CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 16years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
Its been said many times, "they" need the political gumption to lose a number of key routes to non-motorised transport.
"They" need to be prepared to ride out the inevitable flak for what will make a better future.
"They" need to rethink what legacy they want to leave our kids.
Remember the uproar when "they" banned fags in pubs for the public good?
Apart from that the transport strategy is all going swimmingly.
p.s. shared paths? Maybe but not enough. But car free roads? Definitely.
FWIW there were 12 pedestrians on NEPN this morning who weren't school kids, 10 who were, and 45 (one way) riders.
The canal was empty between whatever the estate is called that's built on it (name escapes me) and Harrison Park, but at either end there were quite a few folk - I made it 13 peds to 28 (one way) riders.
Incidentally, I don't think that the absolute numbers are that important of course - otherwise it would be quite hypocritical to claim that we need space for cycling on roads where we make up just a couple of percentage points.
However, I often feel that discussion of the existing shared space routes makes it sound like there are millions of dogs and peds and one or two death-dealing cyclists mowing through them.
Nothing could be further from the truth, I pass fewer than 3 pedestrians per mile of shared path, but up to ten riders (just going the other way) per mile.
Should we ban peds? Hardly. But it should be used as an argument to try and draw demand onto space reallocated from motorised traffic, rather than a stick to beat up people cycling.
I like the line from the Living Streets link that SRD posted: "I welcome the support of the grassroots cycling organisations who don’t wish to see pavements converted into cycle paths."
The canal was empty between whatever the estate is called that's built on it (name escapes me)
Wester Hailes? I recall going fishing with my dad in the canal in the 1970s: still blocked off in those days. Caught a large pike.
I pass fewer than 3 pedestrians per mile of shared path, but up to ten riders (just going the other way) per mile.
Careful, with those low numbers next thing you know folk will be arguing the NEPN should be converted into roads (or tram lines).
It's like a parallel of the Brown / Dugdale "debate".
Irving: shared use isn't safe. It frightens old people and kiddies. Some cyclists don't like it.
Orr: works fine in some other places
Err, that's it.
The canal and NEPN are fairly rubbish for pedestrian commuters. There are very few access points, they take meandering routes and are home to high speed cyclists. Also, pedestrians have the luxury of their own segregated network - free of both motorised vehicles and cyclists.
Lots of people walk in Edinburgh due to the short commuting distances (lots of quite central flats)and a fairly pleasant walking environment. The city clearly has a culture of active travel - build a decent cycle network and there will be a huge increase in cyclists. Safe cycle tracks along major radial routes and a cycle permeable city centre (effectively a novice/unconfident cyclist black hole at present) and you are on to a winner. Truly, build it and they will come.
@Dave I don't think the heat on shared use is about the off-road paths (NEPN or the Canal), it's about city centre pavements being made dual use. There are plenty of peds using the pavement at the bottom of the Mound, on North St Andrew Street, Buccleuch Street, Rankeillor Street etc.
Some of these additions might help to an extent, but they are half-way houses that create conflict and leave both cyclists and peds disgruntled. They also don't look particularly future-proofed if the volumes of cyclists that CEC claims to be targetting ever came to pass. A visionary council of a world-class cycling city would be doing something more substantial (like Copenhagen lanes taking space from roads rather than space from pavements).
Anyone familiar with this area between fort kinnaird and Western VW (looking towards Niddrie)
closed/unfinished road but a shared use path sign now almost hidden by vegetation.
Is/was there a path there?
I think it might have been a 'planned but never happened' thing. There are loads of paths like that down at Granton.
It's actually the area up there I thought would be great for an Edinburgh Cross Race. Loads of space, some trails already cut by people who go about on scrambler bikes, and bags of parking at the shopping centre.
Seem to recall seeing scrambling bikes on that land, and having similar thoughts about a cyclocross trail, whilst i've been driving along The Wisp.
From the wisp though the area seems fenced off with "Danger" signs on it! the aerial view shows an odd shaped bit of fenced off land, but a bigger area not fenced off!
If Hunters Hall does become a cycling hub,maybe that could be incorporated.
I think it's old mining land and so there's always the chance of a big hole swallowing someone out. Which might count against it as a CX venue. Need to find out who owns the land!
I think you'd have to be there quite early to avoid the local yoof on trials bikes.
There was somewhere similar past the Musselburgh lagoons, but it's a bit more manicured now.
Presumably the remains of the former Newcraighall colliery?
Where's kaputnik when you need him? That would make sense to me crowriver.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts