Shortly before the summer break local boy Harry was knocked down and seriously hurt walking home when a white van crashed into him from behind, putting him in a coma.
Last night’s STV News followed up on the accident, reporting on his recovery and return to school whilst looking at issues of pedestrian and cyclist safety in and around the area.
Maya’s story was covered in this week’s East Lothian Courier. She represents one of a number of people, young and old, unable to use the existing pavement at the bridge to get from one side of Pencaitland to the other.
For more background read the story Parallel footpath proposal returns for more consultation and the many comments debating the pros and cons of the parallel footpath plan.
One person who couldn’t attend yesterday’s public consultation was local girl Maya Coates who relies on a K-Walker for mobility.
Unfortunately, this meant she was unable to use the pavement to attend the meeting on foot and give her views on the footpath plans. Instead she came as far as she is able unaided and handed her letter to a member of the community council who passed it on to Brian Cooper from East Lothian Council.
“I am writing to you to see if it’s possible to widen the pavement on the A6093 in Pencaitland between the church and the Spar – especially the narrow bit before the bridge.
I am 12 years old and I like hanging around with my friends and going to the Spar. I have to use the K-Walker to help me walk and be independent. The pavement is so narrow that it’s not safe for me to walk on it because my walker is too wide, this means I can’t go to the shops with my friends. My sister also has a disability and loves to use her red bike, but this is too wide to fit on the pavement.
My mum says there is going to be a meeting about the narrow pavement. I hope that my views will be considered.
Thank you,
Maya”
Remember, if you still want to participate because you missed the consultation and haven’t had the opportunity to air your view through other means, you can still take part in the one question survey here.
Villagers are to get another opportunity to express their views about Pencaitland’s narrow main-road footpath. In September, plans agreed by a range of community groups and ELC transport officials were expected to be passed by ELC Planning Committee. But Planning delayed its decision, saying it wants to ensure villagers have another chance to review the the same plans.
A letter to villagers explains that a public consultation is being offered to all interested locals in Pencaitland’s Trevelyan Hall between 2pm and 8pm on Tuesday the 30th of October. Transport officials and local councillors will be on hand to answer any questions or concerns anyone may have about the proposed parallel footpath before a final decision is taken by ELC councillors on whether to complete the partially done footpath or drop the plan with no alternative solution on offer. Can’t make it? You can still make your views known.
The plan boils down to building a wider footpath running parallel to the main road from the bridge, through church grounds and directly into the school, thus avoiding the main road pavement which is 75cm in places and too narrow for two people to pass without stepping onto the road, or to allow someone using a wheelchair or pushing many makes of baby buggy to safely get across the village on foot.
It was the footpath campaign, made up of concerned parents, dog-owners and other locals, that originally took issue with the ELC over the dangerously narrow footpath in 2008. This came to a head in February 2011 when ELC councillors and officals vetoed an earlier plan to extend the lights and widen the main road pavement.
Subsequent community talks were held at the direct request of ELC councillors. This led to the parallel footpath plan which was the end result of 18 months of discussion between members of the church, ELC transport and planning officials, ELC councillors, the Community Council and the Fatal Footpath Campaign.
The community now has a second opportunity to review the same parallel footpath plan later this month and express a view on whether they wish to see the parallel path proceed to completion or, effectively, drop it entirely. Currently this is the only footpath plan acceptable to ELC’s transport officials.
So what’s good and bad about the parallel footpath plan which is being re-presented to members of the community on the 30th?
PROs
CONs
We would encourage everyone with a view on these plans to make the time to go and see for themselves what’s being proposed and to consider what it will mean for the community as a whole. ELC officials are going to be on hand from 2pm through to 8pm to try to give everyone a chance to see, and have explained, what is being proposed.
However, if you are unable to come along on the day but want to express a view we would encourage you to leave a comment below, email us, and/or take part in our mini survey.
If you don’t see the survey question above you can click here
These plans were the culmination of 18 months of negotiations between members of the church, ELC transport and planning officials, ELC councillors, the Community Council and the Fatal Footpath campaign. These talks came about at the direct request of ELC councillors keen to find a workable solution after rejecting the case for widening the main road pavement and extending the lights between the bridge and the church.
Last Tuesday (4th Sep) locally elected councillor Jim Gillies (LAB), who now sits on the Planning Committee, argued that the new parallel footpath plans lodged had not been given sufficient scrutiny by residents of Pencaitland. Donald Grant (LAB), another local councillor said that this had been going on too long arguing that planning consent should be granted. At the vote Grant lost.
This means that work previously carried out on the site in preparation remains in limbo with no likelihood of the footpath being completed until further community consultations on both this existing parallel footpath plan and any varations or alternatives deemed viable. Crucially, anything presented to the community must be deemed acceptable to both transport and planning officials in East Lothian Council to avoid plans being voted down once again at Council. This is a task now being championed by recently elected councillor Shamin Akhtar (LAB).
Once it is clear what, if any, alternative options may be viable, these, along with the current plans for a parallel footpath or variants of it, will be presented to the community. This will most likely be achieved with a public viewing in Trevelyan Hall and promoted via an information campaign to each household, as well as through this website and social media.
Long time footpath campaigner and mum Sheila Averbuch said, “Last year the ELC failed to widen the main road footpath despite well over 300 village signatures demanding they do so. The half finished parallel footpath through the churchyard was acceptable to the Fatal Footpath campaign as an alternative. I’m astonished that Planning Committee hasn’t yet approved it. I hope supporters of pedestrian safety will tell the Council clearly that they want the parallel footpath completed.”
Anyone interested in the recent preliminary work in and around the grounds of Pencaitland Parish Church can now view detailed planning application information on the East Lothian Council website.
These plans stem from safety concerns originating in 2008 over the narrowness of the main road footpath and are the culmination of many years of discussion and debate amongst interested parties, including the Church, the Community Council, East Lothian Council, the school, Pencaitland’s Fatal Footpath Campaign and other interested parties.
There are two applications:
The first application relates to the creation of an opening to a wall to the eastern perimeter of the church grounds, but it is the second application where the bulk of the changes which affect the community are explained. There are a number of supporting documents — 25 in all.
A good overview of what is planned can be gained from viewing the PDF file plan of the whole section of works, running from the school car park to the east, to the stone roadbridge to the west.
We would encourage everyone with a view on these plans, whether for or against, to leave a comment on the ELC website. It is only through airing your support or concerns that they can be addressed, so it is in everyone’s interest to do so.
Pencaitland Community Council
