CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

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

(5066 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. SRD
    Moderator

    livingstreetsedinburgh@gmail.com

    Posted 5 years ago #
  2. ih
    Member

    Thanks @srd. Any names? I've no idea of their structure, and I always like to write to a named person if possible.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  3. SRD
    Moderator

    David Spaven is chair of the local committee, and the contact named on most of their communications. http://www.livingstreetsedinburgh.org.uk/contacts/

    Posted 5 years ago #
  4. David Hunter
    Member

    Hello everyone; I am a Living Street Edinburgh committee member. We have been reluctant to comment on the extensive and sometimes inaccurate online criticism of our position on the Roseburn-Leith Street cycle route because we think that an online row between cyclist and pedestrian interest does not benefit any advocates of active and sustainable travel. However, things have regrettably escalated to the extent that we feel we must explain our position and a notice is now up on our website. http://www.livingstreetsedinburgh.org.uk

    Briefly, this restates our position i.e. that:
    * we support the vast majority of the route
    * we have two concerns over details - important details, but, in the great scheme of things, details
    * firstly, floating bus stops: these are entirely untested in Scotland and we are concerned at the risk of cyclist-pedestrian conflict. Especially for elderly or disabled people disembarking from the bus who will not expect to encounter cyclists on alighting.
    * secondly, at the east of Princes Street, we think that any space for new cycleways should come from vehicle space, not walkers space. (I would be surprised if any members of this Forum could disagree with this?)

    And finally, we remain committed to working constructively with cycle interests and others who want to make Edinburgh a more people-friendly place to be (as we have done so successfully for example on 20mph). We want to do this through constructive meetings and debate, rather than online forums. I hope that most members of the Forum can respect our position, even if they don’t agree with it. Thanks.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  5. crowriver
    Member

    David Spaven: That's the well kent rail campaigner, is it not?

    Posted 5 years ago #
  6. crowriver
    Member

    I think we also need to remember that newspapers love to stoke up controversy: it sells papers/garners web clicks, etc. Mr Gregson knows this and he and his band of grumpy faced placard wavers are exploiting it to full effect.

    As with just about everything in the EEN, the stooshie is portrayed as the Council's fault, this time in league with the dastardly, taxpayers' money wasting cyclists: the better to get readers frothing with anger at the perceived injustice, and spitting out their bacon rolls in disgust while "loading" outside the Roseburn Cafe.

    The pantomime charade will soon be forgotten about as soon as the next "outrage" is announced, sometime next week?

    Posted 5 years ago #
  7. newtoit
    Member

    Floating Bus Stops are entirely untested in Scotland... Are we as Scots fundamentally wildly different to those in London or Manchester?

    Or indeed on the continent, apart from they're on the other side of the road :)

    Posted 5 years ago #
  8. wingpig
    Member

    It is possible to be constructive on an online forum. I'd've gone to LS's local chapter setup meeting if it had been held at a convenient time/location, though I may well have spent a lot of the time frowning.

    The advantage of online forumses over face-to-face meetings is that sarcasm is much easier. I must confess to having not seen the news reports of the pedestrian upset/carnage/outrage/TRAVELCHAOS at England/Wales/NI's initial floating bus stop implementations.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  9. crowriver
    Member

    "Floating Bus Stops are entirely untested in Scotland... "

    As indeed was the abolition of Feudalism until a few years ago. I must have missed that fateful moment when the sky fell in as a result.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  10. Kim
    Member

    @David Hunter "floating bus stops: these are entirely untested in Scotland and we are concerned at the risk of cyclist-pedestrian conflict."

    Not factually true, there are number of floating bus stops in Edinburgh already, it is just then tend to have motor vehicle passing either side rather than just cycles on one side. Why should the cycle lane cause a greater hazard than speeding taxies?

    As to being "entirely untested in Scotland", they have been in use in other countries (some with far better safety records than Scotland) for over 30 years. Can you suggest any reason why Scotland should be more hazardous then else where?

    So long as best international practice is applied there is NO reason why floating bus stops with cycle lanes shouldn't work here to. Living Streets objection is vexation nonsense, of which you should be ashamed.

    Without the floating bus stops the segregated cycle way is a non starter and all active travel users will lose out. This is the boldest plan that CEC have ever come up with to promote active travel for ALL, and a few members of Living Streets have deliberately tried to block it.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  11. @David Hunter: I appreciate your willingness to engage and direct meetings can be easier to handle than online forums. However, the genie is out of the bottle now with your submission and the way you have been quoted in the Evening News, the debate is already taking place publicly and in practice you can't stop it any more and try to move it into closed meetings.

    From your reply, I don't really get the impression that you have taken onboard the criticisms. It would be helpful if you read some of the comments that various people have made above and try to understand.

    Given that you have been quoted in the EEN very misleadingly, it would also be great if you can write a positive article for the EEN and other local media promoting active travel and clearly stating your support for positive developments.

    It is not really about convincing individuals on this forum, but about promoting active travel in the wider public.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  12. Min
    Member

    We saw one in Bannockburn. Unfortunately it doesn't show up on streetview as it must be too new but I think the mud track here is where it is. Wish I had taken a photo now.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  13. panyagua
    Member

    Here is just one example of floating bus stop experience elsewhere in the UK, which should allay fears about pedestrian-cyclist conflict.

    http://getbritaincycling.net/brightons-floating-bus-stops-ensure-passenger-safety/

    Note also the resulting decrease in general traffic after implementation of the scheme.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  14. "Concern" about a floating bus stop in Roseburn Terrace doesn't mean you have to suggest moving the whole route away from Roseburn Terr and sever the connection to Corstorphine Rd.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  15. @David Hunter "through constructive meetings and debate"

    OK, when is the next meeting where this can be discussed?

    Posted 5 years ago #
  16. Harts Cyclery
    Member

    @David Hunter: Are you now withdrawing your objection to the segregated cycle lanes along Roseburn Terrace?

    Posted 5 years ago #
  17. chdot
    Admin

    Welcome David Hunter!

    Thanks for joining in.

    I understand LS's points of view and the reason for the emphasis on 'pedestrian issues'.

    However people who walk and people who cycle (and people who do both!) need to establish common interest - on and off line.

    Perhaps LS will revisit this -

    "

    Despite the many barriers to walking, 35% of journeys by Edinburgh residents are still made on foot, and the Living Streets Edinburgh Group is engaging strongly with the Council, pressing for the pedestrian environment to enjoy the kind of prioritisation given to cycling expenditure – now due to rise to 10% of the Council’s transport budget. Our current campaigning priorities range across five issues:

    the need for the council to devote more resources to inspecting, monitoring and improving the pedestrian environment

    ensuring that cycling improvements are not gained at the expense of pedestrian safety and comfort

    http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/local-group/edinburgh-living-streets-group

    (my bold)

    and consider why it is - let's say - unhelpful.

    Most 'cycle campaigners' and, I hope, most people on this forum are very conscious of the need to improve things for pedestrians AS WELL AS people on bikes.

    The problem is not 'cyclists' (or LS!) but a society (and most politicians as a consequence) which seem to accept the inevitability/desirability of 'improving things for using motor vehicles' - especially the SG and the way it is 'nice' about active travel, but spends CONSIDERABLE amounts on road building.

    Let's have some unity on where the real problems are and work together rather than concentrate on sectional interests.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    "AS WELL AS people on bikes."

    And very importantly this whole route from Leith Walk to Roseburn is very much for people not yet on bikes - whether they normally walk, drive or take PT.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  19. Chug
    Member

    Could I add this as a floating bus stop already in use in Edinburgh

    Posted 5 years ago #
  20. fimm
    Member

    How about :
    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=16011

    (Translation: PY = Peter's Yard, on Middle Meadow Walk. We usually have a very informal get together there on the morning of the last Friday of the month.)

    Posted 5 years ago #
  21. ih
    Member

    Good spot @chug. And in a way, the whole of Elm Row is one big floating bus stop; you can't get to the stops without crossing roads.

    So we've got the tram stops, and these examples of floating stops with roads on both sides. The cycle track floating stops will be many many times safer.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  22. crowriver
    Member

    @Chug, well spotted!

    Here's a screen grab for those who did not spot the linkee:

    Posted 5 years ago #
  23. crowriver
    Member

    "And in a way, the whole of Elm Row is one big floating bus stop; you can't get to the stops without crossing roads."

    Absolutely.

    Here's a similar arrangement in Dundee. Okay that's parking behind but then that's the case at Elm Row too:

    https://goo.gl/maps/ASJm2dCm4nA2

    Elm Row for comparison:

    https://goo.gl/maps/FsTsAFeUQus
    https://goo.gl/maps/hzg6r8qxqMv

    Posted 5 years ago #
  24. @fimm Was this in response to my question about meeting? I meant a Living Streets meeting. Nothing on their website. Come to think of it, I can't remember having ever heard of any LS meetings or events in Edinburgh. How do they work?

    Posted 5 years ago #
  25. wingpig
    Member

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=14791#post-188161

    "Making Edinburgh Fit For Walking

    Monday 1st June, 18.00 to 20.00 on at the Quaker Meeting House 7 Victoria Terrace, Edinburgh.

    You are warmly invited to the launch event of our Edinburgh supporters' group to discuss and perhaps get involved in making Edinburgh fit for walking on the 1st of June 2015 at the Friends meeting House, Victoria Street, Edinburgh. Doors open 17.45

    We’re virtually all walkers – and in many ways Edinburgh is great city to walk in. But motor traffic continues to dominate the vast majority of the city’s streets, and pedestrians have languished at the bottom of transport priorities for far too long.

    Living Streets' Edinburgh local group is being formally launched to make the case for the enormous economic, environmental and social benefits of prioritising walking within a high-quality public realm in the capital. Come along to hear about what Living Streets stands for, how walking fits into a civilised public realm, and about the local group's plans for an exciting late summer campaign of street audits. This is your opportunity to get involved and help us press the City of Edinburgh Council to transform its many sensible walking-related policies into practical improvements on our streets. Please join us for a discussion and debate on the way forward with the following speakers:

    Standing Up for Walkers, David Spaven, Convener of the Living Streets Edinburgh Group
    A Better Public Realm, Marion Williams, Director of the Cockburn Association (Edinburgh’s Civic Trust)
    Auditing Edinburgh’s Streets, Stuart Hay, Director of Living Streets Scotland

    The meeting room will be open from 17.45, with tea, coffee and biscuits available. There will be opportunities to tell us what you think about walking in Edinburgh generally and in your own locality – and to help shape our late summer campaign.

    If you need any more information, please Contact David Spaven Tel: 0131 447 7764 Email: david@deltix.co.uk. Twiter: (@LivingStreetsEd) | Web: http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/local-group/edinburgh-living-streets-group

    Don’t miss this opportunity to help make Edinburgh a European exemplar of a pedestrian-friendly city!

    Thank you,

    David Spaven,
    Chair, Edinburgh Living Streets local group "

    Posted 5 years ago #
  26. SRD
    Moderator

    at least 9-10 forum members attended, which if memory is correct would make CCE about 1/5th of the audience?

    Posted 5 years ago #
  27. wingpig
    Member

    From http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/blog-post-cycle-superhighways-are-welcome-but-more-could-be-done-to-prioritise-pedestrians (which LS's master Twitter handle @LivingStreets sent in reply to Kim).

    "We currently don’t know the impact of the superhighways on pedestrian crossing times (an issue highlighted by the City of London) and access to ‘floating’ bus stops remains a concern. Unlike those trialled in Stratford, many of these bus stops are well used and wide, straight cycle tracks in places like Blackfriars Road are likely to accommodate cyclists going at some speed. We’ll be asking TfL for more detail before we write our full response to the consultation and share it with you here. - See more at: http://www.livingstreets.org.uk/blog-post-cycle-superhighways-are-welcome-but-more-could-be-done-to-prioritise-pedestrians#sthash.qvOD9JJs.dpuf"

    My bold.
    It would have been quite easy to say "as long as the cycle path around the bus stop at the west end of Roseburn Terrace is bendy" instead of the vague (and variably-interpretable) "concerns".
    The east side of it is effectively bendy as cyclists joining it will either be coming from the WoL path link to the north or from the Roseburn Gardens crossing to the south. Introduction of a bend at the east side of the bus stop is probably not impossible.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  28. Rob
    Member

    I believe kerbs and tarmac are critical to how a floating bus stop is interpreted (like the Brighton example above). Paint on an existing footpath doesn't cut it.

    I say this as someone who's milled about in the painted variety without realising.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  29. ih
    Member

    I've suddenly realised that when LS and other groups (the London Black Cab Drivers springs to mind) speak in a vague way about welcoming segregated cycle tracks they mean something entirely different to cycle groups and some increasingly enlightened authorities.

    They mean an out-of-sight out-of-mind, apartheid type of segregation, which clearly doesn't need to be adequately funded, or fit for use.

    Posted 5 years ago #
  30. @wingpig I also saw this on Twitter, but felt that "concerns" about lack of details in a very busy London location doesn't really give any justifications for moving the whole Roseburn Terr lane onto the next street.

    For me, it is a lot about how this is expressed. There is big difference between expressing concerns that pedestrians find it difficult to cross and saying without any uncertainty "no floating bus stops should be created in Edinburgh" and "cyclists should be routed via Roseburn Place and Street" (quotes from LSE submission). Any number of other concrete suggestions could have been made if they think there is a problem at the Roseburn bus stop, e.g. moving the bus stop further west onto the bridge or making sure it's clearly marked in colour or whatever. But just bumbling in with the demand to essentially scrap the whole thing (at least at this location) is not constructive.

    Having worked with elderly people in a care home for a couple of years in one of my previous lives, I really understand worries that fast cyclists are intimidating, and I always cringe when cyclists are dismissive. Please keep in mind that people are different:

    • The risk is different. A close pass that is totally fine to a fit 20 year old is absolutely terrifying to a frail 80 year old who already had a hip operation after a fall and for whom another fall might mean becoming totally immobile. A collision that might be a minor bruise for you can be life-changing (or -ending!) for others. We should take this concern seriously.
    • Also pure perception of speeds and distances are different. As cyclists (even sluggish ones like me) we are more used to fast movements, closer passes, quick reactions etc. Less mobile people may not be able to process speeds above walking speeds at all, because they just don't experience them much. Not to mention medical conditions like Parkinson's.

    Posted 5 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin