http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: ped/cycle crashes do happen en Mon, 18 May 2026 10:28:46 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-183297 Sun, 15 Mar 2015 13:37:19 +0000 stiltskin 183297@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It seems to me that as cycling has become more popular the thrust of the council's efforts seems to me to be more aimed aimed at restricting cyclists than at accommodating the increased traffic levels.</p> <p>Not condoning inconsiderate high speed pedalling on shared use paths, mind you. But my experience of the Criagleith junction is that putting Give Way lines across the natural flow of the path inevitably causes a problem. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-183287 Sun, 15 Mar 2015 10:16:14 +0000 chdot 183287@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Let's hope neither of these 'cause' any incidents -</p> <p><a href="https://flic.kr/p/rhnHoF"><img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7645/16594219727_8b679da8d9_o.jpg"></p> <p>MMW</a></p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14499&amp;page=2#post-183168" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14499&amp;page=2#post-183168</a></p> <p><a href="https://flic.kr/p/ryZ1s8"><img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7625/16782169971_49bfbee089_o.jpg"></a><a href="https://flic.kr/p/ryZ1s8">photo</a> by <a href="https://www.flickr.com/people/53569811@N03/">SRDUK</a>, on Flickr</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14499#post-182891" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14499#post-182891</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182670 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:49:54 +0000 chdot 182670@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"It's news to me that Living Streets (or anyone else, besides some individuals with the right connections) is involved in this?"</p> <p>If you mean the Barnton path, probably not. References to LS here are are about more general issues. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182667 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:41:08 +0000 minus six 182667@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>a total failure to understand the use of the bicycle as transport and provide appropriate infrastructure for commuting</em></p> <p>Spot on.</p> <p>Around Cramond/Barton/NEPN NCN1, the general perception of fair "shared-use" is the unrestricted freedom to let the dog wander about off the leash, with the expectation that cyclists will proceed gingerly at walking pace to accomodate.</p> <p>Instead, I commute on the busy Queensferry Road dual carriageway, while wishing I lived in a modern progressive country, that would provide a direct segregated cycleway. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182666 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:40:13 +0000 Dave 182666@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It's news to me that Living Streets (or anyone else, besides some individuals with the right connections) is involved in this? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182662 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:12:36 +0000 chdot 182662@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"but then when a vocal minority expresses concern, it always seems to come down to 'anti-cyclist'"</p> <p>There is a long history to this. The Pedestrians Association was started in 1929 ("<a href="http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Streets_%28UK%29">The Pedestrians Association explained is purpose as follows: in view of the serious danger of motor traffic today an Association be formed for the defence of public rights, especially of pedestrians.</a>")</p> <p>In 2001 it became Living Streets and (sometimes) it seems they are more concerned about things like 'cycling on pavements' rather than the reasons that (some) people ride on pavements. </p> <p>Clearly there are good reasons for people with walking/cycling/pedestrians 'interests' to work together more/better. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182661 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 11:04:57 +0000 wingpig 182661@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The capacity of the inter-golf-course bit of this path (even the chicaned point where it meets Barnton Avenue) is always going to be greater than the narrow wall-bordered bit where it meets Barnton Avenue West. Perhaps the lesser slope and narrower path persuades even whizzing numpties to ease off.</p> <p>Seeing as both ends of the stub roads leading to the cut-through are not exactly close to anything it'd be very interesting to find out how much non-dog-relieving foot-traffic it carries.</p> <p>It'd also be useful to know whether the golf-people are just against lighting in general or just low-class lighting such as manky concrete posts with low-pressure sodium-vapour orange lights atop them - would they accept delicate glass globes like those atop the entrance-posts to Holyrood Park? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182660 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 10:48:49 +0000 SRD 182660@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Much of what Kim says is true - and i (and doubtless others) have said as much about the Canal-meadows-innocent links in our feedback -- , but to brand council officers as 'incapable' and their actions as a 'total failure' is neither accurate nor helpful. </p> <p>As this thread makes extremely clear the constraints aren't imposed by their capacities but by presumed political limitations. </p> <p>I'd like to see them push those limits more, and acknowledge the limitations of the infra they're building - i'm sure they know it at least as well as we do...</p> <p>Chdot is totally correct that pedestrians are under-represented/ignored by much policy, but then when a vocal minority expresses concern, it always seems to come down to 'anti-cyclist', which is infuriating. And the double standards of how pedestrian complaints are dealt with (chicanes, magic chicanes) versus cars (we'll reposition the signs indicating a blind corner) is beyond infuriating. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182659 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 10:32:31 +0000 I were right about that saddle 182659@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I suspect @gembo has hit the silver nail on the head. That path separates Royal Burgess and Bruntsfield Links golf clubs. Neither are organisations lacking in members familiar with the levers of power in Scotland. Entry to Royal Burgess famously hinges on an apparently trivial question during the interview, and it isn't 'Rapha or Decathlon old boy?' </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182658 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 10:25:32 +0000 chdot 182658@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Kim -</p> <p>"Looking through this thread it strikes me that the real problem is lack of capacity which is leading to the inappropriate mixing of cyclists and pedestrians. The major problem is that Council Officers seem incapable of understanding the amount of space needed to accommodate cyclists if they want to achieve a 10% modal share. Also a total failure to understand the use of the bicycle as transport and provide appropriate infrastructure for commuting."</p> <p>I think that is partly true but probably shouldn't be - at least in terms of this thread. </p> <p>I'm quite sure CEC hasn't really considered the implications of its own policies adequately. </p> <p>More cyclist will need 'more space' - but very little effort is being made to 'take it away from motor vehicles'. This has been done on George Street (I would say not really for cyclists, though that is touted as the main reason.)</p> <p>Elsewhere it is mostly about 'off road' and predominantly shared use paths. Whether these should be 'for bicycle commuting' is, I think, going to become a key question - IF (as implied) it means cycling at 'speed'. </p> <p>Most people accept that the canal towpath is too narrow for the speeds that a minority seem to think is 'appropriate'. </p> <p>I think there will be increasing pressure to 'persuade' cyclists to 'slow down' whether this is by 'education', unenforceable rules, or more chicanes and bumps/tactiles remains to be seen. </p> <p>Meanwhile will there be a parallel/'new' set of routes ON main roads??</p> <p>Of course part of this 'debate' - the part usually 'left out'/marginalised/ignored - is 'pedestrians' - ie most people, some of the time. </p> <p>'We' shouldn't be just trying for 'better' for 'us'. </p> <p>There ought to be closer working between those who have an 'interest' in 'cycling' and those who seek improvements for 'walking'. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182657 Mon, 09 Mar 2015 09:59:16 +0000 chdot 182657@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"No, the problem is a perception among the Barntonites. The question is, why do they have that perception? @ chdot can the person who attended the meeting help here?"</p> <p>Further comment from someone who went. </p> <p>"</p> <p>The actual volume of traffic on the golf course path was not given, nor the number of accidents or complainants</p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=7#post-182647 Sun, 08 Mar 2015 21:45:53 +0000 ih 182647@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think you've nailed the real issue there @gembo. </p> <p>Does anyone know the FoI process and have any tips on its use? I would like to obtain the communications to the Council that have led to the meeting. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182643 Sun, 08 Mar 2015 18:37:38 +0000 gembo 182643@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think this is the reality.dog walkers in leafy suburbs are very well connected. I cite the long running saga of the new portobello high school where some wasteland that a few dog walkers used turned into a park. It was near a park, yes, but it was not used by anyone. Else.That went up to Scot gov before the needs of 1200 children could be established as greater than the needs of a few well connected dog walkers. IMHO. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182642 Sun, 08 Mar 2015 18:02:40 +0000 ih 182642@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Kim The problem here is definitely not one of capacity. I have counted the usage on this section, and it is very lightly used. The number of pedestrians is vanishingly small (single figures per hour) and the number of bikes is similar except during a rush between 5 and 6 pm, when between 20 and 30 bikes will come down the path. I have not seen anyone 'speed'. It is a reasonably wide path.</p> <p>@Dave did you have a way of getting speed data from strava (I have no knowledge of strava. Hadn't even heard about it until reading this forum) It would be useful to have reliable evidence on speed.</p> <p>No, the problem is a perception among the Barntonites. The question is, why do they have that perception? @ chdot can the person who attended the meeting help here? What was said in terms of actual conflict or close passes by bikes? Have there been any evidenced crashes?</p> <p>The led lights don't dazzle. The problem is that they don't provide any light except to delineate the path.</p> <p>I have a feeling that the real problem is that some people, just don't want bikes there at all, and if they have to have them, they want to make sure that they travel at walking speed. A single chicane at the lowest point won't achieve that. You would need a ladder of DDA compliant well lit barriers. And if you light them, then you have solved the problem, that it is difficult to see darkly clothed pedestrians in the dark. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182640 Sun, 08 Mar 2015 16:09:22 +0000 Kim 182640@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Looking through this thread it strikes me that the real problem is lack of capacity which is leading to the inappropriate mixing of cyclists and pedestrians. The major problem is that Council Officers seem incapable of understanding the amount of space needed to accommodate cyclists if they want to achieve a 10% modal share. Also a total failure to understand the use of the bicycle as transport and provide appropriate infrastructure for commuting.</p> <p>What really needs to happen is that greater capacity is provided on high (cycle) volume routes, this would allow for the proper separation of cyclist and pedestrians where needed. As happens in places where active travel is common (i.e. mainland Europe). Where volumes are low, then cyclists and pedestrians can easily mix. It is not rocket science!</p> <p>Instead of this we have the stupidity of trying to encourage ever greater levels of cycling on routes which are already over capacity and then try to tell people to be nice to each other. We know that it doesn't work, so why waste money doing it.</p> <p>The so called improvements linking the canal and the innocent railway path will only server to make things worst as there is no plan to increase capacity. Apparently predict and provide can only be used for motor vehicles, and then only if the predicted volumes are wrong. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182632 Sun, 08 Mar 2015 01:03:28 +0000 Dave 182632@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>IMO there is too much of a power asymmetry to waste time emailing anyone about this (unless you happen to live in one of the dozen-odd houses in the immediate area). Providing they are properly lit, they may as well put a few chicanes in and be done with it I think.</p> <p>I think it's hard to argue that they are much of an inconvenience so long as they comply with DDA etc., i.e. the one coming off the tram line at the eastern end of that path.</p> <p>The idea that leaflets or painted messages on the surface would have any meaningful impact on anything is laughable, surely? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182631 Sat, 07 Mar 2015 23:52:18 +0000 chdot 182631@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Notes from Barnton route meeting from someone who was there -</p> <p>"</p> <p>Various options were discussed, the majority wanted a chicane at the lowest/fastest point. * and I argued against, I suggested Spokes leafletting cyclists (and peds?) as was done at Roseburn Park (also canal?) and large warnings in road paint (as was done at Roseburn Park) and signs eg the 'Respect' signs you get some places.</p> <p>A chicane would have to be properly lit. The present LED's are because the golf course, who own the land, objected to street type lighting, but if the council 'adopt' the path they may, I think the roads official was suggesting, have more freedom of choice with the lights. So the chicane will not happen overnight (and they don't want to introduce it during the Winter )(safety) so unless they can get it done this Summer it'll be next year.</p> <p>* suggested the LED lights are dazzling to cyclists at night.</p> <p>*, who called the meet said notes of the meet would be sent round.</p> <p>The message to me was that where cyclists speeding is causing real or imagined danger measures such as chicanes will be built eventually. </p> <p>The local area roads manager (or something similar) mentioned the Cramond Brig stretch as something they were currently thinking about, how they wanted to get it right. I got the impression cycle speed on that downhill has alienated some people and that speed reduction measures for bikes will be incorporated.</p> <p>Officials were asked by the councillor and community council office bearers when discussing various issues/localities if emails etc had been received from the public about it. This says to me we should be communicating with officials and councillors as often as possible with both praise and suggestions, it may just influence their decisions.</p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182367 Wed, 04 Mar 2015 10:19:40 +0000 steveo 182367@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I sneezed the evening I got back from the hospital, hurt like all hell but I think it realigned everything! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182353 Tue, 03 Mar 2015 23:13:59 +0000 Cyclingmollie 182353@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I didn't find it sore at all - at least not compared to the hip bursitis, mild concussion and road rash from my knee to my shoulder. My advice would be, once or twice a day, stand with your back to a wall and pull your shoulders back so that they are equal and straight. If you're like me it will give you an indication of how "forward" your shoulder is and let you get it into a better position. The bone rubbing is called crepitus fwiw. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182345 Tue, 03 Mar 2015 22:12:24 +0000 PS 182345@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I suspect how painful it is may depend on where along the bone the break is? Mine was pretty much in the middle, with the added bonus of a fragment off at a right angle, so it seemed to grind with any movement (including, I can remember quite clearly, being in a car going over speed bumps). </p> <p>If you can move it without pain (and with the doc's okay that it's not going to retard the healing of the bone) I'd move it as much as possible. The main longer-term impact (beyond the collar bone being a bit shorter, making you more aero) is likely to be muscle wastage, both the obvious stuff and the more tricky little ones around the joint. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182330 Tue, 03 Mar 2015 19:52:18 +0000 Instography 182330@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm surprised at how not very painful it is. I've had four Ibuprofen today and it's out of the sling. Hospital phoned today to say they'll want to see me in two weeks and that I should use and move the arm as much as possible to stop the joint stiffening up. But the swelling is going down and bringing the ends of the bone together which means more grinding than before but not painful. Or maybe I am literally insensitive.</p> <p>"In similar conditions in future, would you do anything differently?"</p> <p>I guess I might care less about blinding some drivers and just assume that there's always a drunk ninja on every unlit path. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182175 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 12:32:05 +0000 Baldcyclist 182175@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oh, sounds bad, heal well @insto. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182174 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 12:29:51 +0000 Cyclingmollie 182174@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I was stretchered down the stairs with gas an air!</em></p> <p>I had to stand in the admissions queue and fill out a form. I nearly fainted. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182173 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 12:23:11 +0000 steveo 182173@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Nasty Insto, As above the break will heal and it'll be fine. I'm surprised you managed how you did, when I broke my collar bone I was stretchered down the stairs with gas an air! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182165 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:55:37 +0000 ih 182165@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hope you're better soon @insto. </p> <p>In similar conditions in future, would you do anything differently? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182161 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:23:11 +0000 Cyclingmollie 182161@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Get well soon Insto. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182160 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 11:22:59 +0000 paddyirish 182160@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"<blockquote>Touché. I'll accept that I had more light than I was using but I'm genuinely not sure that shining a very bright light into the rain would have helped me see better. Possibly, probably even. My decision was that my dynamo light is bright enough to get complained about on NEPN so usually good enough to see and be seen. But the main bright light is a different beast and I tend to use it sparingly. On that path, in the rain and into the faces of on-coming cars, you do need to think about switching it on. I use it on unlit roads but cover it if cars are coming and on unlit paths like the Dunfermline to Alloa path which is popular with dog walkers (who are also good at having lights themselves and on their dogs).</blockquote>"</em></p> <p>Describes my approach to lighting almost to a T. </p> <p>It is bad luck and sometime stuff just happens... Again better infrastructure would have prevented this but I fear that there are enough other smokescreens for that to be quietly ignored...</p> <p>Best of luck with the recovery. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182148 Mon, 02 Mar 2015 10:43:55 +0000 Dave 182148@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Please tell me you're going to write an outraged article to Living Streets, or someone like that... ;-)</p> <p>Hope it heals quickly and easily! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182109 Sun, 01 Mar 2015 19:08:14 +0000 amir 182109@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ouch - mind you, on the plus side it's the sort of injury that marks you out as a cyclist. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14061&page=6#post-182105 Sun, 01 Mar 2015 16:22:43 +0000 Min 182105@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oooya indeed. Still, it is probably better to have a broken collarbone which ought to mend straightforwardly than some sort of freaky shoulder thing that means freaky physio to fix. Though that doesn't sound like much consolation when I write it down.. Get well soon.</p> <p>As has been said many times before, black clad pedestrians in the dark are almost impossible to see, no matter how good your light is. </p>