Comment on some cycle infrastructure for me.

So basically no cycling infrastructure? Probably better than being forced to ride on shared use paths and told to dismount every few metres... ( I'm annoyed at all the new building around my way has shit token gesture cycle infrastructure).

Sounds like they're replacing something mindblowingly shit with something not very good. <Edit> nothing at all really

The active travel project director at our place keeps saying that paint isn’t infrastructure. Sounds like exactly an example of this.

Comment - Sh1t infrastructure. Paint the tarmac bright and let cyclists use it.

Id use the pavement

Near me there is a nearside cycle lane, then short kerbed islands designed to give 'door space' between the cycle lane and parked cars, and then two way traffic.

Unfortunately the drivers park on the kerb islands to protect their wing mirrors at the expense of cyclist safety.

In the above example, if the cycle symbols are randomly across the road to make it clear cyclists have priority and don't need to give way, it might work, but it sounds too busy for that...it's more like a pedestrianised street for cyclists which won't work if drivers push past riders

In short, there's 2 perfectly good lanes there, where they could easily segregate both types of traffic, but they choose to mix them together on a busy aterial route, risking people's lives, so that people can use the other lane to store their cars?

That's my thought.

The real solution would to have the cars running in the eastern lanes.

Then parking end on across what was central reservation and outside lane of the western side. Inside lane then becomes proper segregated two way cycle lane. Then pavement. All on the side the station and shops are.

There's then a continuation all the East way to the motorway - and the same layout could be used, with one press button crossing at that main junction to cross the car lanes/rejoin carriageway.

Instead we've repeatedly thrown money at paint, dropped kerbs and things in an attempt to polish a turd and maintain car parking (due to the station).

I'm having to be careful, as a cycling friend has been involved in the design as a consultant.... So I need to be clear about my suggestions.

The real solution would to have the cars running in the eastern lanes.

You remember the public meeting where the council proposed that?

(1999 or something)

Unfortunately this will never happen now in Dunblane.

I was in Galloway in 1999...

I'm chatting to a couple of folk about it including a councillor - you know who Crispin - and I'm going to ask why we're not being ambitious on this.

What you need to familiarise yourself with is LTN120: Cycle infrastructure Design. This is basically the set of standards to which cycle infrastructure must now be built:

As far as I recall it doesn’t allow for the design you’re outlining. I don’t work with this directly but it’s increasingly important in infrastructure building - I think there are restrictions now on funding for schemes that don’t comply with the guidelines. Active Travel England has an increasing role in checking whether schemes comply.

The active travel project director at our place keeps saying that paint isn’t infrastructure.

this

so that people can use the other lane to store their cars?

and this.

Parking lane? 🤦‍♂️ FFS.

I'd ride in the hatched area and accept the dooring risk instead of having the whole A9 up my arse.

The bike lane should be closest to the pavement. The parking lane should be to the right of the cycle lane. The general traffic lane should be to the right of the parking lane.

There are parking and cycle lane drawings on p59 and 65. Mixing cycling with traffic is covered in chapter 7:

“Where motor traffic flows are light and speeds are low, cyclists are likely to be able to cycle on-carriageway in mixed traffic, as shown in Figure 4.1. Most people, especially with younger children, will not feel comfortable on-carriageways with more than 2,500 vehicles per day and speeds of more than 20 mph. These values should be regarded as desirable upper limits for inclusive cycling within the carriageway.”

Is it possible to ask for a detailed description of how thay envisage the new scheme will improve safety and reduce the need for car use?

Also point them to p9 of this document here: 

TRANSPORT.GOV.SCOT "https://www.transport.gov.scot/media/50323/cycling-by-design-update-2019-final-document-15-september-2021-1.pdf"

(the scottish version of the one linked up there).

The first point in the guidance says don't put cycling infrastructure on the existing road network and the second point says to protect users from motor vehicles. I can't see how this proposal does that.

That's useful documents thank you both.

I think the Cycle by Design is the one you want for Scotland, LTN 1/20 is only applicable in England and Northern Ireland. I'm not sure on the differences as have only used LTN 1/20

Knowing that stretch of road, I'd prefer something like the old A77 (cycles on one side, cars on the other) to the A80 style setup (still a dual carriageway with little traffic and no Infrastructure) you have there.

Ultimately though, what utility does it serve? That road only runs in that configuration from the roundabout at the end of the M9 to the roundabout at the other side of the bridge (still the India Gate?). Beyond that is Perth Road, single carriageway with the X9 screaming up and down it. Nobody wants to cycle there and the only alternative to the other end of town is Ramoyle which if memory serves is only fun in one direction and a proper bastard in the other.

It's all well and good having infra but if it has no point, what's the point?

Ultimately though, what utility does it serve?

It is a connector road to get from one side of Dunblane to the other - to supermarket, leisure centre etc. Sure you can thread through the centre of Dunblane via one of the green bridges or Ramoyle - but none of them are easy rides or good infrastructure.

It's also could be a connector to BofA from residential areas of Dunblane. There's a growing number of cycle commuters Dunblane BofA or Stirling. Many don't want to do the Glen Road hill and slippery, isolated, unlit ride that it is. I'm of a growing view that the Dunblane old A9 and BofA A9 should be studied with a view to having a separate cycle lane. Stirling council had the funding for it and returned the money to the funder mid-pandemic as they didn't have the capacity to build it.

Dunblane is just an odd layout due to the river and railway cutting it in half, and the old A9 a historic line not created to serve the community but as a trunk route.

Nobody wants to cycle there

Except there are more and more cyclists on it, and all around our area.

A cycle lane on the edge of a car lane doesn't help with cycling with kids or people who are nervous. @mat_outandabout your suggestion of car on one side parking on central reservation (alternating herring bone if room?) Sounds brilliant for everyone

The answer is to remove the free car park from the highway. Paint double red lines on it. This then becomes an instant tow away zone. Then paint a 1mtr wide yellow hashed solid bordered line to segregate cars from cycles.

Camera to enforce lane use and parking infringement.

Wont happen as car is king and pollution,  heart health, obesity and votes on local elections trump common sense

@mat_outandabout your suggestion of car on one side parking on central reservation (alternating herring bone if room?) Sounds brilliant for everyone

If there must be parking, I don't see any other option. Anything else is putting people in danger and discouraging cycling.

Except there are more and more cyclists on it, and all around our area.

Perth Road from the roundabout to QV? Where are you putting a cycle lane on that?

Agreed. But surely we can have some nice things?!

If you put 'Verlengde Hereweg, Groningen' in Google maps and street view it, shows you examples of pavement, cycle lane, parking strip and road in a town centre. (Sorry couldn't figure out how to link directly to Google maps)

To be fair, I've lived in Dunblane for over 20 years and never had an issue cycling through the town, with or without cycle lanes. The current painted lines on that section are a nonsense with the massive bulges at any "on ramp" to the road. Taking away the parking is also not a good solution. The train station is a massive boon to commuters and, while it is all very well and good to say folk should walk to the station, that does add an hour to your commute if you live at the extremities of the town (like I do). I'd actually be for taking away the grassed divider and giving everyone just a bit more space.

surely we can have some nice things?!

Of course and I'm sorry if I'm coming across as negative but you have to have a good case for these things. If you could tie the old A9 route to Bridge of Allan that would be fantastic but where would it run once it hits the M9? You and I know the land is there but what real chance is there of securing it for something useful?(moreso when the resident matriarch has decided its better suited to be a [s]gated scheme[/s] 9 hole championship golf course [honest])

Dunblane has some fantastic back routes that would be far nicer to travel on than that road. Just walking along it was unpleasant, I'd hate to imagine how miserable it would be riding it in winter.

Agreed - and thinking about it I'm cross were on 3rd or 4th iteration. Perhaps at the cost of other cycle infrastructure in the town..

A fascinating meeting with a local councillor last night looking at this.

Unsurprisingly there are some real politics, crappy policies and 'money must be spent' attempts which has led to a total clusterf*ck around many of the cycle lanes and thinking....and a total lack of vision about what could be.

There is money for a study into the cycling infra between Dunblane and BofA - could there be a segregated cycle lane from Four Ways to Lecropt nursery all the east of the A9.

But in the meantime, the lines put in during covid are deemed unsafe and so will be replaced for the 4th iteration, and even that is half hearted. I suggested it was a waste and they should consider gong straight to the 'big idea'.

I have had opportunity to make suggestions and it seems that the councillor is keen that more folk feedback and speak to the transport planning officers.