http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: Leith Walk: revised plans en Sun, 17 May 2026 07:06:00 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=12#post-372731 Fri, 05 Jan 2024 19:50:23 +0000 gembo 372731@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Nothing to report here except I just listened to the excellent Farewell to Ferodo. The excellent poem by Jock Scot with Davey Henderson of the Fire Engines providing music.</p> <p>The green-ish railway bridge over Leith Walk that was removed Lang syne.</p> <p>Jock used to shelter under it if it was raining,</p> <p>Sadly Jock’s daughter Poppy died last year, only 36. Her mum was Anna Chancellor or Duck Face in Four Weddings. The Chancellors owned Quothquan from 1432 until they sold up. Their mansion is a hotel now. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=12#post-125822 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 19:30:56 +0000 PS 125822@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>IIRC, most of the road design guys' responses to "why haven't you made it better for cyclists?" could have been summarised by the rubbing together of thumb and forefinger [cf moving street clutter to free up space for cycle lanes behind parked cars]. It must surely be worth pushing for these to be reconsidered? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=12#post-125816 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 18:02:43 +0000 crowriver 125816@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@WC, the 20mph/Lothian Buses article <em>is</em> misdirecting, if not quite misleading. Even one of the commenters pointed out that it would have been correct to refer to Dave as a 'bus passenger' when he was riding a bus!</p> <p>I see your point about the Leith Walk article, folk have made this point before. In this case I honestly think the cue has been taken from the Scottish government announcement rather than an overt attempt to get frothers notching up more hits...</p> <p>As to the plans themselves, the consultation was on a draft design as far as I am aware. So perhaps some scope still to press for enhancements, or at least put a stop to further retranchments (like the re-instating of filter lanes for motors on Elm Row, for instance). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125814 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:18:03 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 125814@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I wasn't suggesting the politicians were in cahoots with the EEN, but rather that the EEN had simply carefully chosen its headline, and that saying all £3.6m is on a cycle path is misleading (and deliberately so to entice the trolls out from under the bridges). I wasn't necessarily saying that we should care what the trolls post either, but just that with that headline, and the enticement, and the comments, it creates page hits and therefore revenue for the paper, which thereby increases the chance of another inflammatory headline aiming people to take a pop at cyclists in the future (a bit like Dave being referred to in the 20mph article as 'a cyclist' when they could have used his employment, which would be the usual way to refer to someone, or even, given he was riding a bus, as a 'bus user' - the fact he's a cyclist actually means nothing at all to that story (and if he walked everywhere would he have been referred to as 'pedesrtian'? I have my doubts, it's not an inflammatory term for the readers of the paper)).</p> <p>"<em>To get back on topic, I am minded to write to my councillors again welcoming the funding announcement and asking them to ensure the LW plans are not watered down further, and indeed where possible enhanced.</em>"</p> <p>With that level of funding there shouldn't be an ability to fidge it. And yet. Yet. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125807 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 16:18:53 +0000 crowriver 125807@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@WC, it's just a reporting of statements by various politicians. Were they engaged in a conspiracy to aid EEN's web hit stats? No, they were aiming their comments at a well organised lobbying campaign backed by mass protests.....who really cares about the EEN commenters except 'us' anyway?</p> <p>To get back on topic, I am minded to write to my councillors again welcoming the funding announcement and asking them to ensure the LW plans are not watered down further, and indeed where possible enhanced. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125796 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:48:34 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 125796@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>£3.6m Leith Walk cycling path plan unveiled</em>"</p> <p>"<em>... but I don't think it can be labelled misreporting either</em>"</p> <p>But the £3.6m isn't <em>only</em> for a cycle path, surely?</p> <p>Not sure if I'd label this as a 'positive' cycling story. Certainly in my mind that's a story about how good cycling is, or the benefit of cycling over taking the car. This is just a capital expenditure story (are stories about the amount the trams cost 'positive tram stories'?). </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125793 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:42:36 +0000 crowriver 125793@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>To be fair, the politicians involved have spun this as cycling spend. Which it is, largely. If the funding had not been awarded, the roads would have been resurfaced, the paint lanes refreshed, the pavements re-laid. However London Road roundabout would presumably have remained, and no segregated cycle lanes would have been built.</p> <p>The wider impact is, of course, as chdot suggests, to the benefit of 'everyone' ie. pedestrians, traders, etc. as well as cyclists. One might say it suits the EEN to report it as a cycling story, but I don't think it can be labelled misreporting either. </p> <p>In any case, I can recall folk here calling for more positive coverage of cycling... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125792 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:41:31 +0000 kaputnik 125792@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The thing about Chipwrapper trolls is that they just like to vent off, they don't really care about the things that whip them into a frenzy. If they did, they'd spend their time writing and emailing their MPs and councillors, organising campaigs, attending consultation sessions and/or logging Lothian Buses with GPS tracks to refute the nonsense coming out of that otherwise reasonable company.</p> <p>But they don't, they just vent their daily bile on something that counts for nothing at all and they'll change nothing and simply work themselves into an early coronary. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125788 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:21:10 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 125788@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<em>Of course, mentioning that cyclists might get any money spent on them is like the proverbial red rag to petrolheads.</em>"</p> <p>Which drives the trolls to the comments section, which increases page hits, which increases revenue. Twitter comments by cyclists or not, most of the print media world has cottoned onto 'stoke em' up' headlines. They worked in the olden days for picking up off the shelf; they work even better on interweb pages. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125786 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:17:29 +0000 crowriver 125786@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@WC, I think rather that it is just an unintended consequence of most of the Twittersphere excitement about this coming from.....cyclists or cycling campaigners. Of course, mentioning that cyclists might get any money spent on them is like the proverbial red rag to petrolheads. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125784 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:12:26 +0000 Wilmington's Cow 125784@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Headline will be entirely deliberate to stoke up the under-bridge-dwellers. A headline of, £3.6m to make Leith Walk a better place to be, just wouldn't get the same interest. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125783 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 15:05:08 +0000 chdot 125783@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>NOT a helpful headline -</p> <p>"<br /> £3.6m Leith Walk cycling path plan unveiled</p> <p>"</p> <p>'We' need to not <em>just</em> concentrate on the cycle bits to get LW iconic/worldbeating etc. </p> <p>SpaceForPeople </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125781 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 14:30:11 +0000 crowriver 125781@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It's in the EEN, it must be true. Commenters NOT at all happy with this "waste of money" it seems!</p> <p><a href="http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/3-6m-leith-walk-cycling-path-plan-unveiled-1-3108514" rel="nofollow">http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/transport/3-6m-leith-walk-cycling-path-plan-unveiled-1-3108514</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125780 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 14:25:27 +0000 Calum 125780@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Yup, good response.</p> <p>"an exemplar commuter corridor". Oh <em>please</em>. Keith Brown is so ignorant. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125777 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:49:40 +0000 fimm 125777@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Good response from PoP. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125774 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:24:36 +0000 SRD 125774@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><a href="http://pedalonparliament.org/a-step-in-the-right-direction/" rel="nofollow">http://pedalonparliament.org/a-step-in-the-right-direction/</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125772 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 13:10:26 +0000 Morningsider 125772@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Roibeard - excellent comment to Jim Orr. </p> <p>My understanding is also that the money announced today is to allow the plans that have already been consulted upon to go ahead, rather than new plans to be drawn up. The Council were quite clear that these plans were only affordable if the Scottish Government chipped in and that a simple road resurfacing is all that we could really expect if they didn't.</p> <p>I hope the plans can be improved - but I'm not expecting much. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125766 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:36:32 +0000 Roibeard 125766@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@PS &amp; crowriver - I had it on (what should be) good authority, that we'd only get what was displayed in the public consultation if the Scottish Government chipped in.</p> <p>The same authority also strongly suggested that what was saw was a done deal, so the "consultation" wasn't intended to improve the designs.</p> <p>I've already pointed out to Jim Orr that:</p> <p><em>I do hope the "visionary" funding announcement means more towards your experience in the Netherlands than the last draft publicly available. It would be a shame to repeat the "quality" debacle where even Her Excellency, Ambassador Van Assum couldn't remain entirely diplomatic...</em></p> <p>I'm not holding my breath!</p> <p>Robert </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125760 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 12:09:22 +0000 crowriver 125760@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>is it just the cash that was needed to put those (in several places not ideal) plans in place?</em></p> <p>This. However now that the cash is there, the final designs will be drawn up, presumably consulted upon? Anyway whatever opportunity there is to press for the design details to be improved, ought to be taken! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125757 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:58:17 +0000 PS 125757@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Everyone's getting very carried away about this on twitter, but does it represent extra cash that will improve the last set of designs we saw at MacDonald Road library, or is it just the cash that was needed to put those (in several places not ideal) plans in place? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125747 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:19:45 +0000 chdot 125747@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Details - <a href="http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11191#post-125743" rel="nofollow">http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=11191#post-125743</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125744 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 11:13:51 +0000 crowriver 125744@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>@KeithBrownMSP just announced £3.6m of funding for "visionary" plans for cycle/walking-friendly Leith Walk</em></p> <p>Very welcome news! </p> <p>It's a modest start, but let's not underestimate its significance in beginning to change the city for the better. Next objective: get this realised to a good standard.</p> <p>After that, the next targets are surely Princes Street and George Street? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125729 Tue, 24 Sep 2013 10:13:27 +0000 chdot 125729@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>"<br /> Jim Orr (@CllrJimOrr)<br /> 24/09/2013 10:02<br /> Great news from the cycle summit. @KeithBrownMSP just announced £3.6m of funding for "visionary" plans for cycle/walking-friendly Leith Walk</p> <p>" </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125590 Sun, 22 Sep 2013 09:50:19 +0000 gembo 125590@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It is not a very busy street for any traffic? Couple of mopeds, a van, one car? Is italsomone way?i will watch it again </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125578 Sat, 21 Sep 2013 21:47:29 +0000 sallyhinch 125578@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That cost £10k apparently. Which is nothing, in the great scheme of things</p> <p>The bus stops have been criticised for being Danish rather than Dutch (in Denmark, cyclists are required to stop if a bus stops at one of those stops to let passengers pass so the lack of islands isn't such a problem) but it's not a very busy street for buses, compared with LW </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125576 Sat, 21 Sep 2013 20:58:58 +0000 chdot 125576@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>This is cheap!</p> <p>Not sure about the bus stop (0:40) and what happens when there is a bus stopped - but this what LW needs to 'test' various proposals/alternatives. </p> <p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsMqy-3jQXM" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsMqy-3jQXM</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125287 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 20:02:28 +0000 SRD 125287@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Sorryr. I was wearing gembo's gloves </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125284 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 19:57:03 +0000 crowriver 125284@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>the reasons why you do or don't Uncle is best kept to yourself ;)</em></p> <p>One can cry uncle or play uncle, but one cannot do uncle (except in the vulgar and probably illegal sense).</p> <p>/pedant </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125278 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 18:42:27 +0000 Calum 125278@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I have mentioned the Danish city of Aarhus before - it is hilly but it has a 20% bike modal share. Look <a href="https://www.google.com/maps?ll=56.161086,10.211771&amp;spn=0.000024,0.033023&amp;t=h&amp;z=16&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=56.161015,10.203623&amp;panoid=ZUY2T59OhhJ7K17Q7RPMgg&amp;cbp=12,182.34,,0,12.51">here</a> and <a href="https://www.google.com/maps?ll=56.162245,10.206985&amp;spn=0.000024,0.033023&amp;t=h&amp;z=16&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=56.162219,10.207058&amp;panoid=FxMKjTC_yFfR-82XqPYBTg&amp;cbp=12,316.73,,0,13.92">here</a> and <a href="https://www.google.com/maps?ll=56.159246,10.196707&amp;spn=0.000024,0.033023&amp;t=h&amp;z=16&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=56.159327,10.196602&amp;panoid=PVJRoXclmVFs6UuiorT8HQ&amp;cbp=12,329.65,,0,15.56">here</a> and <a href="https://www.google.com/maps?ll=56.15982,10.196235&amp;spn=0.000024,0.033023&amp;t=h&amp;z=16&amp;layer=c&amp;cbll=56.159725,10.196216&amp;panoid=fZQVY386renGrTuYj6p2mA&amp;cbp=12,19.36,,0,14.09">here</a>.</p> <p>Segregation, like in the last link, can make cycling up a hill more pleasant. It's certainly preferable to climbing a hill with a bus at your back. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687&page=11#post-125275 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 16:48:55 +0000 kaputnik 125275@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@SRD <em>I was reminded why I did not uncle when I lived just off Leith Walk.<br /> </em></p> <p>the reasons why you do or don't Uncle is best kept to yourself ;)</p> <p>Another reason why I don't think Greeenways are a suitable cycling solution for Leith Walk are the endemic levels of ignoring them by many businesses. *Cough*...avorita! *Cough* </p>