CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh

Scott Arthur Latest

(1337 posts)
  • Started 1 year ago by chdot
  • Latest reply from ejstubbs
  • This topic is sticky

Tags:


  1. chdot
    Admin

    Transport convener Scott Arthur said the introduction of the ban on January 29 meant vehicles were no longer covering large parts of the pavements in some parts of the city, and the poor condition of pavements had been exposed to public view.

    He said: “Now that people can actually see the pavement on their street, quite often they're finding it has been utterly destroyed by cars having parked on it. So we've had a rise in complaints about footways because of this.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-pavement-parking-ban-exposes-poor-condition-of-citys-footpaths-4600209?

    Posted 1 week ago #
  2. Dave
    Member

    Pavement parking has more or less returned to form in Currie. There's a van stored fully on the pavement on the A70 by the village sign most nights. They've figured out that the wardens' don't come outside the bypass ;-)

    Posted 1 week ago #
  3. Frenchy
    Member

    They don't come inside they bypass at night, either.

    Posted 1 week ago #
  4. chdot
    Admin

    Mr Arthur admitted that retaining a cycle and walking path on either route was “probably the most challenging aspect”.

    However, he pledged: "If the tram does go down the Roseburn Path, as part of the consultation we have committed to having good-quality walking and cycling alongside the tram. It’s not that the walking and cycling route here has been lost, it’s just that we are going to put a tram alongside it. But that will come at a cost, of course.”

    https://web.archive.org/web/20240424035836/https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/roseburn-path-the-battle-over-whether-an-old-edinburgh-rail-line-should-become-a-tram-route-4602356

    Posted 1 week ago #
  5. ejstubbs
    Member

    The nice professor sent me an update e-mail the other day, which included a list of roads in his ward which are scheduled for resurfacing per the "Roads and Infrastructure Investment – Capital Delivery Priorities for 2024/25 report" (due to be considered by the Transport and Environment Cttee today, apparently).

    It came as no surprise to me to see Caiystane Crescent and Caiystane Terrace on the list (out of nine roads in his ward in total). Whoever they contracted to 'do' Caiystane Crescent last time out made a <rule 2> poor job of it: there was grit detaching from the surface and collecting in/blocking the gutters within just a few weeks, and wide linear cracks the depth of the new surface* forming along the seams in the pre-existing surface** within a month.

    The real cause of the lack of surprise, though, is that those two roads are the primary ones used by drivers rat-running between Comiston Road and Oxgangs Road, avoiding the right turn at the Fairmilehead Head traffic lights. If they put down a surface designed to handle normal residential traffic loads i.e. people going to and from their homes then it's not that surprising if regular, significantly greater quantities of through traffic end wearing the surface out quicker. Is it?

    I have several times pondered how the area could be made a LTN but I think having two access points on Comiston Road and three on Oxgangs Road (more if you count through traffic bouncing over the sleeping policemen on Oxgangs Bank and Oxgangs Brae to get to Oxgangs Road North) makes it a bit tricky. But then I am not a traffic planner and I know little of the cunning ideas that they can come up with. On reflection I suppose it's not actually that different to the "Braids Estate" (as Cllr Arthur likes to call it) in terms of entry & exit points - but we all know how that's looking likely to turn out...

    * Especially unfriendly to two-wheeled vehicles. I actually find them scarier on my motorbike than on my bicycle.

    ** Which didn't seem to have been planed or otherwise levelled before the new surface was plonked on top of it.

    Posted 1 week ago #
  6. chdot
    Admin

    Edinburgh transport convener Scott Arthur said he felt "quite ashamed" as he listened to the problems disabled people and others faced in coping with the revamped Leith Walk.

    https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/edinburgh-transport-chief-ashamed-at-problems-faced-by-disabled-negotiating-leith-walk-4605775

    Posted 1 week ago #
  7. chdot
    Admin

    I think I know what he probably means, and the 3 minute video will make it all clear.

    Bus Station update - Council Officers are currently preparing an option appraisal that will benchmark other central Edinburgh options against a new lease.

    https://x.com/cllrscottarthur/status/1783865432908177608

    Posted 6 days ago #
  8. chdot
    Admin

    Transport convener Scott Arthur said the firm was "open to renewing the lease," although it is understood that their proposed terms would likely not be acceptable to the council.

    https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/edinburgh-bus-station-owners-enter-29080207?

    Posted 3 days ago #
  9. neddie
    Member

    Critical infrastructure. Compulsory purchase it!

    Posted 3 days ago #
  10. Arellcat
    Moderator

    A bus station is the kind of thing you generally want to have in the middle of a city, and you want buildings on top of it because it's a bit of a waste of a large space otherwise. There aren't many suitable sites in the city centre, probably only either the car park to the south-east of Waverley station, or the former HMRC site at Haymarket Yards. Or they could demolish the Kings Stables Road multi-storey or maybe demolish Argyle House.

    Was there ever consideration of a new bus station underneath St James?

    Posted 3 days ago #
  11. chdot
    Admin

    “Was there ever consideration of a new bus station underneath St James?”

    Probably, but not by the ‘right’ people!

    Similarly, did ‘transport planners’ think it was a good idea to remove the bus exit onto St. A Sq?

    Posted 3 days ago #
  12. chdot
    Admin

    COAL PENSION PROPERTIES LIMITED Company number 00465783

    Company type

    Private company limited by guarantee without share capita

    https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/00465783

    Owned by 2 people.

    Posted 3 days ago #
  13. chdot
    Admin

    It was good to spend some time at the big bus garage today:

    1 I heard from @on_lothianbuses’ apprentices about how they have been working with
    @poweringfutures to save Lothian Buses money and carbon.

    2 also discussed the bus tracker upgrade with the MD, and she confirmed that 550 of the 700+ fleet has now been upgraded to the new system (and that CEC is working on testing).

    https://x.com/CllrScottArthur/status/1783837552773922893

    Plus 2 min vid.

    Posted 2 days ago #
  14. chdot
    Admin

    Really informative footfall stats. The bus station serves more than double the number of passengers of Haymarket Station. Imagine the furore if Haymarket were to be closed.

    https://x.com/PaulWhite_CPT/status/1785694815541227755

    Posted 1 day ago #
  15. chdot
    Admin

    Apparently

    It's not owned by two people. CPPL is a nominee company set up to manage the properties of the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme. The two people shown are the investment team management.

    https://x.com/awcook0558/status/1785955765741670411?

    Posted 1 day ago #
  16. chdot
    Admin

    Stewardship

    The Trustees of the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme believe that having engaged asset owners who are clear about their expectations will help companies produce sustainable value and that their long-term financial returns are connected to their strategic, environmental, social and governance performance.

    British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme (the “Scheme”) has been a long-term signatory to the UK Stewardship Code. The stewardship reports below set out how Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme Trustees Limited has ensured the Scheme has fulfilled its stewardship responsibilities through 2020 and 2021, and the outcomes of this activity.

    https://www.bcsss-pension.org.uk/about-your-scheme/responsible-investing/

    Posted 1 day ago #
  17. ejstubbs
    Member

    Really informative footfall stats.

    It's passenger numbers, not "footfall" which is a measure of people coming in to a shop or business, whether or not they actually buy anything. Subtle difference.

    I note, though, that the passenger numbers for the bus station are shown as "TBC". For a properly fair comparison one would need to know how that figure was arrived at, and how accurate is. Haymarket passenger numbers are fairly easy to get since every passenger has to pass through a ticket barrier. At the bus station you can just stroll on to a bus and buy a ticket from the driver (or get one one FoC if you have a National Entitlement Card) or show the driver a pre-purchased e-ticket. I imagine they could gather ticket sales/journey logs from the bus companies' ticket machines as well as those sold in the ticket office in the bus station, but it would still be a rather more cumbersome process than simply totting up the entries and exits through the ticket barriers at a railway station.

    CPPL is a nominee company set up to manage the properties of the British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme.

    If you notice that a building is named Hobart House, that very often means that it is a CPPL property. I'm pretty sure that 80 Hanover Street is one of them. Of course it would be a bit inconvenient to have multiple Hobart Houses in one town or city so they do use other names, or sometimes not bother with a name. ISTR noticing that CPPL also have a property on Lothian Road (though I can't recall exactly how I became aware of that).

    Posted 9 hours ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin