I think EEN are trolling their own commenters now.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
Cyclists want traffic ban on George St and Princes St
(22 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
Those bloody cyclists. Don't they know the sky will fall in if honest, hard pressed family motorists can't drive along George Street?
Posted 11 years ago # -
Reading the 'Story', it appears only Kim wants cars banned, Spokes and that other chap appear to be just backing up what he said.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I always think it's funny that people say pedestrianisation will empty out the town centre because people will prefer to go to the (pedestrianised) out of town parks instead.
One big reason we don't go into town is because it's cramped, busy and unpleasant - takes hours to cross the road and constant noise / fumes etc.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Terrible article - none of the quotes mention pedestrianising both Goerge and Princes Streets. It isn't really clear who is calling for what. Is PoP really calling for this?
Posted 11 years ago # -
I shouldn't have read the comments!
Posted 11 years ago # -
If people say "pedestrianisation will empty out the town centre" they've obviously never seen Buchanan Street or Sauchiehall Street on a Saturday.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Newcastle city centre has a large pedestrianised bit up to Grey's Monument which never seems quiet. The Stroget in Copenhagen is a kilometre length of pedestrianisation. Hell, if you go to Macarthur Glen at Livingston you're effectively in a pedestrianised area (as pointed out by Dave).
Posted 11 years ago # -
It's not just that bit round Grey's Monument that is pedestrianised; the whole of Northumberland Street is, too, and that's where all the big shops are.
Actually it would be interesting to map out pedestrianised areas in different cities
Posted 11 years ago # -
"
(e) We are disappointed at the extent of car parking which still remains and we suggest smaller parking areas, with parts of the central reservation landscaped, perhaps with seating, etc.
"
http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/1403-Spokes-George-St-TRO1.pdf
Posted 11 years ago # -
Has anyone looked at the plans for George Street?
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/12463/tro_14_13_plansMost bizarre. basically a two way cycle lane on the North side from charlotte square to Frederick Street, and then from Frederick st to st andrews square it switches to the south side.
Seriously wacky stuff.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I hadn't seen the plans before, so thank you for the link, but the Spokes comments linked to by chdot do mention the lane switching.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Good to see the plans, this has been alluded to before. Ought to work as cars can only go west from Frederick St to Charlotte sq and east from Fred st to St. Andrews sq. roundabout on Frederick st might be tricky but will have option to stay on the road?
Central section will be completely pedestrianised at festival is that right?
Posted 11 years ago # -
@fimm of course you're right. it is in the spokes docs.
but it wasn't until I saw hard-copies of it today that i realised how it works.
edit <stuff deleted> - gembo's right.
I'm so confused....
Posted 11 years ago # -
Whatever the shortcomings it will sure as hell beat mixing it with cars, vans, lorries, buses and having to watch for vehicles exiting/exiting central parking zone.
Looking forward to this, even if I won't use it much...
Posted 11 years ago # -
Most bizarre. basically a two way cycle lane on the North side from charlotte square to Frederick Street, and then from Frederick st to st andrews square it switches to the south side.
Seriously wacky stuff.
I think* the logic is that there are more shops/restaurants/Assembly Rooms on the south side of the street between StASq and FredSt, and the position is reversed between FredSt and CharSq.
*guessing
Has anyone seen if this means that the tarmac in the ped/cycling areas is going to be replaced with a more ped-friendly/aesthetically pleasing surface than the current cratered tarmac?
Posted 11 years ago # -
@ps - yes - and especially issue of hotel access
Re Tarmac - no changes proposed at present. Assumption seems to be that shops etc may put out decking over ped bit. But will have to get planning permission.
Presumably if trial is successful they would repave in long run.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Jeez, that looks like it's been drawn up by the planners on the back of a fag packet after a long liquid lunch in the Doric.
How's the Hanover St junction going to work going eastbound? Bikes still have to keep left of the monument then revert to the bike lane? Suicide bike lane on the 'wrong' side of the road (ripe for collision with u-turning taxi scofflaws)? I'm not sure which is worse.
The potential for ped/bike nastiness is high at all these junctions for bikes going the 'wrong' way...
Posted 11 years ago # -
The Spokes response seems to indicate that it's a shared use path with pedestrians with 'just' a white line like MMW. Is that correct? I thought the original plan was for full segregation of bikes/cars and peds.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Given the pavement remains in place is the pedestrian area to do with restaurants having their outside tables in these zones?
Presume needs traffic lights. I can work out how to access from St. Andrews sq but not sure how to get out at the other end? Also is it not supposed to link to leith walk?
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Also is it not supposed to link to leith walk?"
How are you defining this word "supposed"?
#thisisedinburgh
Posted 11 years ago # -
Different, but interesting -
http://randomswimbikerunstuff.wordpress.com/2014/03/20/fully-raised-lanes-with-segregation
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
