CycleFife

Catch-up

Two divergent strands of the discussions with Bill Walker and Fife Council officials have come together into a couple of proposals, one of which needs the support of Transport Scotland. At this stage it's probably best to draw the strands together. 

My recent email to Bill Walker, which is recorded in a previous post, led to him forwarding the exchange to Keith Brown, Minister for Transport and Housing. He replied with this letter.

Download Cyclists SP reply

This seemed to restate existing policy although it clarified that the A985 is the responsibility of Transport Scotland so although it didn't take the discussion forward, it at least clarified that part of the discussion. A separate email from Fife Council, stated their intention to meet regularly with Transport Scotland to discuss cycling issues. Limekilns seems to be one of many cycling infrastructure requirements that are being frustrated by the fact that responsibility for the trunk road network lies with Transport Scotland.

With that in mind, I summarised what for me were the priorities for Limekilns.

As far as Limekilns is concerned, I would see this discussion with Transport Scotland focussing first on two potential developments  - creating a continuous link on the south side of the A985 between the Limekilns junction and the shared use path at the Hilton Road junction and upgrading (or simply redesignating) the footpath on the south side of the A985 to be shared use. This would allow cyclists to get to the Kings Road roundabout safely and legally without crossing the A985. I suspect the cost of this would be fairly trivial and if it were jointly funded by some combination of Sustrans (as an improvement to NCN76), the Council and the Trunk Roads Initiative it would be a better use of resources than repairing the path through Pattiesmuir.

The Council's response has been very positive:

We intend to meet with Transport Scotland Representatives next month and we will raise your suggestions then. I'd agree that getting a shared use route along the A985 on the section you mention would be a valuable part of the network. As it stands the existing footway is too narrow to designate as shared use. You'd be talking around £150k to widen the footway from the Limekilns Road to Hilton Road and about £300k for the section between Hilton Road and Kings Road. Both would require some land purchase as there isn't enough space in the road corridor for a full width shared use path. There may be some scope to reduce the path width and possibly avoid land purchase however. If Transport Scotland are willing to contribute and Sustrans were interested in match funding then I think we could turn this into a viable project delivered over say 2 - 3 years. One thing we would have to demonstrate is community demand / need for such a route. I'm not sure if you have spoken to your local community council and elected members but getting them on board as well as other local people will greatly improve the chances of getting funding for the project as well as convincing Transport Scotland to contribute. (My emphasis) The new council administration are very keen on community lead projects and there is a locality budget to support this.

I still intend to get some work done on the Pattiesmuir to Grange Road link as this is a worthwhile route and costs to do this would only be a few thousand pounds. This and improving the Limekilns shore route will be progressed this year but I can't give an exact timescale until I have an idea of the area works programme. I hope to finalise this within the next month.

So, the task now is to see what support there is among the Community Council, local councillors and within the village more generally.

 

Decidedly average

Fife has one of the UK's most comprehensive cycle routes. There are over 300 miles (500km) of cycle routes along quiet country lanes, disused railway lines and forest tracks as well as commuter routes in towns. (FifeDirect)

This might be true but you have to ask, where are all the cyclists? The Scottish Government's Scottish Household Survey finds that less than one percent of adults in Fife who are in work or full time education report that they usually get there by bike.

Even if we allow for the fact that some people will only cycle some of the time – in the summer (if we ever get a summer) when the weather is fine – and include all the people who say that they regularly cycle to work or education even though they usually get there some other way, the percentage is still only around 3%. That’s 16th out of Scotland’s 32 local authorities. Decidedly average but pretty poor when you consider the boasts about having one the UK’s most comprehensive cycle routes.

Fig 1. Percentage of adults in work or education who usually or regularly commute by bike

OK, perhaps people aren’t commuting by bike but all those old railway lines and quiet country lanes must be drawing in the leisure cyclists. What about all those adults who ride with clubs at the weekend or the families who wouldn’t dream of cycling to work? They must be taking the kids for a cycle at the weekend. Seems not. In fact, if anything the position is worse. When we include adults who have cycled for at least 30 minutes, at least once in the past 28 days, Fife musters just 8% of adults who could be classed as a cyclist. This places Fife 23rd out of the 32 councils.

Fig 2. Percentage of adults who usually or regularly commute by bike or have cycled for leisure in the past 28 days

It’s hardly surprising when you look at what actually makes up these "comprehensive cycle routes". Google maps has started to display them (solid and dotted green lines) and looking at the area around Limekilns you can see how disjointed they are. There’s nothing at all comprehensive about them when you start to consider using them to get anywhere. Who, for instance, would set off on a bike to do some shopping in Dunfermline when there's just little chunks of cycle path around that major trunk road and they end in a field?

Fig 3. Google maps cycle routes around Limekilns and Rosyth

Re: cycling

I got home from holiday last night in the early hours of the morning and, sorting through the mail behind the door, came across a leaflet from Fife Council letting me know about its new recycling arrangements. The Council has targets to meet in relation to recycling. By 2013, the council must divert 50% of household waste from landfill to recycling and it's currently only recycling 54% so stringent new measures are needed if it's to meet the target of 70% by 2025. Only 13 years to close that gap! Best get cracking now.

Eh? What? Don't get me wrong. I've nothing against recycling. Actually, that's not true but I do it anyway. Composting, paper, glass etc. The lot. I don't even mind having four bins festering in the driveway for up to four weeks between collections.

But where did these targets come from? Why is Fife Council so desperate to exceed them and how do we get them for cycling? Is it the old adage: what gets measured gets done? Here is Fife ahead of its targets for recycling striving to do more. It's figures for cycling are decidedly average.

Thursday: nothing happened

Talking and reading about cycling and provision for cycling can be the most will-sapping way to spend your time. Cycling blogs and forums, newspaper stories and comments about traffic are often filled with frustration and anger, bitterness and sad tales of injuries and deaths. YouTube is a huge repository of videos where motorists shave past cyclists and cyclists and motorists engage in angry encounters at traffic lights. 

It's not always like that. So, let's step back for a minute and enjoy a pleasant ride from Edinburgh's city centre to my unofficial park and ride spot in Barnton. As I rode back, camera running, I realised just how quiet and pleasant it was to ride for 27 minutes, in the rush hour (starting at 5.10pm) and spend hardly any time interacting with traffic. From the film, I selected out all the footage containing a car on or joining my side of the road. I ignored cars heading in the opposite direction. True, they could unexpectedly swerve across the road but if it wasn't at a junction where it could turn in front of me I ignored it. I was left with just four minutes of footage. Four minutes out of 27 and most of that just travelling or waiting behind a car. I'm not saying it's perfect but this is how it is almost all the time. How it should be.

Let's hear it for the good routes. Don't worry if you can't be bothered watching it. Nothing happens. No one crashes and no angry words are exchanged with anyone. There is no bitterness or recriminations about the hopeless provision for cycling. I was in Edinburgh. The sun was shining and I had to stop to take my jacket off.

 

Bill Walker MSP

My main correspondence with Fife Council was initiated through an email to Bill Walker, my MSP, sent via Write to Them. Throughout that conversation, he has been cc'd in the emails. My email to the Council on 18 June suggested that perhaps it was now time for him to contact Transport Scotland since the main trunk road past the village, the A985, was clearly the principal barrier to progress for cyclists and pedestrians in the village. He responded on 22 June:

Dear Steven,

I hope your are well and thank you for keeping me up to date with the situation.

I see that your have been in correspondence with XX and XX (names removed - SH) as I initially suggested.

I hope that you have had some useful discussions regarding the provision of cycling routes around Fife.

Clearly, this is a matter for Fife Council, subject always to budget availability, but as you can see I am copying in XX to ask him if he feels that the best way forward would be, as you suggest, for him to contact the appropriate office within the Scottish Government.

I hope some progress can be made as suitable funding becomes available. Recently, in Parliament, I have supported a couple of initiatives regarding the improvement of cycling routes which would provide some advantages in the promotion of cycling.

Slainte,

Bill

I replied. The links in the text below weren't in the email. I've added them in case anyone is ever interested in following up my references, which I think would be obvious to Bill.

Dear Bill

Thanks for you email. I noticed that you had signed Alison Johnstone's motion supporting National Bike Week, which is very welcome although I'm sorry to say that as far as substantially increasing participation in cycling goes, National Bike Week is harmless but insubstantial fluff. I should also say, just for balance, that I noted that you did not support her motion (S4M-02641) supporting Pedal on Parliament and noting that the Scottish Government’s report on Meeting the Emissions Reduction Targets 2010-22 proposed allocating £1.32 billion over 11 years for active travel, and suggested that 10% of the transport budget should be spent on active travel. I think that sort of funding commitment is what is needed to properly promote cycling in the ways that Fife Council would clearly like to but is unable to.

Yes, the correspondence with XX and his colleagues has been a useful discussion although that is as far as it goes. Not that I was expecting anything concrete to happen immediately but there has been a useful discussion of positions and plans that has good general information on what might happen but has been light on specifics about when. Still, it's early days and the new administration in Fife must still be establishing its priorities. I was cheered slightly by Labour's national transport team saying that "Labour councils across the country should be backing cycling in every way possible"* although I'm not so starry-eyed that I won't wait to see how that translates into funding locally.

I do agree that it all comes down to budget availability but that is more a matter of political priorities than the total available for spending. At the moment, the Scottish Government spends just 1% of its transport budget on cycling. I was disappointed that just this week, while the Scottish Government was allocating £105 million for 'shovel ready' projects, none of that went to the £6m of shovel ready cycling projects that Sustrans has waiting for funding. Sadly, suitable funding was readily available but the Scottish Government decided it had other priorities.

I have to disagree, based on the exchanges I've had with XX and his colleagues, and based on my own experience of cycling anywhere out of Limekilns with my children, that this is clearly a matter for Fife Council. Many of the issues I have raised with Council relate directly to the A985, about which the Council can do nothing without the support of Transport Scotland. That is why I came to the conclusion that little progress will be made without commitment from Transport Scotland to improve and open up access to the paths along, and to improve opportunities to cross, the A985. 

I hope it will be possible to bring Transport Scotland into the discussion. 

Best wishes

Steven

*  This comment was made in the course of a discussion on Twitter preserved here.

Latest to the Council

 

The latest response from the Council has really crystallised the main issue, for me at least, of negotiating the A985 - the main trunk road from the A90/Forth Road Bridge to Kincardine Bridge that cuts through Rosyth and passes many of the West Fife villages. It seems clear that the first issue for anyone, never mind a child getting to school, coming out of the villages and heading in any direction is the A985. I replied (sent 18 June - I'm little behind): 

Thanks once again for you detailed response (and XX's additional comments). I really do appreciate the time you and XX have taken to make not only detailed replies but ones that are honest and candid about the difficulties of making high quality provision for cycling. It is, of course, a political problem at national and local level that prioritises car journeys and fails to make even the most basic provision for cycling, especially what is now called utility cycling. I hope you're right that the political perception of cycling is changing. Certainly I have had some encouraging feedback from Labour at a UK and Scotland level (where they are not of course in power) which has implications for how Labour councils should fund cycling. I'll add that to my blog and make sure that my local councillors are aware of it. Also, Councillor Gavin Yates has been in touch, prompted I think by the Labour Party in Scotland, and offered to ride any routes with me. He's a cyclist but not a councillor in my ward but I'll take him up on that offer and hopefully cover the route from Limekilns to Halbeath that we have been discussing and also the route between Woodmill and Limekilns, which would cover the roads and junctions my son would need to ride to high school. It hasn't been arranged but perhaps you and/or Scott would like to join us? 

In the meantime it would be good to hear from Mr Walker, who has been silent since passing my original email to Murray for a response and to Doreen to 'mind'. I recall that he offered to contact the appropriate person within the Scottish Government. Given the significant role of the A985 and Transport Scotland's budgeting in frustrating developments to cycling routes around the trunk roads, it is perhaps time for contact with the Scottish Government to be made. We can bat emails back and forth endlessly but significant improvement hinges on Transport Scotland. Perhaps Doreen would raise that with Mr Walker.

As you might expect, I have some further questions and comments on your response.

Limekilns foreshore - Is there a timescale for improving the path? And has there been any discussion with the community council?

Primrose Road - Given the ownership, I entirely agree with your approach to maintaining this path. Perhaps it would be possible modify the drainage since the main problem is the giant puddle that develops at the path's lowest point and to agree with the estate to modify its access to the fields off Primrose Road to limit the extent to which agricultural vehicles churn it up.

Shared path along the A985 - From my perspective, the A985 is the major problem that needs to be addressed with Transport Scotland. There are several elements to this: crossing from the Limekilns junction to the pavement on the other side and the lack of a proper pedestrian/cyclist refuge in the middle. The lack of a dropped kerb on the north side. Even walking the bike and trailer would be much easier with a dropped kerb. The lack of a path from the Limekilns junction to the shared path at Bruce Haven. I know there is the foreshore path but given its condition and the greater difficulty of crossing at Brucehaven, the Limekilns junction would be preferable. In any case, the path along the foreshore that goes up Windylaws is not called Cardiac Hill around here for nothing.

It is also quite absurd that the path from Hilton Road and Kings Road is not shared use. With minimal improvement - trimming back the grass that encroaches on the pavement, sweeping the grit and glass - that footpath would be ideal. If it was joined to the Limekilns junction it would be perfect. At one level it doesn't really matter since I'll continue to cycle on it but it would be better if it were legal.

Rosyth Station / Pitreavie Roundabouts - could you clarify where the shared use section starts between these two? I don't think there is any signage. It doesn't really affect me because if I have my daughter on her tagalong or trailer we'll be on the pavement regardless and if I'm on my own I'll be on the road but it would be good to know just in case we are challenged. Signage might encourage other people to use it.

I partially take your point about having to compromise on trailer space but the politicians will need to realise that if they want to increase the proportion of journeys made by bike, they are going to have to accommodate not just solo cyclists but families including trailers, tagalongs and (if the trend continues) cargo bikes. The guidelines were written for a world with bikes never mind trailers. In any case, even cycling with children on their own bikes needs more space. Adults need to position themselves behind and to the right of children just to create the space that children need to be safe and confident. The tendency to create token lanes of 1.5m isn't going to create the feeling of safety that novice cyclists need.

I hope you don't mind me saying that I find your last paragraph refreshingly candid. You are, of course, absolutely right - it is politicians and not officers who allocate budgets and I'm happy to do what I can to improve their understanding of the importance of providing for cycling and the benefits to communities.

Best wishes

 

Crossing the A985

There are two routes out of Limekilns but both of them are problematic for cyclists and pedestrians. For pedestrians there is no footpath beyond about 100 yards on either side of the junction. Google Streetview gives a good view of the junction. Indeed, to the west, the footpath only starts at the junction. Pedestrians need to cross the road to get anywhere.

Cyclists could ride on the A985 (and many do) but it is a busy trunk road and at peak times when, for instance, a child might be travelling to or from school, the road is busy in both directions.

The alternative is along the footpath on the foreshore referred to in many of the emails between me and the Council and accepted by the Council as being in a poor state of repair. That path brings the pedestrian or cyclist to A985 junction at Pattiesmuir. From here there is a continuous footpath to Rosyth, although not for cyclists. Cyclists are supposed to head further away from Dunfermline towards the Rosyth dockyard and come back up, adding an extra mile to the journey. Continuing along the footpath to Rosyth would be illegal. We'll come back to that in a future post.

The shortest route is to cross the road here and go through Pattiesmuir and along a signposted cycle track to Rosyth. That path is in extremely poor repair and we'll have a look at that in a future post. This is what it is like crossing the A985 at about 2.30pm on a Friday afternoon (22 June 2012). I approach it in this video from Rosyth rather than the path from Limekilns. It only takes 90 seconds for me to cross the road but notice that I start crossing before the last blue car heading east has cleared the junction I'm aiming for. Otherwise, the car behind the last westbound Ford Fiesta would have been too close. Not really a novice move.

This is the road kids from the village would need to cross to get to their high school. 

 

It all comes down to budgets

Another detailed response from Fife Council picking on some of the questions left over from earlier emails. As usual, I've deleted references to individuals (and fixed some typos). 

Sorry it's taken a while to get back to you, I've been on leave. In response to your further questions regarding cycling routes between Limekilns and Dunfermline and some of the issues you have raised with my colleague xxxxxx I would comment as follows:

Limekilns foreshore - When this route was originally put in in the 90s the whole path between Limekilns and Pattiesmuir was finished in an unbound dust surface. The surface along the foreshore was pretty good in those days (it was actually a tarmac surface) and was felt to not need further upgrading. When the section from the fore shore to Pattiesmuir was subsequently surfaced the fore shore section was left as, again, it was felt that the surface was OK. Since then it seems to have deteriorated significantly, hence our desire to upgrade it. As it is now a core path we have powers to do this without requiring agreement from the landowner

Primrose Road - this is in the ownership of Elgin Estates although it appears it was a public road at one time in the past. We have a number of such tracks promoted as cycle routes across Fife and the issue we have with them is that they are also farm and field accesses and get used by heavy agricultural traffic which cause all of the damage too them. Our agreement with the estate is to maintain it for passage by bicycles and not to repair damage by agricultural vehicles. In reality we do end up maintaining them for agricultural use as much as cycle use and as such we have tended to adopt a 'do minimum' policy - not ideal but its the only way we can avoid excessive expenditure on them. That said I think its fair that we re-visit Primrose road and carry out repairs if budgets allow.

Shared path along the A985 - The section between Hilton road and the path to Limekilns is shared use. Similarly the section between Waggon Road and Muirside Lane nr Cairneyhill is also shared use. In terms of our relationship with Transport Scotland we liaise regularly on roads and footways maintenance and we have a good dialogue with their strategic sustainable transport team but it is fair to say that we don't do any joint working on improving cycleway links on the trunk road network. There are a few outstanding projects we would like to see developed on the trunk roads in Fife but Transport Scotland do not seem to have a specific budget for this. We hope to address this issue and try to work more closely with Transport Scotland in the future as the trunk road does present a substantial barrier to various cycle routes in Fife.

Rosyth Station roundabout - In an ideal world this would be signalised with pedestrian / cycle phases provided. As it stands we have no budget for this at present, however we would hope to try to improve walking and cycling facilities as we develop the shared use route up Queensferry Road.

Pitreavie Roundabout - just to confirm the footway is designated as shared use round the roundabout (both sides) and up to the Toucan just to the north on Queensferry Road. We had hoped to widen the footways last year but Transport Scotland were just about to commence the works to install the new overhead signs for the Bridge so the project was delayed. This will get picked up once the sign works are complete.

In terms of trailer access we try and provide enough space at junctions and other features wherever possible but in many cases we can barely find space for cyclists. Road space re-allocation is the solution to this. We have done this in Kirkcaldy in a number of locations and received a large amount of criticism from members of public as a result! As time goes on such schemes will gain more public and political acceptance but until that time we have to accept compromises.

We consult and work closely with Sustrans, Cycling Scotland, the CTC and a number of local cyclists. The problem is that we are very much a minority and therefore cyclists receive little political attention and funding. At present there is zero budget for new cycleway schemes from Fife Council's Capital Resources. We get money direct from the government although this is shrinking year on year. Sustrans grants are on the increase thankfully but we still need to find match funding. Events such as 'Pedal on Parliament' have done a great job of raising the awareness of Politicians to cyclists needs and to make them see that cyclists are now a significant part of society. It looks like the funding tide may be turning so we can only hope that things will improve in the coming years. In the meantime public pressure on local and national politicians needs to continue, particularly given the new administration in Fife. Us Council Officers have only a limited influence in this respect!

I have to say that I'm impressed by the time these guys are spending answering my emails. In general, you get a sense of frustration with Transport Scotland and its distinct lack of interest in cycling. The last paragraph is interesting - badger the national and local politicians.

Static

Some updates. Councillor Bobby Clelland, who was included in my first email to councillors just before the local elections, replied just after the election. He said:

Hi Steven

Thanks for the email, sorry for the delay in replying.

I share your desire to have safe cycle routes, and when the opportunity arises I will speak in favour of them.

Bobby Clelland

Short and sweet. I replied.

Hi Bobby

Thanks for taking the time to respond and congratulations personally for getting re-elected and to Labour for having enough seats to form an administration. Since my original email I have been in communication with Bill Walker and Gerry McMullan who have also been supportive. I have also been corresponding with a few Council officials. I have been collating all this on a little blog, which you can find here if you want to see what's been happening. 

http://stevenhope.typepad.co.uk/cycle/

Support for safer cycling initiatives would be great. Perhaps you could take the initiative by proposing a motion supporting the calls by Pedal on Parliament (www.pedalonparliament.org) that councils should follow Edinburgh's lead and commit 5% of the Council's transport budget on active travel.

Best wishes for your new term and I look forward to seeing you around Limekilns.

No reply on the idea of  proposing a dedicated cycling budget for Fife. Oh well.

I've also had a much more substantial reply from the transport folk in Fife Council.

Mr Hope,

Murray Hannah has passed me your email to give consideration to any specific safety issues you may have as part of a route between Limekilns and Woodmill High School. I shall try my best to address any such issues, or provide details on who is best placed to deal with it. It may be that there is an alternative route available for parts, some of which I will suggest, however these choices depend on the age, experience and confidence of the rider. Given this, I'm happy for you to let me know if there are any other specific safety issues on routes not mentioned below you would wish me to look at. I have gone through the points on your first response of 30th April below which relate to safety issues;

Primrose Road - in relation to any planned improvements for the Limekilns junction or any remedial measures as part of the reduced limit, as this road is operated by Bear Scotland on behalf of Transport Scotland, Fife Council are not able to investigate or suggest improvements here. Bear Scotland (North East unit) can be contacted on 0800 587 1107 and may be able to offer further information.

Shared path along the A985 - Again, as this is a trunk road, Fife Council have no powers to redetermine the use of the footway for shared use. You may wish to contact Bear Scotland, as above, or Transport Scotland on 0141 272 7100. Colin Broadwood is Transport Scotland's network manager and his area of responsibility covers the A985.

Kings Road Roundabout - Sorry, but this also comes under the remit of either Bear Scotland or Transport Scotland. Fife Council looked at improvements along this route as part of links through Rosyth including the work that we carried out down Kings Road. I think at the time it was recommended to widen the island at the roundabout, purchase a small corner of land at the allotments, and widen the footway. However this so far hasn't happened. Hopefully joined up working between Fife Council and Bear Scotland will see this completed in the future. I will see if I can find out what stage this is at and if anything can be done to move it along. Even if the island was widened, it is unlikely that it would accommodate a bicycle and trailer.

Rosyth Station Roundabout - The crossing at this location has been designed to national guidelines to accommodate a cycle, wheelchair or pram. There is no requirement to design for a bike and trailer as this would see every piece of infrastructure being over-designed to accommodate a very small minority of users. I can appreciate your frustrations with this as I too have travelled with my children in a bike trailer and these situations are always difficult with lots of manoeuvring required to get where your going. As this is an odd situation with the road levels, hopefully this doesn't present a challenge at most other crossings. The alternative is to cross from the Primrose Lane service road, which I appreciate is not ideal.

Pitreavie Roundabout - The issues here aren't really road safety related and are more an issue of convenience and improvement. There have been no injury accidents in the last 5 years with pedestrian/cycle conflicts to suggest that something needs to be done to improve safety. As Phil Clarke has your comments on this issue, he will be able to keep this in mind for any future improvement works.

Carnegie Avenue - A toucan crossing was installed on Carnegie Avenue to allow cyclists and pedestrians to cross safely at this location. This helps with access to the footway on the north side of the road. However, as you point out, this may not be suitable for all users. This is now part of the core path network and hopefully improvements to the surface will happen in the future. As there are no injury accidents or safety issues there is nothing proposed here for the immediate future from our Safety team.

I'm sorry that I haven't offered much help with your issues, and improvements to the network take time. Children within the 2 mile radius of schools are a priority for safe routes as they are more likely to walk or cycle. Out with this, buses are provided. However, where anyone wishes to walk or cycle it is certainly something we would wish to support. I have suggested some alternative paths for consideration. These will always be a personal choice, so I'm happy to receive any comments on this suggestion.

My suggested route, starting at Woodmill High, is as follows;

From Woodmill travel along Woodmill Road (or the residential roads) to Linburn Road. Linburn Road and Masterton Road have shared use footways along the east side to Carnegie Avenue. There is a toucan crossing being installed on Masterton Road to get you to Carnegie Avenue and an existing crossing on Carnegie Avenue to get you to the south side of Carnegie Avenue. On here, officially, the route is on road along a short section of Carnegie Avenue and then left into Castle Brae, then right into Castle Drive. This route is quite quiet on road with low traffic speeds. At the end of Castle Drive where you meet Queensferry Road there is a signalised crossing to take you to the west side of Queensferry Road then you are back onto your routes around Pitreavie and beyond.

As I say, you may not prefer this route but it's something to consider. I hope this has offered some help. For any improvements Phil Clarke is the best person to look into your requests and I have spoken to him today to discuss this. Some of the issues identified are being considered, but like everything, take time and have to compete for funding. Support from cyclists like yourself will help us keep pressing ahead with making improvements throughout Fife, maintaining Fife Council as a leading authority in providing cycle routes and facilities.

Essentially, this seems to be saying that it's all Transport Scotland's fault, which actually makes a lot of sense, although the idea that I would take this up with Transport Scotland, rather than my locla authority doing it seemed a little absurd. Once you get past the A985 (and bearing in mind that this response is in terms of road safety) cycling between the village and Dunfermline isn't too bad, although I've not tried that suggested route. I replied:

Thanks for your response. I appreciate you taking the time to look at each of the sections of the route and provide feedback. I'm sorry it's taken me so long to come back to you. I have only a couple of comments on those, which are in the context of qualified but general agreement with most of the points you make.

I wonder if you could provide me with some information about the Council’s relationship with Transport Scotland, specifically about how the relationship between the trunk road network and Fife’s local roads network is managed. I ask because it seems odd to me that Fife’s fairly  progressive approach towards pedestrians and cyclists can be undermined by, what appears to me at least, Transport Scotland’s indifference. It struck me last Friday as I was taking my daughter to nursery, crossing at the Shell roundabout, that on local roads, where there is a reasonable volume of traffic, a safe crossing and often a pedestrian refuge is provided. On the A985, where traffic volumes can be higher and speeds are much higher, apart from a few dropped kerbs, there is no specific provision for pedestrians or cyclists at all between Kings Road and the Kincardine Bridge.

Transport Scotland's attitude seems to be to make marginal (and questionable) improvements like reducing speed limits and then wait to see how long it is before someone dies. That may not be how it is but it's how it seems. Of course, what it actually does is establish the road as a barrier, encouraging people into cars (and to a lesser extent, buses) and discouraging walking and cycling. So, while pedestrian accidents might be low, pedestrian (and cyclist) traffic is also low. 

It seems to me that although there are a couple of major network improvements that would improve the link between Limekilns and Dunfermline, and I await Phil's comments on my response to his email, the A985 will be a significant impediment until there are paths along it and crossings over it that allow people to safely join the local roads towards Dunfermline. Hence my question about the relationship between the Council and Transport Scotland.

A few specific points (leaving all the trunk road stuff aside).

Kings Road Roundabout – I appreciate that a pedestrian refuge wide enough to accommodate a trailer might be difficult and expensive (although not impossible) but a combination of wider and longer would work. Personally, I think that whole roundabout would benefit from becoming a light-controlled junction given the uneven traffic flow. In the absence of that, a Toucan crossing seems to me to be perfectly reasonable at that point. In general, the A985 would benefit from more measures that allow traffic to be stopped.

Rosyth Station roundabout - I take your point about the design of the crossing although in the absence of the crossing, getting across from the service road does require a cyclist to be pretty bold and assertive in stopping cars that are coming off the roundabout and catching the eye of traffic joining the roundabout to create a gap where the kerb drops.

Pitreavie Roundabout - I'm sorry to have to disagree with the premise of your view that nothing needs done here. In the time I've been cycling around there I think I've seen three other cyclists and maybe 15-20 pedestrians. That might reflect my timing (probably 9.20-9.30am and 4.30pm and 5pm) although I expect its more likely that there haven't been any cyclist and pedestrian accidents because anyone with any sense would avoid that roundabout if they could. The absence of cyclist and pedestrian traffic is the evidence of a road with a safety problem. Of course, this applies generally: people do not cycle because there is a road safety problem. More fundamentally, unless I misunderstood Phil's original response, there should be no pedestrian / cyclist conflicts here because riding on the pavement around here is illegal. So I should either be on the road, acting legally, where there would certainly be a road safety issue, or the path should be redesigned and redesignated for shared use so that I can ride on it legally. 

Carnegie Avenue - The path on the north side of the road is quite good fun coming down although the surface is a little rutted and washed away from heavy rain. For the time being I'll continue to ride up on the pavement, accepting that it's illegal and relying on the good nature of pedestrians and my experience that the police just smile. Depending on the weather I'll come down on the road or the north path.

Apologies again for taking so long to reply

Best wishes

 

Least favourites #2

While I wait for various people to come back to me I thought I'd add to my collection of less than helpful bits of cycling infrastructure. This morning, since it had stopped raining, I took Ellen to nursery in her trailer. If I go out of Limekilns on the road I have to cross the A985 because there's no path on the same side as the village. It's not a nice road at the best of times and certainly not around rush hours. It doesn't generate headlines like this for no reason.

I can then either go through Pattiesmuir and Rosyth or cross back to the path on the south side of the road to carry on to Rosyth. All this crossing could be avoided if there was a continuous path on the south side of the A985 from Limekilns to Rosyth.

This morning, suspecting the Pattiesmuir route would be a swamp after yesterday's rain, I decided to head along the puddly and muddy route (actually part of the National Cycle Network's route 76) along the Forth and up Windylaw Edge (or Cardiac Hill as it is locally known).

We'll put the surface of the path to one side for now. The least favourite aspects of this route are the narrow, and when you're hauling a trailer, barely negotiable, entrances to the path. At the Limekilns end we have this:

  

Maybe the gate is needed to prevent people driving down there - I'm sure someone would try it - but the footpath at the edge could at least be widened around that post to make it accessible not just to bikes but pushchairs and, who knows, maybe even wheelchairs.

At the other end, as the path reconnects with the A985, an understandable attempt has been made to make it diffcult for someone to come careering down the path and straight out onto the A985. Understandable but not very accessible. 

 

You can see how everyone goes off the path to the right of the bollards. It's the only option for the trailer, which just squeaks through the gap.