CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 14years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
So it's PLU clogging up the racks paid for by train passengers/taxpayers/PLU.
Perhaps. I had gotten the train from the Gyle, rather than cycle in my work clothes across town.
So I feel my overpriced peak-time single merited a return of a few hours of rack use.
I find the haymarket bike parking good if I am going to star bucks after cycling in to edinburgh as the roof keeps the rain of the bike. May be used my others passing also.
I've only used the bike parking at Haymarket once, it had four bikes to each stand (which I guess are designed for two) plus bikes chained to the poles supporting the roof and several bikes just leaned against the wall without being chained to anything. This was in the middle of the day, so probably represents people who commute out from Haymarket by train plus some abandoned bikes.
So it's at least two times over capacity. There is enough space for the current parking to be doubled, without really impacting on anything.
Sometimes we campaign for controversial decisions to be made, 'taking space away' from other road users. Improving the parking situation at Haymarket isn't controversial, the current stands are relatively attractive and we can just extend them. It's incredibly cheap compared with building a bike lane and it's something we can get without anyone expending any political capital.
If we want cycling to be more convenient than getting dropped off by car, we need it to be reliably quicker than being dropped off by car, and that should include parking the bike unless you want everyone to take their bike on the train.
P.S. Apologies for preaching to converted! But I really think this is a very simple way to improve the commuter cyclist experience for a relatively large number of people.
"It's incredibly cheap compared with building a bike lane and it's something we can get without anyone expending any political capital."
Except that those who could sort this out - Keith Brown, Transport Scotland, Network Rail etc. don't understand/care.
I hope the new SR operator will be able to improve things.
Worth asking them about their actual plans for more bike parking.
There seems to be a belief hereabouts that commuters are the only people who use bikes or are entitled to bike facilities when they do. Such that if I'm getting an 11am train I shouldn't expect somewhere to leave my bike at the station if I'm not there at 8am to lock it up and then sit in the cold for 3 hours. Ever notice how both Waverley and Haymarket have fewer, less inviting, seats than they had in the past?
"Ever notice how both Waverley and Haymarket have fewer, less inviting, seats than they had in the past?"
Yep.
I *presume* they are still getting round to it at Haymarket. At Waverley some seats were 'replaced' with ones at/for the coffee stand - so you effectively had to pay to sit on them!
Except - Haymarket is owned by Network Rail and managed by ScotRail. The bike racks are on land owned by the Council. Any decision to expand the racks will get bogged down in some interminable wrangle between these parties. Hopefully, Abellio's plans include additional cycle parking at Haymarket - because if they don't then I wouldn't expect new parking any time soon.
@ Dougal - there is a belief held by me that if I am catching a train later than 8 a.m. I I'll factor in some time to find a place to lock the bike, either across the racks or on a nearby railing. However, if I am travelling before 8 a.m. I believe I will get a space on a rack. I do not hold a belief about what would happen if I caught a train at exactly 8a.m.
I also believe that we can all get in a rut and moan about stuff that isn't easily fixable, the space at Haymarket is actually better than it was. It is a finite space and it is smaller than the number of bicycles.
Interestingly the big space at waverley with the double decker parking is now apparently holding numerous abandoned bicycles. I observed this phenomenon also at Richmond station in London which has a great long covered bicycle rack and many of the bikes never seem to move from it. Haymarket is much more fluid as bikes left there overnight get trashed.
"Ever notice how both Waverley and Haymarket have fewer, less inviting, seats than they had in the past?"
...
At Waverley some seats were 'replaced' with ones at/for the coffee stand - so you effectively had to pay to sit on them!
It's gone full circle though, and the Costa Coffee that used to sit in the middle of the old booking hall has gone, to be replaced by lots of... seats!
I noted the other day at Platform 9 that some of the seats have been replaced (or supplemented) by those dreadfully uncomfortable "perching" bars.
Perching bars also available on platform 12 actually easier to lean bike against them if quiet.
"Any decision to expand the racks will get bogged down in some interminable wrangle between these parties."
Indeed
"The bike racks are on land owned by the Council."
Yes, but presumably NR has other land/space?
It really ought to be part of TS's job to get more involved in things like this. I've mentioned to various MSPs that as NR gets a lot of money from ScotGov it ought to have more influence.
If/when Keith Brown is replaced, perhaps things will change.
Maybe this is one for a mass write-in to the MSP whose constituency includes both stations.
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msps/currentmsps/Marco-Biagi-MSP.aspx
He is a 'pedestrian' rather than 'cyclist', but is also SNP.
Marco Biagi is my MSP. I had an interesting chat with him at PoP this year. He had walked there with the other walking people. Any one else also his constituent?
chdot - Network Rail officially became a public body last month. This was a very low key event, sold as a simple change in accounting practice. It is actually a pretty big deal. The UK acquired around £34bn extra public debt (always really public debt as it was guaranteed by the UK Government) and the UK Secretary of State for Transport now has considerable say over the strategic direction of NR - including appointment of key people. It's very likely that the current model of five year long control periods and the like will slowly disappear as the Government seeks to exercise more control over expenditure.
Transport Scotland maintains nominal control over NR Scotland through a memorandum of understanding with the UK Government. NR Scotland is now answerable to the Scottish Parliament. Probably a good time to ask the SG and the Parliament how it plans to use these new found powers to improve NR performance, e.g. cycling in the Waverley.
"NR Scotland is now answerable to the Scottish Parliament. Probably a good time to ask the SG and the Parliament how it plans to use these new found powers to improve NR performance, e.g. cycling in the Waverley."
Indeed.
Ta.
Had heard about the 'increase in Nat Debt' bit, but didn't realise NRS wasn't already under Holyrood 'control'.
chdot - I think it's worth asking. I should say I'm pretty sure the answer will be long the lines of "This is an operational matter for Network Rail".
"I'm pretty sure the answer will be long the lines of ... "
Probably. But if that conflicts, (or at least fails to adequately help), with ScotGov aims, I don't think that's 'sustainable' (to use a well worn word).
"It's gone full circle though, and the Costa Coffee that used to sit in the middle of the old booking hall has gone, to be replaced by lots of... seats!"
So it has!
The Bike and Go system is a bit poor on the marketing side, and has a huge disadvantage of having to signup beforehand. They also have the fun, that the only way to change the card on the account is to wait for the card to fail, then wait another working day for a failed invoice to appear, at which point you can update the card. Yeah all very clunky.
Good news re the encouraging passengers to cycle to Stations. That's how I started. On train capacity will be the test though.
"The cards, which were launched five years ago, are currently only used for two per cent of trips."
Aye, cos they go out of their way to make it difficult to get one. Waverley just refuses to offer them at all.
Also a piece on the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-30106357
"The franchise winner promised a raft of changes, from better public transport integration to Dutch-style bicycle hire.
But it will also be going Dutch with the profits; some will be reinvested, but the rest will be ploughed into improvements to the Netherlands' railways."
And then there are the hills - or lack of them.
Kevin Keane has clearly not been to Limburg.
"Abellio does already operate in other parts of the UK and Germany.
But this will be the first time it has taken over a nation's network and expectation, from the government and the passengers, is high."
I don't wish to rain on the reporter's parade here, but Scotrail is more similar to entities like Northern rail or Greater Anglia railways, which Abellio also runs. He would have been better to check out what has already been implemented in England for a more realistic comparison to what Scotland can expect.
Rail a natural monopoly, in theory would be no benefit to privatization of the rail. In practice may be get better management and also it creates a political shield for prices which are still in effect set by the state, and makes pay and conditions of workers less political.
The rail companies have to apply government political vote buying type discriminatory discounts ( not even based on ability to pay) , can get millionaires at certain age etc. that can travel at peak times below a true demand management fair. This creates more congestion and a less efficient use of trains than if train companies set fairs themselves. The government insist on discounts, for their favour groups, I think armed forces also get a special deal, government also insist the rail companies through contract allows some people to use the service for free.
In respect to quality of management government does not do as much open recruitment on merit generally, also government does not fire management on merit. Government management would generally be regarded as poor lacking commercial skills. (some people may say).
If in theory government could runs trains as well and wages non-political then would be cheaper for the government to run. There is duplication of back office, rolling stock not used efficiently caused by being privatised and of course profit taken (although the government inefficiency in practice may waste more than the cost of profit). In theory rail privatisation is less efficient, in practice probably not because political nature of employment management, and political nature of fairs creates a buffer as government can blame the rail companies even when their hands are often tied in effect.
If government could run things well then would not make sense to have privatised as a natural monopoly there could be efficiency saving in theory of being government owned, the united states AmTrack is government owned.
Like Royal mail sale tend to think these decisions are made on a political interest rather than utility basis.
The Royal mail sale some free cash to typically middle class that could buy in at fire sale price, one way bet against the public as a whole.
Think this often happens state assets sold below cost to buy votes, from council houses to British telecom.
Where a small amount of money is taken from everyone as a whole in the fire sales of assets, yet a concentrated amount given to a smaller number of people who benefit so cost society a whole, but buys votes from winners, as a small in number so get large amount of money in comparisons to everyone one else who loses a small amount, overall worse for society but can buy votes the story of many government transfers. Take a little from everyone so they dont notice and give it to smaller number of interest groups so that do.
Not quite sure why the rail was privatized poltical reasons weaken unions, to borrow money in effect, by getting companies to invest and then have more money taken out than would be otherwise over longer period to pay for this investiment by giving generous enough contracts to afford this don’t know.
Royal Mail is now looking at charging more for 'remote' deliveries (same as commercial operators of many other utilities).
Our private railway operators have been doing that for years...
Dumb reporting Merseyrail is one of the most reliable and popular operators, and also run by Abellio.
80 years ago the trains in to Liverpool Street were known as The Jazz Service as the timetable was a nightly triumph of improvisation with the resources available.
Prejusging on the basis of one operation is not clever idea
I use Abellio's Greater Anglia service out of Liverpool St London 4 times a week, and IMO the rolling stock is the dirtiest and oldest of any rail service in London. There is no special provision for bikes on my route either. So, how do we get a Merseyrail rather than a Greater Anglia?
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts