Lot of bad parking at This fountainbridge new hotel. Double yellows today meant no parking, even on the car length bit of road without double yellows. I am guessing the line painters were obstructed by a car?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Hampton at Hilton
(17 posts)-
Posted 7 years ago #
-
see also
"Bowmer & Kirkland, the builders who have recently completed the 228 room 3 star Hampton by Hilton hotel failed to make the necessary repairs to the road surface
on Fountainbridge in Edinburgh."Posted 7 years ago # -
Not this morning though, cheeky driver parked in the gap caused by a previous cheeky driver having not moved his or her car for the double yellows.
I hope someone gets the car lifted, not fined that would be harsh, just inconvenienced for their cheek and having to go down the pound to get their car back.
Posted 7 years ago # -
There's a weird tactile island on Rothesay Place here.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Tactiles at Hampton Hilton have been tarmacked. Three little cones attempting to keep the cheeky out until lines can be joined up at the last remaining free parking.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Any idea why these double yellows have mysteriously turned back into single yellows...?
Posted 7 years ago # -
I wondered the same about the double yellows. Looking at streetview from May 2016 there was originally a single yellow.
Funny how when I complained to the council about the tactile island nothing happened, then Scottish worst drivers got involved and it was fixed the next day. I need to get a better publicist!
Posted 7 years ago # -
The next block also has single yellow so drop off for hotel taxis erptc. Already lot of pavement action
Posted 7 years ago # -
Huh!
TRO to turn the pretend-layby into a layby.
It also turns out that if you park on a pavement for long enough you can get the council to 'formalise' it into a road for you: http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/file/12182/plan https://goo.gl/maps/nqVMnd1ZHJL2
Posted 5 years ago # -
@jonty, this makes me sick. Prefer the feckers breaking the law and doing what they like to them doing what they like and claiming the law is on their side. Basically they are blocking the carriageway
Posted 5 years ago # -
RSO/19/04 is now out: Redetermination at Fountainbridge - to convert the "layby" outside the Hampton Hotel on the footway formally to carriageway, thus legitimising the "pavement parking" by massive motor coaches, etc.
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/downloads/download/2840/rso1904_-_redetermination
Please object/comment if this concerns you by 30th April by emailing trafficorders@edinburgh.gov.uk
Posted 5 years ago # -
Here's my objection (feel free to crib):
I am writing to object to traffic order RSO/19/04, redetermination at Fountainbridge, for the following reasons:
1. The loading bay encourages and legitimises parking on the footway, setting a terrible precedent. This will no doubt lead to increased "pavement parking" elsewhere in the city, as drivers come to see this as normal practice. It also goes against the forthcoming measures (parliament bill) to make pavement parking illegal.
2. The loading bay takes up 100% of the council-owned part of the pavement. This means that in future the private owners of the adjacent footway could block it off at any time, without having to give any reason.
3. The footway is not likely to be strong enough to take the weight of enormous motor-coaches and lorries. The flagstones will get damaged, leading trip-hazards and potentially to the elderly tripping and falling (which can be fatal).
4. There is plenty of room on the carriageway for a loading bay, so there is no need to take it from the footway. In the past this section of carriageway was 3 lanes (and is now only 2 very wide lanes).
5. No pedestrian is going to be able to use the loading bay as footway, even when the loading bay is unoccupied - people will be too fearful of a car or coach driving on to it at any moment.I would be prepared to withdraw my objection if the loading bay were to be moved from the footway onto the carriageway (and there is no reduction in the width of the footway).
Posted 5 years ago # -
WHY is CEC even contemplating this??
Perhaps something to do with general failures of the Planning system and inadequate attention to the detail of how people would reach the hotel...
Posted 5 years ago # -
Thanks @neddie. I'll include a request for bollards when I submit mine as well.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Thanks Neddie, I’ve cribbed from your response and added a note about bollards.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Thanks @neddie. I've cribbed and added a bit about it (supposedly) being illegal to drive on the footway and that it is around 200m away from a High School and 300m away from a Primary School, and mentioned about coaches and HGV blind spots.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Objection sent as well, making basically the same points as others have made.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
