Nick Gardner is Councillor for Leith Walk (Labour) and is on the Transport Cttee. Don't know anything about him or his previous views. Anyone local dealt with him?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
T&E committee on Roseburn
(342 posts)-
Posted 8 years ago #
-
"If it is focussed on tweaking Option A I can see it being ok"
Well it's got LH and AMcV on.
Presumably they will both want to "listen", but are unlikely to be thinking 'it's going to be easier to agree to B'.
They will also be aware that money from SG/Sustrans would be useful (if not vital).
Sustrans wants 'community support' but is not going to go along with support for a substandard route when other councils will be proposing better schemes.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I've had some dealings with Nick Gardner on cycling issues in the past. I also met him at one of the consultations on the Leith Walk proposals at McDonald Road library. I'd say he was pretty capable, shrewd, and listens to the views of locals in the ward (of which I am one).
Certainly he's more personable than Deirdre Brock, who I found rather dismissive, verging on arrogant. In her defence she was honest enough to have a clear view and express it, even though it clearly did not chime with my own position. As Ms Brock was elevated last year to Westminster by the SNP bloc vote, and is no longer a councillor, perhaps we ought not to bother her with such local trifles any more.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"If it is focussed on tweaking Option A I can see it being ok"
What am I missing here? How can it be focussed on A (ie diminished in some way) and still be option A. The traders don't want anything on RT. Unless the traders accept that there is ample loading space already under A, and that illegal parking can not be overlooked any more then A is dead.
I am tempted to suggest this:
End the segregated track round about where West Coates Terrace and Balbirnie Place meet West Coates, just before the bridge going West, and have a bloody great parallel crossing there so pedestrians and cyclists can easily cross. Then, from that point westwards you have good quality wide cycle lanes on each side that go right through Roseburn Terrace to some point on Corstorphine Road. The cycle lanes in Roseburn Terrace would not be mandatory BUT (AND THIS IS ESSENTIAL) there is camera surveillance which will automatically result in a ticket for any vehicle that doesn't abide strictly by the regulations in force. In addition permiability should be in place to allow cycle to access Roseburn St, Roseburn Gds, Murrayfield Gds and Murrayfield Ave from either direction. That's Roseburn Vision 2.0.
Posted 8 years ago # -
"End the segregated track round about where West Coates Terrace and Balbirnie Place meet West Coates, just before the bridge going West, and have a bloody great parallel crossing there so pedestrians and cyclists can easily cross. "
This bit, yes.
Then postpone anything in Roseburn itself for the next phase (at some future date). Get on with building the route eastwards to the city centre. Then do a route west to Corstorphine some other time. With any luck many of the opponents will have gone out of business, retired or departed this mortal coil (of natural causes hopefully) by the time the next phase, through Roseburn westwards, is consulted upon.
Posted 8 years ago # -
The cycle lanes in Roseburn Terrace would not be mandatory BUT (AND THIS IS ESSENTIAL) there is camera surveillance
Yet that's the bit that is irrevocably reversed by the jocko realpolitik.
What you/we regard as essential is utterly unallowable within their Weltanschauung.
And this won't change.
Mao Tse Tung says "Change must come, from the barrel of a gun"
Posted 8 years ago # -
Nick Gardner's email basically confirmed what we knew: Politics. Labour/Greens were in favour of A but others weren't so it wouldn't have succeeded. Best hope is that design work ends up with something closer to A than B.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I had an email from Nick Gardner earlier this evening summing up (from his point of view) what happened and where we're at.
He suggests that B would have won it 8-7 had it gone to a straight vote and that the current palaver is thus an attempt to avoid A being lost completely. Despite being in favour of A, he voted for the amended motion as both Lab and SNP are whipped.
He's had a positive experience with a similar process on the Leith walk 'improvements', though I suspect the Roseburn issue is way less tractable. We'll see.
Posted 8 years ago # -
Nick Gardner also mentioned that the email
I'da friend had sent to the committee was mentioned - anyone recall hearing any reference to an 'overweight, middle aged asthmatic' cyclist?Posted 8 years ago # -
"anyone recall hearing any reference to an 'overweight, middle aged asthmatic' cyclist?"
I heard a reference to someone from Porty.
Posted 8 years ago # -
@ih I was working on the theory that the key players know A is the right option but realised too many others had been swayed by local noise so a straight vote would be lost.
Forming this committee as a way to keep A alive long enough to debunk enough nonsense and make slight tweaks to get something almost A signed off.
After all, if they thought B was good enough they could've just let the vote happen
Of course, I know nothing and could be way off base and hopelessly optimistic.
Posted 8 years ago # -
I hope all the Roseburn traders are compliant.
Perhaps before every committee where local views are sought, it should be investigated whether or not local businesses pay rates, comply with by laws, don't illegally park etc - and are named shamed and barred from the consultation process if they are "bad neighbours"
Posted 8 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
