Who cares about rocks falling on the road, that is what the crumple zone and airbags are for
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Holyrood Park: paths, crossings and closures
(219 posts)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
They seem to be offering the Innocent tunnel as an alternative route - but that is closed as well!
<crying with laughter emoji>
Posted 3 years ago # -
"Following the geotechnical engineers’ report on the rock slopes we are planning to undertake works to mitigate further risk from rockfall. In terms of the timescales involved this includes seeking the statutory consent required to work on a Special Site of Scientific Interest and a Scheduled Ancient Monument. We will also need to procure the works on the basis of these consents. Please be assured we are moving as quickly as we can to improve the situation."
That could be a very long wait. Methinks residents of Duddingston are going to have to find alternative routes. Yes, even Cllr McLellan.
"It said the aim was to complete the work by early next year so public access to that area of the park could be reinstated."
We shall see. A hae ma doots!
I mean, it's not as if there isn't an alternative route for motor vehicles. Granted, that takes drivers through the less picturesque surroundings of Craigmillar, but needs must, eh?
Posted 3 years ago # -
“
We believe that a strategic management plan needs to be prepared for the whole Park as a matter of urgency, with full public consultation and scrutiny.
“
https://www.cockburnassociation.org.uk/news/holyrood-royal-park-access-issues/
Posted 2 years ago # -
Don't know how much CCEers were aware of, or concerned about, this since it's not exactly a prime cycling route but the Radical Road currently remains closed (since 2018), with HES coming up with increasingly weird and whacky "solutions" to a problem that is widely regarded as being blown up out of all proportion:
https://theferret.scot/edinburgh-footpath-facing-permanent-closure/
Sky walkway proposal for Edinburgh's Radical Road
A cynic might suggest that the "sky walkway" proposal is deliberately intended to stir up vocal opposition so that HES can then turn round and say "well in that case we''ll just have to keep it closed and extend the fence [as shown in article in The Ferret]".
There's more discussion about this on other forums e.g. https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/crag_access/edinburghs_radical_road_and_salisbury_crags_-_permanent_ban_considered-746616
Posted 2 years ago # -
“
Great news. Stick to the path. Survey results show clear support for a #carfree Holyrood Park.
Let’s hope @theroyalparks hear this too and acts on it with @Edinburgh_CC
“
https://mobile.twitter.com/pablodelmar/status/1577653009831567360
Posted 2 years ago # -
The usual Suddenly Concerned About Ableism Brigade are out in force on the socials whenever this comes up. The quantity of Name1234567 type accounts is starting to make me suspect Royal Parks have hired a botfarm to try and give them an excuse to continue ignoring public opinion :P
Posted 2 years ago # -
This is mad. who wouldn’t want the park to be car free? It is a park. Why would anyone want to drive through a park? There are plenty of roads to drive on.
Now the queen is dead, what is the problem?
Posted 2 years ago # -
“There are plenty of roads to drive on.”
OH NO THERE ARE NOT.
They are closed, closed off, full of traffic jams caused by unnecessary, unattractive, unsafe, unused CYCLE LANES.
I’d like to think that all this wailing is the death throws of those who realise that opposing the inevitable is all they have left to console themselves.
HOWEVER
On the day of the tentative/timid Circulation Plan, I’m not so sure…
Posted 2 years ago # -
“
Our Ranger Service work with @EdinburghPolice to enforce traffic regulations in the Park. Dangerous driving and other infringements should be reported to the police directly using 101 or the contact form https://scotland.police.uk/secureforms/contact/
“
Posted 2 years ago # -
“
Holyrood Park had been managed by the Secretary of State for Scotland since the Transfer of Functions (Scottish Royal Parks and Ancient Monuments) Order 1969 under which Scottish Ministers to this day make regulations about the Park.
“
https://andywightman.scot/2023/07/who-owns-the-palace-of-holyroodhouse-part-1/
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
I'm pleased to see HES acknowledge that allowing traffic to cut through Holyrood Park has a significant negative impact on the ability of residents to enjoy it fully.
I also hope HES will address parking provision in the park, and prevent it being used to provide cheap access to the city centre.
I would encourage everyone to take part in the consultation to ensure their voice is heard: https://haveyoursay.historicenvironment.scot/conservation/outline-strategic-plan-for-holyrood-park/
If HES does decide to close the route, the Council will work with local residents to pre-empt any negative consequences.
“
https://twitter.com/cllrscottarthur/status/1707346957633503663
Posted 1 year ago # -
a self-appointed "
transportmotoring expert" wibbles his gums againNo mention of traffic evaporation
And some incredible doublethink from Cllr Munro:
Without routes through Holyrood many journeys will become hugely longer [...] and the longer journeys would go against council policy which is aimed at cutting kilometres driven by vehicles
Posted 1 year ago # -
Councillor Munro "Let's hope everyone in Edinburgh has their say in this proposal". Funny how she argued that only local residents should have their say on the Greenbank-Meadows quiet route.
Posted 1 year ago # -
I was messing around with Google maps trying to work out what routes would naturally take you through Holyrood Park, and found that I had to be quite specific with start and end points before the algorithm took me that way.
My parents remember when the only route from Glasgow (where they then lived) to my grandparents' house in North Berwick took you through Holyrood Park. That was the late 1960s/early '70s... there can't be that many people who still think that it the obvious way across town (to be fair to my parents, they don't, they were just reminiscing).
Posted 1 year ago # -
Given half of Queen's Drive is already one way, could this be extended so the rest of the road is one way and then narrowed to one lane for cars with the other side being for bikes? As the bare minimum level of change to the road layout of course.
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
The park authorities have this right - cars don't belong in parks.
“
https://twitter.com/cllrscottarthur/status/1708008973637468572
Posted 1 year ago # -
Neil Greig is not an expert in anything other than getting his mealy little voice in the papers
Posted 1 year ago # -
It's a win-win for Scott Arthur because whatever HS decide, it's not something he'll be responsible for and can teflon shoulder any blowback... hence the welcoming noises
Posted 1 year ago # -
The Edinburgh Geological Society are holding a public meeting on the future of Radical Road
Sunday 3 December 2023, 2pm – 4pm
Greyfriars Charteris Centre, 138/140 Pleasance, Edinburgh, EH8 9RR
https://www.edinburghgeolsoc.org/radical-road-public-meeting/
Public Meeting: The Radical Road – Past, Present, Future?
The Radical Road in Edinburgh’s Holyrood Park has been a much loved walking route since 1822. In 2018, Historic Environment Scotland closed the route due to fears of rockfall. This public event will explore the history and use of the Radical Road, and its importance to local people and visitors, walkers, geologists, climbers and historians.
There will be short talks on the geology and history of the Radical Road, its use as a walking route and by climbers and wider issues of access. The meeting will be an opportunity to find out about Historic Environment Scotland’s Strategic Plan for Holyrood Park ( https://www.historicenvironment.scot/about-us/what-we-do/managing-the-estate/strategic-plan-for-holyrood-park/ ), and discuss engaging with this plan, and further action that can be taken to persuade Historic Environment Scotland to reopen the Radical Road.
This free public meeting will be chaired by Rob Edwards, journalist and broadcaster, and is organised by the Edinburgh Geological Society, Ramblers Scotland, The Cockburn Association, Mountaineering Scotland and ScotWays. Historic Environment Scotland have been invited to attend.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Just a reminder that the consultation about HES' proposals for Holyrood Park closes on the 19th: https://haveyoursay.historicenvironment.scot/conservation/outline-strategic-plan-for-holyrood-park/
I'm working through it at the moment and I have to say that one part of question 12 has me flummoxed:
Accept Holyrood Park as a Contested Place - To create a space for open and transparent communication and discussion, even in situations when not all parties will accept or welcome certain decisions relating to the Park
I'm apparently expected to indicate whether I rate my agreement with this statement from 1 "strongly agree" to 5 "strongly disagree" (and it won't let me leave any part of question 12 unanswered). I'm finding this a bit difficult, since I haven't a clue what it means. Anyone conversant with consultant-babble able to decode it for me?
Posted 12 months ago # -
Some examples of the 'contests' could be:
- protecting vulnerable species e.g. frogs versus allowing the public to trample all over them
- drivers wanting to drive through the park, to the detriment of walkers, cyclists and animals
- climbers wanting to climb on rocks that may contain sensitive species or may be loose or present a risk to themselves or people below
- commercial companies wanting to gain from exercise 'bootcamps' or to hold concerts, car shows, whatever...
- closing Radical Road due to risk of rockfalls versus allowing people to assess their own risk tolerance
- ...and so onPersonally, I don't think there should be a 'contest' between cars and bikes/walkers - I think this is a kind of manufactured culture war. Just get rid of the cars - it's clear they don't belong there.
Posted 12 months ago # -
“it's clear they don't belong there“
Which of course is part of the problem.
Most people of working age (and beyond) just accept cars as ‘normal’, perhaps even inevitable/essential etc.
Too many regard cars in HP as highly normal.
Some pretend they care about ‘access for people who couldn’t get there if road closed’ - no suggestions of complete car bans.
More about ‘taking my convenient short cut away’!
Posted 12 months ago # -
@ejstubbs - I assumme the idea is one side of the argument "wins" (e.g. roads are closed to motorised traffic) and the "losers" just have to suck it up. They are the people who "contest" the decision.
Whether you think somewhere being a contested space is a good idea likely depends on whether your side "wins" the contest.
Now, national and local policy clearly supports closing the park to traffic on issues including climate, pollution, car reduction, and biodiversity. I suppose there may be some way to make an argument for maintaining through traffic on economic grounds, but I imagine that would be pretty weak.
Add to that "our" concerns about public authorities trying to "satsify the needs of all road users", which tends to favour motorists, then acknowledegment that a decision might annoy some people could be seen as progress.
The question is, do you trust Historic Environment Scotland to make the right decision - or will it end up with us contesting the decision? I'm in two minds. Past experience tells me that the roads will stay open, but maybe this is the start of something new and the roads will be closed, which I would support.
Posted 12 months ago # -
The Outline Strategic Plan has more words about the "contested space" which make rather more sense than the condensed version in the survey:
Holyrood Park is not a homogenous space, valued and used by everyone in the same way – it is a contested space with often competing views on the appropriateness or acceptability of different actions, whether that be actions of protest, or management, or daily use. This will continue and future management decisions should acknowledge the fact that Holyrood Park will continue to be a “contested space” at the centre of everyday life in Edinburgh.
Decisions should be taken accepting that not all parties will accept or welcome the decision but in a manner that is open and transparent and encourages communication and discussion.My initial thoughts about this are that it's a statement of the obvious: welcome to the real world. Isn't this one of the things that politics is supposed to be about: settling contestation over the allocation of limited resources? And there will always be some people who aren't happy with a given decision, no matter how open and transparent the process was. We've seen more than enough of that in recent times, for heaven's sake, including what happens if you cave in to lingering disquiet and dissent without at least making the effort to clarify what might be more broadly acceptable alternative outcomes as part of the "open and transparent" communication and discussion.
The suspicious/cynical side of me wonders whether there could be some covert meaning here: "How much do you agree that if a decision doesn't go the way you want you'll just suck it up and keep quiet?"
I'm still not sure how I should answer the question, other than with a non-commital, boring and unhelpful neutral response.
Posted 12 months ago # -
Different but similar…
“
“
The more time I spend around policy makers and politicians the less I understand them. Years spent trying to analyse and second guess why Ministers will pledge one thing but often end up doing another, and the part played in all that by their civil servants, special advisors and those super-cautious government lawyers, have left me none the wiser but increasingly sceptical. And beyond that strange alchemy of internal actors, the role of the professional lobbyist and the unerring ability of powerful outside interests to get their way just adds to a general sense of powerlessness. Take land reform for instance. New legislation is to be laid before the Scottish Parliament next month. This is a Bill that Ministers have promised will be transformative in diversifying land ownership and ensuring that land is used in the public interest for the benefit of all and not just the few. The published analysis of the 500+ responses to the Bill’s consultation paper largely reinforces this Ministerial ambition and so most keen observers expect to see a suitably progressive Bill. But the word coming down the line from officials is that those expectations should now be ‘managed’. Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?Angus Hardie, Director
Scottish Community Alliance
“
Posted 12 months ago # -
Deadline for the Holyrood Park Strategic Plan consultation is today.
I haven't managed to complete mine yet. I keep going back to it but every time I end up at one of the "which three of the following [largely indistinguishable objectives] would you prioritise" questions I run into quagmire of indecision. I can't get past the feeling that it's a pointless porridge of consultancy, er...cow manure, and attempting to answer their highly directed and leading questions only panders to their nonsense.
What I want to say is: make it a nice place to spend time in a more-or-less natural environment close the city centre. Get rid of the through motor traffic and the metal security fencing, do your best to protect the wellbeing of the plants and animals that live there, and help people to understand and respect the place when they go there. I can't see any straightforward way to express that by wading through endless "pick three" or "put in order of priority" questions, and I begin to wonder maybe that's actually the point, as far as they're concerned: get people bogged down in answering footling detail questions (IMO the ones they should be answering based on an agreed set of high level objectives & policies) and we won't be bothered by them telling us about specific things that they'd like us to do.
I'm struggling to avoid the conclusion that it's a diversionary box-ticking exercise and - to paraphrase P.J. O'Rourke - completing it would only encourage them.
Posted 11 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
