CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

"Save our Meadows arch from the jaws of extinction"

(50 posts)

No tags yet.


12

  1. Arellcat
    Moderator

    Dave, my point was less about exclusivity as noting that there are already (IMHO) sufficient routes for cyclists to use in the Meadows area to cover all potential through-journeys quite well.

    I do use the canal towpath frequently, on bike and on foot, and it often feels like walkers get a bum deal. JW is wider and doesn't have a metre of water to risk falling into, but I also don't see the benefit to making all paths shared use just because we can, unless we can also include demarcated lanes for cyclists and walkers (since not all cyclists seem to use their brakes); I don't feel under threat or "in the way" when I walk up MMW or LW, and I enjoy the quiet time free of whizzing cyclists when I walk from Melville Drive up to Bruntsfield Links.

    But on my earlier post about the bones, which I can't edit because it was more than an hour ago that I wrote it in a necessitated hurry, I would like to see the jawbones cleaned up and restored - not just as the relic from the exhibition, but as a reminder of a crueller age, my feelings on which this post is too narrow to contain - and so paradoxically I would also like to see them removed and destroyed for that same reason.

    I would actually rather see a stainless steel structure in the same vein as the Gateway Arch in St Louis; something akin to a modern take on the shape, themes and form, and a gateway to The Meadows. I would further like to see counterpart gateways at all the other entrances to The Meadows, each relevant to the foregoing names.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  2. ruggtomcat
    Member

    You just like welding ;)

    Id like to see them preserved, maybe coated in resin or something. Always been a very evocative landmark for me.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  3. Morningsider
    Member

    Dave - I never argued that "Jawbone Walk is too narrow for a bike and pedestrian to use at the same time" I said that "...it is too narrow to carry both cyclists and pedestrians safely". Obviously, Jawbone Walk is physically wide enough to accommodate bikes and pedestrians at the same time. As you will know, this is a busy pedestrian route and conflicts (i.e. potential accidents) can arise when bikes and pedestrians,often walking two or three abreast, heading in opposite directions and at different speeds have to pass each other.

    Perhaps I should expand on the "duty of care" idea. As I see it, there is a clear hierarchy of road users - HGVs/buses, cars/vans, cyclists and then pedestrians. Each class of user is more vulnerable than the previous, with pedestrians being the most vulnerable.

    In response to my stated concern regarding cycling on Jawbone Walk Chdot stated that "There are some on here who take a different view on the grounds of 'careful shared use'". The thing is, those who consider shared use appropriate are generally cyclists - I doubt many pedestrians are in favour of shared use in this location as there is a clearly marked and segregated alternative cycle route.

    Now, who should dictate what is the most appropriate use of Jawbone Walk - cyclists or inherently more vulnerable pedestrians. I think it should be the most vulnerable group who decides what is appropriate as they are more likely to suffer most in the event of any accident. The alternative is to allow the "stronger" road user to dictate terms to the more vulnerable - a dangerous precedent I would argue.

    Dave - I don't think anyone has accused you of being a lycra lout or of trying to kill toddlers or the elderly - but to dismiss the real concern caused by cyclists passing pedestrians at speed on these paths (even if it is slow by cycling standards) seems a bit inconsiderate.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  4. Dave
    Member

    Sorry, I was taking it as read that by width we refer to a safe width as opposed to a physical limit - I should have been clearer.

    I absolutely agree 100% that the best scenario for pedestrians is the eradication of bikes.

    There can be no question that any mixing of modes, in any context whatever, is to the disadvantage of the previous incumbents. This is why drivers want cyclists confined to lanes and facilities, why cyclists want traffic-free routes (which aren't strung across by pedestrians and their dog leads), and why pedestrians don't want cyclists around them.

    So, what we then must accept is the principle that it's OK to take exclusivity away from pedestrians, because this is what every single cycle facility does. Imagine how nice the Innocent or the Roseburn would be without bikes?

    Visually impaired people could get all the way from the Commonwealth Pool to Joppa, and from Leith to Murrayfield or Davidson's Mains without anything to worry about except others on foot.

    It's not even clear to me that the Roseburn in particular is any safer than the Jawbone Walk. The Jawbone is straight and has great sightlines. The Roseburn in several parts is narrower than the Jawbon with vision obscured - I've come close to impaling pedestrians / fellow cyclists several times, and I take the particular care (I should do - I'm one of the few people who not only complains of cyclists on shared use paths, but has actually been nearly killed by one - and has a Youtube video of the crash to prove it).

    Speeds on the Roseburn are also far higher. I can ride *up* the hill at 20mph which I can't imagine anyone doing at any point on the Jawbone. I daresay I could manage considerably faster coming the other way - 30 plus.

    Where's the campaign to ban bikes on the Roseburn, though? Even I think it would be a great step forward for pedestrians (although I obviously don't support it).

    It seems to hinge on some idea that MMW and Melville Drive are an equally good alternative to the Jawbone, so we can win "something for nothing" by hounding bikes off that stretch. But this point of view is false, as is simply evidenced by the continuous and high (all things considered) use of the Jawbone in preference, even though it has its downsides (like riding past the pavilion for the tricky join with the bottom of Marchmont Rd).

    Posted 13 years ago #

  5. mgj
    Member

    Pedestrian use of the Roseburn paths is nothing like as heavy as that in JW, and there are no convenient alternative cycle routes. Likewise, there is a requirement to dismount at the start of JW as the entrance is a pavement prohibited to cyclists; it is in any case narrow and bounded by fences on both sides. Pedestrians on Roseburn can see the blue shared use signs (where they still exist) and expect cyclists; legal or not, the existence of a large 'no cycling' sign will make most people assume that they can walk as they please, dander around etc without having to worry that they are stepping into the path of a cyclist. I guess the main question comes down to 'since the no cycling signs are there, is it worth pissing off a number of pedestrians in order to save 30 seconds or so on a commute'?

    Posted 13 years ago #

  6. wingpig
    Member

    That's if you do actually save thirty seconds - most direct route ≠ quickest route? By the time the lights at the Meadow Place-proximal crossing have changed you could be at Argyle Place waiting for that crossing instead, and going up MMW safely is likely to be significantly quicker than going up Jawbone safely.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  7. Dave
    Member

    Even if it saved five minutes, that wouldn't necessarily be a reason to take it - or if it cost five minutes either.

    You don't have to spend long looking at cyclists in the UK to come to the conclusion that all-out maximum speed is not very high up the list of priorities. If I had to try and pin down the airy-fairy I'd say it is the convenience and directness (not transit time) that appeals.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  8. cb
    Member

    I love getting the chance to check out on the map any new regular journey I have to make to optimise the route for minimal length. It can be surprising how often you find you have been going the 'long way round' because you never looked at the map.

    As it happens Jawbone is on my optimally short route into town (if I'm aiming to come in at George IV Bridge) - but that only counts on foot, mainly due to a footpath used earlier in the route (which I've never seen a bike on).
    If I'm on the bike then I'd use MMW, approaching via Marchmont Crescent.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  9. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Want to use both the cycle lane and the no-cycle lane?

    Need a bin wagon;

    Posted 13 years ago #

  10. Morningsider
    Member

    Kaputnik - Section 64(1)(a) of the Roads (Scotland) Act 1984 allows appliances and vehicles "for the construction, maintenance, improvement or cleansing of a road" to use footways, footpaths and cycle tracks. I assume "cleansing" covers bin lorries emptying litter bins.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  11. kaputnik
    Moderator

    @Morningsider - exactly! The law deems it legal for a lorry to drive down the footpath but - perhaps - not so for a pedal cycle...

    Posted 13 years ago #

  12. kaputnik
    Moderator

    It also struck me that this;

    has been like that since before the worst of the snow started at the beginning of Decembruary. So I've photoed and fixmystreet-ed it.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  13. Dave
    Member

    Here is a useful thought experiment. Suppose in 2003 the Council had removed the signs on the Jawbone to comply with the Act, in which case the evidence suggests it would basically be exactly the way it is today (perhaps with fewer grumpy pedestrians!).

    Anyway, imagine this were so. Now, how would you feel about a campaign by Friends of the Meadows, or whoever, to start shutting down bike access to such paths? All the same arguments could be made, as indeed they could be made for shutting down North Meadow Walk today, since cyclists can use Melville Drive instead (and it's actually quicker). Many I think would resist the shutting down, just as they want to resist opening up.

    I include myself in this, for sure. I would fight any plan to pedestrianise the canal, even though if it was currently pedestrianised, I could see myself fighting any plan to allow bikes... how crazy is that?

    There's probably a scientific term for such inertia, but we could call it "This is Edinburgh"-ism..?

    Posted 13 years ago #

  14. PS
    Member

    We fear change.

    Posted 13 years ago #

  15. kaputnik
    Moderator

    We fear change.

    That's why some of us ride singlespeeds

    Posted 13 years ago #

  16. kaputnik
    Moderator

    So I've photoed and fixmystreet-ed it.

    This has been fixed at some point over the week.

    3 months to fill in a hole that they dug themselves on the NCN? Good going...

    Posted 13 years ago #

  17. chdot
    Admin

    "This has been fixed at some point over the week."

    I wondered if this was done for yesterday's running race(?)

    Posted 13 years ago #

  18. chdot
    Admin

    "
    A bid to raise funds to conserve and restore the Jawbone Arch in the Meadows will be officially launched on Friday. Southside and Newington councillor Cameron Rose has set up a Facebook group to highlight the appeal.
    "

    http://guardian.co.uk/edinburgh/2011/may/04/sighthill-fire-jawbone-walk-appeal

    Posted 13 years ago #

  19. chdot
    Admin

    http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Heritage-body-buoys-up-whalebone.6818945.jp

    Posted 13 years ago #

  20. chdot
    Admin

    “

    Council officials said they are now “beyond reasonable repair” and should be “disposed of”.

    They said there was also “little appetite” for a replica to be made and sited in the Meadows where the original arch stood for over 120 years.

    However Mr Cruickshank, a local historian with a special interest in the bones for over 20 years, said there was a “very keen appetite that they should either be preserved and re-erected on site, or if that’s impractical that a replica should be made and erected where they had been”.

    “

    https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/edinburgh-historian-fighting-stop-jawbone-28729889

    #ThisIsEdinburgh

    Posted 9 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin