CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years 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.
I recently saw a person pootling around town who had put their bike lights on a little early, and i was thinking, ah! forward thinking! good!
only to realise after a second that they'd put both red and white lights on the front of their bike. I've seen this from time to time, and don't get it.
Does anyone know why the spur from Silverknowes out to Barnton wasn't included in the purchase of the Norther Railways? Or perhaps it was and the council chose to dispose of it.
Various possible reasons. My hypothesis is that the railway always owned the branch from Silverknowes Road to Barnton but disposed of it in stages, and LRC was unable (or unwilling) to develop the remaining section.
Barnton Station, immediately north of the Barnton Park Hotel, was the first to close in the 1950s I think, and when that happened the wayleave west of Cramond Road South became redundant. The western half became the houses on the north side of Barnton Park View which was then just starting to be built. Later on, the eastern part became nos.1 to 11 Barnton Avenue when the Barntongate Nursery was sold for housing; and the middle section became the driveway to the Royal High School.
But the railway from Silverknowes Road to Cramond Road South wasn't all lifted; it was singled because the goods station was still in use. The goods station closed in the 1970s and the Safeway was built there (now, Tesco Metro). I have a vague feeling that it was part of the planning application that the supermarket carpark would not provide official continuation of the cycle path. In the mid-90s that path was still just a muddy track. But by then the alternative route – what we all know as route 1/76 – was already established.
It is also possible that LRC chose not to develop the supermarket section because the exit onto Cramond Road South was too close to the main junction, and Cars Must Not Be Held Up By Pesky Cyclists Who Just Put Themselves In Danger Anyway.
That stupid chicane gate onto Cramond Road South is therefore a constant reminder of what could have been. Heck, what could have been was a dead straight cycle path that went all the way to Whitehouse Road. Heck, what could have been was a railway, or tram, that served the northwestern part of Edinburgh.
WELL
(Not sure if this is actually true)
“
Most schemes of this nature are part funded by the Scottish Government Agency ‘Sustrans’.
“
https://www.snapsurveys.com/wh/siam/surveylanding/interviewer.asp
Currie library has an exhibition next week of photographs of the WoL Path before it was a cycle path (shared with others), i.e. The Balerno Branch Line
Colinton library also will have a model of the railway as it was in Colinton.
My discussions with the Be Bright Be Seen people continue. Like I said earlier in the thread, I'm keen to get free stuff for BUG members at my work and to encourage them to ride a bike through the winter, but I'm having to work harder than I think I should have to to temper the victim blaming tone of the messaging. The latest I've sent back for rework is an animated GIF that shows a car passing a bike in the dark. The car headlights are clearly shown as on and lighting up the road, but the bike is shown only as a silhouette with no lights on it, and no reflectors that light up as the car lights hit it.
Can anyone see where this might go wrong if I post it on our internal car-friendly social media platform? Why do I have to point this out to the expensive (presumably) consultants that council is using for this project?
P.S. When I say 'reflectors' on the bike, I'm talking about the legally-mandated rear red reflector and amber pedal reflectors. I don't have an opinion about the reflectives on the person on the bike (well, I do, but it's not relevant to my complaint here!)
@Greenroofer - that particular gif from the council is already generating exactly the sort of response you'd expect from the usual corners of the internet. It get that it puts the onus on the vehile driver that no matter that a bike may not have lights, you still need to be looking out for them and others, however it does with the gif just make a problem.
the bike is shown only as a silhouette with no lights on it, and no reflectors that light up as the car lights hit it
The Be Bright Be Seen people I'm working with are aware of my concerns about unconscious (or conscious, or confirmation) bias, but I've yet to see the visuals. I expect they may be not unlike Greenroofer's, if we are working with the same consultancy.
Last year I designed my own posters that featured only bikes and pedestrians. It's tricky to 'encourage' people to go beyond the legal requirements, while also explaining the legal requirements.
@Arellcat - my interactions are with a graduate travel planner called Sam... He (and I'm sure it's a 'he') is also acutely aware of my concerns about bias.
An approach that came to mind while coming upon yet another totally invisible person on foot on the towpath last week was that it's about courtesy. You don't need to wear reflectives when you're 'prey' on foot or on bike, but if you choose to, it makes easier the job of the person who is 'predator' in the relationship. So it's thoughtful. However it doesn't absolve them of any responsibility for looking out for you.
I am grateful to the people on foot on the towpath who wear reflectives, as it make it easier for me.
This. Entirely this.
Edit: I have visual(s). I spent a bit of time this afternoon tidying them and adding local info, then lost heart and decided to update my own posters. Sadly I was underwhelmed by some of the other supplied material as well.
I complimented a dog owner on their highly visible dog lead the other day and then wondered if dog owners get annoyed about cyclists who don't look out properly for non hi-vis dogs ... It was nice to be able to clock in seconds that the dog was connected to the owner though!
Thread drift - steering it back on track (!) slightly :)
There are some new info boards around Drylaw / Red Bridge on the NEPN - I've not had time to stop and read them yet but the one by the Red Bridge is about railway lines. When I'm not running late for work I'll stop and take a photo of the boards.
Wouldn't wait too long to read them, can't imagine they'll survive the weekend.
@LivM Did this today. The noticeboard has a history of the railways. Also these two paragraphs:-
Developing the cycling infrastructure
In 1981 the Lothian Regional Council bought the North Edinburgh disused railway from British Rail. This helped to create a fantastic leisure facility connecting the area with a safe, traffic-free route into the city centre and to Leith. The cycling campaign group Spokes, that only formed years earlier, had been mounting pressure on the council to include cycling in the transport policies.
With the support of Spokes, cycling and walking became more prominent on the council’s agenda and the city saw developments in the cycling infrastructure. So much so that in 1983, after a two year lobbying effort, Sustrans was appointed to investigate further cycle routes. Today Sustran, Spokes, City of Edinburgh Council and other local campaign groups continue to work to improve access to active forms of travelling.
I've posted pictures on Spokes FB.
@steveo - only a little painted graffiti
Some ‘before’ photos -
https://flickr.com/photos/117983829@N03/sets/72157643950735923
Great shots. Always like to see how the trains just barreled through granton squar. The odd Austin Maxi, no other cars
Lovely. So much gas back in those days.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts