That’s a huge relief. It seemed likely the result would be positive given the earlier report, but still...
Well done to Henry and team for all your work on this.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Roseburn to Leith consultation begins (and the debate continues!) CCWEL
(5537 posts)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Great news!
This thread is 4.5 years old, in case anyone's wondering. David Cameron still had half a year of being prime minister...
Posted 3 years ago # -
Unclear what the modifications are to me from the wording.. being optimistic: is it dropping the shared use pedestrian crossings (which were crap for cycling)?
Posted 3 years ago # -
“with only a minor amendment“
Have read the changes, but don’t know significance.
Minor concession to objectors or some technicalities?
Posted 3 years ago # -
The change is a pretty minor one CEC proposed prior to the hearing - reduces the length of the segregated lane on Roseburn Gardens to something similar to the one on Rankeillor St.
Page 25 vs 35 for a comparison: https://democracy.edinburgh.gov.uk/Data/Transport%20and%20Environment%20Committee/20180620/Agenda/item_71_-_city_centre_west_to_east_cycle_link_and_street_improvements_project_-_section_1_roseburn_placemurr.pdf
Posted 3 years ago # -
Is that it then, no more appeals? Well done Hankchief.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Huge respect to HankChief for the work he put into this. But the time and energy that could have been better spent. In that period my hairdresser told me she didn’t need to colour my hair ash blonde (i.e. white) – it had gone that way naturally.
I’ve done a rough timeline, which misses out quite a few steps including the clean air skirmish and the attack on the Rejuvenating Roseburn information boards.
2014 – report on route options feasibility and user impact
October 2015 report to the Council’s Transport and Environment Committee
November 2015 – first public consultation. Opposition to route mobilised via Murrayfield Community Council. Deadline for consultation extended to February 2016
March – May 2016 – Roseburn Route Support Group formally established and website launched.
June 2016 – consultation shows strong approval of cycle route. But the route has been compromised to a choice between 2 options, Option A vs Option B (avoiding Roseburn Terrace, the most contentious point)
August 2016 – loud noisy public meeting organised by antis
29 August 2016 CCE forumites organise a Ride the Route of a [100] or so cyclists riding from Charlotte Square to Roseburn Terrace. Met with placards and shouts from shop owners
30 August 2016 Transport and Environment Committee (TEC) meeting. Attending – Richard from Spokes, Henry, Rosie from Roseburn Route Support Group
Stakeholder group organised to examine options.
December 2016 – TEC decides on Option A
Feb/March 2017 – Henry, as Chair of Roseburn Route Support Group, joins Murrayfield Community Council. Many meetings with the antis trying to find new lines of attack.
January – May 2018 – Draft Traffic Regulation Orders for Roseburn Area open for comments
June 2018 – TEC vote to keep moving forward with the CCWEL but because of the nature of the objections the TRO and RSO go to a public hearing.
3 August 2018 – RSO to Public Hearing
4/5 November 2019 – Public Hearing
May 2020 – Reporter from Public Hearing finds that objections to the TRO are unfounded.
July 2020 –Reporter from Public Hearing passes the RSO with a minor modification.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Thanks Rosie.
Can you now detail officer time and other costs...
Posted 3 years ago # -
https://twitter.com/adamrmcvey/status/1286977213347368961?s=19
"Great news for West Edinburgh!
The West-East cycle link is a crucial part of Edinburgh’s direct, connected network with big pedestrian gains too. Very pleased after years of pushing this forward its over the line & we can start delivery.
Whoop whoop indeed!"
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Rosie, to add to the timeline:
2021: construction.
6 years since the first consultation. 7 since the initial feasibility and route options.
Not sure it's a cause for celebration when some simple, minor changes to make roads safer for cycling take this long to deliver.
The system is designed to hold up any changes to the status quo. At this rate of progress I'll be drawing my state pension by the time we have a connected network of segregated routes across the city, if ever.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I've had it pointed out to me that the TRO was passed by the Reporter in May, but that Ministers, using the Reporter's report passed the RSO. on July 24th, another 3 months.
This has been a long grinding business for a few hundred metres of cycle track.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@chdot - also add stress on cycle officers for dealing with a recalcitrant and often extremely aggressive opposition.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@ Rosie
Yes
“Obviously the whole Roseburn saga has been hugely damaging to staff availability to do useful things AND at a considerable cost to the city (not just financial).“
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20300&replies=18#post-334714
Posted 3 years ago # -
“This has been a long grinding business for a few hundred metres of cycle track.“
Yes, but more important than that.
Not even just about cycling - or walking.
It was always about people/cities/transport/health/etc.
Unfortunately/inevitably people in favour of this were identified/vilified as “cyclists”.
I’m sure most rode bicycles BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY they had (fairly modest) Expectations of ‘better’ -
E.g. facilities that some people would feel safe to use on a bike. Improvements for people walking - this was always about improving junctions and road crossings.
To a lesser extent it was (attempting to be) about reducing traffic - which would benefit everyone (even those still driving).
It was even about improving things for traders (or at least the ones who weren’t relying on illegal parkers).
I’m not sure this has moved things on much from being about “cyclists” and “cycle campaigning”.
The fact is that the people who care about this sort of thing are (often) people who use bikes as transport.
They also hang out here, and/or have been involved in PoP and/or Spokes.
Clearly that is not a criticism or a suggestion that ‘we’ should do ‘more.’
I’m sure those who have stuck with this want/deserve a rest - maybe even feel ‘that’s it I’ve done enough’.
The sad truth is that (not just about cycling) a small number of people do a lot of work they shouldn’t have to.
Covid should have made some of the stuff Spokes has been asking for for 43 years just ‘obvious’...
Posted 3 years ago # -
@chdot -
The sad truth is that (not just about cycling) a small number of people do a lot of work they shouldn’t have to.T'was always thus.
Covid should have made some of the stuff Spokes has been asking for for 43 years just ‘obvious’...
I had hoped that a totally obvious popup route from west of Corstorphine to Shandwick Place would have been built, which would have been cutting the Gordian knot. Frank Ross came out for that, and had come round to support the CCWEL. Sadly, no.
You're right that it should be viewed more widely than a cycling concern. Sustrans did try and do that by combining it with a Rejuvenating Roseburn scheme.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I was at one of the second wave of consultations (after the initial generation of options) for the section to the east and it was already very Cycling (council-"cycling officer" & Spokes) versus community-group-representing-the-inconvenience-of-not-just-Parking-wherever-you-like, with the council officer mostly having to deal with rebuttals to BUT PARKING AND LOADING challenges rather than helpful suggestions from Spokes/PoP/Living Streets (prior to the Edinburgh faction) on which design option was best and how to improve them further. By the time it got to public consultation at that undercroft on George St the vociferous objections in principle were already at full steam.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Walthamstow village had same strength of objection but have held their nerve for the little Holland.
Let’s hope this thin sliver of victory can be sustained.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Supreme effort! I only sometimes find time to browse the forum these days, but when this thread started I was very active, it's always been a little strange to keep seeing it pop up).
How many metres of cycle facility has been secured per year?
The contrast with how relatively easy it is for developers to just build new estates is interesting. They apply, council rejects, either appeal or scotgov calls it in and minister approves, wham bam. It would be interesting/depressing to contrast the years per metre of cycle facility being approved versus the total length of new housing estate road being built in the same period...
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Dave - I would love to see a graph of amount of cycle route built. With the Covid 19 measures they're meant to put in 30km in the next few months and I would guess that's about what they've put in over the last decade or so.
Posted 3 years ago # -
“I would guess that's about what they've put in over the last decade or so”
I’d guess it’s a fraction of that - even if you count paint.
Posted 3 years ago # -
The last major "new" off-road route I can recall being completed was the shared use Porty-Seafield footway. That was back in 2012. Also there was a bit of tinkering with the Meadows to Innocent route.
These were, I might add, both existing routes, albeit well below useable standard, so really just welcome upgrades. There was a budget for a bridge and ramp to Leith Links which made the Porty route more viable, so that was genuinely new.
Since then? The shared use footways on part of Leith Walk. The (still officially closed) segregated routes on Picardy Place/Greenside Place. Er, that's it? So less than 5km of "new" routes by my guestimate.
I mean there are some bits and bobs of permanent routes still under construction (e.g. Jock's Lodge, rest of Leith Walk) but these are unusable currently so don't count. I'm also not counting temporary Covid-19 related stuff that messes around with situationally unaware wands, cones and the like.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@crowriver, The rather nice shared use path next to Lower Granton Road was completed in the last couple of years.
Posted 3 years ago # -
There's another 5-10km of new paths around Gilmerton (the Gilmerton-Shawfair path and connections, paths through Little France Park). Not sure exactly how old some of them are, hence guessing at distance.
Not much direct council involvement in them being built though.
Posted 3 years ago # -
What about the cut-through from the Meadows to the Innocent? Is that older than 2012?
Posted 3 years ago # -
“Gilmerton-Shawfair path“
Mostly Midlothian?
Posted 3 years ago # -
The Little France path is great. Climb up it and come down the parallel off-road route at full tilt.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Mostly Midlothian?
Almost entirely Edinburgh between Gilmerton and Shawfair. Short bit east of the A7 is in Midlothian.
The Gilmerton-Roslin section is mostly Midlothian (south of the bypass).
Posted 3 years ago # -
@fimm - that was opened in 2015. 100 or so metres of actual segregated route on Buccleuch Street.
Posted 3 years ago # -
“Almost entirely Edinburgh between Gilmerton and Shawfair”
Thanks, should have checked the map!
Posted 3 years ago # -
@Rosie, yep, mostly just existing route upgraded, i.e. "a bit of tinkering with the Meadows to Innocent route" as opined earlier.
@acsimpson, had forgotten about Lower Granton Road. Maybe a kilometre in length? Or less?
@Frenchy, dunno which bits of the Little France route are "new" or within past decade: ERI's been there a while now. Have never used the Shawfair path, but I *think* some of the Gilmerton routes to Modlothian are older than ten years...
Posted 3 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
