Call for action on Fife cycle path dubbed ‘not safe’ for cyclists or pedestrians

It was launched by Dr Lydia Cole and the St Andrews Space for Cycling group, and has garnered 436 signatures from local residents. It will be presented to North East Area councillors next week., and ask it to consider improvements and safety measures.

The cycle path forms part of National Cycle Network Route 1. It also connects travellers to the University of St Andrews Eden Campus, the railway station, and more. Although the first two thirds is segregated from traffic, the final third brings cyclists and pedestrians onto a narrow, barrier-less path adjacent to 50MPH traffic on the A91.

“In strong winds, which are increasingly common, cyclists risk being blown into oncoming traffic on one side or down a steep bank into fields on the other,” the petition said.

Other petitioners called the path a “mess” that “needs to be fixed”.

"I have led family rides along this path and even as a qualified cycle ride leader, and I do not recommend leading people along this route. At the end you have to get off and walk in order to avoid children falling into the road or getting hit by cars at the crossing in Guardbridge," another petitioner said.

Another added: “This part of the cyclepath is clearly dangerous as well as being unpleasant to cycle along."

The petition highlighted both the poor condition of the pathway surface, and the speed and proximity of the traffic. Some petitioners also mentioned the “dangers posed by the numerous ‘blind’ driveways which crossover the path”.

The petition has also already been supported by Councillors Jane Ann Liston and Al Clark (both Lib-Dem councillors for St Andrews). An area committee report from John Mitchell, Fife’s head of roads and transportation, acknowledged that “the cycle track does not meet modern design guidance”.

“The Council is aware that approximately 1 kilometre of [the cycleway] at Edenside does not meet modern design guidance for a shared pedestrian/cycle path beside a live carriageway,” the report said.

Nonetheless, options for improving it are limited by property rights and road safety concerns.

Initial inspections of the A91 suggest that it would not be safe to widen the cycle path into the roadway space because of traffic speeds. That means it’s “highly likely” that the council will need access to private land to widen or realign the pathway.

“Access to private lands is almost certainly required for a long-term solution,” Mr Mitchell’s report said. “If access to the land to the north of the A91 became available, one option would be to provide a path through the private land, currently used for agricultural purposes and for equestrian use.”

The report continued: “Alternative solutions are harder to identify or could be extremely expensive. Nonetheless, land ownership opportunities are also being explored on the south side of the A91 as well.”

Mr Mitchell said private landowners have been identified and will soon be contacted by Roads and Transportation officers while the council starts the process of trying to obtain land to enable the path to be upgraded.

The petition and improvement plans will be discussed at the next North East Area Committee meeting on Wednesday, October. 23