I have to agree with living streets about the use of shared use space - I don't think it works at all. The other day cycling round St Andrews square to Dublin street was a perfect example - I got off in the end - there's too much potential for conflict in my opinion and it's not through malice on anyone's part.... I'd like to see pedestrians and cyclists catered for in such a way as to make both feel they were on the "same side". Absolutely agree about taking space away from vehicles rather than those on foot.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Consultation: Meadows to Castle Terrace
(86 posts)-
Posted 7 years ago #
-
"I have to agree with living streets about the use of shared use space"
Posted 7 years ago # -
Is there 'shared space' in those plans? I read the LS report, but didn't see that.
Agree it's a great report, but think we should be clear about when we mean 'shared space' and when we mean 'inadequately demarcated cycle lanes'.
Posted 7 years ago # -
"think we should be clear about when we mean 'shared space' and when we mean 'inadequately demarcated cycle lanes'."
+1
Posted 7 years ago # -
I didn't reply to this one as my remarks would be overtly negative and really about the bigger picture of why we're linking these two places through back streets. These 'small' outsourced schemes don't seem to have the staff or budget to make positive changes based on consultation.
The path literally just gives up and stops on the pavement 5 metres from Lothian Rd with no effort to improve the junction there. If there's not some as-yet unannounced plans in the works for Lothian Rd it's pretty bad.
And the fact that a significant percentage of this project's budget will be spent relocating a two stage sheep pen crossing a mere ten metres, that has no benefit to cycling? Save me.
There's another Meadows to Usher Hall link that would benefit far more people...
Agree almost in full with the Living Streets report. Sub standard cycling facilities shouldn't be coming at a cost of making sub-standard pavements, too.
Posted 7 years ago # -
heheheh. good points klaxon! all true.
Have to say though, I cycle from George square - Usher hall several times a year, and my family does Castle Terrace to Chalmers st nearly every week (often with kids on own bikes), so we'd sure benefit from this route, even if it is back roads etc
Posted 7 years ago # -
Stuck between a rock and a hard place
How to positively reinforce spending on infrastructure without coming over as ungrateful when the plans produced have clear and preventable flaws
Posted 7 years ago # -
It would be nice to think that CEC would learn from Roseburn/Oprion A and realise that improved infrastructure should be introduced without too many compromises and especially that 'don't upset motorists' is a 20th C consideration.
Because of the ALL party agreement on Option A there is now a window to be BOLD.
This isn't 'just about cycling' it's about improving Edinburgh for everybody - especially pedestrians.
Inevitably this means restricting/reducing motor traffic - which is supposed to be CEC policy.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Points 15 & 16 of the Living Streets submission seem to conflict with one another:
15. ...the new crossing, to comply with Council Street Design Guidance, should not be staggered, but instead should be ‘continuous’, facilitating quicker passage by pedestrians – a guardrail island shared by cyclists and pedestrians of the nature proposed is totally unacceptable...
16. ...a new continuous crossing of Lothian Road should not however exclude a (sufficiently wide) central refuge – such a refuge is likely to be essential to allow slower pedestrians to cross in two phases...
So they still want a 2-stage crossing, just not a staggered one! I thought LS knew better than that and now preferred single-stage crossings. Those 2 points seem to send mixed messages, especially when combined with Spokes' preference of a single-stage crossing.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Sounds like they want a single stage crossing, but with an island in the middle, so that people who want to cross in two stages can do so; best of both worlds.
Posted 7 years ago # -
@Frenchy
The problem with having a "sufficiently wide central refuge" as LS suggests, is that it makes the single-stage crossing much wider overall and therefore more time-consuming and more difficult to cross for all users. And it would add longer delays for traffic.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Interesting proposal from LSE to close the junction of Kings' Stables Road with Lothian Road. Does much traffic use this? It would make extending the segregated cycle track to Charlotte Square marginally easier.
Posted 7 years ago # -
It's a vicious junction to cross as a pedestrian, similar to Calton Road. Think the main uses are taxis heading from town to the Cowgate and folk who want to get into the multi-storey car park quickly.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I get the impression that's quite well used.
Posted 7 years ago # -
The other problem with having a "sufficiently wide central refuge" as LS suggests, is that it changes the look and feel of the road - it makes the road look like a 'faster' road, designed for motor vehicles.
Conversely, when the carriageways are narrow, with no refuges and cars are close to oncoming traffic, it makes drivers feel less safe and therefore slow down.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Interesting proposal from LSE to close the junction of Kings' Stables Road with Lothian Road.
The junctions closed for probably 4 months every year anyway. Never seems to have any impact.
Posted 7 years ago # -
There's nothing particularly on KSR at all. Service access to the kirkyard, gardens and KS lane can be maintained from West Port. The car park is equally easily accessed from Castle Terr.
Beyond that it's a rat run round to the Cowgate for people driving up the West Approach Road, in the citybound direction only.
Posted 7 years ago # -
You can't turn right down it without a u-turn, so it's of no real use to traffic coming from the WAR. I imagine it saw more private car use when Shandwick Place was open to cars.
Posted 7 years ago # -
A u-turn there isn't so hard, particularly if you're piloting a TX4
Posted 7 years ago # -
I received a letter today from my namesake with a Y apologising for not preparing summary of the consultation responses. Staff shortages. Aiming to get this summary to me by end of first quarter. Then points out that cooncil won grant alongside all other competitors and will be pushing ahead with meadows to George st. Wonder how Forrest road will pan out? So all resources going on that route so meadows to castle terrace postponed.......err, so no great rush for summary of stage one consultations.
Guess the skelf palaver highlights the need for stage one and stage two consultations for sure. Been down that way a couple of times Recntly all seems fine. Maybe the local dog walker has found some different waste ground or bought some poo bags?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Following the earlier consultation on the route design proposals a consultation report has been completed which summarises the findings of the consultation and the Council’s responses to them. This can now be accessed via the following link;
https://consultationhub.edinburgh.gov.uk/sfc/design-cycle-walk-meadows-castle-terrace/Unfortunately due to a current lack of resources this scheme has been placed on hold. We will ensure that you are kept up-to-date with any future developments regarding the scheme.
Posted 6 years ago # -
More consultation.
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/news/article/2506/have_your_say_on_meadows_to_george_street_improvements
Posted 6 years ago # -
@stickman
Note this is a different route to the one described on this thread
Posted 6 years ago # -
So it is. Is there a thread for the CL+ plans?
Posted 6 years ago # -
I think there is another thread for it, but I don’t have google powers for the mo
Posted 6 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
