THAT RIE path « CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum

CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

THAT RIE path

(91 posts)

Started 14 years ago by chdot
Latest reply from Trixie

No tags yet.

12…4 Next »

chdot
Admin

You've probably seen

Anth's video

I hadn't been on that path for a while, so I thought I'd take a look on my way to see the icy Innocent

I decided not to video it (can't compete with Anth's tricks) as I knew it would be far from smooth, though in spite of the warning in the still above I wasn't prepared for how difficult/dangerous that edging makes it.

This path, and the steps (and 'cycle ramps'), has always been a joke, but now it's BEYOND A JOKE. (Location)

Individuals and organisations (including the Council and University of Edinburgh) have been trying for YEARS to get some improvements put in place. But those responsible - the hospital owner/operator (Consort Healthcare) - seem to want someone else to pay.

Perhaps these photos will make it clear what some of the problems are and why 'something must be done'...

It certainly seems to be a well used route - not surprising given the number of health caring people working on the site. Imagine how many more people might use this route if they weren't forced to practice their bunny-hopping skills (or lack of) every day.

UPDATE

I'm reminded that there was a fairly recent plan to spend £25K. (Which seems quite a lot for dealing with the basic problems of poor, poorly maintained, ramps.)

The Council and University were willing to pay half the cost (though I'm not sure that they should have to...) but NHS Lothian and Consort weren't!

Currently the only 'plan' is for the path to be improved when the Sick Kids is built in a few years time....

NOT GOOD ENOUGH

Posted 14 years ago #
Claggy Cog
Member

I work on the site, and most of the cyclists that I know who use this dismount at the top of the steps and walk down, and always walk up. It really is a joke and I really cannot see why there should EVER have been steps, if it had been ramp-like all the way the ascent/descent would never have been that significant in any case. It is not user friendly for pushchairs either, and you could never use a wheelchair on it. Craigmillar Castle Park the road that this supposedly cuts out is very narrow, cars travel at excessive speeds along it, and it is not cyclist friendly, but this path is not either, so your options from anywhere like Peffermill, Niddrie, Craigmillar, Duddingston towards Restalrig and Portobello, or if you come off the Innocent and come up Duddingston Park, are limited if you want to get to the RIE site this way. Are you certain also that the council do not have some responsibility for this....there is, as you probably know, a Bike Users Group (BUG) on the site and they are lobbying, as far as I am aware, to have changes/improvements made, and I think that it may have been the council they were in contact with, or else the Scottish Govt. If it is Consort, they are such a bunch of cheapskates, just want to take the rent which is exorbitant, and do nothing to improve the site or working conditions, they simply are not interested and will fudge the issue, employ delaying tactics or just fence-sit for so long in the hope that it will all go away.

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

I worked for one of the law firms that represented Consort in the PFI for the hospital (all done before my time!) and worked for a year in PFI.

Given the arguing you saw on an almost daily basis over simple things like lightbulbs and so on this path will be waaaaaaaaaaay down the list if it is Consort's responsibility.

PFI is great for getting things built in the first place (usually) but by god it doesn't half create problems once it's all in place.

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"this path will be waaaaaaaaaaay down the list if it is Consort's responsibility"

That's true, but after many years of largely ignoring the people who have complained, it's time it was closer to the top of the list.

There have been proposals (not sure who started the idea) for a new, less steep, alignment which would clearly be expensive and may be being used as a reason for not doing the more straightforward job of making proper, wider ramps (and removing the wooden edging).

Though in fact the simplest/best solution would probable be to convert about half the width of the steps into a shallow ramp and ignore the bits at the side.

P.s. Consort involves Balfour Beattie so they might know something about construction/civil engineering.

UPDATE

I'm reminded that there was a fairly recent plan to spend £25K. (Which seems quite a lot for dealing with the basic problems of poor, poorly maintained, ramps.)

The Council and University were willing to pay half the cost (though I'm not sure that they should have to...) but NHS Lothian and Consort weren't!

Currently the only 'plan' is for the path to be improved when the Sick Kids is built in a few years time....

NOT GOOD ENOUGH

Posted 14 years ago #
DdF
Member

It appears that the council and Uni have both agreed to their share of the 25k as chdot says, but Consort and NHS have not. However, the 25k project is apparently anyway only to do improvements around the bad areas, not to provide a really good facility.

There's a rumour that Consort(?) will quite soon apply to the council for permission to build a massive new car park (part of the existing one will be used for the new Sick Kids building, so the new car park needs built well in advance of that). This will be the chance for the Council to impose a condition that the car park only gets permission if hospital access and parking for cyclists is also up to standard - and they might well impose such a condition if there's enough pressure when the planning application comes forward.
Assuming we find out about it in time, Spokes will be notifying all our members who we know to work in NHS to put in personal objections to the planning application unless this is done. Hopefully others will do the same too!

Posted 14 years ago #
Min
Member

Everyone knows Consort are bar stewards so it is no big surprise that they will not pay a few coppers (to them). But you'd think the NHS would be keen to encourage staff and outpatients (in some cases) to keep healthy and cycle in.

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"
I have been contacted by Cllr Maureen Child regarding your concerns about the condition of the path at RIE.

I have written to the Chief Executive of NHS Lothian regarding this matter and I will be back in touch on receipt of his reply.

In the meantime, however, if you have any further queries regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Yours sincerely,

George Foulkes MSP
Member for the Lothians

"

Wonder what he wrote!

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

UPDATE 18.2.10

These councillors are taking an interest

Michael Bridgman <Michael.Bridgman@edinburgh.gov.uk>

Maureen Child <maureen.child@edinburgh.gov.uk>

Norma Hart <norma.hart@edinburgh.gov.uk>

Ian Murray <ian.murray@edinburgh.gov.uk>

Conor Snowden <Conor.Snowden@edinburgh.gov.uk>

Responses from MSPs

"
I have written to the Chief Executive of NHS Lothian regarding this matter and I will be back in touch on receipt of his reply.

George Foulkes MSP
"

"
Thank you for your recent email to Fiona Hyslop MSP. I will be sure to pass on the concerns you have to Ms Hyslop at her earliest convenience and I understand that her SNP colleague Dr Ian McKee MSP shall be replying to you on her behalf.
"

"
Thank you for your email. I completely agree and I will write a letter to Consort Healthcare and copy it to Edinburgh Council.

I will forward on any response.

Yours sincerely
Ian McKee
"

"
Mike Pringle MSP has written to James Barbour, Chief Executive of NHS Lothian regarding this issue and will be back in touch once he has received a response.
"

"
Thank you for your e-mail to Shirley-Anne Somerville MSP.

I understand that Ian McKee MSP will be responding.
"

"
Thank you for your recent email regarding the path from Craigmiller to the ERI. It is clear that in its current state it is not a convenient alternative at all.

I have written to Consort Healthcare as you requested and I will get back to you as soon as I have a reply.

Kind regards
GAVIN BROWN MSP
"

Posted 14 years ago #
Min
Member

Well users will be thrilled to hear that Something Has Been Done in the form of a few shovelfulls of soft sand being put down over the sludge the other day which immediately became tramlined with tyre tracks. Hurray..

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

Photo Please!

Posted 14 years ago #
Min
Member

Okay, here are the improvements..

Not quite treacherous enough I would say since I managed to get down with only mild terror and no loss of limb. A good dose of rain will soon sort that out.

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

You. Are. Kidding.

This is what they consider an adequate solution????

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"You. Are. Kidding.

This is what they consider an adequate solution????"

WELL

I have just got a copy of the letter sent by Consort to an MSP.

It's paper so it'll take me a few minutes to type.

(It contains some classics worth waiting for.)

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

I'm looking forward to this...

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

(From Consort Healthcare (ERI) Limited - and I thought it was officially the RIE these days.)

"

Footpath Linking Craigmillar to ERI

Thank you for your letter of the 19th February enquiring about the condition of the footpath from Craigmillar to the Royal Infirmary.

We have recently undertaken an assessment of the footpath as there has been deterioration particularly since the bad weather over the winter months.

The footpath (not a cycle path) you are referring to was designed and built as such as part of the project facility for which we received planning permission and it is our responsibility to maintain.

When the weather has improved we shall be undertaking our planned maintenance to repair any damage and we shall be installing signage asking cyclists to dismount as they are currently damaging the culverts.

As you will be aware we have had requests from various parties to install a cycle path and this has been discussed on site by, Consort, NHS Lothian,The University of Edinburgh and the City of Edinburgh Council. The city of Edinburgh Council did undertake a topographical survey a few years ago to see if the gradient of the footpath could be reduced but the proposed cost at that time (approx £140,000) was deemed to be cost prohibitive as the travel survey undertaken demonstrated minimal use of the footpath at that time.

Currently there are many discussions underway over the planned changes to the site, namely as a result of the reprovision of the Royal Hospital for Sick Children to the Little France site.

As a result there will be many changes to the road infrastructure and we are planning (with our colleagues) to review cycling provision on the site. As you so rightly we must all be encouraging people, particularly staff to walk and cycle to work where possible.

When I have more details as the design for the RHSC develops I shall be happy to write again to inform you of the proposal.

However, should you wish to discuss further at this stage do not hesitate to contact me.

"

WELL -

What "culverts".

"the travel survey undertaken demonstrated minimal use of the footpath at that time"

Wonder if that means by cyclists or anyone? Not really surprising given how bad it is.

Posted 14 years ago #
Min
Member

So at what point, exactly, does the cyclepath become "not a cycle path"?

And why does the gradient need to be reduced?

******s

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

Riddle me this...

If, as the letter seems to suggest, this is a 'footpath', the suggestion being that bikes shouldn't be ridden on it, erm, then why is there a shared use sign for it? Hmmm.

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&source=hp&q=edinburgh&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=Edinburgh,+United+Kingdom&gl=uk&ei=teqgS7PYHIyTjAeJzNjkDQ&ved=0CBIQ8gEwAA&ll=55.926858,-3.138549&spn=0,359.980795&t=h&z=16&layer=c&cbll=55.926989,-3.138558&panoid=MGI_M33EUBKhH0R9dDy1lg&cbp=12,66.83,,1,14.77

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

That sign is at the Craigmillar end. It would be interesting to check on the other end (I can't remember from doing the video, and it's not clear on my clip, and Streetview doesn't wander round the back there).

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"why is there a shared use sign for it?"

THAT is on the Council's part of the path - you remember the one they had to build because they failed to close Craigmillar Castle Road as originally planned.

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"And why does the gradient need to be reduced?"

Perhaps to comply with the DDA for wheelchairs....

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

Well someone should tell Sustrans as well, since their mapping shows it as an off road path all the way, not just the bit as far as the hospital land. AND there are NO (or certainly weren't) any signs to tell you that it had STOPPED being a shared use path.

What an utterly ridiculous position.

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

"the travel survey undertaken demonstrated minimal use of the footpath at that time"

There might be a reason for that - poor path, used little, perhaps?

"a topographical survey a few years ago to see if the gradient of the footpath could be reduced"

Seriously, why? Further up the path, on the council land, it's steeper. You can walk up if you don't feel up to cycling, but going down you could do it far easier without the steps and the gradient doesn't matter.

"The footpath (not a cycle path) you are referring to was designed and built as such as part of the project facility for which we received planning permission"

Hmmm, that planning permission should be available online...

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

I assume the "culverts" are those narrow bits of concrete at the side (see photos) which were put in FOR cyclists.

No doubt Consort will argue that they are 'for cyclists to wheel their bikes on' and the extra weight of the rider is causing the damage.

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"Hmmm, that planning permission should be available online..."

Sadly no.

There was no "online" then.

ALSO I seem to remember at that time 'the public' could only inspect (for free) pending planning apps.

The Council has investigated several times to find if there were any "conditions" that could be enforced.

Er, no.

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

I'll bet they say the culverts are actually for drainage...

Posted 14 years ago #
chdot
Admin

"I'll bet they say the culverts are actually for drainage..."

Probably.

But I'm 99% sure they were put in for bicycles - I think after the stepped path was put in.

Posted 14 years ago #
Min
Member

"That sign is at the Craigmillar end. It would be interesting to check on the other end (I can't remember from doing the video, and it's not clear on my clip, and Streetview doesn't wander round the back there)."

There is no sign at the hospital end. Part way down the steep concreted bit there is a sign telling cyclists to dismount at the barrier. There is no barrier.

Posted 14 years ago #
Wilmington's Cow
Member

What about the white lines there?

;)

Posted 14 years ago #
Min
Member

Posted 14 years ago #
DdF
Member

There is/was another opportunity to put pressure over this, through the current planning application for an 815-space car park at the NRIE. A circular about this was sent to all spokes members known to work in health, and I've just put it here - I know of several people working at NRIE who have put in an objection. The developers will probably argue the path isn't relevant to this application, but the new Scottish Planning Policy gives some arguments on the other side [some in the circular]. See the short article on p6 of Spokes 106 and for the full document go here. It also keeps up the profile of the issue (or should I say scandal).

Unfortunately the date for objections has now passed, but anyone feeling strongly about this could ask your councillors to raise the matter now and to support them when the car park application goes to Committee for decision [expected 08/06/2010].

Posted 14 years ago #