http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Fantasy commuting routes en Sun, 05 Apr 2026 21:17:10 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-133508 Wed, 20 Nov 2013 09:48:08 +0000 chdot 133508@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>In view of <a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11672&amp;replies=4#post-133507">Loanhead – Gilmerton cycle route Consultation</a> thought it might be worth reviving this thread. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-91162 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 23:50:29 +0000 kaputnik 91162@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Baldcyclists fantasy of having some basic routes that come up to a minimum standard, and just <strong>work</strong> as cycle routes would be nice. Utopia even!</p> <p>If anyone can name me a route in Edinburgh that doesn't involve some piece of short sighted stupidity, engineered-in inconvenience or lack some basic feature (like a connection to the next bit of path, or safe road crossing) then I'll be impressed. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-91147 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 22:18:49 +0000 559 91147@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>1. All Scottish Road planners to spend 1 year attached to comparable Dutch road department. </p> <p>2. On above secondment they must cycle everywhere </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-91098 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:31:04 +0000 Baldcyclist 91098@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Back on topic, I'd just like the A90 cycle path to be usable at night. I have no 'grand designs' for cycling Utopia really, perhaps we should ask Carlsberg? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-91097 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 14:29:13 +0000 Baldcyclist 91097@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>In West Lothian, developers need to contribute (as much as 20% of projected profit paid uo front, I was told by one small developer) to local schemes as a condition of planning. A primary school in Bathgate, and Armadale high school have been funded a large part by the surrounding re-generation.</p> <p>Asume similar situations in other areas? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-91063 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 10:53:05 +0000 cb 91063@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Fantasy commuting route: Extend the Roseburn Path south across the railway lines (build a bridge) swing left when it reaches the WAR and follow the WAR all the way to Lothian Road.<br /> Would need a bridge to cross Dalry Road. East of Morrison Link I would propose just taking a lane away from the WAR. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901&page=2#post-91042 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:30:48 +0000 kaputnik 91042@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em></p> <p>From Sustrans -</p> <p>"In terms of construction, Midlothian will build from Loanhead to Straiton Ponds (boundary with CEC) this financial year.</p> <p>We then hope to work with CEC to get a route from there to at least Lasswade Road <strong>next year</strong>."</p> <p>Posted <strong>1 year ago</strong> #<br /> </em> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-91039 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:23:30 +0000 chdot 91039@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"It was nice of Midlothian to build such a lovely dead-end of a path though"</p> <p>Um it ends at the MidL/CEC border (as u no)</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2449" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=2449</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-91036 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:14:18 +0000 kaputnik 91036@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>actual rail tracks (but not used) soon after</em></p> <p>The rail tracks have been cut back as far as Millerhill now. Trackbed is just rough ballast, hard going to walk. Probably only a fat-tyred bike could cycle it. I think chdot might have coaxed a Moulton along it though?</p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kaputniq/6018240741/"><img src="http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6123/6018240741_ca5ab1126d.jpg"></a><br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/kaputniq/6018240741/">Opportunity unfulfilled</a> by <a href="http://www.flickr.com/people/kaputniq/">the Magnificent Octopus</a>, on Flickr</p> <p>It was nice of Midlothian to build such a lovely dead-end of a path though. The underpass exists as Bilston Glen Colliery survived just long enough to see construction of the Bypass. It shut not long afterwards though. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-91035 Thu, 15 Nov 2012 01:12:01 +0000 wangi 91035@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Re underpass/bridges over the bypass - there's a stoater just sitting there waiting to be linked up north of Loanhead at Straiton Pond. It's already got a decent cycle path on the Midlothian side which then dwindles to nothing under the bypass and then onto actual rail tracks (but not used) soon after.</p> <p>Link it up to Lasswade Rd &amp; Burdiehouse Burn for city access and through to Millerhill for a longer path.</p> <p>Map: <a href="http://osm.org/go/eve1Wn37F-" rel="nofollow">http://osm.org/go/eve1Wn37F-</a><br /> Photos: <a href="http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/43835143" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbase.com/wangi/image/43835143</a> &amp; <a href="http://www.pbase.com/wangi/elr_railway" rel="nofollow">http://www.pbase.com/wangi/elr_railway</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90884 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 22:04:22 +0000 Morningsider 90884@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>WC - you are correct. A planning authority can attach relevant and proportionate conditions to the grant of planning permission. They can also enter into an agreement with a developer (known variously as a planning agreement, section 75 agreement or planning gain) to provide facilities or cash to help alleviate problems created off-site by a proposed development, e.g. road improvements, extensions to schools, provision of social housing etc.</p> <p>The reason there seems to be less of this happening at the moment is due to the current economic climate. Developers really have the upper hand when it comes to negotiating with planning authorities as so little is currently being built - meaning a developer can threaten to take their development elsewhere if an authority tries to attach too many conditions. In addition, developers can plead poverty (as finance is genuinely pretty hard to get) and authorities are wary of scuppering proposed developments by being making conditions too onerous.</p> <p>It was easy to tap developers when they were making huge margins on new homes, which people were desperate to buy when prices were booming. Not so easy now. The public sector cannot step into this breach in the provision of smaller scale infrastructure as almost all public sector infrastructure spending is being soaked up by a few mega projects. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90880 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 19:37:13 +0000 chdot 90880@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well this is a successful thread!</p> <p>Great mix of fantastic whimsy, perfectly possible in some other (political) universe <em>and</em> some things that should already exist - or at least planned for 'the near future'. (Keep them coming.)</p> <p>I've been at a conference all day which include a lot of people explaining how things are done differently just across the North Sea. </p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/8182100440/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8337/8182100440_e46409b326.jpg"></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/8182688686/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8340/8182688686_aa18c64898.jpg"></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/8182507180/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8204/8182507180_a2c4baec90.jpg"></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/8182825352/"><img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8488/8182825352_034ee1c08c.jpg"></a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90877 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 17:53:02 +0000 kaputnik 90877@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>We should review where any impenetrable man-made road barriers (A1, A720, M8, M9, West Approach Road) cut across the natural "as the crow flies" route that a cyclist would take, and provide separated, traffic-free crossings. If you think about the Bypass, it's incredible that there isn't one, single, proper cycle-friendly under or overpass provided beyond the Union Canal (and that wasn't put there as a cycle route).</p> <p>There are a couple of underpasses, but not one of them is properly connected to any other infrastructure in any meaningful or useful way and most of them are hangouts for flytippers, ne'er do wells, graffitoists and permanently carpeted in broken glass. </p> <p>Councils should be obliged to provide traffic-free, safe cycling connectivity between themselves and their neighbouring councils. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90870 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:15:01 +0000 Cyclingmollie 90870@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>EddieD, yes. The City Bypass really gets in the way. A cycle bridge at Sheriffhall would help that. And a proper connection from Musselburgh through Dalkeith now the rail-track is being put back, preferably via the Country Park and connecting with the North Esk Path at its top end. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90869 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:03:35 +0000 EddieD 90869@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>More routes across the A720 - there's nothing from Sheriffhall until after Old Craighall, and Sheriffhall scares the bejasus out of me either on the road or using the pedestrian links, (and I've cycled round Rome and Paris...but not Athens). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90868 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 16:01:50 +0000 kaputnik 90868@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yes. Forrest Road. A two-lane one-way system with parking on both sides and pavement buildouts. Cylists forced into one crappy lane in one direction (which is single yellow, so regularly parked on) and have to divert around Bristo Place in other. Should have segregated 2-way lane to join up with MMW. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90866 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 15:08:18 +0000 LaidBack 90866@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Cycle routes should always be the most direct energy efficient way in the LB model city. So yes to Scotland Street tunnel of course.<br /> Add in a broad direct cycle route to the Meadows on Forrest Rd. In fact just shove traffic other than buses round Bristo Place. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90857 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:53:55 +0000 Cyclingmollie 90857@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>shuggiet: <em>"Maybe car drivers need to stop, get out, press the button, and wait for green...:-)"</em></p> <p>I like how you think. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90849 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:10:45 +0000 shuggiet 90849@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>2 way cycle path on all existing NCN routes, with separate path for pedestrians.. Would apply to NEPN, Canal (maybe with creative use of moveable pontoons), Innocent, Broomhouse paths etc. </p> <p>Agree - where there are places of industry/employment like Edinburgh Park, there should be mandatory preference for cycling above cars for 2 way segregated cycle paths, secure indoor parking, easy connected priority access into the site.</p> <p>Strongly agree on the 'default to Red' for vehicle traffic...Maybe car drivers need to stop, get out, press the button, and wait for green...:-) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90847 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 13:03:50 +0000 Cyclingmollie 90847@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>As someone pointed out on Twitter the other day, there's plenty room for cycle lanes if we remove the tax-payer subsidised parking from all our streets. That's two lanes given up entirely to cars almost everywhere - that would be my fantasy lane. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90842 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:57:20 +0000 cc 90842@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I love wingpig's underground cycle tunnel network! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90841 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:53:07 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 90841@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>By this I mean default to Red to Vehicle traffic and Green to Pedestrians to allow free movement of the masses</em>"</p> <p>This ^^^ </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90840 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:52:55 +0000 PS 90840@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@K Yes - Cooncil should have masterplan of direct, efficient and non-conflicty routes across town (for the avoidance of doubt, that does not include the canal towpath) and coordinate linking all developments to those. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90839 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:52:04 +0000 DaveC 90839@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oh sorry for got to contribute...</p> <p>I would like the line from the Forth Bridge (rail) to Edinburgh park me widened to allow a safe cycle path to be routed along side. We could have it pass the Tramhub with feeders to the airport/Bank and allow commuters to park and ride into the centre and visa versa (ride in on the train and then take the tram (with bike) into the city centre).</p> <p>Also providing a Forthside Prom extenstion along Dalmany (difficult as its private land) possible with a bridge/opening pontoon bridge at Cramond. Very easy to put in place with the lock gate style opening pontoons to allow boats to pass freely.</p> <p>MOST IMPORTANTLY (and very easily implemented)</p> <p>Ultimately I'd like in the city centre pedestrian light phases to be reversed in priority. By this I mean default to <strong>Red</strong> to <em>Vehicle traffic</em> and <strong>Green</strong> to <em>Pedestrians</em> to allow free movement of the masses, as there are <strong>far</strong> more pedestrians than cars passing certain pinch points, think West end at Ryan's Bar and Waverly Bridge and North Bridge/South Bridge junction.</p> <p>Even if it was only for certain 'rush' hours. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90836 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:49:44 +0000 kaputnik 90836@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Okay then I'm modifying my request in light of the above that if councils already have the powers, I'd like them to be used. (not discretionary either, it should be mandatory, unless the facilities/infrastructure already exist) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90835 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:42:59 +0000 DaveC 90835@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yep Anth... aher,, WC is right, councils can stipulate infrastructure be modified to suit requirements. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90832 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:37:48 +0000 Bhachgen 90832@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><blockquote> "I'd also like to see major business parks - like the Gyle or Edinburgh Park (selfish request there) - forced into providing PROPER access for cyclists. I don't think it should fall to the council alone to provide facilities, I think they (the council) should have sufficient powers to mandate and specify how developments such as these provide infrastructure. If they want to make money by building shopping barns or office complexes out of town, providing traffic-free access should come out of the developer's pocket." </blockquote></p> <p>Yes Yes Yes. A planning requirement for half a dozen metal hoops in a corner of the car park does not the mustard cut.</p> <p>Loved WC's idea for a North-East to South-West link across the city centre too. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90831 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:34:54 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 90831@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>I think they (the council) should have sufficient powers to mandate and specify how developments such as these provide infrastructure</em>2</p> <p>They <em>do</em>, in theory. They can, when faced with a planning application, put conditions on there (I tihnk this is still the case, I'm remembering public admin law classes from uni here). So if there's a huge supermarket planned, for example, Asda can be required to contribute to the costs of putting in place a better road system to take account of more cars coming and going to that car park. It would be no bother at all for the council to say, 'right, you can build that, but you must provide cycle infrastructure in this way'.</p> <p>Though Morningsider may pop up and tell me that's bunkum (part of me hopes it is, because if it's still the case then it shows up our council even more for the lax attitude to cycling despite the 'model cycling city' claims). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90830 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:20:16 +0000 kaputnik 90830@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'd like to see routes that have been converted into one way to inconvenience/discourage drivers (or because they just aren't big enough) to have cyclists' salmon runs. Places like Ponton Street and Semple Street, to avoid having to go up Lothian Road. Or Valleyfield Street, to make it easier and safer to go from Meadows to Gilmore Place.</p> <p>That kinda thing - the existing "traffic calming" set-ups just make it more dangerous for cyclists by forcing us onto the major routes with car-centric junctions and lane layouts, rather than allowing us to use our size and maneouvrability advantage to pick our way quickly along the side streets and bypass snarl-ups caused by congestion on major routes.</p> <p>I'd also like to see major business parks - like the Gyle or Edinburgh Park (selfish request there) - forced into providing PROPER access for cyclists. I don't think it should fall to the council alone to provide facilities, I think they (the council) should have sufficient powers to mandate and specify how developments such as these provide infrastructure. If they want to make money by building shopping barns or office complexes out of town, providing traffic-free access should come out of the developer's pocket. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=8901#post-90828 Tue, 13 Nov 2012 12:03:48 +0000 PS 90828@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>At least one road in all directions from the city centre to the city extremities converted to one way (single lane) for motor vehicles, with the other lane made into a segregated two way cycle path (ie, wide enough of two-abreast in each direction). </p> <p>Being a naive optimist, that is what I thought the "Quality Bike Corridor" was going to be when I first heard about it. Would have been dead easy to do. </p>