Monday, February 02, 2009

What a load of bollards.

It seems Cllr. Gittins has found the bollards that had been placed on Betty Dawes Hill at The Rough and moreover has had an explanation as to why a staggered barrier wasn't put up.

In his own words he was told "[cyclists] might run into it as they rode down the footpath" which is a fair consideration until, as he then points out, you realise that no-one is supposed to be cycling down the hill anyway. So to summarise - barriers needed to be put up to protect motorists from cyclists who shouldn't be there, but the barriers that would do that can't be erected as they might cause accidents for the cyclists who shouldn't be there. Oh makes perfect sense to me.

Now as I've said I'm all for dealing with 'what is happening' over 'what should be happening', but in this case you could kill two birds with one stone by putting proper barriers at both ends of the hill path - this would stop cyclists from running into motorists by keeping them off the path they shouldn't be on in the first place.

If they decide to push their bikes through the barrier then chose to ride them down the hill and crash then I declare that their own bloody fault in the same way someone ignoring a "Danger of electrocution" sign gets killed or injured.

As for the existing barriers -

Hill bollards

"as much use as a chocolate fireguard." and still why they extend off to the left beats me.

[Additional - To take the other viewpoint the actual road surface at this point was in serious neglect and a danger to cyclists who didn't use the middle of the road; not good on a long blind corner. Not helped by motorists overtaking cyclists at this point. However the roads have all been done up so the major problem no longer exists.]

0 comments: