The first post on the event page encouraging people to vote for option B has arrived - I thought this might happen.... I'm not sure whether to respond.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Roseburn to Leith consultation begins (and the debate continues!) CCWEL
(5559 posts)-
Posted 8 years ago #
-
Committee papers out:
in summary, Option A delivers a better cycle route and overall a more people- friendly street environment in Roseburn Terrace. However Option B still delivers a workable cycle route and improved conditions for pedestrians in Roseburn, whilst addressing more fully local business concerns around loading and probably reducing the risk of additional congestion on the A8.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@algo If you do respond, stick to a straightforward message, 2/3 responses in the consultation support A. It's a no-brainer.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@algo - if it's not too late I'd quietly remove posts debating/promoting *any* of the options - there a are plenty of paces to discuss this. This is an event page, posts should be about going/not going, arrangements, routes, etc. There's a danger useful posts about logistics could be lost in the 'noise'.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@urchaidh - I'm inclined to agree. Nigel Bagshaw has responded but I think I can still delete the post, or perhaps better just post a notice saying the page is not for debating options but simply about logisitics - as you suggest
Posted 8 years ago # -
@Stickman "probably reducing the risk of additional congestion" is interesting phrasing.
"Traffic modelling suggests that congestion on Roseburn Terrace, would not be
significantly worse than currently under either Option A or B. However under
Option A, illegal waiting or loading could cause significant impacts, affecting
buses as well as general traffic. It should, however, be noted that drivers tend to
avoid stopping in locations that will obviously cause such impacts;"So really the increased risk is from illegal parking, not from the cycle route itself.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I don't understand why it is so important to draw traffic into an already grid-locked Haymarket junction?
Posted 8 years ago # -
@Erob Which doc is that quote in italics from? I've done searches but can't find it.
In effect it's saying that A might actually cut down on illegal waiting and loading, whereas with B they expect the illegality to continue. Another reason A is better then.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@ih it's in the link Stickman posted above.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Thanks @Erob. I was searching through the council papers HankChief had linked to further up.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I've written to my councillors, and since none are on the transport committee asked them to speak to their party reps on the committee, especially if you have SNP councillors.
if you've not done this before, then it will have far more impact!
https://www.writetothem.com makes it easy.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Not sure we had this posted earlier
http://pedalonparliament.org/this-monday-ride-in-support-of-the-east-west-edinburgh-route/
Please keep up the emailing of Councillors and come along on Monday morning.
If anyone would like to turn their letter into a short blog post, please let me know and we will get it published.
#OptionAalltheway
Posted 8 years ago # -
Adam McVey will be there on Monday. A good sign?
" despite the early start setting off from Leith, I'll be there!"
Posted 8 years ago # -
I got this reply from Adam McVey - doesn't say explicitly he'll support option A but I hope this is what he means...
----
Dear Algo,Thanks for getting in touch.
The SNP group will be supporting the East-West cycling project to enhance the public realm, improve conditions for cyclists and address longstanding issues (such as the Russell Road/Roseburn Street junction).
While the final decision on this will be taken at the Transport Committee on the 30th of August, we have taken on board many comments that have been communicated by the local community and organisations and hope you’ll be satisfied that these concerns and aspirations have been adequately addressed.
Kind regards,
Adam
----Posted 8 years ago # -
I think that means SNP group is backing Option B.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"
Hello,
City Centre West to East Cycle Link and Street Improvements
As you are aware The City of Edinburgh Council has developed proposals for the City Centre West to East Cycle Link and Street Improvements scheme.
As part of the process of developing the scheme the Council, with the assistance of Atkins Ltd has undertaken extensive consultation with stakeholders, local businesses and members of the public. I thank you for your participation in this process and your contribution to the scheme development is appreciated.
In total, we received nearly 2800 responses to the consultation from six sources, namely:
Online Questionnaire;
Leaflets;
Public Exhibitions;
E-mail;
Facebook; and
Stakeholder ResponsesAll responses received have been captured in a consultation report which can be found through the below link. This report provides a general overview of the responses received. All these responses have been considered and a number of changes have been made to the proposed scheme as a result.
Due to the number of responses received, we are unable to provide a detailed response to each respondent; however your points have been noted and considered. The below link also takes you to the ‘You said, we did’ report along with other project documents. The ‘You said, we did’ report provides detail on individual and reoccurring comments/themes (You said) made during the consultation process. These comments have been categorised within their corresponding areas along the route. The (We did) section outlines how the Council has considered the design comments.
· http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/20135/cycling_projects/1209/roseburn_to_leith_walk_cycle_route.
I would again like to take this opportunity to thank you for your consultation response and your contribution to this project.
Kind regards,
Adrian O’Neill
Adrian O’ Neill
Professional Officer
Road Safety and Active Travel"
Posted 8 years ago # -
So that's
'No-one was consulted' then...
Posted 8 years ago # -
So I spent quite a long time last night reading through all the various papers. The cycling team have done a very comprehensive job on this and, despite the objectors, the consultation looks to have served its purpose. People have raised concerns and they've been addressed, and where they can't be accommodated then it's been explained why.
The papers are full of evidence, modelling, and justifications and explanations of design. If after reading all this the councillors go for Option B (or even worse reject the whole thing) then it's impossible to see how decent cycling provision will ever get built in Edinburgh.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"If after reading all this the councillors"
I think the sad truth is that few councillors will read all the documents. Even if they do, not sure that any against Opt A will be persuaded to change their minds.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"
Spokes CycleCampaign (@SpokesLothian)
25/08/2016, 12:54
Do you #shop by #bike at #Roseburn /want more people to? Send your ideas/experiences/pics--> https://twitter.com/SpokesLothian/status/756451410301124608http://pic.twitter.com/bO5oboKiKB
"
Posted 8 years ago # -
Even if they do, not sure that any against Opt A will be persuaded to change their minds.
A few points from me...
1. Option A is already a compromise with 2.5m bi-directional vs a recommendation of 3m min. And in parts on West Coates down to 2m. Eek. So Option B isn't the (only) compromise option.
2. The reduction in loading on Roseburn Terrace is only 28%. How often are they all in use (with legitimate loading). Are we will really going to put in a conflict-creating cycle route just to allow a bit more illegal parking...
3. CEC missed out on Community Links Plus funding because somewhere else put in a more exemplar project although we were commended for our so it must have been close. Are we now going to water down our proposals and still think we'll get Community Links funding?
With everyone else upping their game now is not the time to lower our ambitions.Posted 8 years ago # -
@HankChief good points, I think your point 3 is especially powerful in persuading doubters.
I take what may be a very controversial view on this forum. If they don't choose A, then they shouldn't choose B either on the spurious grounds that they are triangulating the problem and coming up with a compromise that will suit all. It won't. It would be better for them to be honest and admit they don't support active travel. We can then choose at the ballot box who we want to support. I believe a general trend towards cycling and more sustainable travel is actually on our side, but B will not further that cause.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I'm with you on that, option b is no option if they don't want to do A then can the whole thing. Of course goodness know what kids not bikes moron will do emboldened by that "victory".
Posted 8 years ago # -
I don't think not wanting Op B is controversial.
I assume that if its 'approved' that doesn't mean that work on the whole LW2R project will start on the ground a) soon b) at Roseburn.
Posted 8 years ago # -
ih - I totally understand where you are coming from on option B. At the moment, I think every effort should be focused on encouraging support for option A. As I said up thread - paint option A as the only choice. Ridicule option B - but leave it at that. Officials and supportive councillors need all our help just now - don't give the anti's anything they could use against the scheme.
Just remember, things are getting better. A few years ago we were discussing the "Quality bike corridor"
Posted 8 years ago # -
"Just remember, things are getting better. A few years ago we were discussing the "Quality bike corridor" "
I know what you mean, but we should STILL be discussing QBiC.
It's STILL awful, and instead of fixing it a bit - even just the road surface - they've moved on to flasher projects.
It's just like 'roads' - 'new' is easier (not) than fixing potholes.
Part of the problem comes back to the artificial split between capital and revenue spending.
Posted 8 years ago # -
chdot - agreed. I was just trying to think about the bigger picture - it's easy to forget how far things have come on. Which I suppose makes this option B nonsense all the more frustrating. I had hoped it was just a sop to the anti's - which could be easily dismissed due to its obvious rubbishness. I had no idea that any councillor would actually consider it a sensible option - honestly, when will I ever learn!
Posted 8 years ago # -
I just cycled up the QBiC. A guy parked his car on the bike lane at double yellows just past the fossil fuel station and walked away from it, quite unconcerned.
I'm with @ih. Segregation or straight up unmoderated road share.
Posted 8 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
