CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 16years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
Are you able to do FOI requests for other council areas or do we find some folk in other cities to do the same?
You can do FOI requests for council areas you don't live in.
Sight Scotland wouldn't be FOI-able, I think, but I would hope that a polite email to Mark Ballard is fruitful.
Aye, Sight Scotland yet again manage to conflate two different types of bus stop and tar them all with the same brush.
"Shared-use bus boarders", which are "paused" in England only.
"Bus stop bypasses", which are recommended for new designs.
All of the proposed "floating bus stops" on Dundee St are of the "bus stop bypass" type.
Also telling that the article has to show an image of a bus-stop-boarder that no longer exists in Edinburgh. And ironic that Sight Scotland then go on to claim:
[floating bus stops] lack clear kerbs or guidance to tell where the pavement ends and the cycle lane beginswhen it was Living Streets Edinburgh themselves that insisted on at-grade separation of cycle lane and pavement on Leith Walk, contrary to all guidance and recommendations.
Explainer from Blackford Safe routes:
Archived EEN version, to save you from adding to the manufactured controversy
UK Government recommendations:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/floating-bus-stops-provision-and-design/floating-bus-stops-provision-and-design
From Living Streets Report - an attempted complete (slash completely unnecessary :) typology of bus stop layouts... Ordering is my own, as are some tweaks to names. Click images to embiggen.
Type 1: Vertically projecting platform (kerb height raises) - e.g. Loanhead Rd
Type 2: Horizontally projecting boarder
Type 3: Bus Layby, hope-and-pray lane - e.g. Lanark Rd
Type 4: Carriageway stop, dissappearing lane - e.g. The Mound
Type 5: Kerbside cycle track - none in Edinburgh?
Type 6: Bus stop boarder - no buffer, raised table) - none in Edinburgh?
Type 7: Bus stop boarder with buffer - e.g. George IV c. Sept 2020, or more currently CCWEL at West Coates - though that also features a zebra crossing and tactile paving unlike this illustration.
Type 8: Cycle track at bus boarder - none in Edinburgh?
Type 9: Bus stop bypass, short island, un-directional cycleway - e.g. plans for Dundee St & Fountainbridge
Type 10: Bus stop bypass, long island, bi-directional cycleway - e.g. Leith Street from Greenside row to London Rd
Types 5-10 are all 'floating bus stops'.
Dundee St to Fountainbridge consists exclusively of Type 9 Bus Stop Bypasses.
I think there might be a "Type 7: Bus stop boarder with buffer" on West Coates (A8) at Wester Coates Rd, and possibly a couple on the northern end of Leith Walk
(Aside - I know type 2 and type 3 are also in Edinburgh.. just trying to remember examples)
Edit - type 3 on Lanark Rd (link added above)
@neddie yes - have updated!
@neddie - you beat me to it!
I suppose it is useful for council officers that most of the objections to the scheme are based on misinformation and misunderstandings. They can easily point out the lanes are kerb segragated, that there is tactile paving where required, and that they don't run through bus stops.
Also, look at the other photo in the article. The Sight Scotland rep standing on a pavement smashed by vehicles cutting the corner, incorrectly positioned tactile slabs, and most strinking to me - acres of carriageway space that they have to cross to get anywhere. Make it make sense!
I thought that!
My other thinking regarding zebra and parallel crossings is for how much shorter a period of time it takes to cross a 1.5m unidirectional cycleway for a person with visual impairment (or anyone else for that matter) - compared to time to cross a road. The number of things that have to stack up for there to actually be a user conflict here are staggering.
I suppose it is useful for council officers that most of the objections to the scheme are based on misinformation and misunderstandings. They can easily point out the lanes are kerb segragated, that there is tactile paving where required, and that they don't run through bus stops.
Aye, it's not the officers I'm worried about - it's the reactionary, badly-informed, and noo-very-bright TRO subcommittee that's the issue
@Morningsider: I think it is remarkable how they managed to squeeze so many references to "fast-moving cycle lanes" into the article. I've seen, and indeed ridden in, a goodly number of cycle lanes in my time and not one of them was going anywhere - at least, not at the time I was using it. For all I know, they could have been ripping themselves up from the foundations of the highway by some means and tearing around sticking their fingers up at speed cameras, racing between cashpoints with their pals and similar antisocial behaviour. But I rather doubt it.
To put it another way: it's deliberately emotive twaddle.
The only "floating bus-stop" I know that actually causes problems is the one outside M&S in Morningside which is an island entirely surrounded by road. When the community council put forward plans to pedestrianise that area the same people who complain about floating bus stops said they couldn't support it as, yes, it'd take away the car parking spaces in front of the shops. With many "campaigners" it's not about supporting disabilities, it's just a convenient mechanism for them to object to anything that gets in the way of driving.
@ejstubbs - yeah, that did stand out. Alongside:
Dangerous and life threatening
Danger
Fear and confusion
Stripping away their independence
Roll them out unchecked
Daily fear
Stressful and hazardous
Putting lives at risk
Danger zones and an accident waiting to happen
Unjustifiable
Clear risks
Real danger
Risky
Strips away independence
Effectively excludes visually impaired people from society
You would think it was a strip of landmines rather than a cycle lane.
And Cllr Whyte chimes in. “Life threatening”.
Archived version of the EEN article above:
the council’s own “travel hierarchy” says pedestrian needs should come before those of cyclists
So close to getting it...
Can't wait for Whyte to call for cars to be banned, and for everything to be pedestrianised
My teenage son rides independently and has to cross Dundee St several times a week. At the moment he is instructed to use the pavement because entering the carriageway at the bus stop is unsafe. I'd say it's even unsafe for experienced cyclists, as you can't see oncoming traffic past the bus.
So this is what Whyte is campaigning for - for people to ride on the pavements. How does that help visually impaired people?
Just come across this -
“
City Scope is a modern civic tech platform designed to make local planning applications understandable, accessible, and transparent. Built in Edinburgh, City Scope combines live planning data, AI-generated summaries, and intuitive design to help citizens, professionals, and communities stay informed about how their neighbourhoods are changing.
“
https://www.city-scope.co.uk/about
It seems to be mostly about planning applications but there’s also this -
https://www.city-scope.co.uk/active-travel
Inc -
“
Fountainbridge - Dundee Street
UPDATED
START Jan 2028
END Mar 2028
“
New post about City Scope site -
You must log in to post.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts