambles it is, However, whereas in the past they could have taken advantage of the available parking and enjoyed a coffee in one of the seafront eateries now they will have to drive straight due to the much reduced parking.I doubt genius is the word mist Clevedonians would choose.
Utterly bonkers. They have spent god-knows how much on successive schemes to fix a problem that as far as I can see resolves around unwanted parking.
If so surely the obviously solution is to slap double yellows on the road and hire Parking Wardens to police it by issuing tickets.
They would then gain revenue (minus staffing costs) and not spunked tax payers money on successive schemes that make them look a national laughing stock.
If so surely the obviously solution is to slap double yellows on the road and hire Parking Wardens to police it by issuing tickets.
They would then gain revenue (minus staffing costs) and not spunked tax payers money on successive schemes that make them look a national laughing stock.
juice said:
Utterly bonkers. They have spent god-knows how much on successive schemes to fix a problem that as far as I can see resolves around unwanted parking.
If so surely the obviously solution is to slap double yellows on the road and hire Parking Wardens to police it by issuing tickets.
They would then gain revenue (minus staffing costs) and not spunked tax payers money on successive schemes that make them look a national laughing stock.
It was like this, where you could park up and eat your chips while sat in the car looking at the sea.If so surely the obviously solution is to slap double yellows on the road and hire Parking Wardens to police it by issuing tickets.
They would then gain revenue (minus staffing costs) and not spunked tax payers money on successive schemes that make them look a national laughing stock.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff