Cyclist hits camouflaged bollard in Bristol

STEFANOS4784

Wander whos brilliant idea these were?

http://swns.com/camouflaged-bollards-ca ... 11304.html

Anyone on here come a cropper because of these?

Mark Elvin

But it's not a camo bollard is it, it's white, which in 99% or circumstances makes it more visible.

I'm sorry, but I actually laughed at that.

Pross

Mark Elvin wrote:

But it's not a camo bollard is it, it's white, which in 99% or circumstances makes it more visible.

Spot on, it wasn't blending in with the white line, it was blending in with the snow. Most bollards are black so would normally blend in with the tarmac and the fence in the background. That said I agree with the cyclist, absolutely no need for bollards there in any case (maybe one at the entrance each end to stop cars driving through but that's all). It's another case of excessive clutter on the roads.

amaferanga

But there are plenty of colours that wouldn't blend with the tarmac nor the snow. Black and white aren't the only options....

dodgy

On other shared pedestrian/cycle paths it's enough to paint a white line down the off centre (making the cycling part slightly wider) and drawing cycles/people on the appropriate parts every few hundred yards. So they put bollards in after a few complaints? Really? Cash strapped councils are putting in physical cycle/pedestrian control infrastructure after a handful of complaints?

Oh and he looks like he wasn't wearing a helmet.

/runs

Pross

amaferanga wrote:

But there are plenty of colours that wouldn't blend with the tarmac nor the snow. Black and white aren't the only options....

True, but other than in the snow I can't really see a situation where a white bollard would be a problem. In order for it to be camouflaged against the white line it would have to be viewed from straight in line with the cycleway being dead straight. It could have been made neon yellow or orange or it could just not have been put there at all - I know which I'd rather!

Mark Elvin

Just realised, that's on my doorstep, I walk/ride that path several times a week, never had a problem, the bloke must be blind to hit that.

Headhuunter

Pross wrote:

Mark Elvin wrote:

But it's not a camo bollard is it, it's white, which in 99% or circumstances makes it more visible.

Spot on, it wasn't blending in with the white line, it was blending in with the snow. Most bollards are black so would normally blend in with the tarmac and the fence in the background. That said I agree with the cyclist, absolutely no need for bollards there in any case (maybe one at the entrance each end to stop cars driving through but that's all). It's another case of excessive clutter on the roads.

I agree with that, I ran into a stupid, needless bollard randomly placed in the middle of the Thames Path. Councils often seem to enjoy placing unnecessary street furniture all over the place... I mean whatever the colour, what is the use of that bollard anyway?

Tom Butcher

Can't see the problem - shared paths are only suitable for slow speed commuting and you should be able to avoid bollards if you are riding slowly.

mrushton

He's an academic - common sense often goes out of the window with those boffin types

Ben6899

What colour do people want these bollards to be?

Black - blends in with surfacing
White - blends in with snow (for 2 months of the year)
Dark green - would still blend in with the surfacing
Blue - would still blend in with the surfacing

Red, orange, yellow, bright green, turquoise - stand out, but rather like a sore thumb and everyone would complain they're an eyesore.

Preferred option - get rid of the bollards.

Headhuunter

Tom Butcher wrote:

Can't see the problem - shared paths are only suitable for slow speed commuting and you should be able to avoid bollards if you are riding slowly.

I most definitely was moving slowly, I was with a mate who really doesn't ever cycle fast. He was in front and as I moved out to pull alongside him, the bollard was there. You could argue that I should have been looking out for obstacles, but really, what IS the point? If a piece of street furniture is necessary then fair enough but why actually actively invest taxpayers money in a lump of metal which is entirely needless and worse, represents something that could injure people? Surely councils have better things to spend money on?

Headhuunter

Ben6899 wrote:

What colour do people want these bollards to be?

Black - blends in with surfacing
White - blends in with snow (for 2 months of the year)
Dark green - would still blend in with the surfacing
Blue - would still blend in with the surfacing

Red, orange, yellow, bright green, turquoise - stand out, but rather like a sore thumb and everyone would complain they're an eyesore.

Preferred option - get rid of the bollards.

Colour is irrelevant. Get rid of the bollards.

Ben6899

Headhuunter wrote:

Ben6899 wrote:

What colour do people want these bollards to be?

Black - blends in with surfacing
White - blends in with snow (for 2 months of the year)
Dark green - would still blend in with the surfacing
Blue - would still blend in with the surfacing

Red, orange, yellow, bright green, turquoise - stand out, but rather like a sore thumb and everyone would complain they're an eyesore.

Preferred option - get rid of the bollards.

Colour is irrelevant. Get rid of the bollards.

Yeh that's what I said. :thumbsup:

Mark Elvin

For the bollard to blend into the white line he must have actually been on the white line in the first place, which is wrong anyway.

briantrumpet

Headhuunter wrote:

Colour is irrelevant. Get rid of the bollards.

Well, I've never heard highway engineers called that. But I'm glad that race doesn't come into it.

rake

Headhuunter wrote:

Tom Butcher wrote:

Can't see the problem - shared paths are only suitable for slow speed commuting and you should be able to avoid bollards if you are riding slowly.

I most definitely was moving slowly, I was with a mate who really doesn't ever cycle fast. He was in front and as I moved out to pull alongside him, the bollard was there. You could argue that I should have been looking out for obstacles, but really, what IS the point? If a piece of street furniture is necessary then fair enough but why actually actively invest taxpayers money in a lump of metal which is entirely needless and worse, represents something that could injure people? Surely councils have better things to spend money on?

There may actually be a need to stop motor vehicles going up/parking there and blocking the whole lot, which really getto to me when i have to turn on to a very busy road. sure they could have made them flexible somehow.

Wooliferkins

"A spokesman said: ”The bollards were installed in response to requests from passengers travelling between the Ministry of Defence and Parkway and Abbeywood stations, to help safely separate cyclists and pedestrians who use this path"

See what happens when you let MOD procurement types have their way?

Headhuunter

rake wrote:

Headhuunter wrote:

Tom Butcher wrote:

Can't see the problem - shared paths are only suitable for slow speed commuting and you should be able to avoid bollards if you are riding slowly.

I most definitely was moving slowly, I was with a mate who really doesn't ever cycle fast. He was in front and as I moved out to pull alongside him, the bollard was there. You could argue that I should have been looking out for obstacles, but really, what IS the point? If a piece of street furniture is necessary then fair enough but why actually actively invest taxpayers money in a lump of metal which is entirely needless and worse, represents something that could injure people? Surely councils have better things to spend money on?

There may actually be a need to stop motor vehicles going up/parking there and blocking the whole lot, which really getto to me when i have to turn on to a very busy road.

But as someone pointed out, all you need is a bollard at the start of the cycle lane/shared path and one at the other end, you don't need them all the way along as appears to be the case here...

Pross

Yep, one at each end to stop cars is all that's needed. If the aim is to stop cyclists going onto the footpath side then a bollard every 20m isn't going to work (pedestrians going on the cycleway is usually a bigger issue in my experience - or worse still people walking dogs on telescopic leads and letting the dog walk on the cycleway!). It's just a pointless, knee-jerk reaction to a few complaints with probably a local councillor who has no understanding of highway design insisting on something being done (I have bitter experience of this sort of thing!).

Ben6899

Pross wrote:

Yep, one at each end to stop cars is all that's needed. If the aim is to stop cyclists going onto the footpath side then a bollard every 20m isn't going to work (pedestrians going on the cycleway is usually a bigger issue in my experience - or worse still people walking dogs on telescopic leads and letting the dog walk on the cycleway!). It's just a pointless, knee-jerk reaction to a few complaints with probably a local councillor who has no understanding of highway design insisting on something being done (I have bitter experience of this sort of thing!).

You and me both!

BigJimmyB

Didn't know Ricky Tomlinson was a cyclist?

x8swift9x

No need for bollards on that path at all. I used to cycle on it to and from university whilst I was at UWE. I fell off on that path also, out of saddle sprinting + pinch flat = hitting the floor hard.

MrChuck

Pross wrote:

Yep, one at each end to stop cars is all that's needed. If the aim is to stop cyclists going onto the footpath side then a bollard every 20m isn't going to work (pedestrians going on the cycleway is usually a bigger issue in my experience - or worse still people walking dogs on telescopic leads and letting the dog walk on the cycleway!). It's just a pointless, knee-jerk reaction to a few complaints with probably a local councillor who has no understanding of highway design insisting on something being done (I have bitter experience of this sort of thing!).

+1

Why don't cyclists stick to the cycle side of shared-use paths with lines down them? Because pedestrians walk on that side too. So it's hard to see the point of the bollards.

Ollieda

As mentioned before - for the bollard to blend into the white line for this chap then he would have had to be cycling on the white line.

The photo of the bollard covered in snow could be from a different time as the incident (the photo of his cuts doesn't have much snow in the background so it could be the bollard photos was taken by a reporter at a later date) but if it was and he was cycling along he would have had to be cycling on the snow both for the bollard to appear camouflaged and for him to acctually hit it! From the photos the bollards look to be regularly placed and the path appears to have a curve along it in the incident points so at least one bollard should have been visible to him, and if this is a path he regularly takes he would know they were there.

Sounds like a case of bad cycling skills causing an acident then looking for someone to blame so it doesn't look like bad cycling skills!

Pross

^+1 in addition the photos only show it in 2D whereas in 3D the relief should make them possible to see even against a white background. Inattentiveness is a far more likely cause especially as they are on the white line in any case so he should have been well clear of them.

nwallace

A bollard every 20m is a crap slalom course.

It should really have red reflective band at the top.

redvee

As usual some interesting comments on the story from the Daily Fail west country relative the Bristol Evening Post. Every time a story about a cyclist being injured whoever is to blame, the anti-cycling brigade get in with their comments.

ridley2010

Pisser! We need more stories like this, they get me through my day

cougie

Hasnt the guy posted here with his story ? He pulled out to overtake his mate and ran straight into it ? Sounds like colour wasn't the main issue here ? He didn't expect a Bollard and wouldn't have seen it no matter what colour til he pulled out ?

I don't know the path so no idea if the bollards are needed.

I rode a shared use path near me the other week - v quiet - no cyclists apart from me - just three couples walking along the 2 mile length of the path. All of them happily walking in the cycle path and not the walking side. Not an issue really but just shows that the public don't really think a bike path will be used ?

MattC59

What a f*cking idiot !!!!
If he can't be bothered to look where he's going, he deserves everything he gets !
Note the second picture, they dont seem particularly camoflaged in that one.
If there was snow on the ground as in the picture, then what was the idiot doing riding in the snow when there is a perfectly clear path.

Anyway, would I be right in thinking that if he was in a position where the bollard was camoflaged, then he'd have to be cycling down the white line, which also indicates that he was about to, or had been cycling on the footpath.

No sympathy, no story, the guy has hurt himslef and has found something else to needlessly moan about. Pinkeyeleftydogooder with nothing better to do !!