http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Cycling the Jawbone Walk en Mon, 18 May 2026 10:28:22 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-358298 Thu, 03 Feb 2022 22:38:05 +0000 chdot 358298@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2022/02/jawbone-arch-too-fragile-to-return-to-the-meadows/" rel="nofollow">https://theedinburghreporter.co.uk/2022/02/jawbone-arch-too-fragile-to-return-to-the-meadows/</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-358266 Wed, 02 Feb 2022 10:19:10 +0000 chdot 358266@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>“</p> <p>The Jawbone Arch, which stood at an entrance to the Meadows for more than 120 years, has been declared too fragile to return to its traditional spot.</p> <p>“</p> <p><a href="https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburghs-famous-jawbone-arch-could-find-new-home-at-national-museum-of-scotland-3551068" rel="nofollow">https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/politics/council/edinburghs-famous-jawbone-arch-could-find-new-home-at-national-museum-of-scotland-3551068</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-161706 Sun, 10 Aug 2014 20:36:25 +0000 chdot 161706@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Sounds like we're pedalling in order to raise money for a new roof or something"</p> <p>Name change?? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-161704 Sun, 10 Aug 2014 20:13:00 +0000 ARobComp 161704@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Pedal for parliament... Sounds like we're pedalling in order to raise money for a new roof or something. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-161648 Sat, 09 Aug 2014 23:31:57 +0000 SRD 161648@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I was invited to attend. Not sure if it was me personally or as POP. Unfortunately I was never actually able to make any of the meetings owing to work commitments :( </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-161638 Sat, 09 Aug 2014 22:28:13 +0000 fimm 161638@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I wonder who the "Pedal for Parliament" (sic) representative was... #nosey </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-161635 Sat, 09 Aug 2014 21:53:10 +0000 Snowy 161635@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>If I wrote a proposal with 'measures of success' like those ones, I'd lose my job! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=3#post-161631 Sat, 09 Aug 2014 21:17:04 +0000 neddie 161631@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Here's the full report from the South Central Neighbourhood Partnership "Meadows Cycling/Pedestrian Improvement Group: Action Plan":</p> <p><a href="https://www.dropbox.com/s/mt737vr8xakzil5/Final%20report.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://www.dropbox.com/s/mt737vr8xakzil5/Final%20report.pdf</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-161567 Fri, 08 Aug 2014 17:04:48 +0000 Snowy 161567@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Riding, I personally prefer to avoid it and go along to the MMW lights, which although it's a daft junction design, at least has a fairly short light sequence.</p> <p>A chicane isn't in anyone's interests. The dogleg from the crossing is already a pedestrian crush at peak times. Add in the usual prams and kids bikes, and a chicane is going to royally piss everyone off.</p> <p>It as though there are three completely separate groups of people in the council who are not talking to each other at all</p> <p>One lot are tasked with south of Melville Drive and keeping Meadow Place blocked off and doing odd things to the line of the cycle path and bollards</p> <p>Another lot are tasked with north of Melville Drive, dissuading cyclists from using Jawbone Walk and coming up with stupid ideas like a chicane to annoy the maximum number of people possible</p> <p>And the last lot look after the pedestrian crossing between the first two, and are steadfastly ignoring any suggestion that it could be made a lot better by realigning it, or widening it, or even that there's an issue </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-161546 Fri, 08 Aug 2014 15:04:29 +0000 chdot 161546@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"who are the "Meadows Cycling/Pedestrian Improvement Group" anyway?"</p> <p>A mix of 'interested people' chaired by Cllr. Rose. </p> <p>He cycles and wasn't the only one. </p> <p>They have been trying to deal with 'problems' (perceived and real) of peds and cycles. </p> <p>Various threads on here have demonstrated that there is no absolute consensus amongst 'us' (the 'responsible' cyclers). </p> <p>Jawbone has always been 'contentious'. </p> <p>There will be people on here approving of <em>these</em> chicanes (if they happen) and others with different views. </p> <p>Cyclists are allowed to cycle on most Meadows paths (there are short sections where, anomalously, it's not legal to cycle - but no No Cycling signs) the rest are subject to the 'normal' "responsible use". </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-161545 Fri, 08 Aug 2014 15:04:18 +0000 Dave 161545@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Sad really - there have been numerous opportunities to sort this out by opening up the Jawbone end and properly aligning with the ped crossing. More than ten years since legislation was passed to allow people to cycle along here - making it even more of a crush to make this less pleasant for everyone is a retrograde step.</p> <p>That said, I can't imagine anyone who is currently willing to put up with the crush and railings that are in place is going to be put off by a further chicane. Smart money is on what I do, use the car access opposite Marchmont Rd to cross the front of the pavilion thing then cut onto the path.</p> <p>This is Edinburgh, where anybody can set up an anonymous "Friends of X" group and apparently circumvent due process... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-161537 Fri, 08 Aug 2014 14:25:09 +0000 fimm 161537@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>And who are the "<em>Meadows Cycling/Pedestrian Improvement Group</em>" anyway? Some subset of FOMBL? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-161526 Fri, 08 Aug 2014 13:09:15 +0000 neddie 161526@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It seems there is talk of installing chicane barriers at the Melville Dr end of Jawbone Walk.</p> <p>Apparently there have been complaints to councillors about cycling on Jawbone.</p> <p>This is one of the actions of the "Meadows Cycling/Pedestrian Improvement* Group" of 16th June 2014:</p> <p><em>Action 3 Jawbone Walk, part (2): Install barrier chicane arrangement at the Melville Drive end of Jawbone Walk to discourage cycle use</em></p> <p>Will attach a copy of the report once I get back to my Dropbox account.</p> <p>*Improvements for whom exactly? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102059 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:18:05 +0000 Morningsider 102059@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>To be fair to SNH - the Outdoor Access Code does cover most situations, and it is pretty long already. The paths in the Meadows are very unusual in that they are techniclly roads - almost all paths within parks fall into the "no legal status" category. </p> <p>The Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 is still very much in force, with some minor amendments. I think it helps to think of legislation as very large game of Jenga - a huge pile of impenitrable bricks, the shape of which is changed over time by people who have no idea what the eventual consequence will be with the very real likelihood that it will all eventually come crashing down. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102058 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:04:46 +0000 Dave 102058@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes, that last is the impression I was under.</p> <p>If you consult the <a href="http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A309336.pdf">Outdoor Access Code</a>, for instance, it doesn't mention anywhere the possibility that (unless not adopted for maintenance by the local authority), you would perhaps be guilty of an offence for cycling on a path in a park - notwithstanding that the Jawbone is specifically a core path.</p> <p>For instance, you are explicitly allowed to ride on the grass. It would be very odd for wardens to tell cyclists not to ride on the path but muddy up the grass instead. That got me wondering whether these parts of the 1984 act were effectively overridden by the 2003 act. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102057 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:55:39 +0000 kaputnik 102057@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>This thread is a marvellous demonstration on how clear the law on this really is (it's not!) Unless one is as schooled in matters as Morningsider, you can be convinced you are right / the other is wrong, but it turns out you're probably both wrong, or right for the wrong reasons! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102056 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:46:27 +0000 Morningsider 102056@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Dave - the Land Reform Act gives cyclists and pedestrians the right to be on and to cross land, with certain exceptions. One of these exceptions is where access to the land is regulated by another statute, e.g. the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984. </p> <p>Most footpaths, tracks etc. have no formal legal status and are simply "land", over which you can exercise access. As a general rule, if a path, track etc. isn't included in the relevant list of public roads held by each local authority then you are free to cycle or walk along it, unless prevented by other legislation or regulation (obviously, you can cycle along public roads, but the list also includes those paths, tracks etc. where access may be limited to pedestrians).</p> <p>I think the slight loss in legal clarity is worth the benefit in that we can now legally cycle along pretty much every path in Scotland. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102053 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:37:29 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 102053@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Long reply deleted.</p> <p>In short - no. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102051 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:27:41 +0000 Dave 102051@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Is there something about the definition of a 'footway' that means not everything people walk on (that isn't parallel to a road) is legally a footway?</p> <p>The 1984 act, going by the post above, would seem to divide 'routes' of any type into roads, cycle tracks, or footways/footpaths (the distinction merely being colocation with a motoring 'road').</p> <p>However, that would imply that the Land Reform Act actually doesn't allow non-motorised access to many places at all. I doubt the 7stanes routes, for instance, have been legally classified as "cycle tracks" given that they are just muddy ruts in a hillside that the Forestry Commission now maintains carparks and a cafe beside. </p> <p>As they aren't roads either, they would seem to be "footpaths" according to the 1984 act?</p> <p>Implies, for instance, that it would be OK to ride on the grass (or hillside) under the LRA but only until the point that the desire line started to look a bit like a path, at which point it would be illegal to cycle on it? (Not a "cycle track", not beside a road = "footpath") </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102050 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 16:24:23 +0000 kaputnik 102050@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>I still wouldn't cycle it myself - I always use MMW</em></p> <p>Except the council's own signs on MMW tell cyclists the path is closed and to "use an alternative"... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102047 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:53:31 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 102047@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Knew there had to be a reason - ta Morningsider. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102044 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 15:30:39 +0000 Morningsider 102044@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>WC - Jawbone Walk is a core path. Section 7(1) of the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003 specifically exempts core paths from any statutory or other restriction on their use by pedestrians and cyclists. </p> <p>I still wouldn't cycle it myself - I always use MMW. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102042 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:52:22 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 102042@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Right, got there.</p> <p>s.151 of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 has the interpretation provisions and a 'footway' is a 'road' for use on foot only beside a carriageway; a 'footpath' is a 'road' for use on foot only not beside a carriageway. A 'cycle track' is any 'road' which is for the use of cycles only, <em>or</em> cycles and by foot only.</p> <p>So s.129 above prohibits you cycling on either a 'footpath' <em>or</em> 'footway', so doesn't matter if it's beside a road or not. So the question is, which has probably been answered here before, why is cycling allowed on Jawbone Walk? Why was the prohibition on cycling deemed unlawful? (and it's not the Land Access changes because cycling on the footpaths and footways is specifically excluded from that). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102041 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:46:31 +0000 LaidBack 102041@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Here's a park sign I spied in East Princes Street Gardens. Seems that cycling is allowed. Instruction is to keep to firm hard surfaces and give way to walkers and horse riders. ....so keep to paths. </p> <p>Council has boards on MMW telling people to cycle alternative routes at moment too - due to path closures. </p> <p><em>Council should have these in Meadows and then you could refer the complainers to it, Sarah.</em></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/66067108@N08/8020643126/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8301/8020643126_fe9c97c176.jpg"></a><br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/66067108@N08/8020643126/">New city park signs</a> by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/people/66067108@N08/">LaidBackBikes</a>, on Flickr </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102038 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:41:14 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 102038@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Roads (Scotland) Act 1984</p> <p>s.129(5)<br /> Subject to section 64 of this Act, a person who, in a footway, footpath or cycle track, as the case may be drives, rides, leads or propels a vehicle or horse, or any swine or cattle, commits an offence:<br /> Provided that the foregoing provisions of this subsection do not apply—<br /> ...<br /> (b)in relation to a pedal cycle which is either not being ridden or is being ridden on a cycle track; </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102034 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:32:42 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 102034@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Kappers, he's corrected me on that before I think (in that I thought the same thing, that to count as a footpath it had to be alongside a road - turns out that assumption was wrong). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102032 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:29:07 +0000 kaputnik 102032@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>It is pretty fair to assume that the general public would rightly think cycling is not allowed here</em></p> <p>As far as I'm aware, unless it is the footway alongside a carriageway (what most would call a "pavement", but not Scots Law) then cycling works on a by-exception policy and by default is permissible. So it's perfectly legal to cycle on the paths in the Meadows and would a bye-law to prohibit it (such as the ones in place for Princes Street Gardens). </p> <p>It's the other way around for "pavements", where you can only ride on them where it is permitted as part of a shared or segregated path.</p> <p>If it is designated a segregated path (as in Middlew Meadow, North Meadow and South Meadow Walks and Leamington Path) then you have to ride on the designated side.</p> <p>So for the undesignated paths in the Meadows, which aren't "pavements", you are legally allowed to cycle them. The previous signs that were up banning it (I think) had no basis in law after the outdoor access legislation came into force (right of non-motorised access), much like the Porty Prom, which took 8 or 9 years to come into line with the legislation and lose its signs.</p> <p>Morningsider will be along shortly to correct / clarify this. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102030 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 14:02:42 +0000 Bruce 102030@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>As far as I can see, there is no marked area that says cycling is allowed unlike the rest of the meadows which has clearly marked paths.</p> <p>It is pretty fair to assume that the general public would rightly think cycling is not allowed here. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102011 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:49:51 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 102011@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>Not only is he just plain wrong, it's certainly intimidation, and it's verging on assault.</em>"</p> <p>If people are genuinely intimidated by the action then it <em>is</em> assault (or at least <em>can be</em> - would be up to a court to determine, you don't need to cause actual physical harm, not actually intend to cause physical harm, but merely put someone in fear that they may be subject to physical harm).</p> <p>As others have said, the 'no cycling' stuff should have all come down by now (was it because those paths weren't, for some reason, designated 'footpaths'? They sit outside the Land Access legislation which is why you're still not allowed to ride on the pavement).</p> <p>Though personally I think it's a little narrow for sharing with peds (countered by the fact that it's a very very useful angle of a route). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=352&page=2#post-102009 Tue, 26 Feb 2013 11:29:50 +0000 Sarah 102009@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Brilliant, thank you. My peace with the meadows is restored :)<br /> Now all we have to do is re-educate angry people to correct and less angry.... </p>