http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: April 28th Pedal to Parliament - Ride Route Required en Wed, 08 Apr 2026 12:34:46 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60088 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:57:22 +0000 chdot 60088@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Start time partly depends how long event is meant to take.</p> <p>At the moment the poster might be seen to mean 11 AT Parliament.</p> <p>Clearly there needs to be a start time.</p> <p>Assuming that the start point is The Meadows it might be good to encourage people to assemble leisurely from 11 for coffee (various cafés in general area) followed by lunch (ditto + bring your own).</p> <p>Then leave at 2 via (route to be finalised), arriving at SP by 3.</p> <p>Then speeches (presumably) and onwards to Holyrood Park for afternoon tea.</p> <p>So people can have 'a day out' or just join for bits.</p> <p>It would be unfortunate if most people wanted to stay at The Meadows, but I'm sure they won't!</p> <p>IF people are around The Meadows for a couple of hours, might be worth organising Dr. Bike and some Fun and Games.</p> <p>If a late start (quite reasonably) is for people from out of town, I suspect some of them won't really want to hang around afterwards too much.</p> <p>So Main Event still Pedal on Parliament, but perhaps with a bit more organised <em>before</em>, with Holyrood Park as an optional closing?? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60083 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:39:18 +0000 crowriver 60083@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>2pm sounds better to me personally. As you say simpler for folk travelling from out of town too. There'll be a lot more folk in Edinburgh city centre to witness the procession too... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60077 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:28:03 +0000 wingpig 60077@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I haven't been through the Meadows on a Saturday morning for a while but 14:00 is probably better in terms of competition with people playing ball-based team sports (and parking all along Melville Drive) for space to amass at the start... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60075 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 16:20:52 +0000 sallyhinch 60075@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>we're talking about a later start now (just to send this thread off in yet another direction). 2pm would make the sign more readable and make it easier for those of us who have to get to Embra by train on the day - what do people think? Would an afternoon affair be better? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60067 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:48:46 +0000 crowriver 60067@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yep. I read it as 'I am', only just noticed it's '11am'.</p> <p>Crags: maybe better as a simple 'naturalistic' silhouette? The op art zig zag effect makes the upper half of the composition fight too much with other elements. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60064 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 15:03:35 +0000 Roibeard 60064@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The issues folk are having with the "11 AM" may simply be an issue with the <a href="http://xkcd.com/1015/">kerning</a>.</p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60063 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:57:36 +0000 Morningsider 60063@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>a. Yes<br /> b. Not completely. 11am sign is a bit confusing - I initially thought it said "1 I am". Crags need to look more Crag like (I really should have been an art critic). Possibly needs a little more descriptive text, I know you want to avoid this - but it isn't clear what this is about just from the poster and not eveyone will check twitter or the website.<br /> c. Yes </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60057 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 14:15:54 +0000 cb 60057@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I like the background in that it's clearly talking about the Scottish Parliament.</p> <p>At first I read the child's sign as "I I AM"</p> <p>There need to be a venue. Presumably a website when we have one. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-60045 Thu, 08 Mar 2012 13:42:30 +0000 ruggtomcat 60045@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>A) its a bit busy, maybe doesn't need the background<br /> B) yup, love the child seat<br /> C) you had me sold at 'pedal' :) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59954 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 23:23:44 +0000 kaputnik 59954@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>If anyone cares to do a spot of reviewing for me, you could examine the below image and critique it. It's on a guest pass link, so not available to anyone but a select and discerning audience.</p> <p><a href="http://flickr.com/gp/kaputniq/RE5GfA"><img src="http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7190/6962705699_b6fccbfb55.jpg"></a></p> <p>Basically, does it A/ catch the eye B/ make sense and importantly C/ make you want to join </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59950 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:03:50 +0000 sallyhinch 59950@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>CAPSICUM - I like it! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59934 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 20:55:15 +0000 crowriver 59934@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yeah, maybe it should be called CAPSICUM (Cycling Action Plan for Scotland Instantly Cancelled for Umpteen Motorways) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59929 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 19:42:49 +0000 Kim 59929@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I was aware that there was something in CAPS about it, but there has been very little action on actually implementing CAPS, just look at the Scottish budget... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59924 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:49:54 +0000 sallyhinch 59924@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Strict liability (or investigating the possibility of implementing something a bit like strict liability) is actually in the national Cycling Action Plan. Who knew? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59913 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 18:02:24 +0000 crowriver 59913@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Thanks Kim, I recall reading that a year ago and it reminds me that it is probably now time to ask for a progress update on those actions the Scottish Government promised.</p> <p>An e-mail to my MSP may be on the to do list this week... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59909 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:50:07 +0000 Kim 59909@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@crowriver if you would like Strict Liability to be on the MSP radar you could <a href="http://www.kimharding.net/blog/?p=1646">follow up my last attempt</a>, good luck! :-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=4#post-59896 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 17:12:13 +0000 crowriver 59896@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Bells. Hmm. A bit like this then, but without the avant garde music emanating from topiary. (Bit of a slow start mind).</p> <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tziOig12XEA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tziOig12XEA</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59892 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:43:16 +0000 sallyhinch 59892@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@morningsider - that would be excellent could you PM me? maybe Anth as well as I don't speak Lawyer</p> <p>@anth - bells would be good, much more kid and family friendly than drums. We'd need a rich benefactor if we're to run to our own though ... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59890 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:42:36 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 59890@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That would be a huge help Morningsider - jurisdictional matters are not my forte! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59889 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:40:13 +0000 Morningsider 59889@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Not that I want to seem immodest - but I do know where the dividing line is between Scottish and UK legislative competence. I'm happy to proof any final draft of the manifesto to make sure all technical/legal stuff is in order.</p> <p>I also speak fluent civil service and politician and can advise on terminology if that would help.</p> <p>Happy to sort this out via PM from appropriate people. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59888 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:37:10 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 59888@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>BELLS! I wonder how much it would cost to get loads of little PoP (Pedal on Parliament) bells made up for everyone??? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59887 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 16:36:00 +0000 Smudge 59887@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>To my mind excessively shouty drummy processions are a pita, if people want to get drummy/shouty then can we do it at the finish? (also safer/simpler for those with big drums!)<br /> Surely it would be much more pleasant (and relevant) if everyone just continually rung their bells? (and less painful! Much as I love my airzound it's not pleasant to be around for long...) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59881 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:51:26 +0000 crowriver 59881@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@sallyhinch, now that I see the detail in the Googol doc, I'm happier with the phrasing. </p> <p>Don't forget the Scottish Parliament is a primary legislative body. Scotland also has its own separate legal system. I'm not sure where the dividing line is between Holyrood and Westminster regarding responsibility for road safety, speed limits, strict liability, and mandatory training, but even if these powers are not yet devolved the Parliament could pass a motion on them to send a political signal to Westminster, as has happened on other matters. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59877 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:38:09 +0000 chdot 59877@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>New thread (sorry)</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5593&amp;replies=1#post-59876">Shared use paths</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59875 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:36:03 +0000 SRD 59875@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"as having to crawl along at barely above walking pace " </p> <p>Good point Min. It _is_ just like the pavements in Sweden and the (rel few) shared use pavements I saw in Copenhagen.</p> <p>:) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59874 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:34:04 +0000 Min 59874@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Especially not when drivers are all proceeding at 20mph with no delays at all due to all those road blocking cyclists being out of the way. ;-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59873 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:32:52 +0000 Min 59873@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Of course we should cycle considerately when sharing with pedestrians but I can't see "shared use" ever leading to more cycling as having to crawl along at barely above walking pace definitely does not make cycling a more attractive alternative to driving! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59871 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:28:50 +0000 SRD 59871@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>CB &amp; Roibeard - I agreed with you both before I started using this bit of shared path on a daily basis. </p> <p>i find on NMW, cyclists struggle to pass each other, and pedestrians can be very crabby even if you gently point out that it is a cycle path. on the (less well travelled) joint usage path, none of this ever happens. </p> <p>issue of paths previously marked 'no cycling' now deemed joint is more complicated! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59868 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:23:39 +0000 cb 59868@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Does "more carefully" mean 'slower' due to having to weave in and out of pedestrians.</p> <p>My personal view is that a line down the middle with bikes on one side and pedestrians on the other usually works pretty well and would probably work better if it was more widespread. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=5573&page=3#post-59867 Wed, 07 Mar 2012 15:17:24 +0000 Roibeard 59867@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@SRD - However the pedestrian conflict still exists in the minds of those that aren't familiar with the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003...</p> <p>I've had disapproving tuts and comments when using the formerly no-cycling paths - presumably because of long memories, or the impression that because some areas are dedicated to cycling, the pedestrian paths are dedicated too.</p> <p>See also the long running Prom saga!</p> <p>Robert </p>