CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
“Calls for new road to ease Edinburgh Airport traffic bottlenecks”
(34 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
Has nobody involved in these calls ever heard of induced demand? More roads do not solve congestion, they just create more traffic.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Fortunately, a system already exists at the terminal car park to regulate supply & demand through pricing.
All they need to do is up the price to more closely match the demand.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The underlying problem is that many people seem to believe driving to the airport to be their only realistic option. As crowriver implies, any new road is likely to be similarly congested almost from the start.
But IF they're set on new tarmac, I would be a bit more radical...get the airport traffic off the local road system, tuning it for active travel and public transport, by closing Glasgow Road between Newbridge and Gogar except for local access and public transport, and creating a main airport access road from the M8 just to the south.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The councillor overseeing planning in the city has called for the new road to integrate cycling and pedestrian access for proposed housing developments as well as helping to ease traffic in the west of the Capital.
Planning convener, Cllr Neil Gardiner, said: “The council has commissioned a study of the west of Edinburgh – it’s very important that is taken into account in any proposal. The council is trying to bring different parties together to find a framework for the future. I think it’s important to work with the planning department and find joined-up solutions.
“There’s obviously the West Craigs development to the east. What we are looking for is pedestrian and active travel-led solutions to the area so not everything is going down the A8 and to limit the amount of cars coming into Corstorphine, which is already too much.”
He added: “It needs all parties to come together so that any proposal that come forward don’t form a barrier but invites good connections across the railway to West Craigs and equally through the roundabout at Gogar.
“I think the developer needs to look at the strategic content. It’s seeking to take cars off the bypass, which is probably welcome to reduce the amount of traffic on the A8 corridor because that’s overloaded.”
Posted 4 years ago # -
The road would be “full accessible to general traffic” and is being provided to reduce congestion on the current airport road.
Nope. A new road will not reduce congestion because of induced-demand. When will they learn?
This is just business as usual. Keep building more and more roads. Keep inducing more and more private motor traffic.
We are supposed to be in a climate emergency, for goodness sake.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Not just inducing more road traffic, but more flights too.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Seems like a no-brainer to make the access road public transport-only. A bit more tricky if it'll be an access to a new business district, but doable. Drivers on Twitter often seem convinced that it's buses causing all the congestion so surely should make access road free-flowing? If you let taxis on the new road it genuinely might (for a while).
Posted 4 years ago # -
Considering how busy the East exit from the Gogar roundabout is at rush hour, I can't imagine this new road will make things particularly pleasant for anyone...
Posted 4 years ago # -
Let's face it, this road is little to do with "reducing congestion on the current airport road" (not that it would even achieve that) and is all about enabling the commercial exploitation of all the land between Gogar and the airport (including one of the airport's own runways). As such, I hope it's unanimously rejected.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Planning application is in for a new access road to the airport: 21/00217/FUL
https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/planning-applications-1/view-comment-planning-applications
Deadline is 12th March
The new road will induce more traffic and more flying, which completely flies in the face of actions needed to reduce climate breakdown. The active travel provision is also very poor.
Please object.
There are a good set of reasons for objection to be found here:
https://lowtrafficcorstorphine.org.uk/edinburgh-airport-new-access-road-active-travel-route/Posted 3 years ago # -
18 objections now, 1 supporting
Posted 3 years ago # -
Urgent!
Could do with some more objections
Posted 3 years ago # -
Could do with some more visible objections/campaigning from Transform, Stop Climate Chaos Scotland, FoE etc
Posted 3 years ago # -
It's possible they don't know about it.
Please could someone inform them.
Posted 3 years ago # -
TS on the case
https://twitter.com/transformscot/status/1369971471515344896
Posted 3 years ago # -
I would also add that the plans are very opaque about what will happen to the important East-west cycle route round the North of the Gogar roundabout.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@neddie someone called Ed H tell them on Twitter, I think you know Ed H quite well?
Posted 3 years ago # -
the designs for that 'cycle lane' are just depressing. up to 27 objections now.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Unfortunately I think the road will go ahead (either on approval or appeal), so it's useful to object to the dire cycle provision (both to the airport and for the QR9 crossing) too.
Some policy arguments I came up with, which I believe LTC are using:
The omission of a segregated cycleway in the application is a critical failure and without the inclusion of this, the application must not be approved. Without a segregated cycleway, the application fails to comply with several CEC and national policies, commitments, and aspirations.
The application fails to comply with the Edinburgh Local Transport Strategy, specifically PCycle2: ”cycle lanes, or where appropriate physically segregated cycle infrastructure, in all schemes involving main roads (except where this may not be necessary if the speed limit is 20mph).”. The application also fails to provide Advanced Stop Lines at any signalised junctions, a further failure to comply with PCycle2 and the Local Transport Strategy.
The application fails to satisfy the West Edinburgh Transport Appraisal Refresh (WETA). The WETA clearly states: “Sections 1 and 2 should include a fully segregated cycleway.” This has not been achieved and is unacceptable. A shared use footway does not achieve this and trying to claim that it does is simply misleading. There is a clear distinction between segregated facilities and shared use facilities in the WETA.
The application fails to comply with the City Mobility Plan, specifically Movement 15: “Expand and enhance the citywide network of cycle routes to connect key destinations across the city, including increased segregated cycle infrastructure on main roads.” and Movement 23. “Mitigate conflict in shared spaces Mitigate conflict between those walking, wheeling and cycling on shared paths and spaces through infrastructure design, signage and awareness campaigns.” By proposing a shared use footway, this will lead to built-in conflict between pedestrians and cyclists, directly opposing the policy goal to reduce this conflict.
The application fails to support the Edinburgh Active Travel Action Plan (2016) by significantly degrading the comfort, safety, and quality of QuietRoute 9. This application will negatively impact the attractiveness of the route and reduce the potential for modal shift.
There is a consistent failure throughout the proposals for crossings to be on the desire line. The Transport Statement alleges: “These facilities are direct and on the main walking and cycling desire line, where appropriate.” This is categorically untrue. Numerous proposed crossings, both controlled and uncontrolled, are located far from the desire line. This shows a clear failure to acknowledge the Transport Hierarchy.
Posted 3 years ago # -
I've added my slightly less eloquent objection to it now too.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Deadline for comments is today. Link to do so: https://citydev-portal.edinburgh.gov.uk/idoxpa-web/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=QN4EJ4EWKTZ00
Posted 3 years ago # -
Apologies, comment deadline is Sunday!
Posted 3 years ago # -
43 objections & 57 supportive comments just now...
Posted 3 years ago # -
I wonder if someone is campaigning for people to support the application. I was sitting at one objection 2 days hours ago.
Posted 3 years ago # -
@acsimpson, of course because they have gone on and spotted the objections from here so yes organized. Upthread the feeling is this road will be built so the aim now is to argue for decent cycling infra
Posted 3 years ago # -
Planning permission refused.
4 reasons:
1. The nature of the proposed development is contrary to the existing National Planning Policy 3, the Strategic Development Plan and the Local Development Plan (LDP) specifically Policy Emp 4 - Edinburgh Airport in that it is not supported by an approved airport master plan.2. 2. The proposed development would be contrary to Local Development Plan (LDP) Policy Des 2, Co-ordinated Development, parts a) and b) and would fail to deliver coordinated development in West Edinburgh. The application is premature
and may compromise the development plan strategy for West Edinburgh.3. The proposed development would be prejudicial to the implementation of Local Development Proposal T9, Gogar Link Road specifically the delivery of proposed new roads, network improvements and public transport proposals.
4. The proposed development would be contrary to Local Development Plan (LDP) Policies Des 1, Design Quality and Context, Des 8, Public Realm and Landscape Design, part c) and has not addressed requirements of the Edinburgh Street Design Guidance. The overall design concept has not sought to draw up the positive characteristics of the surrounding area or demonstrate how it would contribute to a sense of place. The application proposal is based on a functional road
design which has prioritised movement before place.None of which seem to be 'building a new road to make it easier to drive to an airport during a climate crisis is disaster fuel'.
Posted 2 years ago # -
There's a certain poetic justice in "The application proposal is based on a functional road design which has prioritised movement before place." Presumably this is at least in part because they've tried to soften the plans by developing their bizarre "crosswinds" vision for essentially a new town centre within a few hundred metres of an operational runway, which happens to include the long-aspired for new link road nestled amongst it.
You can't help but feel if they'd been honest and said "we want to build a big new isolated tarmac road in a field to let more cars get to our airport" they might have sidestepped the need to justify the "sense of place" created by the new road.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Will they appeal to Scot Gov?
Posted 2 years ago # -
What's really shocking is that the airport can build as much parking as they want, without need for planning permission.
Multi-storey after multi-storey.
IT. WILL. NEVER. END.
Posted 2 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
