http://cyclingfallacies.com/en/bingo
Probably bad form to hand these out at the door!
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Roseburn to Leith consultation begins (and the debate continues!) CCWEL
(5536 posts)-
Posted 7 years ago #
-
As suggested by chdot, I'll be tweeting from tonight's meeting: @PidginPosting, #cycle4Roseburn.
Posted 7 years ago # -
To those attending tonight - I salute your indefatagability!
Posted 7 years ago # -
Hats off to the people speaking. I'm coming along to support you.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Posted 7 years ago #
-
Signal is very patchy, so may not go as planned....
Posted 7 years ago # -
Chapeau
Posted 7 years ago # -
Impressive reporting on meeting via Twitter.
Posted 7 years ago # -
If it was the most nimbyish of the local Visionites amongst the meeting's objecting attendees and not all of then walked out then it's perhaps a good sign. Councillors and committee members will need to be reminded nearer decision-time that not the entire population of the area was represented by the voluble anti minority at the meetings.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I was following the Twitter reports on the train on my way home tonight. Great detailed summaries! Sterling work from the pro-scheme speakers in the face of a hostile crowd.
Judging by many of the audience comments, not only would anyone playing Cycle Fallacies Bingo have got a full house, but I think we can also pinpoint the epicentre of the EEN commentariat: Roseburn.
Posted 7 years ago # -
A loooong night. Twitter feed gives just a flavour of it. I tried to be as neutral as possible but it was very difficult given some of the things said.
Absolutely huge kudos to HankChief for standing up and facing the wrath of a baying elderly mob. Think that some people did hear him out despite lots walking out and PG sending his collecting bucket round in the middle of what he was saying. Very rude.
Best part of the night was definitely getting the lift home on back of HankChief's big rig, although the seat post falling and the crank shorteners would have given a comedy view. Think acsimpson who was tailing us got a picture which I would love to see posted here.
Posted 7 years ago # -
My god I almost hit Peter when he put that bucket around at the start of HankChief's presentation! (I was the guy at the side that shouted at him and told him to have some respect...)
But yes, big respect to Henry and Adam for their presentation. It feels to me like the battle for the locals is a tricky one and that the focus should be on the councillors, but I'm interested to know what others thought.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Lived up to my low expectations, although as I said to Claire and daisydaisy afterwards it was actually better than I feared.
Blazered, mustard-trouser wearing suburban Edinburgh at its worst. Jowly blowhard men standing up to announce "I'm a lawyer..." then launching into a tirade involving every anti-cycling cliche you can imagine. To be expected.
The most depressing moment for me was the man who stood up and said "I'm a respiratory surgeon" and proceeded to talk about the huge health problems caused by traffic pollution. I thought he was going to be passionately in favour of the plans. He followed up by saying the bike lane would cause even more pollution and that it was absolutely disastrous.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I knew it would be a cracker....
So in summary...
We have an unelected, unaccountable individual (who happens to encourage consultation fraud) making sweeping comments about the current proposal and it's impact without the need to support them with any evidence or basis of truth (6.5miles from Gogar to town by car in 12 minutes was my favourite) whipping up an anti-cycling fever amongst the community and feeding off their legitimate (but alleviatable) concerns and prejudices.
He then goes on to run a pseudo consultation (did I mention he encourages consultation fraud?) on some lines he's drawn on a map, which don't take into account any design standards or expert modelling and wants them to be taken seriously.
Meanwhile the council officers who have spent years on the proposals and considering the impacts face a barrage of challenges to their competence over the smallest detail.
Did I miss anything?
Posted 7 years ago # -
Stickman - can't sleep either then?
Are you or someone else able to storify.com your tweets? (Not now obviously)
Posted 7 years ago # -
A big RESPECT!! to HankChief talking to that mob.
What's infuriating is that a large swathe of the crowd have given Pete's back of the envelope nonsense the weight of the American constitution.
And the woman near the end who was full of how brilliant Edinburgh's existing infrastructure is.
Also - it seems the road is too narrow for cycle routes but too wide to cross in a oner.
You're wasting your breath if you point out other cities have done similar things with success as They Are Not Edinburgh.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I've got some notes and have been wondering how to write them. Will see if I can get a storify up.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Chapeau again had family bonding evening but was sorely tempted ( I have occasionally gone to the one in Balerno, we have no PG to whip things up though. What a shame my old pal from demos etc is now firmly entrenched with Tory Murrayfield , in us specific instance the SNP element of Pete the park keeper's gang are Tories too and Pete who was labour is Tory too. Conservatives like to keep things the same.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Just remembered pete saying that cyclists want to take the most direct route and not go all round the houses when justifying HIS scheme!
Posted 7 years ago # -
Spoke to a couple of shop keepers, sadly convinced that they'll go out of business if option a goes ahead. We had a nice chat, neither of us changed our mind, but the guy from Roseburn cafe said he'd like to see the evidence on what happens to shops when a cycle route goes in. The guy speaking on behalf of the shopkeepers said with a certain no of customers coming by car, and half the parking going, 8 shops would go out of business. I couldn't persuade them that in a more pleasant street for pedestrians, and cyclists they'd get new customers that way.
Posted 7 years ago # -
From Adam McVey:
"At well attended public meeting on Roseburn cycle scheme. Useful issues discussed but unfortunate lack of respect for many others' views."
Posted 7 years ago # -
(6.5miles from Gogar to town by car in 12 minutes was my favourite)
Being charitable...perhaps a kilometre/miles conversion mistake? Or did he mean 12 minutes into the city centre, rather than Roseburn?
Posted 7 years ago # -
It sounds as frustrating as I would have expected it to be - so kudos to everyone who went along.
If one or two of the shopkeepers can be cajoled into seeing the light (and sounds like daisy has made good headway in the right direction with the café) then that's the kind of thing that might spread among them. This 'businesses will inevitably close down if there's a cycle lane put in' idea just grabs hold everywhere this kind of thing is mooted, and from what I've read, and what research I've carried out over the years, it never happens.
Though as we've heard said many times, maybe Edinburgh is entirely unique. After all we have hills, and rain, and people buying fridges, and no other city on the entire planet has those things.
Posted 7 years ago # -
The cafe is also the shop mostly likely to benefit from a more pedestrian friendly environment? hoping someone can take some info along to him.
Posted 7 years ago # -
"This 'businesses will inevitably close down if there's a cycle lane put in' idea just grabs hold everywhere this kind of thing is mooted"
It may even turn out to be true. Some businesses closing can almost certainly be attributed to tram works - including Leith Walk where 'tram benefits' never happened!
Plenty of small businesses have given up when large supermarkets have opened up (not just Edinburgh of course).
The internet is 'ruining' retail.
Woolworths, BHS etc have all gone, so it's certainly not just that 'small businesses' can't cope with change.
IF a high proportion of the Roseburn shops rely on people who come by car - and/or can't/can't be bothered to walk a short distance - perhaps they are in the wrong location (or at least could do better somewhere else).
'We' can't prove that a cycle lane will improve their business - any more than they can be certain that one will put them out of business.
In many ways it's surprising that there is a range of businesses that survive on that unattractive stretch of busy road.
I recently went along Bread Street and was surprised at how many empty shops there were, so some more central places aren't exactly thriving.
I haven't looked for some time, but when all this started I checked which businesses were promoting themselves online. Hardly any were on Twitter, few had web sites (some use FB).
Certainly there is no 'visit wonderful Roseburn for its attractions (including shops)' web site.
Presumably all the fuss is attracting lots of extra custom from hard pressed motorists(?)
I presume the pubs do fine when there's something on at Murrayfield. Other businesses have perhaps just learned to cope?
I used to go to the Mac repair shop (closed ages ago) and I've been in one of the cafes, but don't think I've ever been in any other shop.
What am I missing - and how would I know?
Posted 7 years ago # -
"
The Stop CS11 campaign submitted a petition signed by 3,873 people opposing the plans, while a similar campaign in St John’s Wood attracted 258 signatures.
However many cyclists and pedestrians responded in favour of the plans, which seek to remove one of London’s most intimidating gyratories at Swiss Cottage, and prevent thousands of vehicles a day from using Regent’s Park as a “rat run”.
"
Posted 7 years ago # -
As a non-attender... a big thanks to all who went and endured the entrenched attitudes of those that can't cope with change.
Some of the 'comfortable in their car' faction think that by holding the line against cyclists and more pedestrian space they will return to the 'good old days' when the car was king. They seem oblivious to the fact that internet use has filled the streets with delivery vans (and bikes) supplying goods that their shop maybe has - but at the 'wrong' price.
Much easier to make a stand against the council, cyclists, the EU and IndyRef2 when it happens.
Reality is that in the years from 2011-2016 even desirable Marchmont changed quite a bit. Shops still closed and that's despite freely available double parking and a scarcity of traffic wardens. The cafe next door to the ex LB shop always gave me a soundbite of what 'ordinary' people thought of 'cyclists'. Like Roseburn shop keepers you were never far away of a negative comment - half said in jest of course. Despite years of interaction I'm not sure if anyone's views ever changed.Posted 7 years ago # -
"Despite years of interaction I'm not sure if anyone's views ever changed."
Indeed it may well entrench attitudes, due to sense of feeling threatened by "outsiders" - vis the Brexit camp's increasing xenophobia...
Never underestimate the power of groupthink amongst people who feel they need to "defend" their way of living against perceived external threats.
Ably whipped up by preening demagogues of all stripes, including wee local miniature versions like PG...
Posted 7 years ago # -
I'm still trying to make some kind of sense out of last night's meeting. I think there's material there for several Pol Sci PhDs.
First huge respect to HankChief for getting up and facing that crowd. It was grossly hostile at the beginning: shouts of "Who are you?" and "where are you from?" For which HC had the perfect reply, "I attend this church" and "my daughter had her birthday party in this hall last Saturday." After that he was listened to in as respectful a manner as the denizens of Murrayfied can muster (after Pete Gregson had been told in no uncertain terms to stop rattling his collection bucket).
Much of the meeting was chaos (very badly chaired) with random unrelated comments being shouted out, flatly self-contradictory statements (the respiratory surgeon who claimed the cycle track would be a disaster as it would increase respiratory disease was the sublime example) and wildly inaccurate claims from retailers about how much of their custom comes from car drivers (no mention of the fact that each of those car drivers is parking illegally during the hours that the majority of shops trade).
Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that it has raised immense levels of anger in the community. Why? In sheer frustration, I think, one supporter said that the proposal was about saving lives and it is just a cycle track. Even this was met with shouts of "how many people have been killed". Here are a few of the possible reasons for opposition:
1. From a lot of comments last night about junctions, lane widths, where traffic will be displaced to, and manoeuvrability, I believe most opposition is from car drivers (probably approaching 100% in Murrayfield) who cannot contemplate any inhibition on their "right" to drive and park anywhere they want.
2. Impact on retail. Retailers are convinced beyond discussion that the cycle track will destroy some of their businesses. No amount of evidence that enhancing "the place" will be of benefit persuades them. As chdot points out, we can't prove that businesses will benefit, and there may be some adverse impact during the actual construction, but I feel confident that improving the environment on Roseburn Terrace will provide positive business opportunities. Most of the businesses on RT now look pretty down at heel and unattractive. This is a combination of the road being a noisy, traffic dominated canyon, and it must be said, a lack of imagination on the part of the retailers. Roseburn could become quite an attractive destination with its proximity to the WoL, the Roseburn Path and Roseburn Park, but the area needs to be humanised and the retailers need to up their offer.
3. Visceral hatred of cyclists (which I've mentioned before). My view on this confirmed, based on a full bingo card of cycling falacies plus some new ones. It's linked to (1) because any bikes impede the universal use of cars. Apparently, cyclists come through Roseburn Park at 30mph. I would be amazed if there is one historical incidence of this, but paradoxically providing these speedsters with a pedestrian free cycle track is also anathema.
4. Pete Gregson. One actually has to admire his ability to whip up such a frenzy. I think I see where he's coming from now. It's about buses of which he is a firm proponent. The cycle track will remove bus space. What he just doesn't seem to take on board is that increasing bus use (a good thing) requires a multi faceted approach not least of which is reducing the number of private vehicles. I think he's actually in opposition to most Murrayfield residents (he supports a congestion charge - they'd love that) but he's tapped into the car-loving, bike-hating zeitgeist and he doesn't realise he's working against his own vision.
5. Finally, I can't leave out our Living Streets maestro, David Spaven. LS really needs to widen its horizons. It is immensely disappointing to me that people who walk and cycle cannot make common cause, and the fault is entirely in LS court. Their objection to "floating bus stops" is truly disgraceful. I don't believe there is any evidence that a well designed FBS causes any pedestrian/cyclist conflict, but LS just can't see that the object of their ire is the motor vehicle, which does all the killing and injuring of pedestrians.Apologies for long post!
Posted 7 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
