There have been some changes to the infamous Quality Bike Corridor, under the Spaces for People fund. Frankly, they're awful and do nothing to meaningfully change the status quo, let alone make it a route suitable for all ages and abilities. I've just sent this to my local councillors and to Lesley Macinnes:
Dear Southside & Newington councillors, and Transport and Environment Convener, Cllr Macinnes,I’m writing to express my anger and frustration at the latest flawed attempt to create a safe cycling route between the Meadows and King's Buildings (the route once known as the ‘Quality Bike Corridor’). I understand that the latest improvements have been funded by the Scottish Government ‘Spaces For People’ fund, designed primarily to allow people to avoid public transport and switch to active travel during the COVID-19 pandemic.
In England, the equivalent fund from the Department for Transport included this text in the letter to local authorities considering applying for funding:
All cycling schemes, permanent or temporary, will need to include segregation or point closures to through traffic: advisory cycle lanes, and those marked only with white paint, will not be funded.
I am not aware of any similar ‘red line’ in the Scottish government guidance, which is a great shame. Over the last few decades, councils across the UK, including here in Edinburgh, have wasted money on painting lines on the road, which are routinely ignored by car drivers who park (often legally) in them and which also encourage drivers to pass people cycling more closely than they otherwise would. Critically, they don't enable cycling for the vast majority who do not currently cycle for their everyday journeys. In other words, painted lanes are failed infrastructure.
Therefore, I was surprised to say the least when I saw that the council’s plans to ‘upgrade’ the route between the Meadows and King's Buildings, which has been a failure since the day it was completed, included more of the same: painted lanes. While I didn’t respond to the consultation personally, I did contribute to Spokes’ response, which included this text:
The entire corridor is generally too busy for advisory cycle lanes to be a safe solution.
It would be made much safer for cyclists and pedestrians by removing through traffic,which could be accomplished by installing a bus gate somewhere along the route. Access for deliveries would therefore be maintained, whilst removing through traffic (except for pedestrians, cyclists and buses).
In response, the council responded:
Causewayside has a lot of tenements and shops and removing all parking would be detrimental to residents and traders. It is considered that advisory lanes at some locations achieves Spaces for People objectives and still meets the needs of other road users/stakeholders. We have implemented segregation in all uphill sections and wherever feasible in other areas.
I find this response utterly appalling. Firstly, it’s completely inaccurate. By removing through traffic, parking could be retained, as the much reduced levels of traffic would negate the need for protected cycle lanes. Secondly, as a resident of a tenement on Causewayside, I can say that I want to be able to safely cycle on the street outside my flat and want to breathe clean air. Removing through-traffic would absolutely not be detrimental to residents like me (49.7% of residents in Edinburgh Central live in a household with no access to a car, so we’re hardly a small minority). Some residents, in the worst-case scenario, would have a minute or two added to their journeys; a small price to pay in a pandemic and climate emergency. Finally, it's worth mentioning that the Sustainable Transport Hierarchy in Scotland's National Transport Strategy puts cycling second to walking/wheeling, and private car last - the choice to prioritise the needs of other road users over the safety of people cycling goes against this.
Edinburgh University also highlighted that novice cyclists would likely be using the route due to the suspension of the regular bus service to King’s Buildings (emphasis mine)
Due to the impact of social distancing measures on the capacity of bus services and the implications of this for their fleet, Lothian Buses have advised the University they are unable to provide buses for the shuttle bus service that normally operates between the city centre and King’s Buildings. This service will therefore be suspended. In line with Scottish Government guidance we are communicating to our students and staff to walk, wheel or cycle wherever possible. We anticipate there will be more novice cyclists travelling to and from King’s Buildings who would greatly benefit from more protected cycleways.
They too identify the problems with advisory cycle lanes in their consultation response (again, emphasis mine):We are concerned that the proposals for a cycle lane in the southbound direction are almost entirely for an advisory cycle lane. The lane appears to go through existing sections of P&D parking bays. There appears to be no attempt to remove these parking bays or divert the cycle lane around them. We are concerned that the cycle lane will be consistently blocked by parked vehicles.
Again, this is the type of failed infrastructure that the Department of Transport in England would deem not worthy of funding. It’s beyond me why anyone at Edinburgh City Council could consider it appropriate anywhere, let alone on this route which:
- the council have explicitly been told is likely to have a number of novice cyclists on it
- has two parallel road (i.e. the A701 and A7) perfectly suited for through traffic
- is used by parents and children to get to Sciennes Primary SchoolAlready, there are numerous examples on social media of the measures being a failure in exactly the way the council were warned.
For example:
(sources: https://twitter.com/BromptonGeek/status/1330166178183045121?s=20, https://twitter.com/BromptonGeek/status/1328430819363475462?s=20, https://mobile.twitter.com/diarmidmogg/status/1330118008979775489, https://twitter.com/justacwab/status/1328735282561241090?s=20, https://twitter.com/justacwab/status/1327612196675792898?s=20)
Frankly, whoever at the council who made the decision to prioritise keeping the route open for through traffic and keeping parking over providing a safe route for cycling ought to be held accountable. As councillors, I understand that it’s your responsibility to hold the council to account.
Please advise me how you will hold the council accountable and do one of the only two things that would make this corridor safe to enable anyone to cycle it (not just existing hardened ‘cyclists’ like myself, but people of all ages and abilities). That means either:
a) remove parking and have uninterrupted physically protected lanes throughout or
b) retain parking but install modal filters to remove all vehicular traffic except for buses and access.
If you would like to see the problems on this route, I’d be happy to meet you (socially distanced, of course) for a walk or bike ride along it.
Finally, I want to make clear that I strongly support the principles of the Spaces for People programme; in fact, I see it as vital to the city. However, flawed schemes like this do not achieve its objectives and undermine it. I understand the council has been allocated more money for further schemes and it is imperative that this route is fixed urgently and that the same mistakes are not made elsewhere.
Yours sincerely,
posts
