should urgently seek to expedite progress of its long overdue road repairs improvement plan.
If only there were some preventative measures the council could be taking. Like enabling people to travel around using less damaging vehicles. Alas.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
“Plans to make Edinburgh city centre ‘largely traffic free’ “
(191 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
Aye that's all grand. If CEC are so committed to this then why did they leave "Business As Usual" as one of the options to consult on?
It's standard/best practice options appraisal methodology to include "do nothing" or "do minimum" as an option. It allows you to demonstrate the cost and expected impact of your proposals and, more importantly, the cost/impact of not taking action.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“and, more importantly, the cost/impact of not taking action”
Is that just ‘money costs’ or societal costs of not reducing car use, improving air quality etc?
Posted 5 years ago # -
@PS, and yet, in section 1, "The case for change", p.6, the report says, *in bold*, "No change is not an option."
Then proceeds to lay out the options, the first of which on p.7 (also in bold) is "Business as usual".
(SFX of head hitting brick wall).
Posted 5 years ago # -
Is that just ‘money costs’ or societal costs of not reducing car use, improving air quality etc?
Done properly, it would cover societal costs, with impact on health being a significant factor.
@PS, and yet, in section 1, "The case for change", p.6, the report says, *in bold*, "No change is not an option."
I would have thought that that is a rhetorical flourish. They'll still need to model a "no change" base case against which they can compare the preferred option(s).
Posted 5 years ago # -
Taking a step back from the detail of what is in the document. I imagine the Council is carrying out this consultation so it can clearly establish that there is majority support for "transformative" change in the city centre. Only when it has this in the bag can it actually pursue such policies and proposals through statutory plans.
Evidence of public support was invaluable to councillors who supported the city-wide 20mph limit and I imagine it will be even more important for this project. The administration needs clear evidence of public support for such change so it can rebuff attacks from the Tories and others opposed to it.
As you know, I have doubts as to whether much of this will ever materialise. However, without our support it will never stand a chance.
So - once more to the online surveys and public meetings!
Encourage as many supportive voices to respond as possible. There is no need for long responses, everyone simply needs to tick every box which says "I support transformative change". Give officials the chance to tell councillors that "Yes, the people of Edinburgh support transformative change".
Posted 5 years ago # -
@ Morningsider
Agree.
20mph was a much simpler idea.
Apart a small demo with dog [literally), there wouldn’t be too many people keen to argue against ‘safer streets’.
It’s also true that ‘us and more’ did a good job of dealing with consultations and sending emails (etc.)
This is more complex and perhaps more of an ‘act of faith’.
I presume PS is correct in the need for ‘no change’ to be a baseline option. I just hope Adam and the new Lesley are as willing/able to vocally back this scheme as Andrew and the previous Lesley were most of the time.
20mph was fairly binary (apart from certain ‘this road shouldn’t be 20’ arguments) this is more difficult.
I hope this doesn’t develop into a version of ‘back it all - even any bad bids’ - like with the Congestion Charge referendum.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I hope this doesn’t develop into a version of ‘back it all - even any bad bids’ - like with the Congestion Charge referendum.
I don't see this as being an issue here. It's more of a conceptual document: some of the proposals would require legislative change or the backing of various third parties. It's not all going to happen overnight.
I think Morningsider's spot on - this is a means of demonstrating public support for a vision of the future, so we should get behind it to demonstrate that the Conservative reaction is wrong-headed (cf, numerous European examples of traffic-reduction being overwhelmingly positive for cities, their inhabitants and their businesses) and represents only a small minority.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“this is a means of demonstrating public support for a vision of the future”
Which of course part of the problem.
Many of those most likely to understand/agree with this “vision” are still waiting for basic elements of previous promises to occur...
“some of the proposals would require legislative change”
Is CEC actively campaigning for these?
It’s a shame SG isn’t leading on some of these things.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Many of those most likely to understand/agree with this “vision” are still waiting for basic elements of previous promises to occur..."
Exactly.
I hope I'm wrong, but I wouldn't be surprised to see a fairly strong backlash against "change" given the publicity this "vision" document is getting. Many car commuters, and many retailers will try to defend what they see as their interests.
Will the council stand up to the reaction and push this vision? Or will they instead water down the vision until it's only slightly more visionary than "Business as usual"?
Whatever progressive change eventually comes out in the wash will either be years late or not delivered at all because "reasons".
I'll not be holding my breath on this one, even as I participate in yet another consultation exercise...
Posted 5 years ago # -
“as I participate in yet another consultation exercise...”
Posted 5 years ago # -
From one of the links that came up in your search string (my emphasis):
---
WHAT WOULD DRIVE PEOPLE AWAY?
Failure to deliver on projects that have been consulted on previously.
Failure to explain why projects couldn’t be delivered.
Failure to acknowledge previous contributions.
Failure to report back a summary of the consultation outcomes.
Failure to report back on the impact of the consultation process.
Too many emails in general. (Or too many consultations? Ed.)
Too many emails about irrelevant subjects.---
Also, this gem at another link:
---
However, I was surprised when several of the delegates said they did not want to do it because they had been doing lots of public consultation in the area over the past few months and they thought people would be fed up with being asked questions and might demand to know what was being done about what they had already said. In short, they thought that the locals might be suffering from consultation fatigue.
---
Posted 5 years ago # -
Such cynicism about consultations!
Spokes Facebook post:-
TRANSPORT TRANFORMATON – EDINBURGH COUNCIL
Transport and Environment Committee meeting 9 AugustThe prospectus for a transformation of Edinburgh’s transport will be discussed at the next Transport and Environment Committee meeting on Thursday 9 August. It’s a public meeting and you can also watch on line.
The paper for that meeting is really worth reading – quite radical in the changes in some of the options it proposes to make to Edinburgh’s transport and infrastructure.
Some points to note:-
The Summer Summit, when the Council closed the streets to motorised traffic on 21 June, now looks like it was the opening act of the transformation gig (headliner Livable City). There was very little advanced notice of it happening, but as we complain about long consultation processes before anything is done at all, no problem there. Now the Council is proposing the streets be closed on the first Sunday of every month. The precedents they quote are New York’s Summer Streets and Paris’s Paris Breathes, where streets in the city centres are closed for a day.
Paris and New York are not the only cities that are cited. “We must join cities like Copenhagen, Oslo, Barcelona and other leading cities in reshaping how our city works and become synonymous with urban innovation if we are to meet the economic, social and environmental challenges we face.”
“The Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan for Malmo, Sweden (2016) sets a modal split for the city, together with targets by 15 sub-areas to assist the city in becoming healthier, more accessible and to reduce transport emissions.”
Cue howls of” Edinburgh is not Copenhagen/ Oslo/ Barcelona/ Malmo. “
Priorities:- Frequently “foot, bicycle and public transport”. The paper stresses throughout reducing vehicular traffic, meaning private cars. HGV’s to be reduced by creating freight hubs with goods being carried into the city by cargo bike or electric vehicles.
“You would be able to go to, but not through the city centre. A series of hubs could be developed where buses would drop off and other forms of less impactful transport would take over.” That is likely to be extremely controversial.
Altogether this is a “bold and ambitious” prospectus, as it says of itself, and one which ties in well with the ideas from our recent 'City Centre Transformation' public meeting.
The next step after this Thursday’s meeting will be the consultation process, which everyone should get involved in, as many of these proposals will be vigorously opposed.
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/meetings/meeting/4508/transport_and_environment_committee
Posted 5 years ago # -
“Such cynicism about consultations!”
Unfortunately it’s often fully justified.
It’s not just about CEC.
Far too many consultations seem to have occurred where the result is ‘not what was wanted’.
Too often, particularly in Edinburgh with cycle infrastructure, it turns out there aren’t the resources (more often staff rather than money) to do the work in any sort of reasonable timescale.
Then there’s things like bus lane changes. Probably not a consultation as such, but plenty of objections which were ignored. Now it seems there may be a consultation about changing them again.
Then there was the developer run ‘consultation’ on Picardy Place -
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=15889&page=9#post-261369
I’m not cynical, just jaundiced.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Not just about consultations, delivery too -
“
Councillor Jason Rust at the section of road on Buckstone Terrace where the council were given £64,000 by the builders of 300 new homes to install a pedestrian crossing in December 2013 but it still hasn't been installed.
...
The feeling in the community, given the length of time it has taken, is that we are being treated with contempt by the council, particularly when they have had the money all that time.
...
Scott Arthur, Labour councillor for the area, said the delay was “unacceptable”.
A council spokeswoman said: “We appreciate this process has taken longer than expected in order to identify a solution that best meets the needs of the community, and thank residents for their patience.
“
Posted 5 years ago # -
Posted 5 years ago #
-
The Kaimes Road / Corstorphine Rd crossing has been 9 years since it was assessed...
Posted 5 years ago # -
Too many consultations
Not enough consultation?
Hard to get the balance right?
Posted 5 years ago # -
“Hard to get the balance right?”
Probably, but that’s not really the point.
You will be well aware of consultation fatigue - classically where ‘deprived communities’ are asked what they want, only to find that a few years later they are asked similar questions when very little happened in between consultations.
The process isn’t helped by the (inevitable) fact that the consultants are paid and the consulted are not.
This is fine if there is any chance of ‘improvements’ being carried out, which all too often doesn’t happen.
One major consultation that did a great deal of good work was the one that created the Core Path Network.
This brought together landowners, locals and interest groups. The results weren’t ‘perfect’ but there was great progress in making “responsible access” easier.
The optimism of the process was partly fuelled by the belief that ScotGov would provide a sensible amount of money for creating, improving and developing the agreed network.
It just didn’t happen.
Posted 5 years ago # -
“
More of the same is not an option when it comes to traffic in the centre of Edinburgh. We are much more aware now of the dangers of air pollution from vehicles – it can be a silent killer.
“
Posted 5 years ago # -
I know John! It's all mental - a freight hub at Haymarket! How would that work? Next "they" will be telling us that there is a giant site at Haymarket that has been vacant for decades, which used to be a freight hub, that could be used for this purpose! Honestly, its as though some of these people have no idea what they are talking about.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Having ridden through the city the last time there was a 'traffic free day', this is not ideal for cyclists at busy times of the year. Its only the cars that keep the pedestrians from wandering everywhere across roads without looking out for bikes, making everywhere shared use.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Of course it needs to be done properly with plenty of space.
Posted 5 years ago # -
It depends what traffic free means; is it removing polluting vehicles from the city centre for a while, or is it allowing people to wander where they like without looking/having to look for traffic, treating the whole space like a large pavement. Because the latter was how Edinburgh felt on June 24. I was trying to get to the Botanics from Marchmont and it was very unnerving, especially the Mound.
Posted 5 years ago # -
When rolling stones was playing was also difficult to cycle down the road with no cars. The cars also break the glass and keep the road clean of objects, I noticed more broken glass than normal when road was closed. A down side of no cars is that glass on the road never disappears.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"allowing people to wander where they like without...having to look for traffic, treating the whole space like a large pavement" Yes, I think that's the idea...sounds pretty good to me!
Posted 5 years ago # -
Exactly David, that is the idea!
Posted 5 years ago # -
So, we take our favoured mode of transport, which we spend years arguing is the most efficient and effective way of getting around town, and put it on narrow tracks on some roads, and elsewhere make them swerve around pedestrians. I'm not seeing this as some form of golden dawn; bikes would be banned from the area after the first or second accident. Is there really that much leisure cycling in the city centre?
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
