"Gembo [quite pointedly] What are you up to?"
If they're still there on your way home PLEASE say "Evenin' all", unless there's a more apposite local equivalent. Is "'ello 'ello 'ello" an official police cliché up here or just down south?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Commuting
Today's rubbish canal cycling
(144 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
I've said before the canal is a miserable place to be on foot, but its rarely because of out and out speed, close passes, incessant bell ringing and general rude behaviour. All things which are difficult to police, mainly because they're legal and realistically not that unsafe.
I hate to be that guy, but is really nothing better for old bill to be doing.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“is really nothing better for old bill to be doing”
Well there always is.
Problem here is Police seem to have a fixed view of ‘problem’ - speed.
Even odder (according to gembo) is that ‘under 15mph’ is OK.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I cycled along the canal for a fair distance for the first time on Tuesday last. For the most part a pleasant experience. Being a newbie I at first negotiated the bridges verrrry slowly until I noticed cyclists sensibly pinging their bells on approach. After that I pinged by bell before negotiating the bridges verrrry slowly. It was late afternoon not quite heavy cycle commuting time, a moderate amount of foot traffice, dogs off leads, swans and boats on the watter. I wasn't in a hurry so didn't mind not building up a 'too fast' speed. And ++ to the point if you don't have some sort of odometer on your ride it all comes down to the bicyclist's own feeling of how fast they are going, safety-wise or otherwise.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I'm still shaking my head at the 15mph thing. That would be me going full pelt on my leccy bike along there. Not a chance that's safe or considerate if there's ped traffic.
Posted 5 years ago # -
>walkers to walk on the right
Eh? When walkers are on the right, that's when the whole system breaks down, everyone should keep left.
Nothing more annoying than someone walking on the right (your left) towards you with a few cyclists coming towards you on your right and both you and pedestrian having to stop to wait for them all to pass, vs slowing to walking pace when behind a pedestrian walking on the left waiting for other side's walkers/pedestrians to pass.
If everyone keeps left it works amazingly down the towpath
It's far too busy at rush hour to have different modes on different sides of the path, no one would move.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Not sure left is the side for pedestrians , It may be more usual to walk on the right, for example when see video of crowds on bridges wobbly bridge in London etc it appears more usual to walk on the right.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Right is right.
Same as a country road with no pavement - so you are seen by cars and can see cars coming. Pretty sure it was in the highway code as I grew oop in t' country.
Cyclists have to pass the pedestrian by moving to the right as they can see if there is another pedestrian walking with their back to them and then must slow down (and tailgate the pedestrian walking in the same direction as the bike as they may be oblivious to what's behind them, headphones or deaf) or stop to allow the pedestrian to passPosted 5 years ago # -
Left or right?
If only it was so simple.
“If everyone keeps left it works amazingly down the towpath”
Well yes IF everyone does and there aren’t people coming the other when you are wanting to overtake.
“Same as a country road with no pavement”
Good advice for a country road.
No guarantee that it keeps people safe, at least cars will generally keep to the left.
Point is, towpath is multiuser. Multi-types-of-user. Some better ‘behaved’ than others.
Realistic it’s not fit for purpose, with more than a trickle of users, IF anyone thinks that the primary purpose is unrestricted transit, at a ‘reasonable’ pace, by people who choose to use bikes.
There will NEVER be a time when everyone keeps left (or right).
Use it, expect random, or go elsewhere.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Posted 5 years ago # -
Back in the day I used to bimble to the 'duct and then light the afterburners as the citizens thinned.
There was a guy used to hook it into town of a morning flat out on tri bars and I hope Plod cuff his ear if he's still at it.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Oh and ask walkers to walk on the right to see oncoming traffic"
Walkers don't need to see the traffic. Walkers are the traffic.
The only reason we are told to walk on the right on roads is because we are expected to get out the way. After all you can't expect the otherwise competent motorist to chose between your safety and their speed.
Being shared space there is no legal basis (highway code or legislative) for pedestrians or cyclists to travel on any specific side. I agree with toomanybikes though if it is busy enough that sides need to be taken everyone should stick left and go with the flow. This allows overtaking when there is sufficient space and doesn't force anyone to stop and wait for people to clear.
Are there any specific offences which only a cyclist/pedestrian could commit on the tow path? Or is having a dog not under close control the only user specific offence?
Posted 5 years ago # -
“Back in the day I used to bimble to the 'duct and then light the afterburners as the citizens thinned.”
Evenings used to be good - all the way to Tollcross.
But now many more people are travelling actively.
Isn’t that what ‘we’ want?
Posted 5 years ago # -
“Back in the day I used to bimble to the 'duct and then light the afterburners as the citizens thinned.”
I got over taken by a runner one fine evening such was my bimble! Not sure how I managed to stay upright.
Posted 5 years ago # -
To be clear - the main problem is that the canal is a) lovely and b) the only safe way to head west to the office parks.
If Edinburgh was to build a city-wide network of level green active travel paths on stilts we could have a party instead of getting radared by the boys in black.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Certainly a problem of too little space for too many people.
I gave up cycling along the canal from Harrison Park to Craiglockhart in the morning and took Slateford Road instead. At least everyone was going the same way and I wasn't a couple of feet from a body of water.
@IWRATS - agree, but where would that level green active travel path actually run? Assuming you could make a path along any given road?
Posted 5 years ago # -
And the right vs left thing for pedestrians. People are absolutely certain about right vs left. I am absolutely certain that in a wider shared space eg the NEPN that walkers stay on the right, so that cyclists coming up behind won't startle them. However other people are absolutely certain that everyone should be going the same way. I can't see this ever being settled.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Seems sensible to face oncoming. On the road, the Highway Code says:
"Rule 2If there is no pavement, keep to the right-hand side of the road so that you can see oncoming traffic. You should take extra care and be prepared to walk in single file, especially on narrow roads or in poor light keep close to the side of the road.
It may be safer to cross the road well before a sharp right-hand bend so that oncoming traffic has a better chance of seeing you. Cross back after the bend."
Posted 5 years ago # -
@Rosie. Just ride along the NEPN.
I don't have any vested interest in the answer, but as someone who walks and cycles up the NEPN pretty much every day it is very obvious to me which side makes things much easier for both parties....left. I actually came to this conclusion after I had a number of unpleasant near head-ons from bikes whilst on foot & I realized that walking against the flow was the problem.
The NEPN is not wide enough to guarantee a safe pass when a bike overtakes a pedestrian with someone coming the other way. This leaves you with the problem of where the bike is supposed to go in the face of the oncoming foot-jockey. It is just so much easier to tuck in behind while waiting for a gap. Based on experience,I am amazed that there is any doubt.Posted 5 years ago # -
Amir. But a shared path is not the same as a road. I very much doubt that when that was put in the HC they gave the slightest consideration as to whether it was appropriate for a path. As someone above says, that advice is predicated on the fact that the pedestrian will step out of the way if the oncoming car can't overtake.
Posted 5 years ago # -
>"Well yes IF everyone does and there aren’t people coming the other when you are wanting to overtake."
No if people are coming the other way, that's exactly when it works, because you slow down to walking pace and everyone keep moving vs having both the oncoming pedestrian and cyclist stop to avoid colliding.
>"Use it, expect random, or go elsewhere."
Or use it, hope for order, disappointedly but courteously navigate chaos, and don't go elsewhere because the parallel main roads are miserable.
It's also frustrating when out running on the paths on the left side when right side runners are oncoming, because you have to move out to the right and worry about being cycled into from behind, rather than just flowing in traffic.
You walk on the right on roads so you can jump out of the way if needed, you should never have to jump out of the way on the shared use paths.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Seems sensible to face oncoming"
The downside is what happens when peds see oncoming. If the ped is sanguine enough to stay right, possibly all is fine. Many blindly dive to the other side of path at first glimpse, possibly into a bimbling*/flying* cyclist (*delete as applicable).
Which makes me think all foot/cycle traffic on left by default would be best, and overtakers take the responsibility and culpability that normally goes with such action. All utterly unenforceable of course.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“No if people are coming the other way, that's exactly when it works, because you slow down to walking pace and everyone keep moving vs having both the oncoming pedestrian and cyclist stop to avoid colliding.”
Can’t really disagree with that, but I was writing in the context of this thread where there is an assumption that some people won’t slow down ‘enough’, which is why the police have got involved today.
There really is no chance of instigating a ‘system’ where people will all go on the left or the right.
My binary comment of ‘get used to it or go elsewhere’ really relates to those people who think that they should not be impeded and are not willing to slow down without feelings of annoyance.
I accept that the parallel roads are hardly an alternative to be relished by most people so it’s perhaps a question of deal with the current realities and hope/campaign for better.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"There really is no chance of instigating a ‘system’ where people will all go on the left or the right."
Considering how many people still insist on walking in the marked cycle parts of both Leith Walk and the meadows, I agree 100%.
I very rarely use the canal path, but when I do, I find myself slowing to walking speed and saying "excuse me" to pass anyone, and going at walking speed under the bridges.
When there's nobody around, I'll go at maybe 10-15 mph.Posted 5 years ago # -
Literally right next to where the officers are standing, there is a car parked on the pavement, close to a hedge. It almost certainly looks like a wheelchair nor double child buggy would get past without walking on to the road:
https://twitter.com/edd1e_h/status/1032990343971700736
But hey ho, let's ignore everyday motoring "taking all the space"...
When will @EdinPolSW "encourage" drivers not to park on the pavements (right next to where they are standing)? HOW MUCH PAVEMENT BLOCKING IS TOO MUCH BLOCKING? #sharethespace (not when it's a pavement)
Posted 5 years ago # -
I don't think you can instigate a perfectly observed system, but I do think "keep dogs on Leads" and "keep left" signs would go a long way to reducing conflict. Not sure what signs would help for cyclists behaviour "use that bell" and "overtake with care" maybe? The latter is uselessly vague though.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The cyclist dismount signs are often ignored would keep left be any more successful.
Posted 5 years ago # -
What would the rate of dismounting over the aquaduct be with no signs? Id wager far lower.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I'd wager not. I'd say most people make a risk-based decision about riding across the aqueduct, rather than being directed by the sign. All the sign does is generate conflict. If the sign said. "Cyclists MUST give priority to pedestrians. Keep left. Ride across at your own risk" it wouldn't generate anything like as much conflict. Scottish Canals have never responded to my question about whether the sign had any force in law.
As a regular towpath commuter I ride across at commuting times, as do the vast majority of other riders. On a sunny Sunday afternoon I'd walk across, as do the vast majority of other riders.
As to the general question of keep left, I am certain that when the Council were considering the new signs about courteous behaviour for shared-use paths that appeared recently, one of the options was sign saying 'Travel on the left, pass on the right', aimed at all path users.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Backing up the thread a bit to The Polis. I think he meant that if you were cycling At 15 mph and encountered a dog or a child or some such erratic specimen you could brake and avoid but if you were up at 18 mph or 20mph then you would struggle to avoid conflict.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
