CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

Roseburn to Leith consultation begins (and the debate continues!)

(5190 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

    Ah

    Posted 1 month ago #
  2. HankChief
    Member

    That's what big Rurigdh told us tonight :-)

    Posted 1 month ago #
  3. HankChief
    Member

    The question on compensation for traders was raised by Cllr Beal at today's full council and Cllr Day agreed to meet with the traders but would go as far as commit to a compensation scheme...

    Posted 1 month ago #
  4. chdot
    Admin

    If he gets given a free bacon roll will he have to declare it?

    Posted 1 month ago #
  5. HankChief
    Member

    ^that should say ‘wouldn’t go as far as to commit…’

    Posted 1 month ago #
  6. chdot
    Admin

    Project Update - Sections One and Two, July 2022

    https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/ccwel/news/article/28/project-update-sections-one-and-two-july-2022

    Posted 3 weeks ago #
  7. Rosie
    Member

    In spite of the business-repelling CCWEL, a new business has opened on Roseburn Terrace.

    https://hordeumbotanicalstudio.co.uk/

    It combines interior decoration with an upmarket coffee shop.

    Posted 2 weeks ago #
  8. chdot
    Admin

    Upmarket!

    What’s the neighbourhood coming to??

    Posted 2 weeks ago #
  9. chdot
    Admin

    Posted 1 week ago #
  10. boothym
    Member

    Seen a couple of tweets recently with photos of the construction work at Palmerston Place, where they are narrowing the junction and adding a connection to a crossing to Bishops Walk.

    https://twitter.com/Samuel_Lloyds/status/1551249643836788738 (pics 2 and 4)

    https://twitter.com/LaidBackBikes/status/1554148523431583744 (pic 2)

    Am I missing something, or have they really created a cycle track with the same paving slabs as the pavement rather than using tarmac? Unless there's been a change these should be the plans:
    https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/25292/ccwel-final-preliminary-design-rosebery-crescent-to-melville-street

    Posted 6 days ago #
  11. Stickman
    Member

    Unbelievable.

    Perhaps more time was needed to finesse the designs.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  12. chdot
    Admin

    Less about time, more about competence?

    It’s so obviously ‘wrong’.

    Not like someone decided to make a path in their back garden and started building it without thinking it through enough.

    There must have been a LOT of people involved at various stages, some of whom presumably had experience of similar - or at least knowledge of guidelines, regulations and ‘best practice’???

    Posted 6 days ago #
  13. Yodhrin
    Member

    Either someone at the implementation stage is a moron, someone at the admin stage handed down wonky briefs, or one of the interminable Posh People Posses has wormed their way in at some stage and had a good old bleat about "the character of the area" or somesuch pish and convinced a council officer to make changes. Though you would think the latter would need to be signed off by the TEC.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  14. Morningsider
    Member

    Looks like a considered decision to me, as the slabs used on the cycle lane are a different size from those used on the new section of pavement. If it was some foul-up I reckon they would all be the same size.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  15. chdot
    Admin

    That makes it worse!

    Posted 6 days ago #
  16. chdot
    Admin

    It’s sort of a nice idea, but would need to be VERY different slab colours

    AND would be safer without the lip.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  17. CycleAlex
    Member

    @boothym There’s been a lot of changes in the designs since the one you’ve linked to were created. Latest are here: https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/ccwel/downloads/download/8/general-arrangements

    Reasonable theory I saw is that the pavement was originally natural stone which would have contrasted but was value engineered down to cheaper precast concrete.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  18. crowriver
    Member

    That'll be pure joy to ride on in six months' time after several hundred delivery vans, HGVs and SUVs have parked (sorry "loaded legally") all over it.

    Posted 6 days ago #
  19. Yodhrin
    Member

    Honestly the main issue with it at this point isn't even for cyclists - that setup is going to get someone with sight problems badly hurt. High contrast between cycle and ped infra is vital for partially sighted people, I will bet a fiver they fudged the equalities assessment for the change if they bothered to do one at all.

    It needs to be challenged, officially - is there any way for us to actually do that?

    Posted 6 days ago #
  20. fimm
    Member

    Yodhrin you could start by doing a FOI request for the equalities assessment?

    Posted 5 days ago #
  21. Morningsider
    Member

    @Yodhrin - the kerb delineating the cycle path should be enough for it to pass any equality impact assessment. The use of coloured surfacing is a recommendation in guidance (Cycling by Design 2021, page 114) rather than a requirement.

    Posted 5 days ago #
  22. Yodhrin
    Member

    @Morningsider Really? That's disappointing, I thought the regs would be stronger than that.

    Posted 5 days ago #
  23. boothym
    Member

    @CycleAlex thanks for that, I missed the link to that on the construction page, saves me trying to find it in the mass of RSO/TRO documents!

    Pages 2 and 3 of the section 2 arrangements show the designs which are being followed: https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/ccwel/downloads/file/54/section-2-general-arrangements

    If it is to save money, are paving stones really that much cheaper than tarmac?

    Suppose at least the footway will be the same width as before, but still...


    (Photo from CEC tweet)

    Posted 5 days ago #
  24. Morningsider
    Member

    Research by the boffins at the TRL found that paving slabs are more expensive to install than asphalt and also have higher "whole life" costs - largely due to tripping accidents caused by poorly installed and maintained slabs.

    Posted 4 days ago #
  25. chdot
    Admin

    Also damage/replacement presumably?

    Posted 4 days ago #
  26. Dave
    Member

    Great link.

    The whole life costs (the sum of the discounted costs)
    of the asphalt footway are (£27.79/m2
    ), only 77% of those of the flagged footway (£35.75/m2
    ).

    I'd actually have expected a bigger difference, but there you go.

    Posted 4 days ago #
  27. CycleAlex
    Member

    @boothym Oh I assume it's still slabs for aesthetics/rich people complaining reasons, but presumably without the value engineering it would have been different slabs on the footway.

    With the grade separation and slightly different shape perhaps it won't be too bad if they plaster it with cycle symbols.

    Posted 4 days ago #
  28. ejstubbs
    Member

    All the above going on, yet AFAIK* there's still been zero progress on the no left turn (except for cyclists) from Clifton Terrace in to Grosvenor Street.

    * I pass by that way fairly regularly but TBH I've given up looking out for any progress on this change specifically, since nothing ever appeared to be happening. So, apologies if I've just failed to notice it.

    Posted 4 days ago #
  29. CycleAlex
    Member

    That's starting at the end of September. Would've posted but the tram cycle safety thread is locked for whatever reason.

    Posted 4 days ago #
  30. chdot
    Admin


RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin