I’m aware that the latest nonsense from CEC is running (legitimately) on several threads.
Perhaps best to have a new one.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Latest plans for Leith Walk - and how to deal with them
(255 posts)-
Posted 6 years ago #
-
Posted 6 years ago #
-
"As part of the consultation on the tram extension, there is a chance for people who live and work in Leith and Newhaven to find out more on the proposals and ask questions. As well as the tram extension, proposals are included for the creation of a public transport corridor on Leith Walk for tram and bus during commuting hours at either end of a weekday to ensure that buses and trams can keep to timetable as much as possible.
The events take place on:
Thursday 23 March: Leith Theatre, 11am – 6pm
Tuesday 3 April: McDonald Road Library, 10am – 4pm
Thursday 12 April: Leith Community Education Centre, 3pm – 9pm
Saturday 21 April: Ocean Terminal, 12 noon – 5pm"I can only make it to the Ocean Terminal event. I will do my best to make my feelings known in clear terms, without frothing at the mouth.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The question they should maybe be asked is this; Would you build a car lane that wasn't continuous? If not, why are you building a non-continuous cycle lane?
I may be an extremist but I'd rather have no cycle facilities than non-continuous ones. The proposed arrangement wastes the budget and reduces our ability to take the lane for safety.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“I will do my best to make my feelings known in clear terms, without frothing at the mouth.”
I’ve stopped going to these things for that reason.
I value my health more than CEC values Edinburgh.
This shouldn’t be happening until the outcome of the tram enquiry is known - I’m sure there will be lots about CEC’s ability to manage large projects.
And this level of time, effort and cash shouldn’t be spent on a speculative project - where IS the money expected to come from?
Posted 6 years ago # -
"I may be an extremist but I'd rather have no cycle facilities than non-continuous ones. The proposed arrangement wastes the budget and reduces our ability to take the lane for safety."
No. That's the attitude that made them drop plans for segregated bike lanes northbound from Picardy Place to Elm Row, on the west side. Loads of folk responded to the consultation saying they were "dangerous" and they were dropped like a hot potato. Now there will just be some paint on that side, with a bi-direction lane on the other until Montgomery Street.
As a fairly regular user of the Leith Walk segregated facilities, I want more, not for the idea to be dropped. Not every journey is going the full length of Leith Walk.
The main problem with the designs is from Pilrig northwards. This is where the focus needs to be. If they're removing pavement build-outs etc. maybe some loading/parking can also be removed to extend segregated cycle lanes? Parking/loading needs to be the target. This has been removed completely from Constitution Street, the same could happen in areas of Leith Walk that are apparently "too narrow".
The choice of designing tram halts as central islands can also be questioned: why not design them like floating bus stops instead? Or even just on the footway, passengers crossing the traffic lane on zebras to reach the tram when it stops. This works in Europe...
South of Pilrig I suggest the focus ought to be on design details rather than questioning the idea of segregated cycle lanes completely.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“I suggest the focus ought to be on design details rather than questioning the idea of segregated cycle lanes completely.”
But the point isn’t yes/no to segregation, it’s “Would you build a car lane that wasn't continuous? If not, why are you building a non-continuous cycle lane?”
Posted 6 years ago # -
“
I asked the question at the time as did @LAHinds and we were assured it was tram proofed - spitting tacks here - I know some cyclists think Leith walk work crap but it was an improvement and don’t want to see it ripped up - I am quite cross about this
“
https://mobile.twitter.com/jomowat/status/975687261399461888
Posted 6 years ago # -
Seems to be a major issue with bunker thinking
While the council is running a 4-stage process to stickyplaster the flaws of the first process, they're simultaneously producing new plans that have exactly the same problems
'Cycling issues' can only be considered as expensive retrofit and mustn't be considered in any major project.
The plans are howlin for pedestrians too, they're proposing removing every single zebra and pedestrian crossing between Balfour St and Foot of the Walk - 600m
For all that was bad about Leith Programme Phases 1-3 in terms of lack of cycle provision, the soft permeability from one side of the street to the other enabled by the zebras, ped crossings, and single lane of traffic each way has made the whole north end quite nice to walk around, far more so than south of Pilrig St.
Posted 6 years ago # -
This is a Roseburn moment. Leith Walk absolutely MUST have segregation its full length. Anything else is unacceptable in the context of current policy and all the other arguments that we've already been through.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“
I can assure you promises were made at Leith Walk Improvement Consultation Group, no pavements would be changed. Perhaps some corners at traffic lights might need small changes. Furious all this work and money going down the drain! I wonder what @SustransScot think about this?
“
https://mobile.twitter.com/lahinds/status/975690430628159490
Posted 6 years ago # -
@chdot, "why are you building a non-continuous cycle lane?” They already made that decision when they re-did Leith Walk north of Pilrig. At the time they blamed it on "a different culture", which I took to mean the small business lobby led by the chap from the bed shop. Ironically many of those small businesses look set to close soon with the impending redevelopment of that block by Drum Property Group.
We can be arguing for removal of parking/loading from areas that are deemed "too narrow" for segregated cycle lanes. We can question the space-hogging design of tram halts.
There are many other issues too, like loss of pedestrian crossings, and further north the loss of entire current routes to cyclists and pedestrians (e.g. west of Ocean Terminal).
Posted 6 years ago # -
And, further to my last, this is about place-making,something the Council seem to be willfully still ignoring. I'm not sure this is the case with councillors, but it still seems to be a major issue with sections of council officers.
Can Daisy change the culture? Something needs to happen to stop this sort of awfulness being proposed.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Agree with Harts here
The consultation has laid the ground rules that the entire north end is game for digging up in full again
In that context nothing less than full seg to the Foot of the Walk is acceptable.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Leith Walk absolutely MUST have segregation its full length.
If there's no room on Leith Walk for segregation then there is no room on any street in Edinburgh. We've got 25 metres here.
Posted 6 years ago # -
No. That's the attitude that made them drop plans for segregated bike lanes northbound from Picardy Place to Elm Row, on the west side.
Was it? The point I was making was that I'd rather they did nothing than spend money on something that isn't useful and sets a whole load of awful precedents. Typing that doesn't feel too controversial.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“This is a Roseburn moment. Leith Walk absolutely MUST have segregation its full length. Anything else is unacceptable in the context of current policy and all the other arguments that we've already been through.“
Yes.
Roseburn campaigning achieved a great deal but was only up against a few councillors and a handful of locals mislead by a misguided individual.
Generally the bit of CEC that was involved wanted what the ‘cycle campaigners’ wanted.
LW is a whole different game involving different (‘more important’) bits of the establishment and LOTS of money (ultimately YOURS of course).
Going back on the ‘futureproofed’ promises is useful, but that’s a sideshow..
The old cliché is “follow the money”.
It’s FAR from clear that the extension to Newhaven is financially a good idea, so who is promoting it and why?
As has been pointed out on other thread, the SNP (SG & CEC) was against the tram in the first place and said ‘not a penny more’ last year, but now there is an SNP councillor who seems to be keen.
In a rational world those wanting more tram would be trying to work with ‘natural allies’ - people who promote walking and cycling.
BUT #ThisIsEdinburgh AND this whole macho big-engineering-stuff is just a bullying juggernaut.
It’s bad enough when it’s fields round Aberdeen or air over the Forth but this is City Centre where lots of people Live, Work, Walk.
Needs large scale, well organised, opposition - not to the tram (though there are plenty of reasons for that) but to the stupidity of pretending that a tram line is good for people when it bypasses bus stops, bulldozes half-decent, new, infrastructure and sidelines the walkers, cycle and bus users who are actually the people moving around and requiring decent infrastructure that could be provided for a fraction of the sum.
IF the tram (down LW) is an answer, what were the questions and why aren’t those in favour more respectful of the public and the civic space it wishes to take over?
Posted 6 years ago # -
@IWRATS. A route that terminates at Pilrig is still useful. Not as useful as one that goes to the Foot of the Walk, but still useful. And I remember very well the debate on here and elsewhere about the so-called "dangerous" segregated lanes going north from Picardy Place. Rather than try and argue for improvements, folk responded very negatively criticising the designs (which were definitely flawed) and they were just dropped.
Let's not make that mistake again.
"I'd rather they did nothing "
No. Not if they're spending millions. I want something that I and my family can use. Even if it doesn't go all the way to the New Kirkgate Centre. I'd prefer if it did, but if for whatever reason that's impossible, I want something out of all this money being spent. It's going to be spent anyway, might as well get as much as we can out of it.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The Walk should be the one street in Edinburgh that is roomy enough for everyone to happily have their space. I'm astounded at these plans. I'd go so far as to say I'm upset. The plans as they stand are not an improvement for the people who live, work or spend time in the area, so what is the point?
Posted 6 years ago # -
“I want something that I and my family can use.”
And everyone else.
Which means PROPER provision for people who walk (not least to tram stops on BOTH sides of the road) and those who cycle with young children.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The £4 saved for the NHS for every £1 invested in cycle infrastructure was presumably based on UK data where most to all cycle infrastructure is poorly designed. So "is much worse than it should be" isn't the same as "isn't useful".
Posted 6 years ago # -
“The Walk should be the one street in Edinburgh that is roomy enough for everyone to happily have their space. I'm astounded at these plans. I'd go so far as to say I'm upset. The plans as they stand are not an improvement for the people who live, work or spend time in the area, so what is the point?“
Briefer than the way I put it!
The major point of this is that the tram (as large, inflexible, newcomer) shouldn’t be allowed to barge its way in because SOME people believe it's more important than everything else.
This is NOT an off-road section and the speed limit will be 20mph.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@crowriver
I think I understand. I value the experience that people will have over anything physical. To me if they deliver something that makes the experience worse (as this must) then I get no consolation from any bicycle-themed or labeled part of what's delivered.
I can see that others wouldn't feel this way.
Posted 6 years ago # -
How do you fit pavements, segregated cycle ways, parking, carriageway and tram lines into a historic street?
Posted 6 years ago # -
@Morningsider - thank you! I was busy trying to find comparable streets in European cities which had both trams, cycling infrastructure. Not sure why I didn't try Amsterdam first, seems ridiculously obvious in hindsight...
Posted 6 years ago # -
Another example from Amsterdam on a comparable, if possibly slightly more narrow, street. Includes a tram stop.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.3713046,4.8610935,3a,75y,273.84h,81.15t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn_6ak4G4Pt44_UpyfVDuKQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Posted 6 years ago # -
“How do you fit pavements, segregated cycle ways, parking, carriageway and tram lines into a historic street?“
Exactly!
The problem is the two lane nonsense that CEC has stuck itself with for no apparent reason other than (presumably) #trafficflow.
There wouldn’t be many trams, they wouldn’t stop that often so traffic holdups no more significant than for most other roads in Edinburgh.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Even the tourist £s that 'they' are so keen to chase would be boosted and spread around by providing a seg route on the Walk. *bangs head off wall*
Posted 6 years ago # -
"..two lane nonsense..", "..traffic holdups no more significant.."
I suspect that the 15 year baked in thinking is that nothing must delay the trams, hence two lanes. CEC and its 1970s ideas just don't understand that the answer to most issues from mass transport to pollution is to restrict motorised traffic, but this and Picardy proves that we will have to wait another 30 years. I won't be around then.
Posted 6 years ago # -
chdot, I don't think tram opposition is helpful here - it just comes across as zoomery of the EEN type. The tram debate has been had and won. It needs to go to Leith, Ocean Terminal and Newhaven. The reason it needs to go to Newhaven is that there is STILL a lot of development earmarked for there and Granton and if the thing is going to be a network then it needs to loop back into town as per the original plans.
In short, the tram to Newhaven is happening. The argument is about what happens either side of the tram line (and to an extent between the tram lines). That's where we must absolutely focus.
Posted 6 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
