http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: "extensive facilities for cyclists" (and expensive too!) - St. James 'Quarter' en Wed, 13 May 2026 04:24:12 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=5#post-193411 Thu, 16 Jul 2015 23:58:11 +0000 chdot 193411@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/letters/blunder-warning-1-3831663" rel="nofollow">http://www.scotsman.com/news/opinion/letters/blunder-warning-1-3831663</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=5#post-193264 Wed, 15 Jul 2015 11:12:11 +0000 Min 193264@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Rant incoming:- </p> <p>The traffic lights at the top of Broughton Street have eventually been changed to allow for the fact that traffic can't go in and out of Broughton Street. For the first week or so they were just operating anyway. Now they have apparently been "improved" by making the green light phenomenally long for traffic coming from Queen Street leaving crowds of pedestrians to get sick of waiting and dodge and weave through the lanes of moving traffic to try and get across.</p> <p>Also - why must "cyclists dismount"? There is space (thus far) for cyclists to keep on the road at Broughton Street but they are supposed to dismount and push their bikes on an already narrow and overcrowded pavement? Ridiculous. Motor centric.</p> <p>I hate the way roadworks are managed in this country. If that word can even be used. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=5#post-192603 Mon, 06 Jul 2015 10:30:03 +0000 wingpig 192603@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Cathedral Lane and Broughton Road closed, so expect more bunged-up-ness like there was this morning between the roundabout end of London Road and York Place as large and impractical vehicles struggle to distribute themselves efficiently in a changing number of curving lanes. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=5#post-192493 Sat, 04 Jul 2015 11:47:14 +0000 chdot 192493@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/john-lewis-threaten-to-leave-over-st-james-plan-1-3821500" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/john-lewis-threaten-to-leave-over-st-james-plan-1-3821500</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=5#post-192407 Fri, 03 Jul 2015 10:35:17 +0000 chdot 192407@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>Work gets under way on the £850 million Edinburgh St James project in earnest tomorrow – with the first road closure just three days after planning permission was granted. </p> <p>In a sign of the mammoth development is gathering pace, parts of Broughton Street will be closed for two weeks to allow new power cables to be laid.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/disruption-begins-as-work-on-st-james-kick-starts-1-3820546" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/disruption-begins-as-work-on-st-james-kick-starts-1-3820546</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=5#post-192394 Fri, 03 Jul 2015 08:59:02 +0000 neddie 192394@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It probably won't matter what the stone cladding is. In a few years time it will be covered in a fine layer of soot/grime from 3 times as many cars all belching illegal levels of PM10s and NOx into Leith St. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-192383 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 21:19:55 +0000 kaputnik 192383@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>that it is appropriate to reinstate the building at this position on Leith Street from an historic environment perspective</em></p> <p>That's pretty convenient logic given the "historic environment perspective" didn't matter one bit when choosing the stone cladding of the development. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-192367 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 18:30:16 +0000 crowriver 192367@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ah yes. That would be "unpopular" though. So clearly impossible.</p> <p>Sorry cyclists, tough cheddar. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-192365 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 17:03:42 +0000 neddie 192365@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@mgj</p> <p>CECs own transport hierarchy (highest priority first) is: pedestrian, bike, tram, bus, taxi, service vehicles, private car.</p> <p>It is cars that should be the first thing to be displaced in the event of a "lack of space".</p> <p>The solution is to remove one (or both) of the general traffic lanes. No need to demolish any historic buildings in order to accommodate cars. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-192364 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 16:51:47 +0000 mgj 192364@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Given the gradient of Leith Street, I'd rather have an enforced lane shared with buses rather than a narrow dedicated lane for bikes, both ways, especially after cycling from the foot of the walk.</p> <p>I think the planners were saying that there would be room for dedicated cycling lanes, bus lane and general use lane both ways only by shifting the road west into the development (ie towards where the King James hotel and John Lewis are); the other option is to take down the tenements - and I hope for the sake of a short section of dedicated bike lane we are not in a position of arguing for further demolition of perfectly good buildings. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-192354 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 13:06:19 +0000 neddie 192354@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The Environmental Impacts section makes for interesting reading too (page 23):</p> <p><em>h) Environmental Impacts</p> <p>Air quality</p> <p>There are air quality impacts resulting from the car park... </p> <p>...Environmental Assessment stated its opinion that certain elements of these proposals will produce adverse impacts on Local Air Quality. Environmental Assessment maintain this concern and would prefer the car park extracts are put at a higher level. Within the scope of the design proposed, such an approach is not possible. Taking into account<br /> that the decision on the outline planning permission took into account the air quality impacts, it is not reasonable to require further mitigation measures at this stage.</em></p> <p>Sorry, but I don't see how it "not possible" to vent the car park to higher level - these are called chimneys. They used to be built all over Edinburgh. Let them build the chimneys above the car park as monuments to the folly of CEC planners and environmental destruction, instead of trying to "cover up" the pollution issue by hiding the vents and dumping the noxious gases into the Leith St canyon. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-192352 Thu, 02 Jul 2015 12:54:15 +0000 neddie 192352@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The full report on the St James Qtr. decision is available here:</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/47631/development_management_sub-committee_1_july_2015_full_meeting_papers" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/47631/development_management_sub-committee_1_july_2015_full_meeting_papers</a></p> <p>From:<br /> <a href="http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings/meeting/3711/development_management_sub-committee" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings/meeting/3711/development_management_sub-committee</a></p> <p>Section 3.3(i) (page 24 of the pdf) gives their response to transport matters.</p> <p>Section 3.3(l) (page 26 of the pdf) gives their response to the material objections.</p> <p>From the transport section:</p> <p><em>On Leith Street as far up as its junction with Calton Road, a segregated cycle route is proposed. Objectors would prefer this is continued to Princes Street. This is not possible at this time for three main reasons. Firstly, at its Princes Street junction, Leith<br /> Street is narrow. This restricts available space.</em></p> <p>But according to the Dutch experts who visited Edinburgh: "There is always room for cycle tracks"</p> <p><em>Secondly, the needs of other modes of transport have to be met. The street is a major north/south route through the city centre. It accommodates buses as well as cars and other vehicles. Bus lanes are<br /> needed to ensure that the public transport network can move as freely as possible. Once bus lanes are included, additional lanes are needed for vehicles other than buses, cycles and taxis.</em></p> <p>"vehicles other than buses, cycles and taxis" being (mostly single occupancy) private cars. So basically the needs of private cars are being put before those of cyclists, contrary to CEC's own hierarchy. And undoubtedly, the pavements could do with being widened to meet the needs of pedestrians. </p> <p><em>Combined with the pavements, this means that there is not enough space overall to provide a segregated cycle route within this part of the street. Cyclists will be able to use bus lanes.</em></p> <p>So tough, you'll just have to lump it with heavy machinery.</p> <p><em>Thirdly, the form of the building has planning permission as a result of the outline planning permission. Given this, and that it is appropriate to reinstate the building at this position on Leith Street from an historic environment perspective, it is not possible to make the street wider.</em></p> <p><em>While it may be possible to implement further measures to improve cycle accessibility along Leith Street in future, it is not possible at this time.</em></p> <p>So basically we can't be bothered doing it now, so we'll just leave that up to someone else to do &amp; pay for, some time never.</p> <p>There is plenty of material in there for a blog post or two, I imagine (I don't blog, but hopefully some of the eloquent bloggers out there will write something about this completely lame transport/environmental response) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-179240 Wed, 28 Jan 2015 21:43:44 +0000 Fountainbridge 179240@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I've stuck my objection in. The plans are rather vague to comment on though. I noticed some existing pedestrian crossings had disappeared on certain plans.</p> <p>From a pedestrian point of view very little changes around the site unfortunately and definitely a missed opportunity. </p> <p>The developers say they'll be improving Leith Street and will no longer need the pedestrian bridge. Can't see how considering it's still 4 lanes wide and no extra pedestrian crossing points. </p> <p>Seems to me a way of removing easy access to the Omni Centre car park.</p> <p>A once in a generation opportunity to fix things - sadly not going to be this generation.</p> <p>###############################</p> <p>With regards to the comment about loosing a lane on Leith street. At the moment there's only one lane at the top end of the street, opening out to 2 lanes further down. Theoretically the road could continue with one lane the entire way down towards Picardy without losing capacity.</p> <p>Up hill though there's 2 separate streams of traffic - towards North Bridge and traffic turning along Princes Street. The traffic turning right often becomes blocked. It should be possible to realign the road to allow 3 lanes plus bike. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-179195 Wed, 28 Jan 2015 13:57:44 +0000 chdot 179195@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Objections to be in on Friday. </p> <p>One particular issue is plan for Leith Street. </p> <p>From Spokes objection -</p> <p>"</p> <p>A) LEITH STREET </p> <p>[Transport Statement, 4.3] We object to the Leith Street proposals. Segregated cycle provision from Picardy Place up to Calton Road is welcome, but it must continue up to Waterloo Place, for Princes Street, not end at Calton Road. </p> <p>Given the very tight width constraints we appreciate that this means reducing motor traffic from 4 to 3 lanes, with only one lane either uphill or downhill, at least for some of the way. We note that reducing traffic lanes from 2 to 1 in order to install cycle facilities is what the Council has already done successfully at the Mound crossing of Princes Street – despite initially rejecting our suggestion of that, on the grounds of traffic modelling results.</p> <p>"</p> <p>More at -</p> <p><a href="http://www.spokes.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/1501-St-James-Centre-Objection-PA-14_5263_AMC.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.spokes.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/1501-St-James-Centre-Objection-PA-14_5263_AMC.pdf</a></p> <p>Background -</p> <p><a href="http://www.spokes.org.uk/2015/01/leith-street-cycling-future-or-not/" rel="nofollow">http://www.spokes.org.uk/2015/01/leith-street-cycling-future-or-not/</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177641 Tue, 13 Jan 2015 13:48:09 +0000 chdot 177641@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>“The masterplan is based on the creation of streets, squares and buildings, each with individual characters but brought together within a unified whole.”</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/how-st-james-revamp-will-change-edinburgh-1-3659292" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/how-st-james-revamp-will-change-edinburgh-1-3659292</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177494 Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:55:00 +0000 Morningsider 177494@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Tulyar - common good land can be leased. The Waverley Market site (Princes Square) is common good land. The Council didn't really negotiate that hard with the developers though though - rent of one pence a year for a 175 years seems a tad generous to me. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177487 Mon, 12 Jan 2015 11:18:04 +0000 kaputnik 177487@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>On skimming this, it looks like the pedestrian cut through is it james craig walk? </em></p> <p>That's the one. The remaining bit of the back of George Square Georgian housing faces on to it, now a student <strike>prison</strike> apartments. I think the intention is to turf the student accomdation company out and restore the block as flats and offices. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177470 Mon, 12 Jan 2015 07:57:19 +0000 gembo 177470@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>On skimming this, it looks like the pedestrian cut through is it james craig walk? From bus station to what was HMV, that gave you the view of NSAH carbuncle is to be acquired by the council but leased back to the developer for a pound a year. There is still some housing in this little area? However the lanes round the back that only ever saw use when bus station closed are to be sold. I guess these are the vehicular access points? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177468 Mon, 12 Jan 2015 01:35:15 +0000 Tulyar 177468@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Why can't Common Good Land be leased? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177407 Sat, 10 Jan 2015 11:58:27 +0000 neddie 177407@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Disposal of Council-owned and inalienable Common Good land to the developer of the St James Quarter</p> <p><a href="http://www.broughtonspurtle.org.uk/news/st-james-quarter-council-land-deals-go-committee" rel="nofollow">http://www.broughtonspurtle.org.uk/news/st-james-quarter-council-land-deals-go-committee</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177280 Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:19:24 +0000 UtrechtCyclist 177280@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Broughton Spurtle say they're having problems with the links, but everything is available from <a href="https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&amp;keyVal=NGU1HAEWI4900" rel="nofollow">https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&amp;keyVal=NGU1HAEWI4900</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177278 Thu, 08 Jan 2015 18:05:17 +0000 chdot 177278@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So I clicked on</p> <p>"</p> <p>Illustrative Masterplan Addendum Part 2: Transport. Illustrative routes through and around the development.</p> <p>"</p> <p>and got -</p> <p>"</p> <p>Document Unavailable<br /> This document is unavailable for viewing at this time.</p> <p>"</p> <p>Hope it's a temporary problem!... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-177277 Thu, 08 Jan 2015 17:55:33 +0000 neddie 177277@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.broughtonspurtle.org.uk/news/st-james-quarter-more-flesh-bones" rel="nofollow">http://www.broughtonspurtle.org.uk/news/st-james-quarter-more-flesh-bones</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-176574 Fri, 26 Dec 2014 18:20:49 +0000 Fountainbridge 176574@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>What are the chances of this turning in to another Caltongate, SOCO or Omni Centre development? What's to stop the site being demolished and sitting empty for 10 years? As far as I'm aware they've not even submitted an outline planning application.</p> <p>Whenever a developer offers to do something more than what they absolutely have to, they have an ulterior motive.</p> <p>I'm guessing by moving the York Place tram stop it will increase the throughput of the overall junction, and possibly increase capacity on York Place / bus station junction. That will form one of the main access points to the development.</p> <p>Original plan for Picardy Roundabout public transport interchange<br /> <img src="https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7541/16111447022_2aecd49fb3.jpg"> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-176304 Sat, 20 Dec 2014 11:17:58 +0000 chdot 176304@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/plans-for-st-james-quarter-tenements-unveiled-1-3639855" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/plans-for-st-james-quarter-tenements-unveiled-1-3639855</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-172349 Sat, 15 Nov 2014 11:20:54 +0000 chdot 172349@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/st-james-square-flats-to-be-restored-1-3606096" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/st-james-square-flats-to-be-restored-1-3606096</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-171332 Fri, 07 Nov 2014 13:28:07 +0000 chdot 171332@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>" </p> <p>Plans to make the £850 million St James Quarter a cycle-friendly hub have been praised by campaigners, who say the development will help link-up disjointed city-centre bike routes. </p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13886" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13886</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-170560 Sun, 02 Nov 2014 13:10:53 +0000 dougal 170560@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>So one day, in the future, it might be possible to leave the train station by Calton Road and get to Leith without going back to Princes Street first. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-170538 Sat, 01 Nov 2014 14:18:20 +0000 crowriver 170538@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm in favour of even a short extension, as personally it would bring the tram usefully near to where I live. Walking distance (or a short bike hop off-peak?). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=12696&page=4#post-170526 Sat, 01 Nov 2014 11:38:29 +0000 chdot 170526@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"</p> <p>It is understood proposals to extend the terminus from York Place to McDonald Road – a distance of around half-a-mile – have arisen after developers behind the £850m St James Quarter offered more money to the city in contributions than was originally expected. They previously offered to pay for a transport hub as far as Picardy Place.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://www.citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13830" rel="nofollow">http://www.citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=13830</a> </p>