CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

TRAFFIC is to be banned from the north side of Princes Street

(340 posts)

No tags yet.


1…789…12

  1. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    I don't think we're going to see any progress until everyone accepts openly that encouraging cycling and restricting driving in one area must be balanced by the opposite in another.

    For example, the QBC should have been shorter, perhaps two or three blocks long and painted entirely as a bike lane. Within that there should have been no parking at all. Although motor vehicles would still be able to use it, there should have been priority at all times for cyclists.

    The streets parallel to the east and west should then have no bike lanes and cyclists encouraged to use the QBC.

    As a first principle I would suggest thinking of adaptations to the streets that spread some of the fear currently felt by cyclists onto drivers. How would you do that? I don't know but I think it's a rich vein to mine.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  2. kaputnik
    Moderator

    At present there are a few ASLs

    which we have already established in previous threads are often more of a hazard than a help to cyclists.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  3. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "As a first principle I would suggest thinking of adaptations to the streets that spread some of the fear currently felt by cyclists onto drivers. How would you do that? I don't know but I think it's a rich vein to mine."

    Replacing airbags with spikes. Would focus the mind.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  4. steveo
    Member

    even Clarkson would agree with that.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  5. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    WC: "Replacing airbags with spikes"

    That's a bit extreme perhaps. Maybe this:

    More ideas from the ETA.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  6. steveo
    Member

    didn't someone on here mention these lasted a few days I'm their area before they were broken...

    Posted 11 years ago #

  7. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    steveo, yes, it was on here. that's how I heard about them.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  8. Dave
    Member

    I don't think we're going to see any progress until everyone accepts openly that encouraging cycling and restricting driving in one area must be balanced by the opposite in another.

    I applied my PrejudiceExchanger to this, and the results were not promising:

    "I don't think we're going to see any progress until everyone accepts openly that encouraging ethnic minorities and restricting white supremacists in one area must be balanced by the opposite in another."

    Not that exchanging out-groups is a fair or balanced activity, of course. Other conflicting groups are available (I encourage people to experiment).

    Posted 11 years ago #

  9. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    Sorry Dave, you've completely lost me. Separating vehicles by type isn't comparable to separating people. Do you want to cycle on railway lines?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  10. chdot
    Admin

    "Do you want to cycle on railway lines?"

    Sometimes -

    http://rrbike.freeservers.com/main.htm

    Posted 11 years ago #

  11. DaveC
    Member

    On my work PC F Secure removed a virus from that site chdot.

    Dave C

    Posted 11 years ago #

  12. LaidBack
    Member

    I can understand the 'attraction' of having one route where bikes and cars don't compete. In the case of the infamous Argyle Place slip road this would have meant inconveniencing some drivers slightly - including some on this forum.
    The reaction of course would be initially "why can't I drive where I normally drive?"
    The answer would be "because we have actively decided to advantage weaker road users and don't think that advertising / social media / bike training can do this alone."

    All changes cause controversy but in the end we'd see the benefit.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  13. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    LaidBack: "All changes cause controversy but in the end we'd see the benefit."

    If the change was a trade-off between two routes; say banning bikes from Princes Street in return for segregated on-street bike lanes on George Street I would be okay with that. But I think there is a knee-jerk response to any move to ban bikes from anywhere.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  14. LaidBack
    Member

    I wasn't suggesting that bikes should be banned (not possible anyway surely?) - was really meaning that there would be a route to appeal to (welcome) newer cyclists.

    Cyclists, like pedestrians, shouldn't be forced to go on long diversions. Some though may cycle an extra block to avoid a junction as they gain confidence...

    Posted 11 years ago #

  15. Dave
    Member

    "Separating vehicles by type isn't comparable to separating people."

    Separating vehicles by type wouldn't involve strange compromises to pride (or prejudice) like penalising a minority in exchange for concessions somewhere else. That very concept is an appeal to an abusive mainstream, not a rational argument.

    What separates cyclists and the mainstream is very much like (probably, in terms of science, virtually inseparable from) the origins of separation of other types (cultural/social/religious/ethnic/etc).

    Posted 11 years ago #

  16. Cyclingmollie
    Member

    In practical terms I think this separation shows up most obviously (to cyclists perhaps) when the media talk about a cyclist being in collision with a car rather than a driver. It's a sort of category mistake. Is it important to point this out? Yes, very. At least if I remember my anti-discrimination training correctly. But I think we as cyclists need, as I say, to try to move on from "we want to cycle everywhere and also ban others from some of those places". In Belgium I believe it is considered bad behaviour to cycle on the road when there is a cycle path. I think that concessions, whether in law or in behaviours might be a better way forward.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  17. chdot
    Admin

    "

    The council chose late yesterday to postpone similar upgrades to the west and eastbound parts of George Street from St Andrew Square to Hanover Street. Improvements to rough sections of road around St Andrew Square have also been put off.

    "

    http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-evening-news/transport/night-time-roadworks-for-new-town-1-2857762

    Posted 11 years ago #

  18. DaveC
    Member

    I can see this segregated path for cycles on George Street meaning cyclists having to yield to motor traffic leaving George Street, as it turns north towards Queen street and the New Town. It'll be stop, start... the whole way along. I know traffic has to yield to vehs on the roundabouts currently. But if we believe that traffic heading east, to Hanover Street (north) for instance, will be watching cyclists ahead, riding in the same direction, and yielding to them as they turn left/north, I think we're being a little naive. Instead I see vehs just driving up to the left turn and taking the turn without even noticing cyclists. In fact I can see the Council putting GIVE WAY signs to cycles on the side roads (heading north).

    At least in the current situation when riding 'in traffic' drivers see the cyclists as we are on the same carrageway, and providing we make it clear we're going straight on, they don't cut us up.

    Sorry to drag this back to a negative direction but I don't see this 'throught' route in the centre being as fast as the current setup.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  19. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "Sorry to drag this back to a negative direction but I don't see this 'throught' route in the centre being as fast as the current setup."

    So why not respond to the consultation saying that it would be good if it wasn't stop-start?

    "I think we're being a little naive"

    I think we're being a little defeatist!

    Posted 11 years ago #

  20. cb
    Member

    From that Evening News article - I don't understand why they've only postponed some of the resurfacing. Why not all? Is the east end of the street in better nick at the moment?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  21. Dave
    Member

    @DaveC, you will be able to ride on the road if you like (at peak time, you'll be much faster than motorised traffic too).

    I think it's important to underline that these sort of schemes are the difference between people cycling and not cycling, whereas the agenda on the cycling side has often been set by a self-selecting group (patently including all present) who are willing to grapple with taxi, bus, goods and private motor vehilces being driven at them.

    So yeah, it's almost inevitable that it won't be as fast as being on the road, but the demographic is people who aren't going to ride otherwise, different story...

    Posted 11 years ago #

  22. PS
    Member

    @cb Some of the east end of Geo St was resurfaced towards the end of last year. That may be what the reference is to?

    @DaveC/WC Now's the time to shout about prioritising the segregated cycle lane. Even now Fred and Castle Streets are low priority routes for cars, so I could see those two junctions bing easy wins. Hanover likely to be trickier, but this is all about the Council sending a pro-cycling message.

    Visibility of cyclists at junctions will be important as they'll be in the other side of the parked cars from the motor traffic. Another reason to give cyclist and peds priority?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  23. PS
    Member

    I've never really felt Geo St is too stop-starty in its current form, the blocks are nice and long and the traffic flow tends to be east-west.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  24. chdot
    Admin

    Today -


    Resurfacing George Street

    Don't know if the raised bit (top of photo) is finished or not started.

    Looks better without cars...

    (Yes that's snow.)

    Posted 11 years ago #

  25. Calum
    Member

    Cycle tracks in the UK do tend to give way to side roads, but that has more basis in a determination to suppress cycling than in regulations or necessity. The cycle track on George Street could and should have priority over side roads - there are existing examples in London and Glasgow that do this already.

    Left turn conflicts can be mitigated in several ways:
    >Dedicated cycle traffic light phases
    >Setting the cycle track back from the carriageway
    >Putting the cycle track on a hump across the junction
    >Tight corner radii

    There is no good reason why riding on the cycle track should be slower than on the road. The only reason it might be slower is if incompetent people are allowed to design it - and there's admittedly a good chance of that.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  26. Morningsider
    Member

    The formal plans for Princes/George Street are now public. The first big change is that it will be a 12 month trial with only temporary changes made to infrastructure. A decision will then be made on permenant changes.

    No real change to the proposals for cycling - a two way cycle lane on George St and westbound cycling in amongst the buses on Princes Street.

    Lots of cyclists responded to the consultation (approximately a quarter of all respondents) and were massively in favour of a Princes St two way cycle lane. Hints in the document that this might be considered after the 12 month trial. Details:

    http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/meetings/id/39430/item_7_3-bulding_a_vision_for_the_city_centre-consultation_outcome

    Posted 10 years ago #

  27. DaveC
    Member

    "Hints in the document that this might be considered after the 12 month trial."

    So no 2 way cycle stretch, and at the end of the trial, they'll find no evidence that one would be beneficial? Why not use this method for all future new road building projects?

    Official "In the past 12 months we found that a theoretical motorway from Perth to Fort William showed that no traffic used this new 'imaginary' stretcth of motoroway, so we have decided to shelve plans for building it" If only!

    Posted 10 years ago #

  28. PS
    Member

    Lots of cyclists responded to the consultation (approximately a quarter of all respondents) and were massively in favour of a Princes St two way cycle lane. Hints in the document that this might be considered after the 12 month trial

    So, will it be considered more strongly if lots of people break the rules by cycling east on Princes Street, thereby demonstrating the need for two-way cycling provision? Or will such blatant ignoring of the rules lead to a loss of goodwill towards cycling? A dilemma.

    Posted 10 years ago #

  29. SRD
    Moderator

    so they're basically doing exactly what they said they wanted to do, but only 'temporarily'?

    Posted 10 years ago #

  30. Dave
    Member

    Yes, I think clarity is needed on what conditions during the trial period would encourage cycle provision on Princes St afterwards.

    Should I divert my commute to ride eastbound along Princes St?

    Posted 10 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

1…789…12

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin