If a toddler had been killed on the pavement outside my shop by a car, and if a cyclist had been killed in the previous week, then I may be a bit more circumspect about having a go at road safety measures.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Scottish Govmt announces £10m for pop up cycle/walking lanes
(3661 posts)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
"London is a completely different city with a young population"
If there's no young people in Edinburgh, maybe selling toys is not the right business model...
Schrodinger's Edinburgh - simultaneously too young and too old
ROFL
Posted 4 years ago # -
Lots of stuff in that piece.
Highlights that there are no simple answers (in theory or practice) to any of this.
He seems to have joined those who think ‘this is nothing to do with Covid’.
Last paragraph -
“
If the council is serious about reducing the impact of car usage, there are far better ways to do it. They could provide free bus transport, increase the cost of a parking permit for non-electric cars and use technology to enable car sharing. We could also reopen the South Suburban Railway line for passenger use.
“
All true (apart from how much CEC could do them for responsibility/financial reasons).
Car sharing has been promoted for years, not a great deal of takeup - not going to increase any time soon.
Posted 4 years ago # -
The median age in Edinburgh in mid-2019 was 36.5, while the median age in London was 35.6. Less than one year difference between the two cities. The UK average was 40.3, so both cities have much younger than average populations.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Car sharing has been promoted for years, not a great deal of takeup - not going to increase any time soon.
It would increase rapidly if drivers had to pay the true cost of storing their private property in a public space
Posted 4 years ago # -
@chdot: From the article you linked: It is understood one of the traffic “wands” marking the cycle lane has been removed which will allow Mr Cunningham to drop his wife at the kerb.
Thus illegally occupying the mandatory cycle lane? And at a point where, if there are other vehicles parked in that parking area (which there were the other day when I went past) any cyclist finding their path obstructed might well have difficulty diverting on to the main carriageway (even if they wanted to).
Note that there are no wands in the photo accompanying the article - they hadn't been put up when it was taken. They've now been replaced by cycle lane defenders which are much more widely spaced, especially when there is a series of dropped kerb drives as there is at that location. And the edge of the parking area has been clearly marked with a white line, which should go some way to encouraging drivists like that white van man to pass at a sensible distance.
Note as well that the City Cycling Club space is still in place on the other side of the road. Indeed, someone had left a CCC car in there the other day. Apparently that one isn't "crazy" or "downright dangerous" or "an accident waiting to happen" then?
I do feel that the whole thing was a bit of a storm in a teacup, fuelled by archetypal over-the-top local rag language.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@Frenchy: there's no northbound cycle lane protection from The Inch to Cameron Toll
Similar to the north end of Comiston Road approaching the Braidburn traffic lights - although that never did have a cycle lane put in it.
Is the Old Dalkeith Road bus lane still protected with bus lane cameras?
Best thing to do would be to make the bus lane full time IMO.
Posted 4 years ago # -
"They could provide free bus transport"
The idea that free bus travel would convert people who pay to drive and park in city centre/high street locations is somewhat laughable.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@Rob, it may not convert commuters but there's a good chance it would convert some people. Currently it costs over £8 to take a family into town at the weekend. If you park north of Queen Street it costs about £1 to drive the journey. Even if you prefer the bus then that's a large saving.
Regarding Webber's tweet, is it just be that finds it oddly sexist?
Posted 4 years ago # -
“It would increase rapidly if drivers had to pay the true cost of storing their private property in a public space”
That’s true!
Not sure if that’s entirely under the control of CEC.
Quite sure it doesn’t have the will/nerve.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Well, it seems that the Provisional Wing of the Motoring Lobby has commenced a guerrilla campaign to undermine the Comiston Road cycle lanes, starting with the northbound side:
Might sending these to #edinhelp get some enforcement action mobilised? Or somewhere else?
And while we're at it: anyone know why there are no DYLs where that last example is parked? I thought that gap in the DYLs had been filled but it looks like they've been removed again - but there's no obvious trace left of lines ever having been there. Perhaps I was mistaken.
Also contributing to my enjoyment of my ride this afternoon were these utterly pointless "cyclists dismount" signs ahead of a tarmac repair:
If I was feeling charitable I might assume that the contractor didn't have any more "keep right" signs (as had been deployed a few yards further on) on the truck and so went with the 'next best'. Or maybe they just didn't really GAF.
Also fun: someone has been mucking about with the barriers at the Hermitage mini roundabout again - it looked to me as if they'd cut the cable ties that had been holding them together in order to do so. I stopped and moved the obstructive one half a metre or so to one side so as to make the gap more readily cyclable, but it had been moved back again when I came back that way later. I wonder whether it's anything to do with the cafe within the "peds & bikes only" area which so often seems to manage to have a van parked outside? I imagine they wouldn't have been able to get their motor vehicle through when the barriers were in a configuration which only allowed access for bikes. But if they felt justified in partially dismantling the barriers to get their van through (?illegally?) the least they could have done would have been to put them back in such a way that they didn't unnecessarily impede people who are unquestionably allowed to go that way.
Posted 4 years ago # -
@ejstubbs
I don’t think that van belongs to the cafe. I think it’s someone with an autistic kid who insists on parking right outside the gate otherwise it would upset the kid’s routine.
Now, I can sympathise with the need for a routine, but surely it must be possible to change the routine once in a blue moon (with plenty of prior explanations to the child)?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Response to the Lanark Road consultation.
Parking, parking, parking. With a little bit of worries about parking for the golf course.
Cllr Arthur continues his objections to cycle lanes.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Solidarity to the officers who need to respond politely to all of the feedback from elected representatives.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“
The opinion, commissioned by the Get Edinburgh Moving campaign group, argued the proposals – funded under the Spaces for People programme – go beyond the scope of what can be done under the emergency powers to introduce traffic measures to make physical distancing easier for pedestrians and cyclists.
It said introducing the planned LTN in East Craigs was materially different from the emergency measures implemented elsewhere.
“
Posted 4 years ago # -
@chdot, I've had my two articles of the week. But that headline suggests they have missed the fact that the alternative option they are considering is making changes using an ETRO as part of the WEL.
Posted 4 years ago # -
East Craigs David Hunter is certainly not the Living Streets David Hunter
Glad to have finally established that, empirically
Posted 4 years ago # -
I'm intrigued as to what the "Get Edinburgh Moving" campaign are proposing to, well, you know...
Posted 4 years ago # -
@Morningsider: I think there is a Kubler-Ross model for campaigns such as this. Mr Hunter appears have moved from the “We weren’t consulted!” to the “Sustrans & Spokes are controlling the Council!” stage.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Cllr Arthur is now leaving the Transport Committee rather than vote, or even abstain, on the Spaces for People measures, citing concern about the legality. https://www.facebook.com/DrScott4Ward8/posts/3592394434116313
Posted 4 years ago # -
"I understand that these requests were blocked by the SNP Group in the Council. I have therefore decided not to put myself in a position of being asked to vote for something which I genuinely feel may leave the Council open to legal challenge, and shall be asking to be removed from the Transport and Environment Committee."
It's not at all clear to me why an Edinburgh councillor wouldn't vote against something they believe to be unlawful use of our money.
I guess he thinks that's someone else's job? Maybe one of his colleagues in the ruling Labour/SNP group?
Posted 4 years ago # -
Posted 4 years ago #
-
Where is Cockfosters Arthur?
It’s the end of the line darlin, the end of the line. (Line spoken by mole that emerges from hole dressed as London Underground driver And kenneth Williams ill advisedly goes for West Indian accent.)
Willo the wisp reference. Got to love Mavis Cruet, tho that episode has been No Platformed. (Thank you very much - thank you very much, appearing nightly at the Balerno Hippodrome)
Posted 4 years ago # -
Arthur builds a chrysalis and purchases a moth suit in order to become a moth himself.
For real.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Brian's been amusing his friends by chewing on some plastic flashbulbs
Posted 4 years ago # -
Huge number of deputations to Transport Committee today. Some positive, some neutral, some frankly barking.
Mr Hunter is currently conducting an investigation into how Sustrans are trying to tamper with our precious bodily fluids.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“
There are clear benefits to even the most controversial schemes such as the closure of Braid Road. They also, however, come with consequences for local residents and businesses. In my view, the Council has a duty to engage with the public and present evidence-based arguments which show the benefits outweigh the consequences. This is the only way to meet Edinburgh’s longer-term goal of increasing walking, cycling and public transport use. Community engagement, not just consultation, is key as it leads to better outcomes on infrastructure projects. It increases acceptance of decisions by the public, and provides a community commitment to outcomes. The Council’s failure to engage with residents and businesses is why 92% of 300+ people who responded to the Council’s “consultation” on the Lanark Road Spaces for People scheme oppose it.
“
“
is why 92% of 300+ people who responded to the Council’s “consultation” on the Lanark Road Spaces for People scheme oppose it.
“
That’s a big assumption.
As suggested upthread, objections are more about removal of parking and resistance to change generally.
The ‘open to legal challenge’ argument has two elements - whether CEC is doing things it isn’t supposed to do and whether the SG legislation is robust enough to see off challenges that relate to pandemic crisis measures and are TEMPORARY.
‘We’ might like some of these to become permanent and are (currently) clear indications of a change of direction by CEC (and perhaps by SG - less convinced about that...).
Unfortunately Cllr Arthur’s actions remind me of (former) Cllr Orr. The personal in politics can be problematic.
Posted 4 years ago # -
It is widely known that Herr Doktor Professor Councillor Arthur did not wish to be elected. Stood because wished to make political career in order to prevent Scottish independence, which is his main interest.
So why not just use the opportunity to do what's right and go out in a blaze of glory? Or join the Tories and have a punt at becoming an MP?
I understand nothing.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“Stood because wished to make political career in order to prevent Scottish independence, which is his main interest.
“So why not just use the opportunity to do what's right and go out in a blaze of glory? Or join the Tories and have a punt at becoming an MP?”
Perhaps he’s just out of time (in various senses)?
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
