CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 14years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
"
Traffic in the West End must be halved by 2020 to clean up the filthy air in Europe’s premier shopping district, a leading business group said today.
"
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/traffic-in-the-west-end-must-be-halved-by-2020-a3259796.html
That's been a fun evening.
Other than the cycle route discussion my highlight was a particularly agitated and red faced community councillor complaining about amplified music. He couldn't understand why anyone would want to listen to amplified instruments.
I was tempted to ask if he was the one who shouted "Judas" at Bob Dylan.
Not even the heroes of telemark could sit through repeated community council meetings without getting the flame throwers fired up. Chapeau to all who stuck it out
@ Stickman - ha ha.
I was there too. Were you in the red t-shirt?
Yes, right behind you. Was going to say hello at the end but you left before I got a chance.
There was a good showing from the cycle fraternity.
It was exactly what I expected and had prepared for.
Phil Noble was very good and measured. No update other than to say they have nearly finished the consultation response and would be publishing something in the next few weeks. He didn't give any indication of what changes are being made to the plan; I got the impression that there wouldn't be any fundamental rethink.
HankChief spoke very well again: clear and rational in the face of some anger. Don't know how he stays so civil. The new website had some positive responses.
PG presented his vision. He was fairly dismissive of the dangers of tram tracks or anyone who wanted a direct route.
Most disappointing is that Frank Ross has agreed that the Vision will be costed and presented as an alternative at Transport Committee.
Complaints about:
- loss of parking on West Coates by someone who lives on Kew Terrace and so has his own off-street private parking
- ambulances won't be able to get through
- people won't be able to get their 50inch plasma telly in for repair
- only six cyclists an hour
I hope to never attend a community council meeting again.
Well done to all those that went to re-balance the views of those that are stuck in 60s thinking. I really should have gone but as a bike retailer of sorts my views are biased a bit.
(The rant about bus lanes eliminating fishmongers and butchers makes me laugh. Retail - has - changed - for - ever.
Eddie's and other local businesses in Marchmont does ok and that's in a 20 zone. Of course the Marchmonites park everywhere two deep so maybe not the best example.)
Roseburn should be a 20 zone though to improve things? Surely that's something to agree on?
Frank Ross was being diplomatic I think.
And he must know that there is no compromise. Either we get a direct route or we don't. He can blather about democracy, but it's like a general election. One party gets in, the other doesn't.
@LaidBack
No, bizarrely both Roseburn Terrace and West Coates will remain 30mph.
Well done to you guys for going along. It's not easy, but some people there will be listening to you.
For those of you interested I was the guy in the white T-shirt with red stripes who had brought in a basin, don't ask.
Had to stop a lady from trying the cyclists ride so fast when I had to explain they have to mix it with fast traffic as well as call out Pete's track as something to get them out of the way.
I left the gentleman on the far right a copy of the new roseburn site as well as a mention of Nijmegen in the Netherlands. It's depressing that the lady next to me thought the lane was to be just two even after she was told otherwise. Then there was that troll in front of me. Says something stupid then stays sat down.
Update from PG. He is obsessed by Spokes. If only it had the power he thinks it does.
1 JUN 2016 — Hi Everybody,
Good news, but in a roundabout way. This evening the SNP Group at the Council discussed our Roseburn Vision.
We have persuaded them to commit to getting our scheme costed by Council Transport staff as an option that can be voted upon, along with the Council proposal. There will be no motion to Transport Committee on the 7th June, but the decision to get our scheme costed is recorded in the SNP Group minutes and we will not let them forget it!
That means that when it comes to the crunch Transport Committee meeting (whether that be in August or November) there will be at least two options before the Councillors- the Cycling officer's protected cycle track scheme and the Roseburn Vision. And our one will be both vastly cheaper and have the support of 99% of traders and residents. (Thanks to those traders who wrote to Cllrs Ross and Rankin- they will still be using those e-mails six months hence, I hope).
Would any of you like to join me for the next Transport meeting on the 7th June At 10am? I am arranging a small protest for 10am that day at the City Chambers and we must ensure that, just before the meeting starts, Labour and Green Cllrs get handed a copy of our revised scheme.
The battle is not over, but the Council has now agreed to stock our armoury and load our weapons. We must continue to lobby, to present and to talk to politicians. The end game is nigh.
I have just come from a very heated meeting at Murrayfield Community Council where I presented our vision and faced plenty of schtick from a Spokes contingent out to promote their website in favour of the Council scheme - at http://www.roseburncycleroute.org.uk . The Council cycling officer, Phil Noble was there, and indicated there would be minor changes in the scheme. As a result of over 2,000 responses it looks like they might save Roseburn, yet sacrifice West Coates and Haymarket. Divide and rule, perhaps?
Anyway, they are offering a walkabout with Community Council members (I will be on that) and Phil says the Council will go round every single one of the 56 businesses en route and “talk through the proposals in more detail”.
By this, one can surmise the Council is not for giving up on its madcap scheme of protected cycle tracks. It seems any changes made to their plan must be signed off by the stakeholders group the Council has created – the Council’s “Active Travel Forum” - which seems to get the last word on redesign; the forum is clearly stacked by protected cycle track- lovers. The Council declares it is not in bed with Spokes, but if the Travel Forum consists of Spokes members then that is the same thing. (A question for our elected members, perhaps?). The deliberations of the Active Travel Forum can be viewed here and I urge you to take a look at Cllr Hinds’ powerpoint presentation here).This is the Forum that is the source of our woes.
Much was made of the fact that there will be 20% more folk living in Edinburgh in the next few years- that’s 100,000 people- and the Council had decided that the way these folk will get around the city will be by bike. Their logic goes that if they see a nice protected cycle track they will decide they want to cycle into town to get to work. My understanding was that these folk were going to be living in SE Edinburgh, but in the cycling officer’s mind presumably they will be making their way to the city centre by cycling round the by-pass in order to get into work via Corstorphine. The pro-track lobby declared that all those in cars will switch to bike if they see a track and that 100,000 folk in bikes were a more efficient use of road surface than 100,000 in cars. That may be true, but the fact is that those 100,000 are far more likely to be using the bus, a possibility that has evaded the collective minds of the Labour Group. That the track will make life harder for bus passengers (by removing a bus lane) is the territory we must stage our argument on. The mass rapid transit of 100,000 extra commuters from the periphery of the city (where new housing must go) will not be by bike, but by bus and suburban train and tram. Granted, some will choose to travel 7 miles by bike to get to work in the morning but they will be few. More likely they will use public transport. The suggestion of bike racks on the front of busses for those commuters is something that we must champion. The Seattle scheme is the one that must be flogged next. Travelling for 50 minutes by bike in the rain or the depths of winter on a protected cycle track is something even our most ardent lycra-clad spokes fanatics might balk at. There are more arguments to be made. Bike onto bus video here https://youtu.be/ZoE2MKHM7IA
I shall be in touch again when I have the exact wording of the extract from the SNP’s minutes of today’s meeting. (My expectation is that this matter will be resolved not at the 30th August meeting, but at the 1st Nov Transport meeting.) On Sunday night I shall send out the details of our revised Roseburn Vision scheme- once the working group has digested the consultation feedback on Sunday afternoon. If you have not already done so, please complete the survey at http://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/roseburn
Finally, today we got some great coverage in the Evening News- this was on page 4- http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/our-region/edinburgh/leith/roseburn-leith-cycleway-opponents-float-alternative-route-1-4141993 see my comment at the end of the comments string (they are mostly from Spokes folks) as “KidsNotSuits”.
And I got a big letter on page 20: read it here http://www.kidsnotsuits.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/LettersEN310516a.jpeg
Best wishes
Interesting that he's stopped calling it the 'spokes proposal' - think someone to,d him in no uncertain terms to wise up?
"
The suggestion of bike racks on the front of busses for those commuters is something that we must champion.
"
That would keep him busy!
(I believe it would involve changing UK law.)
'Improvements to NCN1 only' will without a doubt have been considered during options development in 2014/2015, so tweaking the cost numbers to whatever PG proposes won't be that hard.
It will score awfully on cost/benefit ratio.
I genuinely think this chap needs some psychological counselling. Seriously. The total lack of reasoning, and the delusions (99% of residents are against the scheme? Really?), the paranoia about the power of Spokes and the fact that every cyclist there is part of an organised lobby and all Spokes members and supporters...
He's got a bit of a Napoleon complex, sees himself as fighting the good fight ("The battle is not over, but the Council has now agreed to stock our armoury and load our weapons"), and reckons he's the general to marshal the 'troops'.
I'm all for democratic process, but that has already been gone through, and so for all of his calls for 'democracy' etc etc, that's exactly what he's actually usurping, as well as adding cost to the process by having to get the council to cost his (frankly daft) proposals.
Despair doesn't even cover it. And the thing is, you know you will never convince him otherwise!
"
People are people - whether walking, driving or on bikes, they'll take the quickest most convenient route. Offering them a longer way round, just because it suits YOU, is not a good way forward.
"
This is from the man who says 'I am a cyclist too' -
"
31/05/2016 10:16 PM
KidsNotSuits
Oh dear, I suppose I ought to say something. What do Spokes say "Build it and they will Come". Well, why build at all? Just do what they do in Seattle and put bike racks on the front of busses. Then our lycra-clad friends can forget about crazy cycle tracks that ruin the area, and sit back in the comfort of a number 26. They'll still be going faster than all the cars, and when they get to the coffee shop they are aiming for they can spin the last 50 yards on their bikes. Problem SORTED!!!
"
the forum is clearly stacked by protected cycle track- lovers
Reminds me of something that would be said at KKK meeting:
"the forum is clearly stacked by N-word - lovers"
How does that sound, PG?
@WC: prompted by your mention of democracy, I just checked the Murrayfield Community Council election results. No votes were cast as there were fewer nominees than available places.
PG also seems to be dividing his time between emailing Edinburgh Council and sending petitions to Hillary Clinton. It's a diverse range of interests I suppose.
"there were fewer nominees than available places"
Can't think why!
This is the sad reality of local local democracy.
As is seen from this thread, people who actually take an interest in local issues, can't imagine joining a CC.
Not that CC's have much real power/influence.
Hi guys, I'm so sorry I missed the MCC meeting last night. I had double booked myself with an EdFoC meeting by accident so couldn't attend.
With respect to the council costing out the "Roseburn Vision". Will the councillors look at this alternative "vision" as a serious and viable route at the Transport and Environment committee meeting? I'm assuming they are advised and given information from professionals with experience and knowledge in order to inform their vote. Council planners and officers with lots of experience have already dismissed the NCN1 as an alternative option, so why is time and energy being given over to a costing and proposal to T&EC?
Sorry if these sound like daft questions. I'm just not very sure why the "Roseburn Vision" alternative has been given any air time.
I'm just not very sure why the "Roseburn Vision" alternative has been given any air time.
The squeaky wheel gets the oil.
And what's the cost of costing an alternative? Whose budget is paying for it? Hmm.
I'm so glad I couldn't get to the MCC meeting. I think I'd have lost the will to live.
"so why is time and energy being given over to a costing and proposal to T&EC?"
Because one or more local councillors wants it done.
Whether that's because they believe in it or 'want to be seen to be responding to local concerns' is another matter!
There is always a tension between staff who 'just want to get on with things' and councillors who 'just want things done'.
In some places (it seems) some councillors 'make' officials do their bidding (good or bad) in others councillors are more or less told what to do by officials!
They are many examples in Edinburgh of officials doing stuff without councillors knowledge or approval (allegedly!) and (worse) an apparent inability in some case to deal with the consequences.
Councillors are elected and therefore 'in charge', but one reality is that policies are approved and not always implemented adequately. Inevitably this is sometimes because there are overlapping/conflicting polices, but there is also the fact that officers don't always pay attention and/or know that no-one will check up.
Of course it doesn't help when cllrs in same party/Coalition don't agree!
how much power do the SNP party group have at council? Can they alone force a council department to change their direction?
Given that the (Lack of) "Vision" is unlikely to qualify for any subsidy and involve private land it possibly wont be quite as cheap as PG thinks.
He does seem convinced that if you're not with us you're a spokes member. He seems to have stopped shouting about being a spokes member, perhaps he has forgotten to renew.
Convenient for him to forget that there is likely to be both large amounts of housing and offices being built to the West of the city in the next few decades.
And as for the militaristic rhetoric, perhaps it's time he rebranded as "Guns not Communities".
Labour bloc outweighs SNP until next year. Then it will all change.
Anything cycling you want done needs done now I am guessing as the SNP cycling dude is still an independent, though I think he is trying to return?
If the route gets installed (Pete is trying to delay this until next year clearly with his round the bins alternative) I hope he would not keep going and have it ripped out as that would be a further cost. HOwever, my study of such obsessions suggests he would do this and claim it as a victory (for the shopkeepers etc). He cannot stop himself I am afraid. Also lot of time on his hands?
I spotted Councillor Cammy Day (Lycra/Labour) yesterday outside door of City Chambers talking to Councillor Jason Rust (Suit / Tory)
SNP suit one day / lycra the next?
In the interest of balance, I spotted Councillor Eric Milligan (Labour / blazer and slacks, with colourful tie and matching hankie in breast pocket) walking through the Cowgate this morning. and Councillor Ricky Henderson (jacket and trousers Labour) outside city chambers too yesterday.
Two fridays back I spotted councillor who shall remain nameless in boozer in interesting ncompnay (two bottles of wine consumed). This I think was tram related.
These are all my councillor spots
as the SNP cycling dude
Jim Orr? They replaced him with Adam Mcvey, no?
Can they alone force a council department to change their direction?
Can any councillors do this? My impression of how the council generally works is the councillors do/say/vote one way and then the unelected machine of the council just goes off and does its own thing.
"Labour bloc outweighs SNP until next year. Then it will all change."
Yes, and probably.
However the recent Holyrood elections indicate that 'Edinburgh votes in interesting ways'.
Looking forward to the WalkCycleVote collected candidate info.
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts