CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

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

(5559 posts)

No tags yet.


1…656667…186

  1. HankChief
    Member

    A reminder that the Murrayfield Community Council meeting is next Tuesday at 7.30pm at the church halls on Ormidale Terrace.

    A council officer will be giving an update on the Roseburn plan and PG will be giving a presentation on his alternative vision.

    To help elevate the debate, some locals have put together a website explaining the benefits and using an evidence based approach to countering the concerns against the plans.

    The plan is to launch it tomorrow morning, so if you can hold on a little longer your patience will be rewarded.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  2. Stickman
    Member

    PG's vision: will he also be speaking in tongues?

    Seriously, good work and huge thanks to those behind the website. Are you getting a right of reply next week?

    Edit: looks like MCC have broken the embargo... http://www.murrayfieldcc.org.uk/news/news_detail/548

    Posted 8 years ago #

  3. NiallA
    Member

    Terrific site HankChief et al - hope it helps.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  4. HankChief
    Member

    Stickman: No embargo for MCC. Actually glad they to have put a message out about it and will let us announce it at the next meeting.

    The team are still making last minute changes so we're not going to go making a fuss about it until tomorrow morning.

    Then I'll want you all to spread it far and wide and refer people to it who are misunderstanding what the proposals are all about.

    Until then have a peruse if you wish and let us know of anything you think we should add.

    We do want this to become a community website, so if there are concerns that we should be covering, or dare I say it *evidence* of disadvantages then we want to hear about it. Contact details on the site.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  5. Stickman
    Member

    Any word on when the council will publish the consultation report? Or is it getting its first airing at the meeting next week?

    Posted 8 years ago #

  6. HankChief
    Member

    Soon. I assume it will come out in the papers for the Transport Committee meeting on the 7th, but I'm not sure.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  7. gembo
    Member

    Love the website. Very fair and balanced and rational. Alas in huge contrast to my old mucker Pete who has unfortunately lost the plot and does not mind bending truth.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  8. shuggiet
    Member

    Very good website Hankchief!

    Posted 8 years ago #

  9. neddie
    Member

    Yes, a very good website indeed. I can see that a lot of effort has gone into it. Well done all.

    A couple of points that you could maybe squeeze in somewhere:

    - it would be worth mentioning that the proposed route will benefit disabled people, both those using wheelchairs and mobility scooters, as well as disabled people that cycle. The general population also underestimate the number of disabled people who can cycle and indeed use bikes as a means to freedom. "How will a disabled person park outside the shops?" is often used as an excuse by the antis (when what they actually mean is, "how will I park outside the shops?").

    - the "visibility" of the direct proposed route acts a marketing tool. When people stuck in cars or stuck on buses can see countless cyclists gliding past them, they'll think, "I could do that, what stopping me?"

    Posted 8 years ago #

  10. Rosie
    Member

    @eddie_h - good points both.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  11. HankChief
    Member

    Thanks for the positive feedback folks. Most of the credit should go to our excellent Web designer who is doing an fantastic turning our thoughts into a coherent site.

    Please keep coming with the feedback, we might not get to all of them tonight but happy to incorporate them.

    The wider sharing of the site will start at 11am - please do join in.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  12. Morningsider
    Member

    Fantastic - a huge amount of effort must have went into this, so well done to everyone involved.

    My only thought (yes, I do occasionally have one) is that it might be a bit much for some people to read. In my experience, people give up reading factual briefings very quickly - so it might be worth having a very short summary page, even just a few bullet points simply listing all the benefits, clearly linked to the front page.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  13. Stickman
    Member

    @Morningsider - agreed. I think this PoP summary is still beautifully simple and clear:

    http://pedalonparliament.org/supporting-edinburghs-east-west-cycle-route-five-reasons-in-five-words/

    Posted 8 years ago #

  14. crowriver
    Member

    Well done, superb effort!

    Posted 8 years ago #

  15. HankChief
    Member

    Pete's vision is out...

    Posted 8 years ago #

  16. Stickman
    Member

    I don't think Amsterdam and Copenhagen will be rethinking their approach in light of the Vision.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  17. Stephan Matthiesen
    Member

    @Rosie In the MCC minutes I read you are asked how cyclists in other cities cope with tram tracks. Strange how they seem to expect you to be able to know everything... If this comes up again, perhaps the following helps.

    I grew up in a city with an extensive tram network, Nürnberg (Germany). In my experience, the answer is: they don't cope. As kids we all fell over tram tracks at some point, so we avoid them as adults. Fortunately the city also built protected bike lanes along most major routes so you rarely have to cycle close and parallel to them. I can't really think of any place in Nürnberg where it's as difficult as Haymarket.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  18. Rosie
    Member

    @Stephen. Thanks. An old bloke who remembered the tram tracks in Edinburgh in the 50s once told me that they were always coming off and breaking their arms, it's just that people didn't make a fuss about it those days.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  19. chdot
    Admin

    PG needs support on this one -

    "

    NCR1- Route A to Devon Place and Magdala Crescent: this requires cutting a 3’ gap in the wall to the new housing and re-arranging fencing and railing.

    "

    NOT as an alternative to the main route, but a useful addition and alternative to Haymarket Yards for people heading to Russell Road/NEPN.

    Won't happen of course due to too many vested interests/owners (plus lack of CEC willingness to compulsory purchase). Another opportunity lost in the planning process.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  20. Stephan Matthiesen
    Member

    Ok, so PG asks everybody to do in the next week:


    So let's do that then. Happy to help...

    Posted 8 years ago #

  21. Stickman
    Member

    You have to give him credit for running a textbook blocking campaign. He started out with fearmongering, distortions, evasions and misleading statements. This latest stage fits right in. So when the council present their revised plans he can point out this and get people distracted and wasting time responding.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  22. Roibeard
    Member

    @Stephan - my sarcasm filter may be offline at the moment, but I would consider a response to the "consultation" a waste of time. There's no guarantee that criticisms will be shape future revisions (and quite the opposite from previous experience) unlike the council's public consultation.

    Conversely, any agreement will be framed as "cyclist support in face of council dictate".

    But write to your councillors!

    Apologies if I've misread what is probably heavy sarcasm above...

    ;-)

    Robert

    Posted 8 years ago #

  23. fimm
    Member

    I finally had a go make making a Garmin track of the NCN1 route last night:
    https://connect.garmin.com/modern/activity/1182848969
    Sadly it doesn't really show the hump at the zigzag, which is what I was hoping for. However the speed trace shows how much speeding up and slowing down I did. I think I will do one for the direct route as well, which will hopefully show a difference!

    Nice website. I have not read all of it, but I did notice on the main page, paragraph 2 "Tackling congestion" should say "Our city is at risk of grinding to a halt..." (not 'grounding').

    Oh, and the NCN had plenty of cyclists and pedestrians on it at 6pm yesterday. If the city has ambitions for London-like levels of cycle use, there simply isn't space for that along that route.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  24. Stephan Matthiesen
    Member

    @Roibeard I don't expect PG to learn much from other views, but I'm not sure why it would hurt to comment on the surveymonkey that the whole route is unsuitable. After the park consultation a few weeks ago, all comments were collated and distributed and the strong opposition to speed bumps seem to have been noted by other local community people.

    The surveymonkey questionnaire is of course set up in a way that it doesn't ask if you agree/disagree to the whole route, you can only leave a comment.

    Posted 8 years ago #

  25. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    I'm confused on PG's vision... He's simply suggested cyclists use the current route with 'improvements', which aren't explained; and then the rest is the usual ranty stuff about how to complain and exhortations to get in Ruth Davidson's face. It's not really the well thought out, planned, modelled cycle route alternative I had expected, given the build up.

    *Disappointed of Duddingston*

    Counter website is good. I'd agree a little text heavy as an opener. That'll work for a lot of people who are willing to go into the detail, and it needs to be there (I especially like the breakdown of the PG petition), but up-front I reckon a quick summary, possibly even in graphic form.

    Other than that, a few typos, but they don't detract from the message. Damned good effort indeed!

    Posted 8 years ago #

  26. Stephan Matthiesen
    Member

    @Wilmington's Cow: You have to look at the "leaflet" and the surveymonkey questionnaire to see the actual suggestions.

    Overall you're right though, it's the existing route with various changes like more signs at the switchbacks to "help cyclists see the route" and 3 or 4 additional traffic lights within about 20 metres of each other at the Roseburn Terrace/Street/Place junction (drivers will love that!).

    Posted 8 years ago #

  27. Stickman
    Member

    And speedy Spokes members get to use the existing bus lane on West Coates but with the extra safety feature of special brown paint!

    Posted 8 years ago #

  28. Morningsider
    Member

    Wouldn't waste your time replying to an online survey organised by the anti-campaign - it will simply boost the number of respondents they can claim oppose the scheme.

    I would hold fire on lobbying until we know the date the scheme is due to go before the Transport Committee and then, about three days before the meeting, love bomb the committee members with messages of support for the scheme. Go too early, or spread things out over too long a period, and members will simply forget or lose interest.

    These messages need to be very short, written by individuals and indicate that the respondent supports the scheme - no gripes, no pointing out flaws - the message must be clear "We support the scheme and want to see it built". Council officers, PoP, Hankchief and Co. have provided all the detailed resources needed - councillors simply need to know that the scheme is popular with "real people"

    Posted 8 years ago #

  29. Chug
    Member

    ^^^What Morningsider said.

    Also, if you tick the first box "I'm a cyclist", and then point out all the flaws in the alternative vision, these two points are likely to be disaggregated and used in isolation:

    "xx cyclists responded"

    and

    "xx% of respondents oppose the council's scheme"

    Neither statement is untrue, but they could just be left hanging for folk to draw their own conclusion that even cyclists oppose the scheme...

    Posted 8 years ago #

  30. chdot
    Admin

    "Also, if you tick the first box "I'm a cyclist", "

    Just tick 'none of above'

    Posted 8 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

1…656667…186

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin