http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Spokes Public Meeting: City Council Action Plan en Mon, 06 Apr 2026 17:51:55 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-5044 Tue, 06 Apr 2010 20:47:57 +0000 SRD 5044@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"presumably it counts towards CEC's total mileage provision"</p> <p>That was EXACTLY the question I asked the councillor at the Spokes meeting, when he sort of agreed with point, but then said 'they're not always parked up'. Hence my challenge. Maybe I should offer a prize - I'm confident I'll never have to pay up. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-5041 Tue, 06 Apr 2010 20:36:37 +0000 chdot 5041@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"presumably it counts towards CEC's total mileage provision"</p> <p>presumably</p> <p>and just before the ASL - </p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4497863530"><br /> <img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4058/4497863530_c81d681604.jpg"><br /> </a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-5040 Tue, 06 Apr 2010 20:35:21 +0000 Arellcat 5040@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Chris, that's a good contender for the Warrington Cycle Campaign. Seeing that photo, it just occurred to me that until now I'd had no idea there was a cycle lane on that section of road at all, and I've been up and down there enough times! And yet presumably it counts towards CEC's total mileage provision. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-5036 Tue, 06 Apr 2010 20:04:32 +0000 chdot 5036@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@SRD</p> <p><a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4180">"I challenge anyone to get a picture of the cycle-lane on the north side of Strathrearn, nr Marchmont Rd w/out cars in it."</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4497226075">You'll mean here then -</p> <p><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2742/4497226075_99c5bd4d4c.jpg"></a></p> <p>Not even a single yellow </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-4426 Fri, 26 Mar 2010 16:35:00 +0000 chdot 4426@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I sometimes wonder if policy and planning are in two separate parallel universes"</p> <p>77. This complaint was echoed by Chris Thompson of Moray Council who explained—</p> <p>“The traditional planning approach creates isolated pockets of good practice or excellence around, for example, a new hospital. However, those stretch only as far as the end of the road and then we are back to whatever existed previously.”</p> <p><a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/ticc/reports-10/trr10-04.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/ticc/reports-10/trr10-04.htm</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-4403 Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:48:48 +0000 Kim 4403@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I sometimes wonder if policy and planning are in two separate parallel universes, and never the twain shall meet :-( </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-4378 Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:30:33 +0000 chdot 4378@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Kim</p> <p>"the Transport Committee is unable to change the speed limits across the city, which go along way to making people feel safer in the city. Even if the 30 mph speed limit was replaced with a 20 mph limit, he couldn't get the police to enforce it anyway"</p> <p><strong>From new Active Travel report</strong></p> <p>96. Peter Zanzoterra of Steer Davies Gleave explained that “where infrastructure has been provided to manage traffic speed down, local 20mph schemes have on average achieved something like a 50 per cent reduction in injuries to vulnerable road users.”</p> <p>107. The Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Climate Change commented on the question of how to address the safety fears of walkers and cyclists—</p> <p>“Safety was one of the clear issues that came out of our consultation on the cycling action plan. The speed of other traffic was a cause of particular concern. Where local authorities have exercised their powers to implement 20mph zones in areas where, among other things, there is a higher density of cyclists, it has generally been thought to be helpful. There is now a 20mph limit outside 90 per cent of our schools, which has been particularly helpful—along with restrictions on parking—in encouraging students to walk and cycle to school.”</p> <p>"Conclusion on speed limits</p> <p>108. The Committee notes the evidence from many witnesses that a 20mph speed limit in residential areas, near schools and on other relevant routes would have a significant impact in encouraging walkers and cyclists to feel safer, thereby encouraging participation in active travel. The Committee believes that the draft Cycling Action Plan for Scotland should be amended in order to set out specific proposals to encourage the wider adoption of 20mph speed limits in appropriate locations in order to promote active travel."</p> <p><a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/ticc/reports-10/trr10-04.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/ticc/reports-10/trr10-04.htm</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-4377 Fri, 26 Mar 2010 11:26:33 +0000 chdot 4377@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Kim</p> <p>"I realised that the Transport Committee has little or no influence on the Planning Committee. Therefore is unable to restrict the large parking developments which bring large flows of traffic into the city."</p> <p><strong>From new Active Travel report</strong></p> <p>"Conclusion on planning</p> <p>90. The Committee believes that active travel must be at the heart of new planning developments rather than included as an afterthought. The Committee also believes that planning professionals may need additional training in order to take account of the requirements of active travel. The draft CAPS document mentions the aim to ‘increase awareness and understanding among transport planners and engineers’ of active travel. The Committee recommends that the CAPS document sets out in specific terms how it proposes to do this.</p> <p>91. Local political leadership will also be required in order to ensure that local planning decisions properly take into account active travel considerations. The Committee notes the objective in the draft CAPS to require local authorities and developers to use relevant guidance documents. The Committee asks the Scottish Government for more information on how it or planning authorities themselves will monitor the use of these guidance documents to ensure that they are properly taken into account in planning decisions.</p> <p>92. The Committee’s next inquiry will be into the relationship between transport and land use planning policies. The Committee anticipates that as part of this inquiry it will want to investigate in more detail how the requirement for modern, integrated transport connectivity and sustainable transport provision is currently taken into account in the preparation of strategic and local development plans"</p> <p><a href="http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/ticc/reports-10/trr10-04.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/s3/committees/ticc/reports-10/trr10-04.htm</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373&page=2#post-4270 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:54:45 +0000 Kirst 4270@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>No, it's just that if it was at Gillespies and you go by tandem, we had a conversation on Tuesday night about the fact you were on a tandem. But it must have been someone else. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4268 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:53:25 +0000 Dave 4268@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Nope, sorry... was I close to being identified!</p> <p>It's at Liberton High though... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4265 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 13:42:33 +0000 Kirst 4265@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"I couldn't make the meeting unfortunately, we have a regular class on Tuesday nights."</p> <p>Is your class at Gillespies and do you go by tandem? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4256 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 10:14:59 +0000 chdot 4256@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That junction</p> <p>Before, after and partially restored.</p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4348595234"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4046/4348595234_7ddb4df25a_o.jpg"></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4348595318"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4067/4348595318_f8c2967b69_o.jpg"></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/3066253735"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3158/3066253735_dd0d5f728e.jpg"></a></p> <p>Just look at the way that car has stopped where it should!! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4249 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:41:09 +0000 SRD 4249@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"genuinely good facilities...the junction at the Dick Vet going south, for example"</p> <p>On the survey thing we handed in at the meeting, I asked if that design could be replicated on Dalkeith Road going south past East Preston Street/Scottish Widows/ Commonwealth Pool. </p> <p>DdF: do you think there's any chance? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4247 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:31:31 +0000 Dave 4247@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I guess it's also important to recognise what is/has been achieved in relatively short timescales. I first started cycling in Edinburgh not that long ago (2001 I think) and the number of people on bikes seems to me to be vastly greater now. </p> <p>There are some genuinely good facilities (the junction at the Dick Vet going south, for example) and, while it's frustrating to have stupid things too, we can sometimes forget that the very idea of cycling being recognized as it is, represents a huge leap.</p> <p>To me there are only really a couple of key issues in the city at the moment, one is the lack of maintainance of existing facilities (white lines AND red filling), and the other is the loss of the Roseburn path to the trams.</p> <p>I couldn't make the meeting unfortunately, we have a regular class on Tuesday nights. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4241 Thu, 25 Mar 2010 00:39:41 +0000 chdot 4241@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"so they are continually reminded that cycling is an issue of concern to an important section of the aware general public"</p> <p>I don't disagree. </p> <p>But I think 'we' as 'cyclists' sometimes assume that enough pressure will make 'them' 'get it'.</p> <p>For 'them' to 'rely' on individuals and hard working groups of volunteers (particularly Spokes) to overcome commercial interests and social inertia which 'assume' that creating better conditions for the car-using 'masses' is 'essential' is a bit much.</p> <p>Politicians have mostly lost the ability/will to show sufficient vision/leadership (unless they know that focus groups will support them). They will talk about health, safer streets, less obesity, etc. etc. but completely fail to recognise that cycling genuinely has a lot to offer in the way of 'solutions'.</p> <p>'We' have to 'prove' that it's worth spending a bit of money on 'cycling'. 'They' just assume that money spent on new bridges, motorways and other large transport schemes are <em>vita</em>l for 'the economy', without which there is no future.</p> <p>People who happen to ride bicycles because they have realised it is, convenient, cheap, fun, healthy (and all the other reasons) should perhaps spend<em> less</em> time pressing for their 'special interest' to be looked after more and more time thinking about ways to lobby on wider fronts with people who want things including less noise and air pollution, better places to play, cleaner parks and streets etc. etc.</p> <p>Spokes has always been in favour of better facilities for pedestrians and public transport users (not least because they are not motorists), but being allowed to cycle through the 'new St. James Centre' is perhaps not an adequate trade-off for a massive car park.</p> <p>MORNING UPDATE</p> <p>Last sentence might imply that Spokes was involved in a trade-off. Not intended or true. The point is that 'the planners' allowed the developers to have a big carpark, improvements to cycling facilities were due to pressure which shouldn't have been necessary. </p> <p>It is still assumed that big commercial/retail developments are a good thing - and that people with the most money to spend 'must' arrive by car. </p> <p>The other reality of 'out of town' developments was also mentioned at the meeting. It's not simple - but it's not just about 'cycling'. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4240 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 23:35:17 +0000 DdF 4240@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>On the subject of why things do and do not happen ... one important factor is pressure from constituents. What is sometimes hard to remember is that what makes sense or is a priority for us may seem very different to huge numbers of other people in the population - e.g. car parking. Councillors get pressures from all directions, and they want to make sure they are re-elected. Even if they understand the sense of something they are unlikely to push it hard if they think it's unpopular.</p> <p>This is why it is really important for individuals to lobby councillors (and other politicians) - so they are continually reminded that cycling is an issue of concern to an important section of the aware general public. That helps to create a helpful general climate. It can feel pretty pointless to each individual, but it all adds up, and it creates the climate in which decisions are more likely to go our way.</p> <p>Then when it comes to specifics it's also good to know <strong>when</strong> is a good time to lobby <strong>who</strong> about <strong>what</strong> - there's much more chance of getting something done if it's up for grabs at the moment. e.g. the first big Spokes campaign (to allow cyclists to use Middle Meadow Walk - yes, it used to be illegal!) took around 7 years as we had to raise the issue and get a big head of steam behind it; whereas if some big development is going to happen anyway it's often possible to get cycling stuff incorporated by emails and other lobbying to the right people at the right time in the process.</p> <p>Cllr Mackenzie made similar points last night - as do sympathetic politicians quite often. Basically, he was appealing for people who want a better deal for cycling to lobby councillors to keep up funding in times of cuts; and on the specific of the future of Princes Street he was urging everyone to lobby councillors and participate in the consultation when it happens this summer. He is obviously supportive, but without clear and significant support from the public to all councillors, his job is much more difficult.</p> <p>This is also relevant to Kim's point about the Planning Committee - these committees are all made up of councillors, and more they know there is a concerned public on some issue, the more supportive they are likely to be. Ditto with the officials who prepare the briefings and reports for the councillors. e.g. even on the St James centre proposal, with its ridiculous number of car spaces [which would have taken a huge amount of pressure to cut] Spokes did manage to get a clause included in the planning permission that there must be access for cyclists 'to and through' the development - and this was based not just on a submission by spokes, but by a number of individuals. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4200 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 14:04:50 +0000 Kim 4200@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"the fact that planning process/committee has to go by various national guidelines and laws, so councillors can't always decide 'in the interests of the City' - even if/when they want to."</p> <p>Hence the point about <a href="http://www.apis.ac.uk/overview/regulations/overview_UK_NAQS.htm">air pollution</a>, the planners are supposed to take into account the impact of the development on the local environment. Motorised traffic accounts 70% on urban air pollution, and critical loads are being exceeded (is there anyone one from the Billett Section of CEH who would like to comment?). This is a traffic management as well as a planning issue. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4187 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 12:21:24 +0000 chdot 4187@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"The thing I was struck by was just how little power Gordon Mackenzie (and the Transport Committee) has to change the things"</p> <p>There are two aspects to that - </p> <p>1) the fact that planning process/committee has to go by various national guidelines and laws, so councillors can't always decide 'in the interests of the City' - even if/when they want to.</p> <p>2) although councillors are elected by Edinburgh voters and are therefore 'in charge' it was <em>very</em> clear from last night that there are large degrees of inertia/actual resistance to implementing existing POLICIES - plus things like essential maintenance... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4185 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 11:15:04 +0000 Kim 4185@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The thing I was struck by was just how little power Gordon Mackenzie (and the Transport Committee) has to change the things would really make a difference. At first I thought it was lack of will, but by the end of the meeting I realised that the Transport Committee has little or no influence on the Planning Committee. Therefore is unable to restrict the large parking developments which bring large flows of traffic into the city. Also the Transport Committee is unable to change the speed limits across the city, which go along way to making people feel safer in the city. Even if the 30 mph speed limit was replaced with a 20 mph limit, he couldn't get the police to enforce it anyway.</p> <p>In my <a href="http://kimharding.net/blog/?p=918">manifesto suggestions</a> for active travel I have a section showing how speed limits effect road safety. Part of the problem of people not feeling safe on the roads stems from police failure to enforce the existing 30 mph speed limit. Maybe <a href="http://www.lbp.police.uk/about/forcemanagement/chiefconstable/chiefconstable.asp">David Strang</a> should be invited to one of these meetings to explain why this is so, he is after all a public servant and should be publicly accountable. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4183 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:30:38 +0000 Arellcat 4183@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"...a nasty pinch point at the junction with Gifford Park, but even I can't think of a good way to fix that..."</p> <p>Given that the pavements and buildings can't reasonably be modified, and short of making cars narrower, the best solution would be to enforce a 20mph limit between the Melville Drive/Hope Park Crescent junction and the Chapel St/Crichton St junction.</p> <p>SRD, seems I'd guessed right after all. :-) I was sitting just in front of you and spent a lot of time scribbling. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4182 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:01:35 +0000 chdot 4182@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4458886714"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4007/4458886714_e70719c699.jpg"><br /> </a></p> <p>"In the meeting he specifically mentioned this corridor in this connection and implied that there would just be same-old same-old with parking bays on top."</p> <p>It was also stated that there was an intention to increase times when parking was not allowed. As presumably parking is already banned at 'rush' hour this won't make much difference - unless they plan to ban parking every hour or so when the there is a student 'shift change' and people travel between these two parts of the Uni...</p> <p>There was also quite a lot of discussion about secure cycle parking. This is the council that has a fairly sacrosanct view about cars and hasn't managed to organise even a 'pilot' on-street bike storage scheme. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4180 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:48:03 +0000 SRD 4180@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Presumably it means painting some cycle lanes directly in the door zone." </p> <p>In the meeting he specifically mentioned this corridor in this connection and implied that there would just be same-old same-old with parking bays on top. </p> <p>He also claimed they're not 'always parked up' but I challenge anyone to get a picture of the cycle-lane on the north side of Strathrearn, nr Marchmont Rd w/out cars in it. Sadly, if this didn't happen, the intersection would be much less congested at rush hour too, so drivers would win as much as cyclists (they would just turn it into a left-turn lane).</p> <p>I agree that cycle-lanes in the door-zone is not optimal, but they would at least be visible to drivers, and not send message to drivers that they take priority. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4177 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:39:14 +0000 Min 4177@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Presumably it means painting some cycle lanes directly in the door zone. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4176 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:37:43 +0000 Dave 4176@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Speaking of which, we had a newsletter round from our local councillor proudly advising (amongst other things) that a cycle 'corridor' is to go up between the uni campuses at Kings Buildings and Potterrow. </p> <p>However almost the very first line was "on street parking will be maintained", and as the only difficulty getting between those sites is caused by on-street parking, I was at a loss to understand what they're proposing to do (apart from presumably paint some extra white lines on really wide bits of road that are fine already).</p> <p>(Actually that's not quite true, there is a <a href="http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&amp;source=s_q&amp;hl=en&amp;q=meadows&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;radius=0.46&amp;sll=55.942519,-3.181486&amp;sspn=0.007787,0.023539&amp;split=1&amp;rq=1&amp;ev=zi&amp;hq=meadows&amp;hnear=&amp;ll=55.941966,-3.183932&amp;spn=0,359.976461&amp;z=16&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=55.94159,-3.183608&amp;panoid=JliYDQpC2r9THmilxKqxPA&amp;cbp=12,329.25,,0,5">nasty pinch point</a> at the junction with Gifford Park, but even I can't think of a good way to fix that!) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4174 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 09:12:20 +0000 SRD 4174@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Me? Short woman with North American accent? Figured you'd all figure that one out :) I asked about the parking bays on top of cycle paths, and pushed him on the coloured surfacing. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4171 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 01:56:34 +0000 chdot 4171@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/4458847268/"><img src="http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4019/4458847268_8fd2a67428.jpg"></a></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/sets/72157623681412826/">More Spokes Public Meeting photos</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4170 Wed, 24 Mar 2010 00:46:24 +0000 Arellcat 4170@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>SRD, sorry I didn't see you there. Did you ask any of the questions?</p> <p>I thought that the huge turnout was a good sign in itself, and that maybe Gordon Mackenzie would've taken note even of that. I'd agree though about the low key grand plan - but this Action Plan is the first real step towards it. What seemed most apparent to me is how little money is actually available (or being made available) for cycle projects, and how incredibly expensive some of the infrastructure works are. </p> <p>My main hope going into the meeting was that CEC runs with its existing cycle infrastructure and puts its money into maintaining it and promoting it better, and works on extending it later on. GM did allude to that sort of plan. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4166 Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:26:57 +0000 SRD 4166@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Depends on what you think the purpose of the meeting was. I thought it was interesting. Helpful to see/hear the council position. He seemed to take most (but not all) questions quite seriously. </p> <p>I was pleased by his indication that he thought coloured surfaces should be being replaced. Doesn't mean they will be, but it gives us something to aim for.</p> <p>Not sure it showed much 'big vision' but maybe small incremental changes are actually more practicable. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4164 Tue, 23 Mar 2010 23:11:33 +0000 Kim 4164@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Was anything achieved? </p> <p>Not being critical here, just interest to know what peoples perceptions of the meeting were. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=373#post-4149 Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:13:00 +0000 Kim 4149@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Just to be sure, <a href="http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&amp;source=s_q&amp;hl=en&amp;q=Johnston+Terrace,+Edinburgh,+Midlothian+EH1,+United+Kingdom&amp;sll=51.47994,-0.292168&amp;sspn=0.01641,0.052314&amp;ie=UTF8&amp;cd=1&amp;geocode=FSmzVQMdrjTP_w&amp;split=0&amp;hq=&amp;hnear=Johnston+Terrace,+Edinburgh,+Midlothian+EH1,+United+Kingdom&amp;ll=55.948258,-3.196034&amp;spn=0.000916,0.00327&amp;t=h&amp;z=19&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=55.9484,-3.195797&amp;panoid=NiwpgZAyAH7sgd0aecC3dg&amp;cbp=12,119.86,,0,5">it is this blue door</a>? </p>