I regularly visit a leisure resort in the borders with my extended family.

It is located in an extensive ‘woodland village’ but, being a very environmentally friendly place, it does not permit the use of motor driven vehicles within its grounds.

After unloading at your cabin, you return your car to the secure parking area at Reception, and you can choose whether to walk back, or hire a bicycle, if you have not brought your own.

We have noted that pedestrians and cyclists seem to be much more considerate of each other there, where all routes are designated as shared, but with pedestrians having priority.

It is also significant that all bicycles used on this site must have working lights fore and aft, plus a bell (not a whistle, hooter, siren nor yell!), and there are path-signs strategically placed and spaced along the ways, to remind both types of user of the presence of the other.

Ditches, low fences and other obstacles on either side of the paths, ensure that cyclists cannot make short-cuts, or encroach on path verges to overtake pedestrians at speed, therefore they require the co-operation of the pedestrian ‘to make way’ at the courteous request of a tinkle on the bell, and a friendly ”Thank you!” as you pass.

Polite pedestrians also quickly learn to ‘Walk on the Right’ in order to leave a cyclist space to pass, more especially on up-hill stretches, where slowing to a stop on a hill can mean falling off for the less able cyclist. In turn cyclists learn to look out for pedestrians and animals, who can change direction and start or stop, much quicker than any vehicle can.

Another advantage of this mixed use is to remind us that all cyclists are pedestrians at some point, and most pedestrians are at least potential cyclists, so if most of them act reasonably most of the time, there will be very little cause for ‘aggro’.

Far from being a Safety Feature, we think that divided routes are actually a hazard for pedestrians, particularly for those with defective sight and/or hearing, and especially so for young children and animals.

‘Wide White Lines’ give both cyclists and pedestrians a false sense of security, suggesting this is their ‘Reserved Territory’ on which the other must not encroach.

Consequently, cyclists race along straights and down slopes at breakneck speeds entirely out of proportion to the local circumstances (viz. on Bruntsfield Links and The Meadows some benches, bins, and pathways can only be accessed by ‘crossing the line’).

Additionally ‘No Cycling’ signs are simply a challenge for the irresponsible cyclist, a justification for the aggressive pedestrian, and should be unnecessary for any polite and reasonable person from either side of ‘the line’.

All authorities involved with cyclists and walkers should make it very clear to all drivers of vehicles, that Path-ways, Pavements, Public spaces, and Parks are designed primarily for use by pedestrians.

However, reasonable pedestrians may be persuaded to share these areas - where necessary - with people who use self-propelled vehicles courteously, carefully, and quietly.

Previous Tollcross Articles
Coffee by the canal as vision of Venice takes shape
Teenage paint vandal caught red-handed
Bike recycling charity on a roll in Capital