Two hours later and you'd never know it had happened:
CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 15years 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.
Two hours later and you'd never know it had happened:
Chapeau to all who organised this morning's event. Highly enjoyable and the turn out was reflective of the need to invest in good quality, segregated cycling infrastructure.
I didn't enjoy the close pass by the Airlink this morning. Thanks to Stickman for having a word with the driver, as I wasn't feeling up to squeezing up a line of traffic to tell him he almost squashed me. Also didn't enjoy the posters and shouts of "bugger off" as I cycled past Roseburn. Incredible.
There was intense irony seeing folk with placards telling cycling to get lost as juggernaut lorries, taxis, cars and vans choked the thoroughfare. Also received several dirty looks from pedestrians.
I was clearly just having far too much fun, keeping myself fit whilst getting to my destination quickly. Folk were just jealous ;)
I found it quite stressful to be shouted at by the antis
It's a shame that it has come to this. I did suggest that we should all be sceptical of 'leaders' who act in such a way as to introduce conflict into a simple difference of views. There is no reason why this issue can't be settled in a collaborative way, but some people clearly benefit from drawing battle lines.
More later.
Forgot about one thing I overheard that shows just how easy it is to create a negative impression...
The lollipop lady on the crossing (who is only there because there's a need created by the traffic of course) saw two young girls across, heading towards the gathered cyclists, with the comment, "Good luck being able to walk through there."
Just wish things like this weren't necessary, and our great leaders had the cojones to make unpopular decisions that would ultimately lead to things improving for everyone. Sadly we're still stuck in a mindset that tries to keep everyone happy, which only succeeds in annoying all parties.
p.s. I'll bet large amounts of money the reports from Mr Gregson will indicate that the passing cyclists were rude, possibly even shouting and swearing at, to the anti demo.
Well done to IWRATs, gembo and others for their diplomatic efforts.
As ever, watching Strava in retrospect is fascinating
That's brilliant Klaxon - I'm looking forward to seeing my strava later tonight. I get to Roseburn about 20 minutes earlier, so will watch everyone passing underneath me.
One other last thought that I forgot to put down. All of the stuff about there not being enough cyclists to justify the route. I saw LOADS as I was waiting. Hardly a moment without a cyclist in view on the road.
Bill Cook (Lab) and a green councillor (apologies for not remembering his name) was also out, and I don't think Jim Orr (Independent) has been mentioned yet.
Robert
I nipped back into town by bus to collect the bike I'd loaned to the EEN chap. Video above shows the usual situation restored. Same story when I cycled back, and I spotted the art store guy loading his protest signboard into the back of his car parked outside his shop.
I think I was mid-rear of the peloton as we approached the old bridge. A local lady, a little bit more mature than myself asked me if we were protesting against the cycle route. I said we were demonstreation support of it. Her reply was something like, good, you're against that lot over there then, clearly referencing the local pavement protest group.
That was it really but it did suggest to me that the local protesters may have noised up a few locals who are either pro Option A or just ambivolent.
Nice one @algo. Something familiar about that image....
Great effort, kudos to HC and other organisers. Who was the journalist who came along in the cargo bike?
I did particularly enjoy being shouted at for not being local.
@urchaidh :-) some of the conversations went seriously Royston Vasey...
@IWRATS - you see Delacroix composition? (yes I looked it up)
The composition is pure socialist realism, but the lighting on the Leader's visage is pure Delacroix (as indeed is the rearward-looking stance of the chap behind the Leader).
My favourite bit was the taxi driver shouting "Shame on you" at us. Never occurred to me to be ashamed of my filthy (sustainable, healthy, life-enhancing, life-prolonging) active travel habits before. And the anti group wearing hi-vis and helmets to stand on a pavement.
Thanks to the organisers for organising!
Some great photos of the event from my pal Andy:
https://www.facebook.com/events/176013649488139/permalink/179454692477368/
urchaidh - journalist in Urban Arrow was Joanne Macauley from BBC. She had Go-Pro and camera guy went on his own to get other angles. Will be on Reporting Scotland for a couple of mins.
I did explain what Option A was and why it makes sense. Having two bike lane should help traffic flow in my view.
Support for direct European style cycle route via Roseburn #OptionA by LaidBackBikes, on Flickr
Came in today, was a little worried when I was having trouble sleeping but got up fine.
Pity I could not build a better banner for the occasion but that's not the no. 1 priority.
Lets see… At the start before we went, there was a city link coach that passed us just as closely as the air link bus in the square but otherwise getting there was doable if difficult.
Now the runts at the side had to have a go at us obviously but it’s when they were speaking which became peculiar.
There was the one guy who owned a shop. Refused to believe that people came by bike, reckoned I'd get hit on the path anyway when I showed him the clip of me being hit.
The lady who owned the art shop was using the old lady being hit by 30 mph cliché. I had to point out how it’s possible on an upright bike. Then she kept suggesting the route in place and how it’s taking away loading, when I tried to correct her she wouldn't believe me and suggested I wasn't listening. No amount of new plans could sway her, finished off by telling her I drove a truck and she left…
Next was a lady holding a folded vision poster. Showed the clip she thought because it wasn't where we were it wasn't valid. Like the one before she thought the bays were being taken and refused to believe so. She said the council were taking them away like the other before.
The SNP representative had a view of the clip next to the café owner who the latter just left (bye bye passing trade).
Finally, this one guy on a bike had a go at me for suggesting such cars turning right towards Russell Road could be electric even when one, “leafer,” passed by (more of a fix than a solution but if that's his response I'd be more worried if the oil ran out). Anyway he didn't like the idea of going on a pavement even when I told him the vision did exactly that, suggested an oncoming police car couldn't get through when it did. Evidently the traffic island is more of an obstacle. Of course me not sounding “Scottish” was just as much as issue as the route itself.
Yeah gutless grumps all round that couldn't read their way out of an alphabet book whose heads are so far up their backside they wouldn't know whether to cough or fart.
On a positive note that café in the back is great and there was a smart dressed man who complemented Cully as well as taking interest in the camera on helmet, reckoned I should have been compensated more for the collision.
And as ever it appears cyclists are responsible for the 3000 odd deaths on the UK's roads every year....
(my bold)
"More destruction to Edinburgh and an exessive amount of money to waste. £6 million would be better sorting the pot holes instead of pampering the whinging law breaking cyclists. No regard for red lights or pedestrian crossings. They are the menace of the road."
That EEN story is the most balanced they've done yet.
I love that Roseburn Vasey picture
Sadly they also posted this...
I don't think Pete has go his maths right.
Loading is currently 94m reducing to 68m (a 28% reduxtion) and it isn't all used all the time...
Basically every single one of those 7 points has something wrong with it.
(also, when he refers to losing half of the loading and parking spaces, are any of them actually parking spaces, or is it all supposed to be just loading?)
I love the 'going down to one lane will create congestion'. It's de facto one lane because of those loading bays already!!!
Also removing the central islands for crossing will make it more difficult for old people to cross, but then in the very same breath he talks about longer crossing times causing tailbacks. So it won't be more difficult for old people to cross because the stopping times for traffic will be longer.
This kind of deliberate misleading ambiguity (and in some cases downright lies) that gets lapped up as 'fact' and regurgitated really annoys me.
" This kind of deliberate misleading ambiguity (and in some cases downright lies) that gets lapped up as 'fact' and regurgitated really annoys me."
+1 on that. On parking spaces, there is presently a small section (two cars long) by Scotmid where parking is permitted outside the morning and afternoon 2 hour busy periods. The rest is "loading" only and we all know that doesn't mean going in to get your bacon roll.
There are 2 parking bays on the South side which would be lost.
It was apparent to this morning's gathering that an emergency vehicle was slowed by the congestion in Roseburn however much of that was due to the traffic island ato the pedestrian crossing preventing vehicles moving to the side to let it through.
My favorite comment was "if the traffic all backs up I won't be able to get my car out"
P.s. Reporting Scotland is on at 6.20pm...
You must log in to post.
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin