CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years 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.
BBC article still talks about 4 lanes going to 2 when actually it's 4 to 3. It also talks about using half a carriageway and a bus lane, when in practice it's only the bus lane.
This is exactly what the protester was saying to folk last night, so I suspect that's where the BBC got the information from. Do we know of a way to get this corrected?
Almost finished a draft of my document...
Just speculating how the transport Commitee is going to shape up:
So we can pretty much guarantee the 3 Conservatives will vote against.
Supporters: presumably Lesley Hinds, Andrew Burns and the two Greens? Adam Macvey? Karen Keil seemed very positive in her reply to me.
Is it going to come down to a few councillors looking at how marginal their own seats and ignoring the arguments?
@Morningsider
"
I would hold fire on website development until it was clear that this might be useful. Doubtful how it could be used to turn anti's into pro's - that takes real work. Easier to get the soft pro people to actually respond to the consultation than make the effort to change people's mind.
"
Well yes, would see any (simple) website as containing the info to help people who want to contact councillors etc.
It's all in this thread - but that's a bit of a challenge to wade through!
Also just to demonstrate that there is an 'alternative view' - not just competing petitions!
Of course it would be nice to get more than just 'cycling' people. I hope some more orgs/groups are working up submissions of support.
@Claire "
As a west Edinburgh resident I will be pretty distraught if this gets derailed by NIMBYs and moaners."
Me too.
I walked home tonight and went along Roseburn Terrrace. I was getting annoyed waiting for the lights to change at Tesco, thinking about the difficulty in crossing the road. There were two cars parked in the west bound bus lane and one in the east, both blocking the precious "traffic flow" but no sign of the shops being busy.
And despite the claim of 6 cyclists per hour (seriously, that's what's being said), there were 5 cyclists waiting in the westbound ASL.
In my mind I was picturing what could be if this is built.
A web page could be a good resource for journalists. I'm hopping mad about the sheer disingenuousness of the info coming from the anti campaign. There isn't a good alternative cycling route. They are not 'pro cycling'. The road's not going from 4 lanes to 2. If people decide against it based on that, then it's just not fair.
Alrighty, here's an initial cut of a document focusing on the Roseburn to Wester Coates area and why the existing route isn't an option: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-jUZJSEV313iWykJxB1ujtG3n-PF8WBGzq7aVno-3UE/edit?usp=sharing. Comments and suggestions are welcome! To make a comment just highlight a section and right-click; to make a suggested edit just type.
Later tonight I'll review comments and also add in the missing map and diagram with a view to publishing a copy tomorrow. The idea is that we'll have a document that concisely explains things and can be sent to councillors, printed and distributed, used for a website, whatever.
Good stuff. Like the concise and simple comparison. Don't know how to get across that there are 3 potential ways to get from Roseburn to Balbirnie, all with critical flaws:
1. Long route via Russell Road: mixing with traffic, junction with Roseburn Street is difficult, need to go up the switchback
2. Right onto West Coates then right into Balbirnie: mix with traffic; right turn across West Coates forces waiting in traffic
3. Right onto West Coates/left on to NEPN: mix with traffic, indirect, uphill.
It was journalists, friends, family, neighbours colleaguea etc. that I had in mind when I suggested the website - basically non cyclists wanting to know what all the fuss was about.
Feels wrong linking to my blog which is well it of date now and more about what I did than the thoughts of the community.
Thanks for doing the doc.
That's great, Chris. I've added the accident info.
@HankChief - It will be good to have something to link from Facebook.
Spokes will come out with its own statement.
I walked along the Haymarket Yards to Balbirnie Place. As a Walking route it's fine, much pleasanter than walking along the A8. As a cycle route it's patchy, as Chris's page says. I especially hate the hook down from Haymarket yards when you cross the tram tracks. I actually stop and turn the beast round 90 degrees.
Random thoughts:-
Re Roseburn Cafe – I think we are kidding ourselves if we can say there won't be losers by this scheme. My ex flatmate was a great fan of Roseburn Cafe, to the detriment of his waist, and walked there but I would guess there are sneaky stops from trades people for bacon rolls.
Also, there are pick up points eg Scotmid takes in deliveries of large items from Fraser's. I got a big box of bedding there once. I use a taxi for such things – far cheaper than keeping a car – but try to convince anyone else to live that way. It has to be drivable and parkable, or no interest.
Some businesses like pubs and cafes should benefit by more cycling traffic & a general quieter ambience, others like hairdressers shouldn't find any difference but places where people pick up big items may suffer.
So I think you can only offer the big picture – which they won't care for – but which may sway others.
Has anyone got good UK stats about businesses making more once places became less of a through road?
Re Roseburn Park – It shouldn't be a commuting route but it is via the Balgreen Path. If this route is one small step towards a direct route right along the A8 that should alleviate at the problem. An anti-person & cyclist last night told me she thought that since the tram had been built the traffic was definitely quieter from Roseburn eastwards along the A8. I'm inclined to agree – which I suppose shows that commuting traffic can be siphoned on to other means of transport & less congestion.
I'll attend the community meeting tomorrow evening but I imagine it will be more of the same.
Chris, thats a good looking document. My only suggestion would be to say we're looking to make Edinburgh a nicer place to live rather than cycle.
BBC news corrections can be submitted here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/contact-us/editorial
"I use a taxi for such things – far cheaper than keeping a car – but try to convince anyone else to live that way. It has to be drivable and parkable, or no interest."
Not really the job of 'us' - or CEC - to convince people to do things differently.
BUT
Just because things are 'the way they are' or 'always have been' or 'that's what people want' (etc.), is no reason that other ways of doing things should be blocked.
'Democracy' isn't about giving the majority what they think they want - or the vocal minority (that works both ways!)
In recent years too many politicians have relied on focus groups to decide/change polices.
So all the more reason for being supportive of the fact that CEC is trying something quite bold. 'We' have criticised plenty of lesser/misguided attempts with too many compromises (notably George Street!)
It's good that Lesley Hinds is backing (and fronting) this. She is certainly not above criticism - remember the fuss about all-day buslanes?!
On this one she can't even rely on councillors in her own coalition, so it is important that people supporting this say so.
Convincing other people is a bonus - but getting as many people as possible to realise that this could be 'lost' is important.
Sure chdot. The railways were pushed through with a load of nimby opposition. - surveyors even physically attacked sometimes.
Even those (including me) who thought the trams were a load of nonsense have come round to them. Still a few people won't take them out of principle but they're very well used.
Good point Rosie. I do wondered what level of evidence is expected from the project - both fron those against it and the councillors deciding on it.
Yes, some people will be negatively impacted by it (as with any infrastructure project) and rightly they should be taken into account but then we should also recognise that everybody is suffering from the pollution and obesity affects of the #carsick culture we currently have, which this would help solve.
You also get the specific benefits for those that currently cycle who will be safer and those that will start once it is open.
The project should be assessed based on the whole picture of the costs/benefits.
"
@agcolehamilton: My 5 point plan to reduce pollution in West #Edinburgh I want @Edinburgh_CC to take action
https://t.co/dUyKNaBQc4 https://t.co/VHBYqp8Ebn
"
"
3: A fundamental increase in investment in active travel across Scotland and the City of Edinburgh Council area including improvements in the cycle path network and safe walking routes
"
"
This is undoubtedly the most important ever Edinburgh consultation on a cycling project, providing a largely segregated route from Roseburn, through the city centre via George Street, and continuing to the future segregated lanes in Leith Walk and Picardy Place. As Spokes had urged at an early stage, the Council has also incorporated a connection to North Bridge via a segregated section in east Princes Street, though details of the junction remain to be worked out.
The project will take space from parked and moving motor traffic, and as such it is now generating opposition – so your support is vital.
"
http://www.spokes.org.uk/2016/01/city-centre-east-west-route/
Has anyone seen the "glossy brochure" opposing the scheme? Is it an accurate reflection of the plans?
I presume the glossy brochure refers to this leaflet that the guy was giving out last night: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrKPO2OLxvEWEVfUjQwa1Zha0E/view?usp=sharing.
Speaking of leaflets, I've now finished my first draft of my document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-jUZJSEV313iWykJxB1ujtG3n-PF8WBGzq7aVno-3UE/edit?usp=sharing. Thanks to a couple of folk that provided comments and to Rosie for details of the tramline accidents. I'll check in again tomorrow and see if there are any other comments/suggestions and after that I'll let people use it as they see fit :-)
Excellent stuff. One minor point on visual impact. In the table could you add some big crosses against the NCN1 comments and some big ticks against the new path ones? Makes it easy at a glance to see what it's explaining. Or would this go against your aim of making an objective comparison?
Other suggestion: ahead of the Transport Committee would it be worth is trying to turn this into a short video showing the various hazards on the NCN1 route? I'm more than happy to spend a morning going up and down the route with my headcam, although I'm sure between us we'll have thousands of hours of footage?
From upthread:
The next meeting (Murrayfield CC) is Wednesday 20th January 7.30pm Murrayfield Church
The route might be on the agenda
Hankchief, chdot - I seem to have misunderstood what the proposed website was about. I think what you propose is a good idea, a resource base for supporters and journalists would be very handy.
Let me know if there is anything useful I could add.
Front page on the Evening News today: BATTLE LINES ARE DRAWN £9m cycle superhighway plan for Glasgow-Edinburgh road sparks mass protest and counter-protest.
"Mass protest"?! Most of the fp is given over to a photo of five angry-looking business folk glaring at the camera.
Hmmm. At least you can't just click a link on a paper newspaper to get to the consultation survey.
"BUSINESS owners fear that a new £9 million cycle route linking the east and west of the city will destroy their livelihoods."
DESTROY. At least it describes the missing link in a bit of the network as CRUCIAL.
Quotes from Hinds and Maxwell, so I expect the "0 comments" to rise rapidly.
That's an interesting choice of picture. There only seems to be two lanes for traffic.
"
Kadir Kavak, owner of the Roseburn Cafe, said his takings would plummet by up to 65 per cent if the plans went ahead, causing him to lose his business “within a year”.
"
Presumably he thinks 65% of his customers arrive by motor vehicle, all will stop coming and there will be no extra/new custom.
Realistic or pessimistic?
A survey of the Roseburn Cafe seems in order to see how many customers actually park their van/car in the proposed loss of loading bays.
In the morning 7-30am to 8-30am and lunch hour 12-00 till 1pm would probably be best.
Realistic or pessimistic?
It doesn't seem unrealistic that takings will drop while the work is being done. However, once it is done, given how much cyclists love cafe's I should have thought there would be plenty of new custom once the work is complete?
In photo
George Rendall - Art et Facts Gallery https://www.facebook.com/artetfactsgallery
Kadir Kavak, owner of the Roseburn Cafe
Osman Simsek - Roseburn Cafe
Alice McMillan, Huseyin Simsek - Vigo
https://www.facebook.com/vigodelicatessen
In article
David Drummond Sewing Machines http://www.daviddrummond.co.uk
"It doesn't seem unrealistic that takings will drop while the work is being done."
Hard landscaping teams eat fried/grilled meat products in rolls, too. They can always find somewhere to park within their Heras cordon, too.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts