As assessment of the junction here, presumably by council travel officers.
TL; DR - there are too many cars, too few pedestrians and too little money to make any safety improvements.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Liberton Road/Kirk Brae
(18 posts)-
Posted 4 years ago #
-
“
This is an example of how over-saturated this junction is (in terms of peak traffic flows) and testament as to why an all-stop pedestrian stage (necessitating roughly 25 seconds of loss time to vehicles) would not work.
“
But of course.
In CEC TransportLand ”traffic flow” is inevitable.
Posted 4 years ago # -
This isn't the recently fatal junction, rather the one at the bottom of Kirk Brae.
Robert
Posted 4 years ago # -
Actually, the page has gone, so perhaps this error had been noticed.
Robert
Posted 4 years ago # -
Seeing as Scott Arthur attended the James Harrison vigil (and allegedly was keen to be seen at it), you'd think he could at least identify the correct junction.
That said, by disseminating the report publicly he has done a service by highlighted the continued utter paucity of active travel thinking in the council.
I particularly enjoyed these gems:
"Cycle early starts were introduced around 18 – 24 months ago. Their installation necessitated an overall reduction in vehicle green time of around 12 seconds. This generated larger queues in the AM peak and led to several complaints. This is an example of how over-saturated this junction is (in terms of peak traffic flows) and testament as to why an all-stop pedestrian stage (necessitating roughly 25 seconds of loss time to vehicles) would not work."
"The junction is one of the top 20 locations identified by feedback submitted via Commonplace as a barrier to walking. The SfP team still in the process of analysing the issues raised at each of these locations and considering whether there is a feasible and affordable intervention can be undertaken. It is hoped to have this shortlisting work completed and to produce a list of publicly generated schemes within two weeks There is, however, no current plan to take a temporary pedestrian enhancement forward at this junction as part of the SfP programme."
Still banging on about staggered pedestrian crossings too. The place needs a clear out.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“Actually, the page has gone“
Just as I was posting a comment too!!
Posted 4 years ago # -
Actually, the page has gone, so perhaps this error had been noticed.
I emailed Cllr Arthur - he confirmed this. Apparently the report was sent to councillors in response to the death, hence the confusion.
Posted 4 years ago # -
I think it's back minus the fatality bit.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Here's the crucial phrase isn't it, in reports like this one...
"Due to this junction being on a strategic route and after extensive modelling, there is no scope to install an “all stop” pedestrian stage. ""No scope" is nonsense. This is a political decision, not a logical one. It's not fact. It's politics. It's not the job of a council officer to make that decision - it's the job of politicians to tell council officers what the scope is. There is always scope - unless there are political limits set - or assumed.
It may be correct to say "there is no scope... without reducing the capacity of this road to carry traffic by X%, which has been deemed to be unacceptable by Y decision of the politicians." That would be completely fair.
I've seen this so often - officers across the land, with personal opinions, hiding behind modelling as if it's a predictor of truth, as if it's a neutral tool which makes it possible to say what is and is not possible. And so often nobody questions it, because everyone's bemused by the idea of the traffic model. The traffic modellers use lots of long words to hide away the fact that all the model tells us is what we know already (but with added detail).
This irritates me so much.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“This irritates me so much”
Yep, agree with the rest too.
There have been Cllrs (in Ed) willing to tell officials what they want and to get on with it.
In Lothian Region days the top two officials were eased into retirement when it was discovered they were still working on cancelled road schemes - ‘the plans will be needed when the current administration is replaced’.
What I fail to understand is why roadist and ‘traffic flow’ attitudes are still so prevalent.
Where are all the officials keen to design ‘mini-Hollands’ and engineer speed reduction that don't need enforcing and holistic transport systems‘ that reduce vehicle use - and consequent maintenance/rants about potholes?
Why does CEC ‘rely’ so heavily on consultants and Sustrans secondees?
Also what does CEC’s Director of Place DO?
Etc.
There would be no need for a “cycle lobby” if Cllrs and officials were bolder about promoting ideas of ‘a nicer Edinburgh’.
‘Climate Crisis’ ought to have been enough of an incentive. The Pandemic (with free money for trying stuff) should just have made it happen.
It seems not that many people expect/want “business as usual” to be the “new normal”
Telling people to go back to their offices to keep sandwich shops in business is not going to work.
Business will never be ‘as usual’. Many people l, who have had the chance, like working from home - if they have sufficient space.
It seems likely that a considerable number of people will be unemployed, many by Christmas and therefore without the income to buy all the stuff they once did - from the surviving shops or online.
It’s disappointing that traffic levels are ‘returning to normal’ - it shouldn’t be expected/encouraged/allowed/whatever.
Politics shouldn’t be just about giving people what they want or giving in to the most organised vested interests. (The backlash against Boris’ unannounced obesity plans is comical/sinister.)
People who say that the ‘cycle lobby’ is ‘all powerful’ are either delusional or lying.
Or both.
Posted 4 years ago # -
Let's play "Fantasy Low Traffic Neighbourhood" here - one obvious way to fit a pedestrian phase into the cycle would be to close one of the roads to through traffic using a bus gate.
But which would you close?
Posted 4 years ago # -
‘Where are all the officials keen to design ‘mini-Hollands’ and engineer speed reduction that don't need enforcing and holistic transport systems‘ that reduce vehicle use - and consequent maintenance/rants about potholes?’
London & Manchester?
Posted 4 years ago # -
“London & Manchester?“
No doubt.
I think I meant ‘why doesn’t CEC (seem to) have staff that are keen to look at different ways of doing things’?
Obviously there are people doing the pop-up stuff - but it’s been a long time coming.
At TfL I gather there are ‘normal’ transport people keen to get involved in Active Travel/new segregation, leading to some unnecessary overlap/conflict with the people trying to get the same sort of things progressed in previous/normal times!
Posted 4 years ago # -
why doesn’t CEC (seem to) have staff that are keen to look at different ways of doing things’?
Could it simple economics? AECOM can afford to pay more and such people are more flexible in their work and can justify being paid more?
Posted 4 years ago # -
I can confirm that this is how it works in the Edinburgh finance houses. There comes a point where unless you wish to become senior management it makes no sense to remain an employee if you're any good.
Widows and RBS and the rest wind up hiring each other's staff as contractors.
The recent IR35 reforms will calm that down a bit but not totally.
Posted 4 years ago # -
“There comes a point where unless you wish to become senior management it makes no sense to remain an employee if you're any good.“
I’m sure that’s an element that affects ‘public services’ generally with austerity/pay freezes and (presumably) less pay/reward flexibility.
I know there are dedicated CEC people who are still there because they believe in what they are doing and not because no one else would employ them.
There are others who have left to go to consultants, Sustrans etc - no doubt some for money, but perhaps also to feel ‘valued’ differently.
Part of the problem is years of ‘freezes on recruitment’, but surely there comes a point when politicians/management realise it would be much more cost effective to have a dedicated (in all senses) in house section with a line management that actually WANTS to get things done.
Maybe 10-15 years ago it was thought there wasn’t enough work to employ people for cycling/Active Travel, but that’s clearly no longer the case.
I am not close to CEC the way I once was, but I get the impression that there are (again) politicians who actually want to make progress, but don’t have the right officer support.
Obviously the whole Roseburn saga has been hugely damaging to staff availability to do useful things AND at a considerable cost to the city (not just financial).
Who’d want to work for an organisation that had to WASTE so much time on idiots??
Posted 4 years ago # -
By Rosie -
“also add stress on cycle officers for dealing with a recalcitrant and often extremely aggressive opposition.”
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=15760&page=165#post-334713
Posted 4 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
