CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

East Lothian Paths Consulation

(87 posts)
  • Started 10 years ago by Schemieradge
  • Latest reply from Schemieradge

No tags yet.


123

  1. Dave
    Member

    Just because it's not very nice? Especially uphill with four lanes, traffic islands and vehicles constantly parked on the left, and speeds of 50mph or so.

    Try riding side by side having a conversation up the A70... not so much. WoL would be much more civil.

    I don't mind a good belt along the main roads to get my exercise to and from work, but I don't like it enough to do it unnecessarily or inflict it on SWMBO.

    It's pretty interesting stuff. I think we're clearly not car dependent since between us we do 150+ miles a week by bike, but then again, the fact that I can utter the words "second car" (even as a remote possibility) when we live *on* the WoL path might suggest otherwise :)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  2. crowriver
    Member

    It's pretty interesting stuff. I think we're clearly not car dependent since between us we do 150+ miles a week by bike, but then again, the fact that I can utter the words "second car" (even as a remote possibility) when we live *on* the WoL path might suggest otherwise :)

    If you ever decide to have children then I think it will go beyond uttering the words.

    It takes a huge effort of willpower not to use a car for *nearly everything* when you have a family, unless you don't own one at all.

    Which leads back to my earlier point (in threads passim) about car ownership leading to choices about where to live which are only practical due to car ownership, and which in turn necessitate the use of the car for journeys which in another location would be possible or even more practical on foot, bike or public transport.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  3. fimm
    Member

    So the question is, tarmac the Water of Leith or fix Lanark Road? Take Lanark Road down to one lane of traffic each way, speed limit 30, proper bike lanes with parked cars between the bike lane and the motorised traffic - there's loads of space for all that. Would you rather cycle that, or the WoL?

    (Somewhat off topic - though we're fairly off-topic anyway - but I wonder how the downhill bike lane would work... would there need to be a sign at the top; "Cyclists if you wish to descend at speed please use the traffic lane"?)

    Posted 10 years ago #

  4. Min
    Member

    The really interesting stuff on this thread is how closely the attitudes of some people towards horse riders match the attitudes of some non-cyclists towards cyclists!

    I don't think the path should be paved but well-drained cinder would be best. Mud is not good for horses either.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  5. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    ^^^ what Min said

    Posted 10 years ago #

  6. amir
    Member

    If there's space, it could be twin-tracked - a bit like by Dalkeith Campus

    Posted 10 years ago #

  7. chdot
    Admin

    "The really interesting stuff on this thread is how closely the attitudes of some people towards horse riders match the attitudes of some non-cyclists towards cyclists!"

    Perhaps, but I think the key issue is the extent to which horses would damage the surface making it worse for other users - including walkers.

    Again, drainage is the key. A well constructed path - properly looked after - may well be optimum in 'rural' locations, but in damp places tarmac may be more pragmatic/cost effective.

    A few years ago I was cycling up the WoL and came across a 'walking for health' group in about 2" of liquid mud (just below the tunnel of course). Don't think they were enjoying it.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  8. Min
    Member

    Perhaps, but I think the key issue is the extent to which horses would damage the surface making it worse for other users - including walkers.

    Earlier on in the thread it was claimed that there are hardly any horses anyway, suggesting that it is simple poor surface and lack of drainage that is causing the problem and not liquidising by the pitter patter of little (big) hooves. A better (but not tarmac) surface will get even less hoof damage.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  9. steveo
    Member

    So the question is, tarmac the Water of Leith or fix Lanark Road?

    Fixing Lanark road would be grand but ultimately that part of the WOL path is old railway no different to the NEPN; its a brownfield site whats the issue with tarmac? There are actual green fields at the other side of the river, you might even find people using for leisure not just dog walking.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  10. chdot
    Admin

    "whats the issue with tarmac?"

    On the WoL/Balerno path one issue is 'fear of increased speed'.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  11. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    Well I would think it's safe to assume that speeds would increase no?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  12. steveo
    Member

    Its as wide as the NEPN and the gradient isn't that steep that some wide barriers couldn't be put in place to reduce velocity. Any way doesn't matter way off topic.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  13. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I think the main WoL path from Slateford, the old railway trackbed, should be tarmacced. This would benefit walkers as well as cyclists. When I've walked up that way before it's been a combination of better bits of surface and quagmire, liberally interspersed with dog turds hiding under leaves.

    If it was surfaced it would be a very useful access to and from the western suburbs of Edinburgh, and there are still plenty of non-tarred sections that join onto it for those that demand to walk in mud.

    Most of the other old railways around Edinburgh have been surfaced and the sky didn't fall in.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  14. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "Most of the other old railways around Edinburgh have been surfaced and the sky didn't fall in."

    No it didn't, but if the fear is simply "Speeds will increase", then we can't say they won't. What has to be pointed out is that speeds don't mean the paths becomae dangerous; which in itself is difficult when we're saying we want 20mph on the roads, and have a go at organisations like SafeSpeed.

    It ain't easy walking the tightrope of competing messages as a cycle campaigner.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  15. Min
    Member

    No it didn't, but if the fear is simply "Speeds will increase", then we can't say they won't. What has to be pointed out is that speeds don't mean the paths becomae dangerous; which in itself is difficult when we're saying we want 20mph on the roads, and have a go at organisations like SafeSpeed.

    I don't think it is a competing message. The actual percentage of cyclists who will ride as fast as 20mph will be about the same as drivers who actually drive as low as 20mph = hardly any.

    It is just that there is a massive double standard applied to cyclists.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  16. PS
    Member

    Going back to the Longniddry/Haddington path, if horse riding is an important part of the local economy, the local community and path use (I suspect it may well be, given that most times I've cycled along the backroads east of Longniddry I've seen evidence of horses and their riders) and East Lothian wants to encourage increased cycling, then the answer is surely put half the width of the path to tarmac and half to well-drained cinders.

    It's been a while since I had a mud-encrusted ride (on my previously clean road bike, lured down the path from the tarmaced Haddington end, grrrrrr) so I can't remember how wide it is, but as an old railway line it must presumably be plenty wide enough for that?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  17. steveo
    Member

    Ach well since we're sticking with the other topic. Some work would be needed for velocity control, barriers and speed bumps of some description, not unprecedented and, if implemented correctly, not a hindrance. Relative speeds and physics takes care of the need for 20mph zones.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  18. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    "if horse riding is an important part of the local economy"

    Musselburgh racecourse supports several training stables, one at Cousland, adjacent to the Pencaitland Railway Path.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  19. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "I don't think it is a competing message. The actual percentage of cyclists who will ride as fast as 20mph will be about the same as drivers who actually drive as low as 20mph = hardly any.

    It is just that there is a massive double standard applied to cyclists."

    But it is, because we're talking about speeds on shared use paths, not cyclist speeds on the road. So...

    At present cyclists on the roads thinks drivers are too fast and want them slowed down for safety reasons;

    At present pedestrians on shared use paths think cyclists are too fast and want them slowed down.

    It's not a massive double standard at all, it's the most vulnerable facility user in each circumstance having a perception of the danger. Just because cyclists don't kill people on paths compared to drivers killing cyclists on the roads, doesn't mean those concerns aren't legitimate.

    As you pointed out above the attitude of some on the thread towards horse riders was reminiscent of the attitude of non-cyclists to cyclists. Surely by simply saying pedestrians are 'wrong' and we're not a danger that is an attitude of cyclists towards pedestrian concerns that is reminiscent of driver attitudes towards cyclist concerns?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  20. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "... but as an old railway line it must presumably be plenty wide enough for that?"

    Certainly is. But not then to ride (whether by horse or bike) side by side with someone on the same surface. And I'd think this is much much more a leisure route for both on which it's nice to ride side by side and chat...

    Posted 10 years ago #

  21. wingpig
    Member

    The non-tarmac path leading south from Dalmeny to Newbridge seems to cope well (23mm-tyre-compatibly) with rain despite being paved with a combination of mud, cinders and pine needles, but then most of it is tree-lined embankment. The WoL has trees but also lots of gloop-impermeable clayey-looking alluvium. What's this Longniddry-Haddington path like for being-on-an-embankment or being-lined-with-trees?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  22. chdot
    Admin

    "Musselburgh racecourse supports several training stables"

    Presumably not the 'leisure' sort of horses likely to use paths?

    There are common interests between cyclists and horse riders.

    Obviously speed and careless driving, particularly rural roads.

    Also things like (lack of) crossings of the city bypass.

    Horse interests were strong objectors to the Dalkeith bypass - cycle interests largely ignored too!

    Posted 10 years ago #

  23. Min
    Member

    Surely by simply saying pedestrians are 'wrong' and we're not a danger that is an attitude of cyclists towards pedestrian concerns that is reminiscent of driver attitudes towards cyclist concerns?

    I'm a pedestrian too, just not a cyclist-hating, motorspeed-defending one. They have a massive double standard towards cycling because they have no understanding of it. Just like most people have no understanding of horse riding.

    They just want it stopped so they can continue to speed in their cars and amble gently along the paths.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  24. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    @chdot, I was pointing out their economical significance. There are lots of stables serving leisure riding too. I can walk past three between here (Musselburgh town centre) and Whitecraig. There are horses in fields at Cousland (little ones) and Carberry Hill. I think horses are a much larger part of the economy of East Lothian than cycling.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  25. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "I'm a pedestrian too, just not a cyclist-hating, motorspeed-defending one"

    And I've got non-cycling, non-driving (non-even-having-a-licence) friends who walk absolutely everywhere in the city and worry about cyclists who are going too fast on shared use paths AND cars going too fast on the roads they're trying to cross. Where do they fit in?

    "They just want it stopped so they can continue to speed in their cars and amble gently along the paths."

    I get why the first thing is bad and is a thought-process we should counter. But ambling along paths? That's a bad thing for people to want to do?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  26. Min
    Member

    But ambling along paths? That's a bad thing for people to want to do?

    It is a bad thing to want to remove cycling from the roads you want to speed on AND the paths you want to amble on.

    It is a bad thing to want to prevent cycling from being even remotely competitive to driving to make it a simple choice between having your life put at risk or being able to ride only at walking pace.

    Where do they fit in?

    A very tiny little broom cupboard? They are probably not the ones making all the noise about cycling while not making any about car speeds.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  27. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Both the East Lothian paths (Haddington, Pencaitland) and the Water of Leith path were single-track railway, with passing loops at stations. Given that standard gauge width is only 4' 8.5" (1.44m), there's not actually as much pre-existing trackbed width as you might think.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  28. chdot
    Admin

    "I think horses are a much larger part of the economy of East Lothian than cycling."

    That's interesting - and good.

    In which case it's reasonable that 'horse interests' are responding (which is where this thread started) and might lead to some sensible considerations beyond 'we ride horses, we don't like tarmac' and 'we're (urbanish) cyclists and want tarmac'.

    The two 'sides' might even talk to each other and put joint pressure on ELC to go something good AND maintain it.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  29. crowriver
    Member

    They just want it stopped so they can continue to speed in their cars and amble gently along the paths.

    There is certainly an element of that, the "I can't stand cyclists" brigade who hold the same attitude when driving and going for a Sunday afternoon stroll on a sharted use path (having arrived there by car).

    Posted 10 years ago #

  30. Min
    Member

    Of course I don't know for sure that each person who complains about cyclists going "too fast" (how fast is too fast?) is also a speeding law-abiding motorist but I only know what the evidence is:-

    -Complains about motorists by cyclists.
    Ignored. Or if not ignored, the best we can hope for is that we will get a line drawn on the pavement which we are expected to ride along very slowly in case we scare pedestrians.

    -Complaints about cyclists by pedestrians. Wall to wall chicanes, speed bumps and police action.

    -Complaints about cyclists by motorists.
    We will get a line drawn on the pavement which we are expected to ride along very slowly in case we scare pedestrians. Police action.

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

123

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin