Vehicles on the prom

stubetts · Post by **stubetts** » 01 Apr 2005, 17:20

What are the rules for vehicles driving on the prom? It has a sign up saying something like "No access unless authorised vehicle" - which I always thought was emergency and council vehicles. I was walking along the prom yesterday with my 3 month old son in the buggy (walking east at the Porty Indoor Bowling Club entrance) when a plain transit van driving west past the back of the Fun City started tooting its horn to move a couple of females walking with their buggies. One of them didnt move and said something to the driver, but let him past. He came past me (going too fast) shaking his head. She had obvioulsy let the driver know her feelings on him driving on the prom, but I wasn't sure what the exact rules were. I often see delivery lorries drive from the bottom of Kings Road along the prom to drop stuff off.

Cheers
Stu

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 01 Apr 2005, 17:38

Stubetts, I've 'spoken' to Maureen Child about this re my end of the Prom. Unfortunately my PC caught a v bad virus and I lost all my emails so I can't check or quote them.

Anyway, the gist of our chat was that vehicles should not be on the Prom without permission. I'd take a note of the make, number, etc of any offending vehicle and email Lawrence Marshall and let him take the matter with whoever is responsible at the Council.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 01 Apr 2005, 17:56

Ah yes, the promise to have locked gates on the Promenade debacle. Remind me - how long did the ones at the Joppa end last? Was it 24 hours?

Until we get properly designed gates installed this problem with unauthorised vehicles will continue to happen. The situation you describe is one I have witnessed on many occasions and frankly it's time the Council got this sorted.

Having said that, the company working on the 'Miami Beach' apartments was given dispensation to use the Prom, so perhaps this was a contractor? No excuse for their actions either way. A speed limit for authorised vehicles of 5mph should be enforced and any vehicle using the Prom should use hazard lights.

As ever, the only way to get action is to complain. I would suggest you email Graeme Paget (the person responsible at City Development) graeme.paget@edinburgh.gov.uk and pin him down on when the work will be complete and ask pertinent questions about the suitability of the design. It needs to be fit for purpose and vandal-proof for starters. There is also the question of liability if someone was unfortunate enough to be injured by an unauthorised vehicle. If you do decide to complain, make sure you copy it to Lawrence and Maureen.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 01 Apr 2005, 18:08

how long did the ones at the Joppa end last? Was it 24 hours?

Hmmf! We never got them at all at the bottom of Pittville Street. And had to wait long enough for bollards!

stubetts · Post by **stubetts** » 01 Apr 2005, 18:12

Right enough, as I passed the new development, the gardeners were laying the new turf next to it, and there was a van parked on the prom. But, as you say, that doesnt mean that they can speed (especially in the school hols with more kids on the go).

Post by **wangi** » 01 Apr 2005, 19:32

Bob Jefferson wrote:Until we get properly designed gates installed this problem with unauthorised vehicles will continue to happen. The situation you describe is one I have witnessed on many occasions and frankly it's time the Council got this sorted.

Which I think you'll find that the majority of the folk living on the prom don't want...

I mean, how much does a simple "no unauthorsed access" or "pedestrian area" sign cost? Especially give the Ã‚Â£Ã‚Â£Ã‚Â£ being wasted on putting in 20MPH signs and bloody big speed bumps when the trend elsewhere seems to be against speedbumps...

The mind boggles.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 01 Apr 2005, 20:07

wangi wrote:Which I think you'll find that the majority of the folk living on the prom don't want...

I doubt it, and if I lived on the Prom I would be leading the campaign to have gates installed and in the interim stating in writing my intention to sue Donald Anderson personally in the event of an accident involving an unauthorised vehicle on the Promenade.

wangi wrote:I mean, how much does a simple "no unauthorised access" or "pedestrian area" sign cost?

Do you honestly believe that a sign of this type would make any difference to unauthorised access? I don't think anyone woud be talking about installing gates unless it was obvious that this was the only solution.

As for 20mph zones, this is a no-brainer.

Speed influences both the likelihood that a crash will occur on any given road, and the severity of the crash. In general, every 1mph reduction in average is accompanied by a 5% reduction in the number of crashes. Casualty severity is very sensitive to impact speed. Even minor reductions in speed can make the difference between a crash being fatal or serious, and between serious and slight. This relationship is especially important where pedestrians and cyclists are present.
Excessive speed is the single most important contributory factor in road deaths. Drivers who speed are known to be more likely to crash.

Speed is the one common factor in crashes which is most amenable to intervention, through traffic calming, speed limit reductions and enforcement.

The Transport Research Laboratory have estimated that reducing average speeds across the entire road network by only 2mph would save an estimated 280 lives a year, prevent 3900 serious injuries and reduce all crashes involving injury by 24,000. These figures are approximately 10% of the annual casualties on our roads.

Slower Speeds Initiative

If you accept this, then it follows that there is no point in having a 20mph zone unless we have some way of enforcing it. Can you suggest a better and more cost-effective means of doing this?

stubetts · Post by **stubetts** » 01 Apr 2005, 20:31

But there is an "Authorised Vehicles Only" sign outside Porty Indoor Bowling Club, but I'm sure that hasn't stopped anyone in the past.

Beach Babe · Post by **Beach Babe** » 01 Apr 2005, 20:37

myself and several of my buggy-walking friends have been discussing this too as there has been a recent increase in white van traffic on the Prom. There is some traffic associated with the Bath St monstrosity and some associated with the very scenic new loo, but otherwise there is definately a number of vehicles (mainly of the unidentifiable white van persuation) who are making a deliver/doing whatever their business is but not taking the nearest exit from the Prom. They do tend to drive too fast and expect everyone to get out of their way.

TBH, I don't moan about much but this has been annoying me (and several others). It seems to be a problem for a while, sorts itself out and then a few months later there's another spate of prom-driving. We've been wondering if, after doing whatever it is that they're meant to be doing, they're just trying to avoid the congestion on the main road

Post by **wangi** » 01 Apr 2005, 20:41

Well certainly the impression I get, and the letters from other residents through my door, is against gates. Remember this is in some cases the only access to their property for deliveries etc. Those last set of gates were so poorly thought out it was amazing - none of the emergency services had keys for example (leading to the police simply driving on the pavement (they should be cycling!) - nice and safe). I've not seen the coastguard go down the prom since...

As it stands just now many people (as in tourists mainly) are unaware that that they cannot park on the prom - a simple, and cheap, sign would go a long way toward fixing that.

I work in the Broughton/Bellevue/Canonmills/Powderhall area, which is speedbump central (I think it was the pilot area?). Anyway it simply leads to drivers accelerating hard between speedbumps - not safe and not good for the environment either. For an alternative solution look at schemes where road signage is being removed - to increase driver concentration (for example on London's Museum Rd).

If safety is the real issue here then the council should be brave and tackle the real issue - the massive over parking on Portobello's residential streets - pavements are for walking, not parking. That would increase visibility and safety. But no, that wouldn't be too popular!

And have I missed the mass of accidents that have made this necessary in Portobello?

Oh, the topic on the gates: http://porty.org.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=288

Post by **wangi** » 01 Apr 2005, 20:43

stubetts wrote:But there is an "Authorised Vehicles Only" sign outside Porty Indoor Bowling Club, but I'm sure that hasn't stopped anyone in the past.

There's a fair few ways onto the prom.

bearcub · Post by **bearcub** » 01 Apr 2005, 20:52

And while we're at it..........why do cyclists think they can just rattle along the prom at a fair rate of knots with, in most cases, scant regard for people walking along it. Personal bug-bear when I'm out walking the dog is when I have to constantly look over my shoulder before making the slightest change in direction - and more often than not find a silent cyslist bearing down on me. The Prom is meant to be off-limits for cyclists and it should be....

Rant over

mr magnolia · Post by **mr magnolia** » 01 Apr 2005, 21:04

bearcub wrote:And while we're at it..........why do cyclists think they can just rattle along the prom at a fair rate of knots with, in most cases, scant regard for people walking along it. Personal bug-bear when I'm out walking the dog is when I have to constantly look over my shoulder before making the slightest change in direction - and more often than not find a silent cyslist bearing down on me. The Prom is meant to be off-limits for cyclists and it should be....

Rant over

well...

the prom is 'officially' off-limits to cyclists, but unofficially it really isn't and it makes no sense for it to be so. Cyclists and pedestrians can and do mix well in a reasonably spacious corridor. Your complaint is with the ones that whiz along silently and speedily. I think thats a fair complaint but it's not fair to extrapolate from that complaint to a wide generalised ban.

If that were a reasonable course of action, there would be no car drivers permitted on any roads. (And umbrellas would be punishable with 10yrs inside.)

speed bumps on the prom, anyone?

of course the topic has been rattled about on another thread that I'll find soon.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 01 Apr 2005, 21:41

Beachbabe - you're way too laid back. You need to get more militant in your role as a pedestrian/parent. Pedestrians rule!

Wangi -

Agree entirely that the polis should be patrolling the Prom by cycle or on foot.

Keys will be available to all emergency services, though to be honest I would prefer a slightly more sophisticated scheme than a padlocked gate. An ANPR scheme allied to an authorised vehicle database would do the trick.

A sign will advise people of non-vehicular access, a locked gate will leave them in no doubt.

Provision was made for local residents under the locked-gate scheme to obtain a key for reasonable access.

Yes, the areas that are to be traffic-calmed have been prioritised using accident stats.

mr magnolia - cycling on the prom is a subject that has been much discussed here and elsewhere over the years. I'm FOR cycling on the Prom - it's only a very small minority of cyclists who act irresponsibly.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 01 Apr 2005, 21:57

Bob Jefferson wrote:Agree entirely that the polis should be patrolling the Prom by cycle or on foot.

Agree totally! Not that long ago (pre dog death) I was almost hit as I came out of a side street by a Police car doing about 30mph along the Prom. Maybe we should put traffic lights at the bottom of each opening with a green man crossing since this is the most dangerous area for pedestrians and dogs. I also agree with allowing sensible cycling on the Prom. Now that COC (in her new role of Canine Kid) cycles to work every day there's no way she'd cycle along Seafield Road with all its associated dangers when there's a much safer route.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 01 Apr 2005, 23:01

To be fair, the polis do patrol on foot during the day and night as well by car/van.

There seem to be a lot of large lorries delivering to the baths and, I think, the old folks home at John Street Lane [?]. Trouble is I tend to see them when I'm still half sleep in the morning and can't get their licence numbers

.

And since the new bollards went up [and the old gate disappeared] I have seen cars using the Prom for three [or more!] point turns - also sometimes cars have been seen turning on to the Prom and by their reactions getting a shock because they thought it was a real road!! Seriously, I'm surprised no-one has yet smashed into the Prom wall.

I lived on Montgomery Street before and after the speed bumps were put in and it did make a big and positive difference to the speed [and volume] of the traffic. I have to say the speed some cars come down Pittville Street and Bellfield Street is a disgrace.

That's my contribution to this discussion and I'm now off to discuss a bottle of wine! As Ms Austen/Ms Heyer would say!!

teddygirl · Post by **teddygirl** » 04 Apr 2005, 11:21

I wish I could agree that it is a small minority of cyclists who speed along the Prom. At one time yes, but lately it is becoming more of a problem.
As someone who walks along the Prom twice a day I have had several close shaves with cyclists whizzing past me and only missing me by inches.
Also I live on one of the streets that lead on to the Prom and that is the most dangerous area...actually stepping on to the Prom without being mowed down,it has nearly happened twice recently.
I am not against people cycling there as indeed my own children learned to ride their bikes there and it was a safe place for them to play but speed is the issue here.
When there has been an incident,instead of an apology from the speeding cyclist it has been "our fault" for daring to get in their way. We try to keep our dogs under control and not wander in front of anyone but we are still made to feel the guilty ones for being there in the first place.
I know a lot of people who cycle sensibly but unfortunately they are fast becoming the minority ( some forum members included in this category by the way

)

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 04 Apr 2005, 16:03

I cycle on the Prom (with absolute consideration to walkers) because I feel the roads are too dangerous due to car driver attitude and uneven surfaces. Even if I am cycling to say, Kitchener's Deli from Joppa, I go the longer way via the Prom to avoid the stretch of road from Marlborough St. to Bath St. which is like running the gauntlet.

It would not take a rocket scientist to work out ways in which all needs could be catered for. My experience of coastal promenades in the States shows that many different needs are provided for by having cycling, walking and roller blading areas co-existing peacefully.

Ultimately it comes down to investment and a commitment by our elected reps to deliver.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 04 Apr 2005, 16:28

Pal of Porty wrote:Ultimately it comes down to investment and a commitment by our elected reps to deliver.

Or else it comes down to people just being a bit more considerate.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 04 Apr 2005, 16:54

My experience of coastal promenades in the States shows that many different needs are provided for by having cycling, walking and roller blading areas co-existing peacefully.

But I don't think our Promenade is wide enough!! Or should the Prom be extended into the beach?

That really would take investment!!

bellybabe · Post by **bellybabe** » 04 Apr 2005, 16:57

mr magnolia wrote:well...

the prom is 'officially' off-limits to cyclists, but unofficially it really isn't and it makes no sense for it to be so. Cyclists and pedestrians can and do mix well in a reasonably spacious corridor.

I suspect you felt you had to defend this course of action since at the exact time you posted this, Mr M, I met Mrs M cycling along the prom... WITHOUT A HELMET

!

I was deeply shocked at the sight of her bare head. Especially as I was listening to my MP3 player and hadn't noticed her calling me.

BB

Post by **wangi** » 04 Apr 2005, 17:12

mr magnolia wrote:the prom is 'officially' off-limits to cyclists

I often hear that... And I'd say i'm on the whole a considerate cyclist. Many folk just enjoy moaning and telling folk what they shouldn't be doing.

I've "been told" when I've been going near stationary along the prom when it was virtually empty.

Anyway, the truth is that on half of the prom cycling is permitted (from Seafield to the Bowling) and on the rest the signage is confusing and ambiguous - at various places you can cycle onto the prom seeing a blue circular "pedestrian + cycle" sign (for example bottom of Marlborough St).

And back to the subject of cars on the prom - the misses and I are often those moaning buggers I hinted at above

Cars parking on the Prom - "it's tar, ... nuthin says I can't". And yes, the Esplanade Terrace end gets a fair few turning manouvers! This is why a sign would help...

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 04 Apr 2005, 17:17

virtually empty

Well, if the Prom was empty, who told you off!!!!!!!

[Sorry, sometimes pedantry gets the better of me!! I'm just so upset at C&C's delayed wedding................

]

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 04 Apr 2005, 17:23

Poppy wrote:Or else it comes down to people just being a bit more considerate.

I agree. There is not much that works in life without mutual consideration (except Dictatorships maybe).

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 04 Apr 2005, 17:26

Poppy wrote:But I don't think our Promenade is wide enough!! Or should the Prom be extended into the beach? That really would take investment!!

What's wrong with that? They are investing about Ã‚Â£500 million into an area only a mile or two along the coast from us.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 04 Apr 2005, 17:28

And if the plans for your big white building are just a tad too large for the space - just steal some from the Prom........see, there's a way round every problem

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 04 Apr 2005, 17:29

Pal of Porty wrote:
Poppy wrote:But I don't think our Promenade is wide enough!! Or should the Prom be extended into the beach? That really would take investment!!
What's wrong with that? They are investing about Ã‚Â£500 million into an area only a mile or two along the coast from us.

Actually, it's not the cost - can you just imagine the furore if it was suggested .............

For a start, this Forum would combust!!

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 05 Apr 2005, 13:44

Epykat wrote:And if the plans for your big white building are just a tad too large for the space - just steal some from the Prom........see, there's a way round every problem

Hmmm.... I thought I was talking about developing the Prom and surrounding area, not about unscrupulous builders being allowed to get away with murder!

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 06 Apr 2005, 12:21

Sorry POP - I was just trying to make it clear about the apparent possibilities when you run out of room - it's seemingly quite simple. Therefore, working on the same principles, since we appear to be running out of room on the Promenade it would be okay to just steal a bit of the sand

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 06 Apr 2005, 22:57

There's loads of sand. I remember the project many years ago when they pumped thousands of tons of sand onto the beach and then built the breakers (can't remember the proper name for them) to stop it all getting washed away again.

Poppy · Post by **Poppy** » 07 Apr 2005, 07:20

Pal of Porty wrote:There's loads of sand. I remember the project many years ago when they pumped thousands of tons of sand onto the beach and then built the breakers (can't remember the proper name for them) to stop it all getting washed away again.

From what I've heard the sand was nicked from Dunbar? Should we sell it back to pay for the Prom extension!

The 'breakers' are 'groynes', BTW!

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 07 Apr 2005, 09:53

Poppy wrote:The 'breakers' are 'groynes', BTW!

Cheers. I will try and remember next time.

Beach Babe · Post by **Beach Babe** » 07 Apr 2005, 13:11

well we walked along the Prom for an hour this morning and there wasn't a single vehicle in sight

Post by **wangi** » 11 Apr 2005, 11:14

"You a**, you f***ing not allowed to cycle here - a***hole!"

... Quite, but swearing in front of kids is fair game I guess! I was going all of 5mph (just out my front door) - wonder where the kids get it from?

mr magnolia · Post by **mr magnolia** » 11 Apr 2005, 14:39

Doubt you went very much faster than 5mph this morning, wangi? But the wind will fair speed you home!