Barnes Residents want 20mph
A community consultation 'The Barnes Ponder' in October 2013 has show strong support for making Barnes a 20 mph neighbourhood .
“20mph is plenty enough speed on the roads!”
This section lists issues - problems on the street network and related matters.
Issues always relate to some geographical location, whether very local or perhaps city-wide.
You can create a new issue using the button on the right.
Listed issues, most recent first:
A community consultation 'The Barnes Ponder' in October 2013 has show strong support for making Barnes a 20 mph neighbourhood .
“20mph is plenty enough speed on the roads!”
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
The Cambridge News sadly reports that a 16-year-old cyclist is dead after a crash on Milton Road.
Created by Heather Coleman // 4 threads
I'm creating this as a general "issue" in the hope that people will put different threads here for problems they have with building sites, generally associated with deliveries. Listing those problems and any action or complaints they've taken personally, and also asking how further complaints can be made.
I can't help feeling we should be talking to the council about making it a condition of planning permission that deliveries that either require "odd" movements of HGVs eg, reversing and taking ages doing so, or parking on the street eg while delivering scaffolding, should not take place during "rush hour", especially on roads that are busy and are major cycle routes.
Created by MJR // 0 threads
http://www.bromptondock.co.uk reports that their docks are offline for upgrades until January 2014. I don't know why or when in January they will return. People with bikes out have just had to keep them until January (free of charge I think).
Created by Heather Coleman // 2 threads
The members' list has just had a post from a Tess Jones saying:
> FYI
> I wasn't able to go to the exhibition, but proposals are here:
>
> http://cambridgeforumconsultation.com/
I've replied that as someone who works on site, this is the first I've heard about this. There are various implications, that need looking at, before we decide if and what we need to say in the consulation.
Created by MB // 0 threads
The cycle (and pedestrian) path between the Telegraph pub & Tibbetts corner needs repair & maintenance. Undergrowth has grown over it, narrowing the path, there are cracks & ridges where tree roots or wear & tear have deteriorated the path & the path markings are no longer clear.
In addition, the route through the car park is often strewn with broken glass and pot holes.
If the path were widened back to its original width, resurfaced & remarked, there would be less conflict between pedestrians & cyclists.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
The route on the east side of the A167 past Crossgate Moor and Framwellgate Moor crosses a number of roundabouts. The cycle-path leads you across the roads very close to the roundabout, via the central refuge in the middle of the road. Some of these roads have two lane entry to the roundabout. Crossing both lanes at once is tricky as you have to have an eye on whether the traffic is about to move out onto the roundabout. If you have a longer vehicle, such as a bus, waiting, then the route to the refuge is blocked. There are no road markings to warn motorists that cyclists might be expected.
The route is probably going to be improved as part of the Great North Cycleway. If these roundabouts are to be made safe enough for children to use, major alterations will be required. (The route goes past Durham Johnston School so should be available to children.) The route should cross further from the mouth of the roundabout, preferably on a different-coloured surface, maybe raised.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
There is a demand for access to the University from Belmont and areas to the east of Durham. Creating a route across the playing fields towards Old Durham would shorten journeys and give a mostly off-road route.
It would require a new bridge and a tarmac surface. Note sure if there would be issues of potential flooding. Not sure if the University would co-operate with route across its land.
Created by MJR // 2 threads
There is a group of councils and others (including the RAC) calling itself A47 Alliance with a website at http://www.a47alliance.co.uk/ calling for a road upgrade.
The A47 is a significant barrier to cycling in many places, such as the single-carriageway stretch from Tilney All Saints near King's Lynn to Swaffham that blocks several desired east-west cycle routes - it is narrow with much heavy HGV traffic, so it's a challenge to cross and feels no fun for most people to ride along. It is possible that any upgrades could be "cycle-proofed" (to use current jargon) to unblock these routes.
KLWNBUG has asked if CycleNation and CTC groups can be be invited to join the alliance.
Created by MJR // 2 threads
There was a Heritage Lottery Fund stage 1 project hoping to progress to stage 2 and work for 5 years from June 2014 to regenerate the "old town" around the Saturday Market Place. The initial draft contains no cycle measures but does mention cycle access policy, so may be persuaded to reinstate lost public cycle parking in places like opposite the old Post Office and might even be a way to fill in the missing link in National Cycle Network Route 1. The consultation papers are online at http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=26919 and open until 16 December.
The key cycling problem in this area is the difficulty of accessing Saturday Market Place without passing through the poor junction at its east end and the lack of signs telling cyclists to use Priory Lane to reach SMP.
Created by MJR // 0 threads
This is Norfolk county matters application http://eplanning.norfolk.gov.uk/PlanAppDisp.aspx?AppNo=Y/2/2013/2013 due to be heard in a meeting starting Fri 6 Dec 2013 10am at County Hall, Norwich. 7 cycle parking spaces were proposed. I objected for KLWNBUG on the grounds that 26 should be provided. Norfolk County Council Highways suggested 14 spaces and a Standard Highway Condition (27 I think) which would leave it to the Borough Council to enforce, who don't have a great track record on that in my experience. The Borough Green Infrastructure Officer didn't comment on cycle parking. Norfolk Police seem OK with the final revision. NCC planning officer suggested that if the 14 are used then it could be expanded without further application and confirmed that as a county development, there's no scope for section 106 funds for building cycle tracks to neighbouring villages.
Created by Caroline Page // 1 thread
Significant domestic car parking in the advisory cycle lane of westbound lane combines with heavy traffic jams to obstruct/block westbound passage to cyclists in rush hour. Generally there is a section of this route where pavement pushing is unavoidable
Created by WillC // 0 threads
Road narrows at pedestrian island; pavement cut away but insufficient and not usable because of surface. Creates danger as it suggest to vehicles that there is more space than there is. Passing cyclists is dangerous.
County Council is building a cycleway that will run for a mile from Boxworth End in Swavesey to Buckingway Business Park and over the A14 to Cambridge Services. This will also be available for horse riders, as it links to bridleways in the area.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 1 thread
Cycleway being built by the County Council - will run for a mile-and-a-half between Wandlebury Country Park and Babraham Research Campus, a major science development hub.
Created by George Coulouris // 7 threads
This issue is intended to act a repository for material that can be used to back-up the LCC's 2014 Local Election Campaign 'Asks'. There are 6 'asks' that were finalised and agreed at the LCC's AGM on 19 October 2013:
1. Safe routes to schools
2. Areas without through motor traffic (AWTTs)
3. Protected space on main roads/major junctions
4. Safe cycle routes via parks and canals (Greenways)
5. 20mph speed limits
6. Liveable town centres
so we'll have 6 threads under this Cyclescape issue where we can collect explanations, discussions and most importantly concrete illustrations of what is meant by each ask.
Created by Heather Coleman // 1 thread
Sorry, being a bit tongue in cheek here, but this just made me cross. And no-one has to follow this issue if they don't want to!
website here
http://www.zizzi.co.uk/venue/index/cambridge-benet-street
I've been "in touch" and left these comments:
"Your Cambridge Bene't St restaurant is allegedly "inspired by the huge cycling community". Therefore how come, in the "get directions" bit of the page, the only transport options are "car", "walk" or "train"? I know how to get from my place of employment to Bene't St by bike and even that there's a large underground cycle park just around the corner but, frankly, this is poor, and your marketing people need a rocket.
I will be posting the url of the restaurant and these comments on Cyclescape to see what the rest of the huge cycling community think."
I'll see what reply I get from their "customer experience team" and post it here as a thread when I do hear back from them.
Created by Jose Ferraro // 1 thread
As the cycle lane on Twickenham Road only goes into Park Road you need to leave the cycle lane to continue along Twickenham Road. At these two roads split there is a very deep crack that almost threw me over my handlebars as my front wheel dropped down it.
This must have been there for quite a while as it is visible on google maps at the allocated point!!
Created by Andrea Casalotti // 1 thread
Here is an ambitious plan for a Bicycle Boulevard from Shoreditch to Fitzrovia, along Old Street, Clerkenwell Road and Theobalds Road, open only to bicycles, buses and motor traffic for local access only.
a. It is now the most cycled route in London, showing that it is the desired EW route.
b. It is of variable width, therefore trying to accommodate bikes, buses, and through traffic in a consistent and safe way is impossible. In other words, a compromise will be a botch job.
c. There will not be mixing of buses and bicycles: bicycles will have a dedicated two way cycle lane on the South side of the street.
d. The Boulevard stops being a mega- EW-rat-run. Motor traffic will have to use Pentonville/City Road.
More details here: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1yw9mkHhGZaVBKYJs6FxyhC1Z4nNYVl-IFH-aR1ScK9U/pub?start=false#slide=id.p
Campaign for a 300m section of the unguided busway between Milton Road and the pedestrian and cyclists access at the end of Nuffield Close to be built as a road, providing a more direct access for lorries and cars to the trading estate.
Nuffield Road’s residential section should then be cut-off for motorised through traffic just past Discovery Way, turning the first part of Nuffield Road into a residential close.
Petition: http://iitm.be/ChestertonTrafficReduction
Picture Gallery: http://iitm.be/NuffieldRoad
Created by Andrew Clegg // 2 threads
The majority of motor traffic turns right from Union Road to head north on Radcliffe Road, and vice versa. Radcliffe Road is a home zone southwards of this junction, with associated streetscaping, and NCN 23 follows the length of Radcliffe Road.
The main problem is when heading North, where some nice streetscaping prevents drivers having a good view of any traffic exiting the home zone. A lesser problem is when heading South, where motor vehicles often pull out in front of you (presumably because they think that everyone will be turning left).
The most obvious quick fix would be to put a stop sign at the end of union road.
Area Committees are a joint meeting attended by both city and county councillors. They decide on planning issues in the area, but also have a role in the allocation of community development money from S106 contributions. They offer an opportunity to engage with multiple councillors at once, through the Open Forum section and speaking on specific Agenda items. The East Area's website is here: https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/east-area-committee
Speaking at these meetings is a good way of making your feelings on matters the councils control public.
Area Committees are a joint meeting attended by both city and county councillors. They decide on planning issues in the area, but also have a role in the allocation of community development money from S106 contributions. They offer an opportunity to engage with multiple councillors at once, through the Open Forum section and speaking on specific Agenda items. The North Area's website is here: https://www.cambridge.gov.uk/north-area-committee
Speaking at these meetings is a good way of making your feelings on matters the councils control public.
Just wondering if a decision has been made about the future of the junction.
If you look on Crash map http://www.crashmap.co.uk/Search there is a pattern of accidents on Countess Crescent pre-closure near the school. In fact it looks like an accident hotspot!
During the closure I was happy for my children to cycle up to the co-op to access the high street to go shopping, meet friends, etc. Not now! We live south of the railway line. When the closure was in place Countess Crescent became by accident a Cycling Boulevard. You can see from the dates on crashmap that it worked perfectly well as a Cycling Boulevard and was extremely safe (no accidents), so no trial would be required to determine if it is safer as a Cycling Boulevard as it has already taken place.
The junction would be the ideal place to be part of a Cycling Boulevard type infrastructure to gain access to the high street and perhaps up to the swimming pool via Parsonspool. Cars would still have easy routes to the high street and swimming pool with a cycling boulevard system in place and cyclists/pedestrians would also have a safe and enjoyable route. That would be a safe and fair compromise for all road users, as all users would have safe and suitable routes.
Currently it is not safe for adults or children by bike. Bit of a time bomb going on the crashmap site data. A positive change made for cyclists/pedestrians will benefit people locally in a safe and healthy way.
To make restrictions only during school hours would be very short sighted, as this route is a main artery for all south of the railway to access all the clubs/shops/swimming north of the railway and vice versa for the children visiting hallhill or friends south of the railway. Basically children use this route at all hours not just in school hours. We should not compromise on child safety. The swimming pool is free all summer to the kids...what then?
As a byproduct of a cycling boulevard, perhaps safe access for cyclists from the south of the railway line would encourage more people to visit the high street and shop, enhancing the local economy.
Please can you let me know of any developments.
For your info, a Bicycle Boulevard in Holland is a 'Woonerf', a living street:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/road-safety/9086705/Why-woonerfs-will-change-how-we-drive.html
Created by Richenda // 1 thread
Apparently TfL commissioned "...to explore the opportunity of a pedestrian river crossing ....". They may not think bikes should also be included, but they should!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/luxury/travel/4162/a-garden-bridge-across-the-thames.html
http://www.gardenbridgetrust.org/index.html
This map shows all issues, whether points, routes, or areas:
The most popular issues, based on the number of votes:
Created by Andrew Woodward // 1 thread
The path linking Bank Lane to Palewell Fields is currently pedestrian only, with gates across it. Opening this up to cyclists would improve permeability and provide a quiet route to Richmond Park Academy school from Roehampton (east-west); and to Ibstock Place school from Sheen (west-east).
Despite the number of bridges that link Newcastle and Gateshead, there is not a single route across the Tyne that throws bike users in to conflict with either high volumes of motor vehicles at high speeds or that uses shared paths that create potential conflict with pedestrians.
Due to the amount of people who already cycle between Newcastle and Gateshead and the potential for this to grow, there should be at least one high level crossing that gives bike users there own space when crossing the Tyne.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 1 thread
Footbridges at Mortlake railway station should be fitted with troughs to enable cyclists to easily wheel bicycles to the other platform. Cyclists frequently carry bicycles over the footbridge, as per the photo - one going in each direction!
Created by Paul James // 1 thread
The cycleways along the Thames Path and along Ducks Walk are not connected with the south/east side cycleway across Twickenham Bridge and only to the north/west side cycleway via a long detour through Old Deer Park or along The Avenue.
A ramped way down from the bridge would create a useful route for people into and out of Richmond town center that is currently only possible by using two flights of steps.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 1 thread
It would be much safer to have cyclist priority on the slip roads here as is done in The Netherlands http://www.flickr.com/photos/smsm1/10046288016/ , or even the following example from Britain: http://www.cycling-embassy.org.uk/photos/good-cycling-facility-of-the-week/good-cycling-facility-of-the-week-14th-november-2013-0
The slip roads also need to be narrowed to slow motor vehicle speeds as does the turning radii of the roundabout.
Created by jpennycook // 1 thread
"Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council has commissioned Sustrans, a leading UK charity that aims to encourage people to travel by foot, bicycle or public transport for more of their local journeys to help create a ‘cycling strategy’ and new cycle network map in consultation with the people who live in, work in or visit the borough."
The strategy ignores most of the Borough, has low aims (lowest common denominator rather than facilities suitable for all riders), and is being made irrelevant by new housing developments.
Responses to the consultation should be in by 11th December.
Here is a map showing the Borough Council's boundaries: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/127249
By zooming in to this map, you can see the proposed corridors as dashed blue highlights: http://opencyclemap.org/?zoom=12&lat=51.2725&lon=-1.15&layers=B0000
Created by Grahame Cooper // 1 thread
Irlams O'th Height roundabout has been the location of a number of collisions involving cyclists (including myself and my daughter last September).
There was a consultation last year over proposals produced by Sustrans for the improvement of this, and I showed my comments (annotations on proposed plans) at a previous GMCC meeting. You can find this annotated document here: https://copy.com/tAIjQdMSxfcsq4fz (large PDF - need to download to see all pages).
A leaflet on the intended imrovements can be found here: http://www.urbanvision.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Cycling-Leaflet.pdf
I am disappointed with this for the following reasons:
- Extensive use of shared footways in the scheme (Salford Council seems to be in love with these, but they are bad).
- Southbound approach on A666 looks impractical & dangerous: a sharp left turn onto the shared footway right at the busy entrance to the roundabout!
- Whilst carriageway widths have been reduced, kerb radii at the mouth of entrances and exits do not seem to have been reduced, so "drivers looking right whilst accelerating left" will still pose a danger for cyclists who do not want to use the shared footways.
- Limited improvements to the subways (tile removal, lighting and resurfacing) will probably not result in an attractive facility for cyclists. Access to this from Bolton Road (northbound) looks awkward.
- There is no undertaking mentioned to ensure that facilities will be maintained and swept.
- I'm still not confident regarding the social safety of the off-road parts, especially in the dark winter months.
Those are my immediate reactions. Could be more to add.
Created by SamGW // 1 thread
The Road between Great Wilbraham and Fulbourn is very well used by Cyclists, runners and walkers throughout the year. It is a single track road with a 60 MPH speed limit. A bicycle path here would encourage more people to cycle to Fulbourn and Cambridge. The path would significantly improve safety for cars, pedestrians and cyclists.
Martin Lucas-Smith // 10 threads
Milton Road, like other main roads in the city, is a mix of typically bad bits of cycle infrastructure. There is considerable scope, possibly within the City Deal funding, to rework the whole streetscape to Dutch standards.
Created by MJR // 2 threads
There was a Heritage Lottery Fund stage 1 project hoping to progress to stage 2 and work for 5 years from June 2014 to regenerate the "old town" around the Saturday Market Place. The initial draft contains no cycle measures but does mention cycle access policy, so may be persuaded to reinstate lost public cycle parking in places like opposite the old Post Office and might even be a way to fill in the missing link in National Cycle Network Route 1. The consultation papers are online at http://www.west-norfolk.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=26919 and open until 16 December.
The key cycling problem in this area is the difficulty of accessing Saturday Market Place without passing through the poor junction at its east end and the lack of signs telling cyclists to use Priory Lane to reach SMP.
Created by Frenchie // 0 threads
This is one of the prime candidate for a cycle contraflow in Newcastle City Centre. Currently one way for all traffic from Percy Street to Strawberry place. Allowing cyclists down from Strawberry Place to Percy Street would improve permeability and connectivity for cyclists. Note: not a lot of traffic, space not an issue, short uphill section so speeding not an issue.
Created by Robin Heydon // 2 threads
The Landbeach Parish Council would like the bridgeway from Landbeach to Cambridge to be upgraded to a cycleway.
Created by Simon B // 1 thread
The river crossing across the River Dee from Chester City Centre to Handbridge is a key access route for cyclists from south of the city into the city centre, especially since the pedestrian crossing across the suspension bridge from Handbridge/Queens Park has a prohibition on cycling.
The crossing on the histroric Handbridge is controlled by traffic lights operated by inductive sensors at both ends of the bridge. The timing of these lights means that those who are slower cyclists or part of a group of cyclists sometimes do not reach the other side of the bridge before the lights have changed for the traffic in the opposite direction.
This causes an intimidatory situation, and occasionally a dangerous situation when traffic has started to cross on to the narrow bridge confronting cyclists coming in the other direction.
It would be helpful to log any incidents that people may have encountered to accumulate suitable evidence for both English Heritage (who control aspects of what can be installed on to the listed structure) and for the Highway Authroity (Cheshire West & Chester Council) to afford this a greater priority than currently.
The Council is unwilling to lengthen the delay on the lights before they change in the opposite direction (citing unjustifiable delay to traffic), and English Heritage have said that additional sensors cannot be installed into the road surface /bridge structure to delay the changing of lights due to cyclists still traversing the bridge.
Where the quite good segregated cycle lane joins The Ride, DfT advice was certainly NOT followed. As per DfT advice, when cycle lanes are merged with the carriageway, it should be done via a length of dropped kerb that is flush with the carriageway and the cycle lane shouldn't be joined at a 90 degree angle to the road.
Here, the cycle lane runs parallel to the road for a short distance before it loops around a large boulder specifically placed to force cyclists around and then finally joins the road at a 90 degree angle.
The kerb, though dropped, is far from flush and creates a risk for cyclists joining the track from the road.
This junction between the road and the track should be scrapped and redone according to DfT guidelines.
Created by Matthew Phillips // 1 thread
If you follow NCN 7/14/70 through Durham from west to east, then after crossing Pennyferry bridge and proceeding south towards Fleshergate you find a no entry sign which adds "Cyclists dismount". There ought to be a contraflow cycle lane on this one way street. Round the corner just further on there is a contraflow lane!
Update, 3rd May 2016.
The road layout has been changed in conjunction with the new office blocks at Freeman's Reach. The road was previously wide enough to be two-way, apart from the problem of the bays for coaches to offload tourists. Now the pavement has been extended to enclose the bays, and the main carriageway is much narrower. What had been ordinary footway further along is now a ramp up to the office doors, with the footway now taking the place of part of the previous carriageway. There is a shared-use sign on the pavement, if you are travelling north, but "cyclists give way to pedestrians" has been added, as though they are aware that the space is not really wide enough. On the reverse of the sign is a "cyclists dismount" sign again, so there is still no means of turning south round the corner to join the short contraflow lane.
By the end of Pennyferry Bridge there is now a little shared use sign indicating that it is permissible to cycle on the new walkway round the river side of the office blocks. Mixing bikes and pedestrians along this route will probably be unpopular.
Created by Andrew Woodward // 0 threads
Westbound cycle lane is painted about 2m out from the kerb for no reason; child cyclists tend to follow paint rather than the common sense option which is to cycle next to the kerb.
Created by WilliamNB // 0 threads
When cycling north-bound along Tavistock Road, there is a cycle lane in places. Once out from under the Crownhill Road bridge the lane turns sharply left, forcing cyclists to yield to traffic joining Tavistock Road from the left.
The Highway Code states you should yield to traffic from the right and this junction is very dangerous to cyclists. It would be far better to simply continue the cycle lane straight ahead and erect yield signs to traffic joining Tavistock Road
Created by Colin Bell // 1 thread
Has there been any improvement in the "new" NCN 11 route from Waterbeach to Lode since last summer? Last time I went that way I had to wheel the bike across fields and carry it over two or three stiles.
Any information, including a forecast date when a proper route is likely to be built, welcome. Thanks.
Natalie G // 1 thread
This consultation seeks to gather your views on Hackney Council’s proposals for improving the environment for cycling and walking and controlling traffic flow on Oldhill Street between Stamford Grove East and Feldman Close, including:
• a one-way system on Oldhill Street from Stamford Grove East to Feldman Close
• a School Street to make it safer and easier for children to walk and cycle to school.
The one-way system will serve to stop people driving vehicles along the footway outside Tyssen School.
For the School Street, the same section of Oldhill Street will temporarily become a pedestrian- and cycle-only zone for 45 minutes at school opening and closing times whilst maintaining access for residents, businesses, pedestrians and cyclists. This will tackle congestion at the school gates and improve the environment and safety for those travelling to school.
Residents and businesses who live and work on this section of Oldhill Street will be able to register for an exemption so they can still get to and from their homes and businesses by vehicle.
Created by Matthew // 2 threads
On 1 January 2026, historic routes in England that aren’t properly recorded will be lost to the public forever. We are looking for people to volunteer their time to help us identify and register these routes before it is too late.
Vehicles are continually abusing cyclists who use the road here because the bus lane on the other side forces the carriageway to be narrow.
Although there is the cycleway, it has the usual problems of loss of priority at sideroads, bins in the way, people going in and out of driveways, etc.
Created by t1mmyb // 0 threads
There is a pair of traffic-calming chicanes/pinch points on The Hollow. The one lower down the hill (where drivers must give way to downhill traffic) has a cycle bypass; the one further up the hill (where ascending traffic has priority) does not.
When I cycle up The Hollow I am probably managing about 5mph; this pinch point brings me into conflict with much faster motorised traffic going up the hill, to the extent that I usually avoid the road completely and take a different route (Southdown Road) that has no traffic islands/pinchpoints.
Created by Kevin Ablitt // 1 thread
It is a constant problem that car drivers think it is acceptable to park in this particular spot.
The single yellow needs upgrading to double yellow lines ( is this enforced anyway ) OR we need hard infrastruture design which prevents such selfish behaviour.
Created by Shaun McDonald // 0 threads
The traffic lights at Eagle Street were timed such that travelling eastbound you would always get caught at the second set unless you were extremely fast setting off. After discussions with the council and it brought up at the Sustainability Forum by Cllr Smart, it was fixed to increase the length of time that those lights were green, and was great as you always knew you could get through the second set of lights without having to wait unless you just went through the earlier ones just before they went red.
However over the past few days the signal timing has changed back to the older timing where the probability of getting through the second set is virtually nil. In an ideal world they would be phased such that the first set would go green, then the second set would go green several seconds later at the point where you would be arriving at them, rather than having them change to green almost at the same time.
Created by Stephan Matthiesen // 1 thread
The chicane at the west end of the Magdalene Glen path interrupts the flow when going uphills, particularly unpleasant for people with weak knees. It also forces cyclists uphills often to stop and start when there are other people going through, as it's not wide enough to pass.
It doesn't serve any useful purpose at it is on the top of the slope where cyclists are very slow anyway. As it's uphills, there is little danger that e.g. kids run out onto the wide pavement of Duddingston Pk South. Cyclists from the West are slow at this point anyway as they turn into the path.