@kenny - It would be good to get your thoughts on what could be a workable set of interventions for a LTN.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Scottish Govmt announces £10m for pop up cycle/walking lanes
(3661 posts)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
I'd be more than happy to. To do that, I'd like to have access to all the data available (such as rat run journeys, including evidence) because, who knows, maybe I'd come to the same conclusions that are being implemented.
Then, I'd like to understand what key challenges are in scope to be improved, in priority order.
These things likely exist. I just don't know how to access them.
Is that possible?
Posted 4 years ago # -
That reads like ‘I’d like to help, but’...
(Don’t worry, I’m quite sure you really want to help!)
It raises interesting questions -
Does CEC have that sort of data?
Is it letting anyone see/use it?
Clearly schemes like this often don’t have relevant data and, more or less, rely on ‘faith’ - or at least ‘well we think it’s a good idea, and hope it will work’.
Doesn’t always.
Problem here is that with so much opposition, data/evidence - and its interpretation - is rather important.
Needs something to counter ‘this is Edinburgh, we are different’.
Just wondering, (in light of mentions of Buchanan) if there are any very similar housing schemes elsewhere?
Posted 4 years ago # -
I don't have that, but CEC have referred to data they have collected.
And thanks to multiple FOI requests it will get made public at some point.
https://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/homepage/10467/freedom-of-information-foi-disclosure-log?month=2020-8
Posted 4 years ago # -
“And thanks to multiple FOI requests it will get made public at some point.“
So, CEC being foolishly secretive?
Posted 4 years ago # -
@chdot
no, I think almost all staff still working from home. Also probably short staffed. So FOI for the data fair enough. Though multiple FOIs for the same data are also going to slow things down as they also take up staff time.
Hopefully they do have such data?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Will these dots be joined?
https://twitter.com/cllrscottarthur/status/1300834476008910850?s=21
Braid Road Briefing – “A full re-opening of Braid Road is not proposed at this stage”
https://twitter.com/edinburghbug/status/1300718420497965056?s=21
In summary, seems cycle/walk shot up in March, car, bus rail & commercial collapsed. Thereafter car & commercial has returned and now/soon will be at 100%+ of pre-pandemic. Cycle gradually declining, bus use slowly growing, rail creeping up. Walking, as you say, hard to assess
Posted 4 years ago # -
That reads like ‘I’d like to help, but’...
Such is the challenge of the written word. I certainly do want to help. Alas, based on the responses to my last post, I am unable to do so, because without the data I was asking for, it is not possible to come up with a solution. How could anyone come up with a solution when we don't know the problem, the intended goal, the parameters?
In my time leading software engineering and operational teams, I have learned many lessons, one of which is that we must validate when someone perceives there to be a problem. On a few occasions early in my career, someone or some team would advise that we had a problem and come up with a proposed solution to it. When the solution was implemented, we determined that, not only did it not solve the problem, but that the problem either did not exist, or was considerably different to that which was believed in the first place.
Therefore, for anyone to be able to solve a problem, we need the data, we need to see the evidence of the problem, we need to understand the perceived goal. When we have that, we can then propose a solution (aka a "hypothesis"), attack it to prove it works, and once we have a solution that survives attack, we implement it.
Right now, based on @HankChief's response ("I don't have that, but CEC have referred to data they have collected"), it appears none of us can make any reasonable proposal, or justify what is being done.
It's entirely possible what is being done is exactly right and necessary, but without any data, evidence etc, how can we support it? There are claims that we have a rat run which I strongly reject, having lived on a cul-de-sac off Craigs Road for a significant period of time and therefore having never seen, even at rush hour, anything close to "rat run" levels of traffic. Others claim it is a rat run - so let's see the evidence and the data.
There are claims that there are lots of short distance journeys being made which we want to cut out. Yep, I'm absolutely sure there are, but are these measures going to counter them? The number of kids who walk along Craigs Road to Craigmount in the morning is _unbelievable_ and I would deliberately time my cycle to work to avoid them because of their sheer number. The number of kids being dropped off by car was insignificant, but possibly could be reduced. But where are the numbers? What is the percentage? And here's an interesting thought - how many of those kids are being dropped off my a parent who is thereafter making a longer distance journey and therefore it's entirely reasonable to travel by car to school since that's where the driver is going anyway? That's just an example, but it's the kind of data that should be known and transparent for people to accept what is happening.
Transparency is key to something like this. If people can see the problem and can understand how the solution is going to make things better, even if it inconveniences them, they are much more likely to accept it. If things are hidden from them, they won't. Basic psychology.
In terms of the LTN proposals themselves, I fear for the residents of Bughtlin. Craigs Road residents (and those in the new build houses around East Craigs Rigg) are going to be inconvenienced quite a lot, but not nearly as much as the people in Bughtlin if they can't turn into Craigs Road. I have absolutely zero issues with Bughtlin residents using Craigs Road to avoid the Maybury Road and its huge queues, because without that, they really are in trouble.
But it's the junction on Drum Brae that really has me worried, especially when people are finally allowed to go back to their offices. Changing that junction so it is a roundabout or traffic lights might help, but I suspect a traffic modeller would be able to show that will just cause major issues for vehicles travelling up and down Drum Brae.
The residents of and around Craigs Road that I know (and I know many) almost all believe that our area is already a LTN, and that there's no need for the changes. I'd be more than happy to support the changes if I could see the data, but until then, @chdot's below comment does feel relevant.
Clearly schemes like this often don’t have relevant data and, more or less, rely on ‘faith’ - or at least ‘well we think it’s a good idea, and hope it will work’.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@Kenny, while I agree with some of what you have said I would disagree about your points on Bughtlin and all other properties accessed from Maybury Drive. I live off Maybury Road and confess to previously using Craigs Road as a rat run to access the North Gyle Terrace junction and jump the queue.
How would you define a rat run? My first attempt at a definition would be driving through a residential neighbourhood in order to avoid traffic on a main road which means that you are saying Craigs Road is not a rat run while also saying that it needs to function as one.
I don't see any reason why Bughtlin residents should be allowed to drive along Craigs Road if they are not accessing properties on (or near) it. If they are then many journeys could be walked or cycled rather than driven and these are precisely the sort of journey this scheme aims to reduce.
Maybury Road might be busy at times but unless you are leaving between 8 and 8.30 or between 3.30 and 5 you will rarely have to wait more than 5 or 10 minutes to access the A8. There is a lot of traffic but the junctions are high capacity.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“
Cllr Macinness tried to sell those gathered on Friday the vision of Waltham Forest – the London suburb dubbed ‘Little Holland’ after a range of road layout changes made things much harder for cars and easier for bikes. I like what they’ve done in Waltham Forest, but I particularly like the five phases of community consultation that went before it. The good people of East Craigs and Craigmount have had no such courtesy.
We have got to change the way we move around in this city and get people out of their cars, for the sake of our air quality and health.
It’s why Liberal Democrats have supported 15 out of 17 Spaces for People proposals, but we need to carry hearts and minds with us along the way and that starts with listening to the people who will have to live with the changes we create.
It should not have taken an opposition politician from a different democratic institution to get these residents in front of the Transport Convener for the first time. I hope she listened.
“
Posted 4 years ago # -
@acsimpson - a fair question (“what is a rat run”) which has caused me to ponder. We use roads such as Craigs Road to gain access between major roads (Maybury Road, St Johns Road) and residential roads (Craigs Gardens, East Craigs Rigg). While there are houses on Craigs Road, such that some would say “surely it is a residential street”, it is also a road that connects major to residential. We seem to be in a position where people using such roads legitimately (in my view) are deemed to be using it as a “rat run”.
My view on what a rat run is, is a road not built for such a purpose as what Craigs Road is, and is over-run by people using it to avoid major roads. The number of cars using Craigs Road is not, in my view, significant enough to consider it a rat run.
From discussions with those affected within Bughtlin, there has been comments made that, if these restrictions were in place prior to them purchasing their properties, they would not have purchased homes in this location due to the perceived increased trouble getting in and out of their estate, which is already restrictive.
Therefore, to counter your comment about “allowing” residents of Bughtlin to use Craigs Road, I would counter by saying that I consider Bughtlin and East Craigs to be conjoined; I am not of the opinion that they are not “allowed” to use Craigs Road, but indeed I fully expect them to use it, due to the cul-de-sac nature of their entire estate. We are all one estate, using roads built to allow residents access. Shutting these roads to justify a problem for which we have no transparently available data, evidence or a prioritised list of gains to be met seems premature.
Let’s get that data, that evidence, see what inference those who collected the data made from it, understand what specific, data-driven gains are hoped to be obtained, and convince ourselves that this is the right decision. Without doing that, how can we identify that the goals have been met at a later date?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Thanks to recent posters. This s CCE gold. Very interesting to hear people talk this through in a measured way.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“Very interesting to hear people talk this through in a measured way.“
Yes.
But the problem remains that many people only see the ‘plan’ as making things more difficult/worse -
“
Again, if we were asked locally, we would tell you that we know the impact of the LTN will be to add further to the idling traffic levels of three of these worst roads because we have limited access routes with dangerous exits. And cars will be necessary despite best intentions.“
https://twitter.com/toomanycookes/status/1300850083047632900
Inevitably there is resistance to change, but unless there are better arguments - which is really for CEC not ‘us’ - there is going to be strong resistance.
I am in favour of try:modify, but as has been said, unless it’s clear what the objectives are (% of car journey reductions increases in walking/cycling?) AND before/after is recorded properly, things are unlikely to be satisfactory.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Also need to be clear about winners and losers. There are always losers. Their loss may be good and necessary but it needs to be recognised.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Anyone who has regularly cycled along Quiet Routes should understand it isn't necessarily volume of traffic which causes issues. The nature of traffic cutting through an area is completely different to those accessing it. They're treating side streets as alternative main roads, complete with driving style.
I doubt any of the people cutting through would see the need for an LTN - the street is always empty, apart from them.
Posted 4 years ago # -
My experience of people calling for "data" when they want to stop something, is that they don't actually care about that data, they just want to obstruct, obfuscate, delay and derail. You can give them as much data as you like, and they'll still find a way to say, "it isn't enough", or "what about X, Y and Z you haven't thought of"
And the fact is, we already have the data. What works elsewhere, all around the world. East Craigs is not special in that respect.
And when it comes to gathering the data, how do you measure abstract things like: "we walk as a family every day to school, and every day I am petrified my children will be killed by a driver doing a 3-point turn who hits the gas instead of the brake"? (These are the exact feelings I live in fear of every day, and our road is a rat run, but some would argue it's not)
The fact is it's all highly subjective.
Social and emotional intelligence is required here.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@IWRATS - indeed. That is why I'm completely unsurprised by the vocal objections coming from the surrounding area - the changes are almost entirely negative to them. For the residents of the streets being filtered it will be a more nuanced question.
I believe the council should be protecting the residents of all residential streets by removing through traffic. I don't envy them having to find ways to appease those who travel through.
P.S. Interesting side note regarding the East Craigs/Bughtlin distinction - you're only one filter away from being the same estate.
Posted 4 years ago # -
one of which is that we must validate when someone perceives there to be a problem
This is an excellent point that I've learned the hard way. But sometimes you have to take a holistic view. How much data is required to say we all need to cut down our emissions? Edinburgh streets are a polluted mess, ice caps melting at "worst case scenario" rates and global temperatures continue to rise.
These LTN are a start and they need to apply to all estates and quickly.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“And the fact is, we already have the data. What works elsewhere, all around the world. East Craigs is not special in that respect.“
Agree
BUT
The whole thing is now absurdly political and post-rational.
“Also need to be clear about winners and losers. There are always losers. Their loss may be good and necessary but it needs to be recognised.“
Seems likely that the objectors are projecting themselves as losers and are unlikely to be convinced they are not however wonderfully the scheme works in practice.
“I doubt any of the people cutting through would see the need for an LTN - the street is always empty, apart from them.”
I’m still not clear whether cutting through/rat running is wholly/mostly about non-residents or mostly/significantly about people from various bits of EC getting to/from their houses.
Clearly ‘we’ are keen on people driving less, which is always a hard sell to people who habitually drive.
IF the reality here is that the majority of the traffic is due to residents then it is different from many places with through traffic/rat running.
Presumably that info is already available?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Can anyone remember how much of this went on when Craigleith Hill Ave was stopped up to vehicles? Presumably that used to be a massive rat run from Telford Rd.
Posted 4 years ago # -
The use of the terms East Craigs for this LTN is confusing. As far as I know the area's which it covers have traditionally been called North Gyle and Craigmount, even the two cul-de-sacs with East Craigs in their name are on the old North Gyle Farm's land. The Rigg was built about 20 years ago and at the time was only adjacent to North Gyle Loan. These two are outside the East Craigs catchment area as are all the houses south of Craigs Road. With them aside the only time I have heard East Craigs used for houses outside the Maybury Road estate is for the Stuarts at the end of Craigmount View.
@Kenny, I can see your point about Craigs Road. It is one of the oldest roads in the area, appearing on the earliest maps available from NLS (https://maps.nls.uk/view/74426699). However when it was blocked by Maybury Road and then the runway built over the far end of it then it ceased to serve any sort of arterial purpose. I would also counter that using it to access Glasgow Road via either Craigs Gardens or North Gyle Terrace definitely crosses a line of rat running as they are clearly residential streets built for the sole purpose of housing.
If you watch the traffic on CR for any length of time (eg while walking along it) you will notice that a significant amount goes well over 20mph, especially around the entrance to East Craigs Wynd as the road heads downhill. Rat running doesn't have to make an area busy to make it more dangerous. Whether these drivers are from Maybury Drive or Fife they clearly don't feel that this is their neighbourhood. This makes crossing the road harder than it should be on a "quiet" road. Similarly Craigmount Avenue is used by traffic to a avoid queues on Drumbrae.
I don't see any reason residents of Maybury Drive should be given priority access to drive along residential roads. It's only just over 40 years ago that these houses were built and Maybury Road was used as their access point to the arterial road network without the need to use Craigs Road. We are as guilty as any other drivers of contributing to the traffic on Maybury Drive.
I'm not sure when your contacts moved to the area, if it was 15 years ago then traffic was much lighter, while if it was 10 years ago then the LDP was already in it's infancy and the new housing was likely to be happening. I use my car when I have to rather than because it's there, so perhaps I'm just not able to understand a mindset which would consider the ability to unnecessarily drive through a residential zone as a factor when buying a house.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I've been pondering on the filter I mentioned earlier. If that were removed, Bughtlin would have access to Craigs Road and EC Wynd/Rigg would have access to Maybury Road.
For Bughtlin, it would take a similar amount of time as going out to Maybury, then back in. For EC Wynd/Rigg, it'd be a bit further but with the benefit of a right turn.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I already use that filter on my bike as it allows me to get onto Maybury Road :)
I'd expect the residents of the streets both sides of the filter wouldn't be too happy with getting the extra traffic.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@Rob, It's good to see an alternative suggestion. However I think that it would create more through traffic than Burnbrae could cope with. As well as the two cars which are almost permanently parked in from of the filter you would need to remove all on street parking from on Burnbrae Drive and Place/Avenue. As those streets are currently cul-de-sacs they don't have speed reducing measures.
A crazier idea (read impossible to implement) would be to open up the filter at the bottom of East Craigs Rigg.As a slightly different option could a single junction be created at the bottom of NGR/Craigs Gardens? It would Handle all traffic coming from Craigs Road and south and provide access in all directions allowing access to Drumbrae to be removed?
One stated aim I have seen is to reduce the level of traffic to the point where the West Edinburgh Link can operate with on road lanes without traffic being a problem. If this isn't done by removing through traffic then how would it be done?
Posted 4 years ago # -
@Ac - I remember the uproar when a footpath between the Rigg & the Wynd was proposed when the latter was being built. This included someone having a huge banner on the side of their house for a couple of years until the threat subsided.
They were worried that school kids might use it...
Posted 4 years ago # -
That's the one. The problem is on the other side of the fence because it needed a bit of front garden from the Rigg resident.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@ac maybe no entry to NGR from Glasgow Road so it can only be used to exit the area, entry remains via Drumbrae? It could be filtered properly at a later date if Drumbrae gets fixed.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I think Frenchy and Hankchief have hit the nail on the head...
There is a distinct lack of pedestrian / cycle permeability between East Craigs Rigg, Wynd and North Gyle Grove. The residents of East Craigs Rigg and Wynd will no doubt only ever see their walking options as being the same circuitous ones they currently drive.
I definitely think that opening up, at minimum, a pedestrian/cycle link between East Craigs Rigg and North Gyle Grove would help matters.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@HC - So it would. That's a shame.
Some of the new houses near Gilmerton Station Road are being built in a similar manner, which will prevent pedestrian access to neighbouring streets from ever being put in. It's infuriating.
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
