Has anyone taken a look in the void underneath the new Haymarket station building and judged it's suitability as a taxi rank?
It seems perfect:
> It's in the station
> It's covered
> It's otherwise just parking for a couple of cars
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Roseburn to Leith consultation begins (and the debate continues!) CCWEL
(5559 posts)-
Posted 8 years ago #
-
Sum total of facebook exchanges today...
I'm all for cycling but...(insert outrageously discriminatory and ill-informed remark here).
Posted 8 years ago # -
Yeah, I bet some of their best friends are black/gay/disabled too, and yet...
Posted 8 years ago # -
@chdot not the capacity of the trains themselves, but the line capacity and the number of trains you can fit down it.
To increase capacity on the railways, we don't just run more trains down the same line unless there's adequate paths. The trains may be rammed full, but they still move as we've allocated adequate line capacity. We then have to invest in increasing line capacity (usually signalling or junction improvements), faster / longer trains etc.
With roads, there's a theoretical unlimited capacity of near-empty cars, even if nobody is going anywhere fast. Even when road A is 100% full of stationary vehicles, we just let them back up onto the feeder roads B, C and D.
Anyway, I digress and don't want to take this thread off on a tangent.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"don't want to take this thread off on a tangent"
Can't be doing with that...
Posted 8 years ago # -
@harts most of those at Murrayfield CC last night were all for cycling but....
I don't think they get that we're not talking about the current volumes of cycling but for a big uplift as a result of having a safe direct route.
I'm all for cars (mine in particular) but for the congestion, pollution, obesity & danger issues they create and general unpleasantness they bring to crowded spaces.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Just posted Chris' doc to Corstorphine facebook page. I do think it could be more unequivocal about the Roseburn part. I think it absolutely should be on the main road and will improve Roseburn. We need to stick to our guns for everyone, not just for the fact that the cycle route would be a bit more direct.
P.S. (don't know who wrote that bit)
Posted 8 years ago # -
I was in Roseburn today. I couldn't see where the furniture shop was, where is it?
Posted 8 years ago # -
I had a look at that alley way behind Tesco that Cllr Edie thinks could be deployed as a cycle path. It where Tesco keeps racks. Also narrow. And what a convolution to get there.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@ i - there's a furniture shop in Roseburn Street, opposite the primary school.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@HankChief
I had the impression that most people there didn't give a toss about cycling or actively disliked it.Posted 8 years ago # -
Well done and thank you to those who went to the CC meeting yesterday. Having sat through one previously where the councillors got all riled up at the prospect of swapping shabby bollards on the old bridge for free planters (donated after the George St experiment no longer needed them) I fear I would have had some sort of screaming fit if I'd had to sit through them discussing anything more complex.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@LivD - it's amazing how long people can discuss bus and tram shelters.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@Rosie @HankChief and others, again thank you.
I've been following the comments you all report from the various objectors, both elected and lay. The distinct impression I get is of a visceral hatred of bikes and people on them. Even those who disingenuously claim they've nothing against cyclists, want them out of the way, unseen, on some godforsaken back alley that's tailor made for conflict with pedestrians (the hypocrisy of it!) None of their stated objections hold water. So, it's not worth trying to convert anyone, they aren't interested in any of the benefits. Let's all follow @mornigsider's advice and submit a positive response to the consultation, and write to all our councillors plus those on the transport committee.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@ih - I agree that there's no point in trying to convert the diehards & Morningsider's advice is sound.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Roseburn Café was empty this morning when I passed….
We can’t know if his 65% reduction in trade claim is true, but we can try and sense check it to see if it is feasible. While on a dull conference call this morning I did this back-of-the-envelope estimate. There are some pretty heroic assumptions in here, so these figures could change massively if you tweaked any of them and if anyone has any better guesses then do your own calculations.
- Café is open 80 hours p/w
- Parking restrictions apply 4 hours per day weekdays (and are strictly observed!), so 60 hours per week where customers could have parked legally- 12 parking places on Roseburn Terrace (assume the cycle lane would impact spaces on both sides of the road)
- Turnover of spaces every 15 minutes
- 75% occupancy of spaces
- So 12*4*0.75 = 36 cars per hour
- So 36 * 60 = 2160 cars per week
- Let’s assume 50% of cars are for customers of the café, so that’s 1080 cars per week- Average spend per car? No idea, but let’s say £4 (seems reasonable – some are coming for a full breakfast, some just for tea or a roll)
- So income from cars is 4 * 1080 = £4320 p/w
- Per year = £224,640 from cars
- So total turnover of the café is 224,640/0.65 = £345,600So a very very rough estimate would be turnover of around £350k per year. This is just turnover, so we’re not looking at rent, stock costs, staff costs, bills etc.
I’ve no idea if this is a reasonable for a café or not. It won’t make any difference to the consultation, but I thought it interesting to see if his claim was wild or not.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@Stickman
There is no parking at all on either side, except on Saturday. It is for loading and disabled only (and as already stated, collecting a bacon roll does not legally count as loading)
Posted 8 years ago # -
Well that changes things considerably, and kind of p***es on his chips a bit doesn't it?
Posted 8 years ago # -
He does chips as well as bacon rolls? If that's the case, I'd definitely stop off there if I was cycling along the segregated Roseburn cycle track.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"
3.5 V Forbes reported that on two occasions recently, while crossing Roseburn Street at the traffic lights opposite Tesco, she had narrowly avoided being knocked down by a car coming round the corner from Russell Road apparently unaware that the traffic lights were red. PC Hair agreed that this issue merited investigation and asked V Forbes to email the Community Policing team at:- EdinburghCorstorphineMurrayfieldCPT@scotland.pnn.police.uk.
"
http://www.murrayfieldcc.org.uk/inc/retrieve_file.php?id=200Posted 8 years ago # -
"
A-boards – request from John Yellowlees for them to be removed from pavement at Roseburn Terrace. Causing obstruction to pedestrians.
"
http://www.murrayfieldcc.org.uk/inc/retrieve_file.php?id=200
Posted 8 years ago # -
"
ROSEBURN ACTION PLAN
This plan contains some matters which are essential and others which may be considered visionary. All plans must inspire action at all levels to improve the area and the human condition.
"
http://www.murrayfieldcc.org.uk/uploads/File/Issues/Roseburn/RoseburnActionPlan.pdf
Posted 8 years ago # -
From above link!
"
THE SHOPPING AREA
The shopping area is hardly fit for purpose. The pavements are too narrow and the road too wide. The pavements are cluttered with plastic rubbish bins, A frame advertising boards and litter bins recently installed by the local authority, as well as poles with traffic signs and so on – the clutter continues. As a result of the above and the noisy, busy and smelly traffic the area is used only for local inhabitants to ‘pop in for a message’ and not to linger or walk there for pleasure.
The pavement clutter must be removed. The narrow pavements must be widened by a minimum of 600mm (60cm or 2 feet) on both sides of Roseburn Terrace. The road is wide and inefficiently used. The Road Engineer must give up a reasonable amount of road space. They have after all managed to reduce the vehicle flow in the centre of the city so there must be room for improvement in Roseburn.
"
Posted 8 years ago # -
That belongs in the cognitive dissonance thread for sure!
In fact the whole furore of opposition to cycle tracks belongs there.
Posted 8 years ago # -
There are some choice sentences in that report from Murrayfield CC which could definitely be quoted when responding to the consultation or contacting Councillors. For example:
"The shopping area is hardly fit for purpose. The pavements are too narrow and the road too wide. " - Murrayfield Community Council
"As a result of the....busy and smelly traffic the area is used only for local inhabitants to ‘pop in for a message’ and not to linger or walk there for pleasure." - Murrayfield Community Council
Nothing quite like authoritative statements from representative community bodies to add weight to one's argument, n'est ce pas?
Posted 8 years ago # -
"
Pidgin Post (@PidginPosting)
09/01/2016, 09:52
https://momentummag.com/why-businesses-want-bike-riding-customers/ @MurrayfieldCC @FrankRoss06"
"
Frank Ross (@FrankRoss06)
09/01/2016, 10:34
@PidginPosting @MurrayfieldCC I will print this of and distribute to the businesses or you could attend a meeting person to explain."
Posted 8 years ago # -
Well that's encouraging!
Posted 8 years ago # -
@crowriver: indeed. Their own local research is consistent with almost every bit of evidence that we can gather from around the world. Yet Roseburn is unique!!
Posted 8 years ago # -
Might be worth asking Cllr Ross if he did distribute the evidence.
He wasn't at MCC on Wednesday night - he was at the Corstorphine CC meeting happening at the same time.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I've literally just blown a Roseburn residence's mind explaining Roseburn Terrace is loading only. They need to be careful what they wish for. No parking is being removed!!
Posted 8 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
