Cycling on the Promenade

Post by **wangi** » 05 Oct 2006, 22:17

Yawn. Tar all with the same brush etc etc... Remember all car owners are evil too

Wangi. Esplanade Terrace.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 13:41

Time to resurrect that old chestnut in today's EN Letters Page:

Accidents just around corner on Porty prom

I would like to point out that on a number of occasions I have been almost knocked down by cars on Portobello High Street. I demand therefore that all cars are banned. Also, some dogs foul the Promenade so I want them banned as well.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 12 May 2007, 17:57

And I would like to point out that I use the Prom nearly every day and I can confirm that instances of irresponsible cycling are on the increase despite the no cycling signs on nearly every lamppost. If cars ignored 'no cars' signs, Bob, I'm sure you be one the first to start complaining. What's the difference?

Post by **wangi** » 12 May 2007, 19:15

The signs were erected without any consultation, and totally go against what another arm of the council's aiming to do (see http://www.edinburghcorepaths.org/). Additionally there are still plenty of other signs which give the impression that cycling is ok on the Prom (which to be specific it is on half of it).

The council should be wholeheartedly promoting cycling, including cycling on Portobello Promenade. Especially with all the local road works and the state of Portobello High Street - this "car park" is very dangerous for cycling along (especially the narrow section East of the crossroads).

As someone who cycles daily along the Prom I acknowledge that there are irresponsible cyclists - please challenge them, as I do. (and likewise cut any of those bloody extendible dog leads on sight)

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 19:25

Poppy, I'm just trying to put the issue into perspective. Thousands of pedestrians are killed each year by car drivers. How many are killed, or even injured, through being struck by cyclists?

I'm not disputing the fact that there is a problem with irresponsible cycling on the Promenade. However, I do not support a blanket ban on cycling. Generations of kids have learned to cycle on the Prom, including my own, and responsible cycling is something we should be encouraging for all sorts of reasons.

The current situation is ridiculous. There is obviously no will on the part of the police to enforce the ban yet responsible cyclists are made to feel like criminals. I would like to see the 'No Cycling' signs replaced with signs that say 'Responsible cyclists welcome'.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 12 May 2007, 19:49

I'm not saying cyclists should be banned from the Prom, but there irresponsible ones do present a danger of injury and I understand the fears that the writer of that letter has. She is entitled to her opinion, surely? Anyway, Bob, I thought from a previous post of yours that at least one of your children took her first solo ride in Brighton Park?!

And you try speaking to a cycllist speeding along the Prom, head down, often with iPod plugged in! I'm afraid I cannot run that fast!!

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 20:11

Of course she is entitled to her opinion. This is a question that has been debated many times at CC meetings and I think we always come to the same conclusion. Although there are one or two hard-liners who insist that the Promenade should only be for walkers, I think that most people recognise that the problems are caused by a very small percentage of cyclists and that it would be unfair to deny the responsible majority the pleasure of cycling along the Promenade.

That's why I think the 'No Cycling' signs should go. Let's acknowledge that the Prom is a great recreational space for everyone and, as wangi suggests, challenge the relatively small number of anti-social people who cause the problems. And responsible cyling, in my opinion, includes having the sense to dismount when the Prom is particularly busy.

And you are right Poppy, both my kids actually learned to cycle in Brighton Park before I let them loose on the Prom.

Do you agree with my idea for changing the signs?

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 12 May 2007, 20:48

Bob Jefferson wrote: Do you agree with my idea for changing the signs?

Change or remove?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 21:04

Change from 'No Cycling' to 'Responsible Cyclists Welcome' or something along those lines.

I'm not suggesting that this in itself will solve the problem of inconsiderate cycling, but neither do I think it would exacerbate the problem. What it would underline is that we are a tolerant community and acknowledge that everyone has a right to enjoy the Prom so long as they respect the rights of others.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 21:10

Btw, do you realise that we have been debating this issue, on and off, since August 2003? I had forgotten all about the online poll we held.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 12 May 2007, 21:23

Bob Jefferson wrote:Change from 'No Cycling' to 'Responsible Cyclists Welcome' or something along those lines.

I'm not suggesting that this in itself will solve the problem of inconsiderate cycling, but neither do I think it would exacerbate the problem. What it would underline is that we are a tolerant community and acknowledge that everyone has a right to enjoy the Prom so long as they respect the rights of others.

The bottom line is that irresponsible people will be irresponsible whatever signs are there (or are not). Much like dog owners who ignore the signs re dog shit! Or motorists exceeding the speed limit. Etc.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 21:26

Accepted. So, given that, do you agree with my suggestion?

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 12 May 2007, 21:45

Bob Jefferson wrote:Accepted. So, given that, do you agree with my suggestion?

Perhaps. But I find these cheesy signs like "Somewhere Welcomes Careful Drivers" ..erm... cheesy. And as I've said, I doubt it would deter the bad apples who don't give a monkey's whether the community is all nicey-nicey.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 12 May 2007, 21:50

Well obviously we are only going to be nicey-nicey to the responsible cyclists and we are going to thrash the living daylights out of the irresponsible ones. Tolerant to a point, that's my point.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 12 May 2007, 22:41

Well said Wangi. As usual a few screw it up for everyone.

And as for the letter in the Evening News - if the author feels the pavement and prom are unsafe, she should walk with her children in the middle of road as the traffic hardly moves anyway.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 13 May 2007, 18:07

Maybe we need bike wardens to patrol the Prom handing out on the spot fines for speeders.

From the cyclists' point of view, I was on the No. 21 on Thursday morning and there was a cyclist coming round the roundabout just ahead of the bus. The bus driver must have seen him because he was in front of the bus but didn't slow down and clipped the guy with the mirror. It was sheer luck that the poor bloke kept his balance but he looked very, very shaken. The driver very kindly shouted abuse at him

. If I was him it would be the Prom for me on Friday.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 14 May 2007, 17:13

In these days of increasing childhood obesity, Towerbank is up with the best with regard to the high percentage of pupils who walk, cycle, rollerblade or scoot to school, rather than be transported by car. It is no co-incidence that the school is ideally situated next to the Prom.

I have walked or cycled my children to school along the Prom for many years and I think it is brilliant to see hordes of people making their way under their own steam - whatever method each individual chooses. In my experience it has all been very harmonious.

The health benefits are obvious but many of the older primary children are trusted to cycle to school without their parents and the safety of the Prom plays a major role in this, as I am sure that most would not be allowed to cycle via the road. Children keeping healthy and becoming more independent seems like a great result to me.

To stop cycling on the Prom because of the minority who do abuse it would deny many people these benefits.

paulw · Post by **paulw** » 04 Jul 2007, 10:53

All cyclists on the prom are a hazard. I have seen collisions between responsible cyclists and responsible pedestrians on a few occasisons. These things are unnavoidable. People walking along the prom can stop and change direction at any time, particularly when looking after small children or dogs. Cyclists do not tend make much noise and often travel at speed. The lack of a cyclepath does not negate the need to protect pedestrians on the footway, especially when the restriction is already in place.

When my son is old enough to get out of his pram and use the prom i don't want to be forced to take positive action against any cyclist that puts him in danger.

Post by **wangi** » 04 Jul 2007, 11:00

Or...

All drivers on the road are a hazard. I have seen collisions between responsible motorists and responsible pedestrians on a few occasions. These things are unavoidable. People walking along the pavement can stop and change direction at any time, particularly when looking after small children or dogs. Motorists may have lapses in concentration and often travel at speed.

When my son is old enough to get out of his pram and use the pavement i don't want to be forced to take positive action against any motorist that puts him in danger.

Yeah?

Post by **wangi** » 04 Jul 2007, 11:01

BTW, I'm the first to get pissed off with cyclists, and I cycle daily along the prom. This morning I avoided the Prom because of the four cyclists who zoomed past me at the start of it...

paulw · Post by **paulw** » 04 Jul 2007, 11:25

Agree. I would add however that motorist vs cyclist/pedestrian when on the roadway is a risk that society in general accepts. (designated cycle paths and pedestrian crossings aside). The roadway in that sense is a shared area. This is where is differs from the prom.

To completely contradict myself i am really aiming my vitriol at the speeding, hog the middle of the road, cyclists, not the slow, will be the one to move, give a wide berth types.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 04 Jul 2007, 13:55

paulw wrote:All cyclists on the prom are a hazard.

Disagree I'm afraid.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 04 Jul 2007, 17:14

At a recent community council meeting Inspector Ward said that, as far as he was aware , the restriction on cyclists using the prom had no legal status and was unenforceable. He'd looked into it and found nothing to back it up. The police could stop people if riding in a dangerous manner but nothing more. Maureen Child was sure it was a genuine legal restriction and said she'd look into but the subject's not come up since.

promqueen · Post by **promqueen** » 11 Oct 2007, 08:24

Would it not be a good idea to get a designated bike lane painted on the prom? I'm fed up with these silent menaces quickly weaving in and out of pedestrians and dugs - it's not good for the heart ! Am fully supportive of folk using their bikes, but if there was something official, at least we'd know where NOT to walk and the cyclists would know where not to wheech !

Admin: merged from prom length thread

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 11 Oct 2007, 19:02

The idea of a dedicated cycle lane has been suggested before. Although this works well elsewhere (the Meadows for example) the Prom is slightly different. For one thing, you have lots of young children and dogs who will not understand the significance of the markings. Wherever you place the cycle lane, people will have to traverse it to access the beach. Some cyclists may regard the lane as their territory and be inclined to cycle faster or with less care.

Don't get me wrong, I'm in favour of encouraging responsible cycling on the Prom but I'm not convinced that a cycle lane is the solution. And neither was Spokes the last time this came up.

Sandra · Post by **Sandra** » 11 Oct 2007, 19:14

promqueen wrote:Would it not be a good idea to get a designated bike lane painted on the prom? I'm fed up with these silent menaces quickly weaving in and out of pedestrians and dugs - it's not good for the heart ! Am fully supportive of folk using their bikes, but if there was something official, at least we'd know where NOT to walk and the cyclists would know where not to wheech !

Great idea, cos I always nearly get run over by cyclists who think they "own" the prom.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 11 Oct 2007, 22:03

Overpass?

Tunnel?

Puerto bella · Post by **Puerto bella** » 11 Oct 2007, 22:35

We were in the Meadows on Sat - walked right round the whole area and you need to cross the cycle lane to get to the grassed areas, playareas, loos, tennis courts etc so its basically the same issue as the access to the beach.

I'd be all for a cycle lane, it at least encourages a more responsible attitude from peds and cyclists alike.

Post by **wangi** » 11 Oct 2007, 22:50

It's entertaining to see how often this issue pops up and gets another round of opinion. Look back for everyone's earlier views!

The status quo is the best way forward. Saying that as a (responsible) cyclist... The often polarised views that people have toward cyclists are not helpful - it would be like expecting all motorists to be like the few idiots. I hate nothing more than bad cyclists, and when I come across them they get an earfull!

Keep in mind that Portobello Prom is currently in the list of Edinburgh "core paths" which is currently up for review - these paths are for cycling too.

L/

Skeely · Post by **Skeely** » 01 Dec 2007, 14:22

I was amused to read in the latest Portobello Reporter that the the prom is "designated as a road restricted to foot passage only". Has anyone told the police? Why do they drive down the prom in patrol cars? Are their bulletproof vests and batons not enough protection from kids on bicycles? It's hardly an approachable community policing style.

promqueen · Post by **promqueen** » 01 Dec 2007, 23:44

That's a bit daft. I'm glad the polis go down the prom, as quite a few oddbods can hang about there from time to time. A burglary in our stair saw the perpetrator run along the prom - later apprehended 'cos the police cars can access it.
Only tonight, I felt threatened by the actions of a couple of dodgy characters in the wee lane at the side of Scotmid - near the Police Station, granted, but if they'd run away along the Prom, I would have been glad to see a police car follow them.
You can see and hear the official vehicles - the bikes are a different story - silent 'til they're right beside you - and some of the cyclists are very cavalier in their attitude to pedestrians !!

Or just selfish buggers !

Post by **wangi** » 02 Dec 2007, 00:13

Prom Queen, what do you think of the police cars needlessly putting pedestrians at risk? They have keys to the gates on the Prom, yet choose to save a few minutes and instead drive on the pavement and off at the corner, between bollards.

And there's no chance a police car could catch anyone with half a brain cell on the Prom - there are lots and lots of places that running - or cycling - people can easily outmanoeuvre a car and scoot up a wee lane or past a bollard!

Skeely · Post by **Skeely** » 02 Dec 2007, 12:32

promqueen wrote:That's a bit daft. I'm glad the polis go down the prom

I'm all for the polis patrolling the prom, but my point is they should get out and walk. They would have much more chance of apprehending someone on foot (or bicycle).

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 02 Dec 2007, 13:02

I'm in favour of cycle patrols to enforce the 'no cycling' rules. You know it makes sense.

Skeely · Post by **Skeely** » 02 Dec 2007, 13:59

Bob Jefferson wrote:I'm in favour of cycle patrols to enforce the 'no cycling' rules. You know it makes sense.

So you're not a cyclist then Bob?

Talk Porty ~ Portobello

Cycling on the Promenade

The Prom

Re: The Prom