CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 14years 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.
Through my experience of transport problems, im fully aware of the problems faced, when getting people and bikes to some decent trails.
I know that a First bus service past some sites, and i'm thinking of setting a service that can ferry people to sites such as glentress etc.
This is in the early stages of thinking about such a service but would be grateful to receive some feedback about this
*meh*
but thats personal, do you think there are regularly peeps who wanna go who dont have vans? can you make it cheaper? can you hire bikes and trail guides to backpackers?
some kinda taxi would be cool, one special rate, up to five peeps. could work :)
could you do it by bike? :P
Can't get the vote thing to work, but yes, I would be up for a family-friendly version. Would prefer a train though. Or we could just cycle it again...
There only seems to be one option on the vote?
We drive to Glentress when we want to go. But, given that it costs £3 to park and then 50-odd miles on the car, I think we'd be willing to consider some sort of transport if it was laid on. The question would be whether the hassle and/or cash saved is worth the inconvenience of not just getting up and going.
For people without their own cars, of course, it's a different story...
Hmmmm. Not sure, I tend to like going really early morning to places like Glentress so that I can get the place virtually to myself and be back to the hub for something to eat as everyone else is just starting to arrive...
It does seem that there is some demand for such a service. However, I just can't see it being economic as there would be a very limited number of trips each day and not everyone would want to go/return at the same time.
btw - that £3 for parking at GT goes to trail maintenance. A bus service running there should be prepared to make a donation to cover any lost income.
There is a guy doing this sort of thing already. I see his van most mornings at Gillespie Crossroads. He takes bikes to trails. Personally, I go with cycling and no car but then I am only ever going to do road or low level off road stuff. Sustrans through your back garden kind of stuff. I struggle with the logic of putting a bike on the back of a car. I do of course combine train and bike that is nice.
SRD's option of the train might be a little costly, getting the line laid, the station built etc but would be nice to have the Glentress Express.
"SRD's option of the train might be a little costly, getting the line laid, the station built etc but would be nice to have the Glentress Express."
Galashiels in 2014(?)
ALSO
Come across this -
"planning permission for a multi-user path for the Leadburn - Roslin Glen section of a path to/from Peebles" just approved.
Unfortunately it's not all former railway lines. I assume Leadburn will be reached next year, Peebles by 2020??
Finding out timescales.
My mountain bike has a maximum speed of about 10mph unless it's going down a wall. There's no way I'd be able to ride around Glentress after riding it there!
(I have thought about hitching a bike-carrying trailer to the lowracer and towing it, but seems a bit unnecessary).
That planning application has to be some sort of joke. There's around 15 junctions or changes of direction along a route which should be continuous. Given that there's a nice direct road through Howgate, I know which one I'll be using.
The road to Peebles wasn't that bad (thread aout that somewhere involving 3 year old, tent, bust gear cable etc), but I would certainly try an off-road route.
"planning permission for a multi-user path for the Leadburn"
As druidh says, it is a shame it is such a twisting route. On the map the former railway trackbed looks largely intact all the way to leadburn which would have created a very fast route.
Again, on the Leadburn to Peebles section the old railway would be a great route.
Unfortunately not everyone likes the idea of a tarmac path. Did anyone look at the Comments tab on the planning application page (containing 12 Objections)?
Jeezo:
- "I cannot see the appeal of miles of tarmac scarring our countryside so please if it aint broke don't fix it"
- "I believe that if this goes ahead it will be a travesty"
- "I see no need for wholesale tarmacing of the countryside"
- "I read with disgust and dismay that this well used route for walkers, horse riders and cyclists is to be turned into a cycle ONLY path and it is to be covered in tarmac!!"
and my personal fave:
- "surely people's Human Rights are being infringed by this madness"
I guess these outbursts have all come from the same place. I found many of the names on this horsey page:
http://www.scottishendurance.com/news.htm
I think I may add a comment about how wonderful tarmac is and can there be a more wonderful sound than that of a horse-shoed hoof clinking on a tarmacadam surface.
Maybe we could compromise and have one half tarmac and the other half gravel. Or gold plated. Or whatever it is that horses like riding on.
I have a feeling it's hard sand that horses like to run on, like that long stretch through Hyde Park. That could easily run alongside a tarmac cycle path for much of the route if they resurrected the Peebles Railway.
I always love comments about tarmacing the country side, if there wasn't already a million miles of tarmac running through it then i might agree with them. We could rip up the roads but then they might have to get their Range Rovers dirty. Also i'd have no where to ride the roady.....
"I always love comments about tarmacing the country side"
As has been suggested such comments often come from horse riders. I can't pretend I understand the needs of horse owners/users, but in many ways their concerns are similar to cyclists in terms of places it's allowed/possible to ride.
In general, in Scotland, it's now possible to walk/ride "responsibly" almost anywhere.
There are places where horses are banned and even places where horses are allowed and bikes not allowed - bridle path in The Braids.
Some bike riders don't take enough care around horses - but some aren't that bothered about pedestrians either...
There's probably scope for more co-operation between horse and bike riders to get better routes/access - but 'we don't like tarmac' attitudes don't help.
Horse interests were actively involved (with other groups) to try to stop the Dalkeith bypass slicing through Dalkeith Park. Not sure if they got any concessions - the opportunity to improve conditions and create links/routes for cyclists was comprehensively ignored.
Historically Midlothian Council hasn't taken that much interest in cycling, but at least this new route shows some interest.
The Council is planning to make the Loanhead to Straiton Pond section of the former Bilston Glen line into a path (presumably with tarmac!)
This is important because the existence of a (working) railway meant that an underpass was created when the bypass was built. The bypass is a real barrier to safe/pleasant travel between Edinburgh and Midlothian by walkers, cyclists and horse riders.
Midlothian is fairly keen to encourage tourism. A good link from Edinburgh for non-motorised travellers would help. It could promote itself as "the place to ride". There are plenty of quiet roads and most of The Pentlands is in Midlothian.
No doubt there are lots of places to ride horses too - perhaps there should be more (with or without tarmac).
One problem is that the bypass is also mostly the boundary between Edinburgh and Midlothian. City of Edinburgh Council is not keen on creating cross-boundary cycle routes because it considers that it's not 'value for money' due to the relatively small number of people that would use it compared with (for instance) MMW.
All the more reason for some joined-up-policies on transport and tourism that don't stop at artificial borders.
chdot 'No doubt there are lots of places to ride horses too - perhaps there should be more (with or without tarmac).'
Apparently there aren't - my daughter has helped out at Tower Farm around Braids and traffic can be a problem.
The Colinton Dell path was not tarred to make it more 'horse-friendly'. (Tarmac wears out horseshoes.)
Personally I can see both sides as these paths are multi-use. The surface on Colinton path is adequate - as is Pentcaitland Trail where horse riders and cyclists co-exist. Key thing is drainage and maintenance.
As far as the circuitous nature is concerned then it won't be used for high speed travel so little reason to tar in this case?
Unfortunately horses can cause havoc to the surface of a path and the only users that don't mind the resulting mud bath are horse riders (and young children I suppose).
If space allowed then a 50/50 tarmac/dirt surface would be good.
See also this article about the London to Paris cycle route. The French side has good cycling surfaces; not so in Britain:
"Sustrans, the charity that promotes cycle routes in the UK, advocates hard surfaces, but faces resistance from some user groups.
"People complain that it is urbanising the countryside," says Simon Pratt, the Sustrans officer handling the Avenue Verte outside London"
"People complain that it is urbanising the countryside," says Simon Pratt, the Sustrans officer handling the Avenue Verte outside London"
So close to nominative determinism at work right there :)
I can see where the horsey culture folk come from but a tarmac surface makes it safer and easier for all riders while the Dell path is no go for a roady and even a bit ropey for a slick tyred mtb. 50/50 shared use with tarmac and hard pack would be a nice compromise.
@LaidBack
"Apparently there aren't"
Well yes. There are the roads of course and the paths you mention plus Longniddry - Haddington. You'd think that horses would be welcome on farmland (not crops) and more able to deal with the terrain that most bikes(?)
I wonder if Midlothian has a horse/riding strategy(?)
"won't be used for high speed travel so little reason to tar in this case?"
Well - If you were in a hurry you wouldn't go that way anyway. Reasons for tarmac are basically to encourage users who don't like mud (inc. townie walkers) AND because unless you do a really good job to sort out drainage and have a maintenance regime/budget tarmac is likely to be more cost effective.
Such things are of course a balance of cost and best way of achieving desired outcome - i.e. (amongst other things) more people willing to walk/cycle, get exercise/fresh air etc. etc.
People's expectations change. A few years ago people responsible for the 'great outdoors' realised that while there were some 'traditionalist' who only wanted discrete singletrack (walking) paths. There was a rising tide of people who actually wanted paths wide enough for two people to walk together - and a decent enough surface so they could wear high heels. (I made that bit up - but certainly a lot of 'casual country explorers' would rather not have to buy boots.)
"There are the roads of course "
I think you'll find that horses, like cyclists - do not appreciate speeding drivers roaring past a few inches away. They don't appreciate it violently.
"People complain that it is urbanising the countryside,"
Somewhat of an irony on places like Colinton - Balerno.
I'm sure there were a few people complaining about destroying rural life when they built the railway!
Though at least they were used to 'industry' as the Water of Leith already had mills - the railway 'caused' them to get bigger...
It's not just tarmac there - 'locals' also object to the idea of lights.
If you've every wondered why the tarmac runs out not long after coming off the canal - that's the bit Sustrans paid for. At various times it could have had money to do the rest, but...
Actually I am in two minds about tarmac for this path. It would no doubt increase speed (it can already be quite fast - which is fine if there are no wakers/dogs) so there would be a 'demand' for speed bumps and/or chicanes.
What IS needed is MAINTENANCE - especially the realisation the leaves fall every year and turn into mush unless cleared. I remember meet a 'walking for health" group about 4 years ago, just below the tunnel, who would have been enjoying themselves a lot more if they hadn't been worrying about the mud engulfing their shoes!
The path got scraped not long after - but it had taken several years to get in that state.
@Min
"I think you'll find that horses, like cyclists - do not appreciate speeding drivers roaring past a few inches away."
Yep, as I was saying - lots of reasons for horse and cycling interests to work together...
chdot: "One problem is that the bypass is also mostly the boundary between Edinburgh and Midlothian. City of Edinburgh Council is not keen on creating cross-boundary cycle routes because it considers that it's not 'value for money' due to the relatively small number of people that would use it compared with (for instance) MMW. All the more reason for some joined-up-policies on transport and tourism that don't stop at artificial borders."
All very true. You can understand Edinburgh's angle given that they have limited funds - those routes with highest actual and potential use are likely to get most money. The same is true for every council.
There is a similar problem for bus facilities etc.
This is one of the main reasons why the previous Scottish Govt (Lab/Lib) set up the Regional Transport Partnerships (RTPs) - to tackle cross-boundary investment which is important at a wider level but which is not a priority for each individual council - commuter bus & cycle routes into cities, park&rides, etc. And why it was such a tragedy that the SNP as one of their first acts removed all capital funding from the RTPs, giving it instead to councils to spend on anything (not necessarily even transport).
Our own local RTP, Sestran (not to be confused with Sustrans) had already set up a big cycling budget (admittedly after a fair bit of lobbying from spokes and others) - nearly £5m over a number of years for routes between Edinburgh and surrounding council areas. They had just spent the first year's allocation (some A8 and Midlothian improvements) when the RTP money was taken away by the new Scottish Government. Otherwise we would by now be well ahead with routes to Midlothian, the A90 route, and so on.
Moral - next May is Holyrood elections. Now is the time to email your MSPs asking if their party will in their manifesto include a promise to re-allocate some of the govt transport money to Regional Transport Partnerships for public transport and cycling projects. [could be easily funded by a reduction in the trunk roads budget!]
There is a lot of new tarmac going down on the lanes around Balerno (still rough patches but some nice new stuff). The worst bit remains at Thriepmur Reservoir but Old Newmills Road, a steep hill where I cracked my ribs sledging in the winter is good, down to railway crossing then up past apre-georgian farm (Gowanhill? ) it was white with green windows but is being majorly renovated, then all the way to back entrance to Heriot Watt, it cuts up very rough here as Uni tries to persuade you not to go in that way, then down to canal and in to Chesser. That is the route I took this lovely sunny morn but I have loads more less than interesting tales of the new tarmac around Balerno to bore you with. The Water of Leith path on the other hand is mud slide for horses only. p.s. do not vote tory as they are very pro-motorist without a doubt [I am off to track down More or Less on R4 it is a maths prog, apparently using words such as bike helmut deny-ers?!]
I should really say that my complaint about that new path is not so much that it's not very direct, it's that it has lots of junctions, turnings and road crossings.
Following on from the planning application chdot found for a Roslin to Leadburn cycle route, I was having a look at this page, and all the lovely maps therein:
http://www.midlothian.gov.uk/downloads/495/parks_gardens_and_open_spaces
Maps 10, 11 and 17 cover the route as far as Leadburn (which is on the Midlothian boundary). Map 17 is the most interesting. The "aspirational" route shown in it is different (and better) to that in the planning application.
It would be nice to think that the Map 17 version of the route would be the final one, but I suspect this predates the planning application which is possibly all just evidence that when the council gets down to it, they have to compromise a lot from their aspirational plans.
Map 5 has the aspirational route for the "sensible" off-road cycle path into Midlothian along the Loanhead Railway trackbed that comes with pre-built underpass for the Bypass. Some recent pics on the railscot website show that this is currently a muddy quagmire.
I'm not sure how far the rails still extend but they run for some distance beyond Gilmerton but not as far as Bypass. They could pay for some of the work by selling the rails for scrap!
Update - PW gangs have been out lifting the rails and sleepers this week;
They were still in situ about a month ago when I went up there with the camera and took some shots (it was about 25 years since a train had last rumbled down them). So is this clearance just to recover them from scrap value or are moves afoot to resurface this as a path?
According to Railscot, Network Rail's land ownership terminates at the bridge on the old backroad between Millerhill Village and Shawfair.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts