http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Since when have... en Mon, 18 May 2026 04:10:46 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-41279 Mon, 19 Sep 2011 15:17:02 +0000 alibali 41279@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Yesterday there was a big hole in Princes Street - which may or may not be tram related."</p> <p>Up in the Pentlands at Red Moss, there are kerb stones being installed. The road is marked "Tram Works". Ironic, I presume...or maybe that's where the money goes. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-41273 Mon, 19 Sep 2011 13:18:17 +0000 chdot 41273@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> Andy Neal, chief executive of Essential Edinburgh, said a range of measures including savvy marketing and easy transport arrangements will be needed to ensure business continue to attract shoppers.</p> <p>"</p> <p><a href="http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Tram-probe-in-39blame-game39.6838874.jp" rel="nofollow">http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Tram-probe-in-39blame-game39.6838874.jp</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-41224 Sun, 18 Sep 2011 12:44:35 +0000 Kim 41224@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oh, I am sure the 'No Cycling' signs can be far away CEC told us they are going to close Princes Street to "Buses, taxies and cyclist", short sighted as usual... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-41214 Sat, 17 Sep 2011 21:56:33 +0000 chdot 41214@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well after all the fuss...<br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6156190824/in/photostream"><br /> <img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6208/6156190824_f4bb361993.jpg"></a></p> <p>Not sure how many takers they'll get for the "Shoppers parking" - most people will think they have to turn right down Market Street.</p> <p>No there's no cycle route at the bottom of The Mound there <em>is </em>a left turn into SStAS from Waverley Bridge.</p> <p>ALSO, unlike last time, it's possible to cycle on most of Princes Street! No 'No Cycling' signs - yet...<br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6156629378/in/photostream"><br /> <img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6156/6156629378_0a6173c80d.jpg"></a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40995 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 11:34:39 +0000 kaputnik 40995@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Now as seen on <a href="http://paper.li/warnorude/1311750449">MDS Cycling webzine</a> (under Environment, on the right, half way down.)</p> <p>Other cyclign webzines are available. Particularly this Friday. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40991 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:47:05 +0000 kaputnik 40991@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That's obviously the hole they have dug so that there is somewhere to bury the contents of allt he other holes they are about to dig. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40987 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 09:31:04 +0000 chdot 40987@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"one is just being rediculous"</p> <p>One hopes one is being ironic. </p> <p>"Mr Conway suggests that South St Andrew Street / Waverley bridge is the alternative"</p> <p>Remains to be seen about that barrier. </p> <p>BUT going WB to PS is never good at the best of times due to hill and multiple lanes. Of course it was it worse when traffic could turn left into SSAS. With The Mound shut there will be more traffic.<br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6147710252/in/photostream"><br /> <img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6185/6147710252_7e7bf5800c.jpg"></a></p> <p>Yesterday there was a big hole in Princes Street - which may or may not be tram related.<br /> <a href="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6083/6147711338_4360bd7f9a.jpghttp://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6147711338/in/photostream"><br /> <img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6083/6147711338_4360bd7f9a.jpg"></a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40980 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 08:35:03 +0000 Dave 40980@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It's hard to understand why cyclists are moaning about not being able to get across town, when you can just go down to the big multi-lane roundabout at the top of Leith walk. Alternatively, you could ride along Queen St and up Lothian Rd before doubling back through the Grassmarket and up Victoria St?</p> <p>Asking the council to keep a cycle crossing open on Princes St. alongside the pedestrian one is just being rediculous. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40977 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 07:43:35 +0000 kaputnik 40977@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@chdot I might take you up on that</p> <p>@min id forgotten about that! When the diversion comes into effect we shall see how one is meant to navigate across town on a bike (if at all) </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40975 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 07:35:54 +0000 Min 40975@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>" Mr Conway suggests that South St Andrew Street / Waverley bridge is the alternative. As I assume this diversion does not involve suspension of parking on Market Street and provision of temporary cycle lanes along the route, I think it is fair to say that efforts are not being made to "maintain a reasonably parked car-free" route for cyclists. "</em></p> <p>South St Andrew Street has been barricaded right across now so is not an alternative anyway. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40972 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 01:09:22 +0000 ruggtomcat 40972@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>just a teensy bit ranty. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846&page=2#post-40971 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 01:06:07 +0000 chdot 40971@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I can lend you a cam, but is it a "route anymore?? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40970 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:59:15 +0000 kaputnik 40970@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ah yes you can just see the red and white fencing creeping into the distance of the shot. IF you look past all the cars (and obligatory white van).</p> <p>I think it's time to buy a helmet cam and make a point of trying to cycle this route... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40968 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:38:17 +0000 chdot 40968@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"As I assume this diversion does not involve suspension of parking on Market Street and provision of temporary cycle lanes along the route"</p> <p>Good points!</p> <p>"The compound on North St Andrew Street is a prime example of this. It is also an example of where cycling facilities (a dedicated cycle lane was and a segregated cycle crossing) were removed / suspended to allow for a tram works and the associated van compound."</p> <p>Was there today. I can't remember why the PROPER cycle lane was made into general car parking.</p> <p><center><br /> <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6147704462/in/photostream"><br /> <img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6068/6147704462_a1f85e49cc.jpg"></a></center></p> <p><a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chdot/6147705054/in/photostream"><br /> <img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6075/6147705054_8bf718b033.jpg"></a></p> <p>I assume that's normal metered parking. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40966 Thu, 15 Sep 2011 00:20:37 +0000 kaputnik 40966@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Both councillors Gordon Mckenzie and Mark McInnes replied to me pretty quickly with similar answers (from different sources - one from council transport section, the other from Trams project office.</p> <p>My reply (which summarises their responses) is as follows;</p> <p><em></p> <p>[pleasantries]Thank you for your prompt reply... [/pleasantries]</p> <p>My primary reason in contacting you was about the loss of the cycling lanes and the key, relatively safe and largely car-free route that the Mound provides for north-south cycling in the city centre. In particular I refer to the following paragraph in the original email;</p> <p>"Sustrans National Routes 1, 75 and 76 are all routed along the Mound. The alternative routes would be to divert via Lothian Road or the Bridges. If you have ever cycled either then will know that neither of these options offer a particularly cycle-friendly alternative. I wonder if you can confirm what arrangements are being made to maintain a reasonably parked car-free and safe journey for cyclists along this key route. I can see time and money has been spent on painting out yellow lines and installing ticket machines; I was not able to see any visible evidence that any time or thought has been given to the cyclists that this displaces."</p> <p>From your reply, and that of Mr Conway from Edinburgh Trams, I draw the following conclusions;</p> <p>* The signed cycle routes, with cycle lanes and double yellow lines, as used by Sustrans routes 1, 75 and 76 are being effectively severed by the closure of the Mound.<br /> * Mr Conway suggests that South St Andrew Street / Waverley bridge is the alternative. As I assume this diversion does not involve suspension of parking on Market Street and provision of temporary cycle lanes along the route, I think it is fair to say that efforts are not being made to "maintain a reasonably parked car-free" route for cyclists. I think this is particularly pertinent as Market Street will become a main route for cars to access the new Mound car park and will also be the diversion route. It will therefore probably be carrying a lot more traffic than usual (in addition to also being a car park).<br /> * It remains to be seen if any aspect of the diversions will make concessions for / be made with consideration to cyclists.<br /> * It would seem that one of the reasons for the closure of the Mound and the cycle lanes it to provide a works compound for the contractor.</p> <p>If I am perfectly honest, my experience of contractors' works compounds associated with the tram project is that these are largely white van parks. The compound on North St Andrew Street is a prime example of this. It is also an example of where cycling facilities (a dedicated cycle lane was and a segregated cycle crossing) were removed / suspended to allow for a tram works and the associated van compound. The stalling of the trams project left this particular (and literal) barrier to cycling in limbo and years later it remains to be reinstated.</p> <p>I do wonder how truly essential it is for the Mound to be closed for around 9 months. I assume the contractor will ensure access is maintained for their white vans; it would not be outwith the bounds of reason for an access corridor to be maintained for cyclists. I'm sure that Edinburgh Trams position would be that they require to close the entirety of Princes Street for the entire 9 month period. In reality I think that the actual amount of time that they need to be doing remedial works between the foot of the Mound and Hanover Street (a small portion of the entire route to be fixed) would be a fraction of this.</p> <p>I have to say that I am disappointed but not altogether surprised by this latest - and in my opinion wholly unnecessary - inconvenience and barrier to cyclists and cycling courtesy of the Trams project. This is the latest in a long list of examples of the Trams project ripping up (often quite literally) the cycling infrastructure with little or no thought given to adequate alternatives or replacing it. To my mind, no piece of cycling infrastructure that the Trams project has so far claimed as its own or removed has been replaced or reinstated. I could list these and provide photographs of the current sorry state of affairs, but that would be a long list of an email whose contents I am sure you are already familiar with anyway.</p> <p>Like everyone else affected by the Trams project, I guess we'll just have to "live with it". It would be nice however if a project that is meant to be delivering Edinburgh an environmentally friendly alternative to the car didn't seem to be going out of its way to impact an existing environmentally friendly (and far cheaper) alternative to the car. Once again, thank you for taking the time to look into this and reply to me.</p> <p>Regards, et cetera...<br /> </em></p> <p>Yeah it sort of degenerated into a bit of a rant... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40951 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 22:11:55 +0000 chdot 40951@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><img src="http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6154/6147831271_fc2dc91a99.jpg"></p> <p>Presume already legal to park?? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40895 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 16:06:29 +0000 crowriver 40895@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>No point getting on a bus then, unless you enjoy sitting on George Street going nowhere fast. Thank goodness we all have bicycles! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40887 Wed, 14 Sep 2011 15:18:26 +0000 chdot 40887@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> edintravel: </p> <p>Princes St closure - diversions commence Sat 17th. Bus &amp; general traffic maps now available to download <a href="http://t.co/tVBp4N9" rel="nofollow">http://t.co/tVBp4N9</a> #edintravel </p> <p>Original Tweet: <a href="http://twitter.com/edintravel/status/113961043641901056" rel="nofollow">http://twitter.com/edintravel/status/113961043641901056</a><br /> " </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40631 Sun, 11 Sep 2011 18:11:26 +0000 Uberuce 40631@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Nose to tail cars parked on it this afternoon. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40608 Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:59:49 +0000 chdot 40608@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"FREE parking promotions or complimentary bus tickets should be provided during tram work to encourage people into the city centre, councillors said today."</p> <p><a href="http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/edinburghtransportplans/Free-parking-plan-during-tramworks.6832105.jp" rel="nofollow">http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/edinburghtransportplans/Free-parking-plan-during-tramworks.6832105.jp</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40607 Sat, 10 Sep 2011 15:58:03 +0000 chdot 40607@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"City chiefs have announced that road diversions will be introduced gradually from 5am next Saturday, with the full diversions to be in place by the following Monday morning, when work will begin."</p> <p><a href="http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Return-of-the-tramworks.6833947.jp" rel="nofollow">http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/topstories/Return-of-the-tramworks.6833947.jp</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40602 Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:09:37 +0000 kaputnik 40602@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Maybe we're to ride down the Steps instead? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40582 Sat, 10 Sep 2011 08:50:06 +0000 Nelly 40582@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>As a purely practical question, do we know what the 'plan' is, should people reach the bottom of the mound on a bike ?</p> <p>I only ask as (has been noted previously) this is a busy route, and we cant expect all cyclists to be as aware of this problem as us.</p> <p>i.e. Are they to nip onto the pavement (perhaps between the galleries) and use the pedestrian crossings on princes street ? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40581 Sat, 10 Sep 2011 08:34:42 +0000 chdot 40581@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"Tramworks back in days despite pleas by retailers"</p> <p><a href="http://www.scotsman.com/news/Tramworks-back-in-days-despite.6833703.jp" rel="nofollow">http://www.scotsman.com/news/Tramworks-back-in-days-despite.6833703.jp</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40471 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:06:36 +0000 kaputnik 40471@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Councillor McKenzie replied to me today, acknowledging that indeed double yellows are out and parking is in and it's the fault of the trams. It's "temporary" (well yes, but temporary for 9 months is a long time!)</p> <p>Did not take the bait about my points on closing off the NCN, not maintaining an important route for cyclists, not putting in place any alternatives etc.</p> <p>I'll reply thanking for prompt response and put my point more directly about closing off the NCN and cycle routes without any alternative or so much as a sign to tell you (I assume they would be happy to let you get to the bottom and realise it's a dead end!). Will ask what alternatives if any have been considered. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40411 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 11:07:56 +0000 Stepdoh 40411@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well metered and informed response 'nik, and although I think it will get nowhere since they've wired up the machines it's good to have it noted that they've managed to chop a national cycle path in half.</p> <p>Well done CEC, another great plan comes to fruition. </p> <p>I remember '<a href="http://www.wellington.govt.nz/">Absolutely Positively Wellington</a>' (that was the council's brand name, I kid you not) had a great solution to the parking problem, parking buildings that were slightly cheaper than the street parks $1.5/h vs $4/h, and free on the weekends. Stopped people heading out to the big boxes in 'the hutt' and provided relief on the street.</p> <p>Mind you, they did sell their parks to a singaporean operator in a wonderfully short sighted move, who then removed the free weekends and upped the prices, is $6/h vs $4 for street. Humph.</p> <p>And as the snazzy new signs attest, there is no shortage of parking places in Edinburgh, just a shortage of cheap street parks and a plethora of expensive NCP ones. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40407 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:49:32 +0000 kaputnik 40407@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Councillor McInnes has forwarded my email on to Marshall Poulton (Head of Transport, City of Edinburgh Council) for comment (I'm cc'ed in). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40355 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 01:44:53 +0000 Giant 40355@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>They are just gaining far to much money from the car's!<br /> So while money's tight, they want to make sure, plenty of folk use their cars to fill their pockets and waste the money on something useless-it sure does NOT go towards safe cycle paths.</p> <p>It's disgraceful ! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40352 Thu, 08 Sep 2011 01:19:43 +0000 chdot 40352@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> Reducing parking is a key way to increase road space for all but there is rarely any appetite from either local or central government to “wage war on the motorist.” In fact, the current Government is rolling back many restrictions on cars.  <br /> "</p> <p><a href="http://www.bikehub.co.uk/news/sustainability/when-designing-for-new-cyclists-ignore-the-existing-ones-says-study" rel="nofollow">http://www.bikehub.co.uk/news/sustainability/when-designing-for-new-cyclists-ignore-the-existing-ones-says-study</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=3846#post-40344 Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:12:16 +0000 crowriver 40344@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The number of parking spaces in Edinburgh has actually increased since the 1980s, some three or four thousand more. So, of course, has the number of cars on the roads...</p> <p>I'm minded to write to the Council too, it's ridiculous they are doing this really. </p>