Thank you Morningsider for putting that well - given the good will at council (in terms of policy and funding) and the new councilors/administration it seems much more productive to use positive reinforcement to influence plans, not just whinge about what's been done already. That doesn't mean not being critical, but being engaged constructively.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Thoughts on the Quality Bike Corridor
(168 posts)-
Posted 11 years ago #
-
@Morningsider - I'd also opt for the mandatory lanes, it's only a small step further than the parking restrictions, but more noticeable to drivers. I suppose the hierarchy is:
- No parking during the hours of operation
- No loading during the hours of operation
- No unauthorised use during the hours of operation
Unlike other cycle lanes in the city, at least we've got 1 and 2, if not 3. If you want 3, you need to move across one street to the bus lanes of Minto Street, which is a perfectly sensible suggestion already made, but fails the "direct route" test we cyclists so like...
Robert
Posted 11 years ago # -
But no loading etc signs are ignored constantly and regularly every day. 'oh it doesn't apply to me' 'i'm just popping in/waiting' 'it isn't stopping if i've got flashers on. etc etc. In fact, these 'quick' stoppers are almost more dangerous, because so unpredictable. and, in half the cases, they don't even realise it is supposed to be no-stopping.
I was in a queue at the ATM by Polwarth roundabout last night, so read the signage on santangeli's about how the 'no stopping' blazons between the atm and the bins were removed by council to allow for loading. But, every single day people stop illegally on the double yellows across the road, and all around the circle.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@Morningsider So how could it be improved?
Well they could have taken note of all the people who told them at the consultation that parking was a major issue. They could have applied a 20 mph limit to the whole length of the QBC, again this was brought up on the consultation. They could have tried using separation and prioritising cycle traffic at junctions.
They could try applying the principles of Sustainable Safety. There is a lot of talk about Active Travel, but we really need Action.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Good points. As others have said, restriction on use of the new facility of a car park and enforcement of (all*) the rules is the next sensible step.
*by "all" I of course mean prosecuting illegal cycles/cyclists as well as illegal motor vehicle users. Of course that means Police doing that rather than some other task, but as we all know a proportion of Police resource decisions are governed by pester power!
Posted 11 years ago # -
But what are they actually likely to do at present/in relation to the existing facilities that we can ask for/pester them for/demand with a reasonable chance of success? You can't get the moon on a stick until you have at least a moon or a stick to put it on.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@Morningsider
"What should the next major bike project look like? Constructive criticism is probably more useful than sniping - the council has plans for many more cycle lanes, lets make sure these improve on the QBC."
@Crowriver
"Whether it is the right infrastructure to invest in is a valid question but is a different issue. Like it or not there's going to be no fast revolution in the way the city's planners think. We are looking instead at incremental change."
@SRD
"it seems much more productive to use positive reinforcement to influence plans, not just whinge about what's been done already. That doesn't mean not being critical, but being engaged constructively"
I think I agree - better that 'cyclists' are seen to be 'nice' and not just 'whingers'.
BUT if this was a 'less than adequate' scheme for 'motorists' or one that inconvenienced them a bit there would be an outcry!
If the ENews got on board things would be changed - or scrapped - at whatever costs, without even being given the chance to work!
Remember the Central Edinburgh Traffic Management Scheme?
At the moment it's not possible to give a 'fair view' - not least because of the gas works.
Clearing (Edit OOPS I meant Clearly!!) parking is an issue (rules and times) and enforcement.
Assuming these were 'perfect' is the rest 'good enough', 'as good as can be expected in Edinburgh' or 'really needs some tweaking'? (Not sure if doubling the width of the lanes would count as "tweaking"!)
"We are looking instead at incremental change"
INDEED, I agree. Can't decide if this is unambitious fatalism or pragmatic realism - think "incremental change" could be done better though!
Posted 11 years ago # -
@wingpig But what are they actually likely to do at present
Get the enforcers round? I've contacted the Parking folks last week and this, and they said they'd get NSL to monitor the situation and take action against offending vehicles.
I'm not sure who NSL are, but I presume the action is actually taken against the offending drivers...
There's definitely the argument that the City should be getting its money's worth, so that would be the angle pursued with the councillors.
And I'd also be inclined to contact the relevant professional bodies if one of their members was persistently bringing the profession into disrepute by ignoring both their legal, and their health and safety, responsibilities.
Perhaps even the HSE might be interested in unsafe practices endorsed by employers, even for those employers that aren't in a profession with published professional standards.
Robert
<feeling militant today>Posted 11 years ago # -
"There's definitely the argument that the City should be getting its money's worth, so that would be the angle pursued with the councillors."
Whole of QBC is conveniently in Southside/Newington Ward
http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/councillors/specificWard/4/southsidenewington
Two of those were at Bike Breakfast - one (or both?) went on Bike Breakfast Ride (which probably should have gone along QBC!)
Map - http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/1386/southsidenewington-ward_15
Some councillors only like dealing with people who live in their ward - but this is a city wide issue too.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Politics is the art of the possible" (Bismarck).
Motorists can shout and whinge and get politicians to listen because they are the majority. When cyclists do the same, with a few exceptions we can largely be dismissed as an unrepresentative fringe group (as Keith Brown has done for instance).
We can complain about the QBC and other routes not being fit for purpose but the response from politicians (not officials) is likely to be exasperation, rather than a u-turn. Unless and until cyclists become a significantly larger group, we can't really expect the political system to take us much more seriously than it does at the moment.
I'm not saying that's right, or just, or fair. It's not. We can and should argue for change, better infrastructure and a fairer deal for cycling. The fact is though, unfortunately we are not living in Copenhagen, Gröningen, Münster or Portland. We don't have a mass cycling culture and haven't had for 60 odd years. Our city is dominated by motoring and car culture despite the Council's efforts over the years to reduce car use and encourage other transport modes.
That is the reality. I think as cyclists we need to be quite focussed in the messages we send to politicians, if we want to get anything done. Never mind asking for the moon on a stick, even a tiny sliver of Dutch Gouda on the head of a pin is going to be a lot of hard work.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Where was it people painted their own cycle lane?
1000 metres of white road paint costs £100 on ebay.
Just sayin'!...I don't know how much of the QBC's gone in yet. If you want to get further change, getting masses of people to write/protest is probably still the way. Clearly the university/students are a very good group to get mobilised on this issue. Maybe next September it might be worth:
a) Figuring out how to publicise the 'QBC' to the new students.
b) How to get them to start campaigning for improvements?Going off topic now...
Other things to do:
1. If the police are genuinely refusing to enforce the new 20mph speed limit, then is there a place for citizens to step in, first maybe monitoring speeds, then stopping cars (e.g. 50% over the limit) and handing drivers leaflets informing them of the speed restrictions?2. Get plain-clothed police to start patrolling the city on bikes.
3. The government's feeble response, after years of campaigning, even after PoP would make me think peaceful direct action might be needed. But I worry any such protest might risk alienating car drivers further (although I'm not sure that's possible). Linking the protest with the rise in cycling injuries/deaths might avoid that but this will risk adding to the fear people have around cycling...
But a simple protest, maybe at a particularly dangerous junction/street? Mirroring the "Kindermoord" protests?I definitely prefer the positive protests to be honest: like POP and #bike20, but I just feel frustrated by how easily they are ignored...
...still the 5% of the transport budget and the QBC are examples of real progress! Any progress can never be at the cost of a single parking space or inch of road though!
Posted 11 years ago # -
"because they are the majority"
But they are not.
There may be more people driving in cars than cycling, but there are more people walking and, perhaps, more people who would like to cycle.
There are significant numbers of people who can't/don't drive for age, infirmity, economic or other reasons.
'Government policies' are to get more people active - including cycling. CEC policies want 15% by 2020.
"Unless and until cyclists become a significantly larger group, we can't really expect the political system to take us more seriously than it does at the moment."
That has a certain logic BUT this isn't about "cyclists" this is about people - getting about, being inconvenienced, and less healthy because of the (expected) dominance of car based transport.
I'm sure Keith Brown sees 'cyclists' as a 'lobby group' to be ranked below most others. Whether this is the fault of 'cyclists' or KB is an open question!
The SNP Government (says it) wants a fairer, healthier, etc. Scotland - time to prove it.
Labour/SNP Edinburgh wants "A Council where co-operation, fairness, accountability and responsibility really matter." (Coalition agreement)
It's not about the minority 'us' getting what 'we' want (though sometimes it seems like that).
It's about arguing for (and getting) policies, conditions, attitudes, actions that make life more pleasant for more people and counter the assumptions and complacencies of the last 60 years or so. So easy then!
Posted 11 years ago # -
It should run parallel with the pavement, be mandatory, go behind parking and buss stops, have a curb and be wide enough for two bikes to ride side by side.
We are blessed with ginormous avenues in this city and we use them so badly, they are a warground, not a conduit.
People here fear change. People drive because the system is set up to make that the best choice, its easy to see from the other cities that it takes just a small change in the environment to change what the best choice is.
say our choice factors are comfort, cost and safety. It should go without saying these are all subjective values as perceived by the individual making the choice.
Cars are a bit more comfortable than bikes, a lot more expensive and at the moment a lot safer as well. Easy choice.
If riding a bike could be as safe if not safer than riding a car suddenly the equation changes and boom! Mass cycling culture. Sure this is oversimplifying things but hey its only the internet.
The primary safety concern when cycling is interaction with cars, without which cycling is extremely safe, even those stupid face first upright thingys ;)
There is really no reason why an international city cant do this, who knows we might even end up with a pedestrian culture as well!
Posted 11 years ago # -
Edinburgh already has a pedestrian culture. A huge number of people walk in the city as it is relatively compact. Of course, things can improve...
Cycling is quite visible in Edinburgh, but we're not even near places like Cambridge or even Hull as regards a cycling culture in the city (IMHO).
Drivers are the majority: even amongst cyclists! We definitely have a car culture in the city. Anything that goes against that is in trouble with the (minority of?) drivers who want the car culture (billed as "convenience") at the expense of pedestrians/cyclists.
Never mind what the government or council say they want in some distant future (like 2020), what have they actually done?
Council: increased cycle funding to 5% of transport and investing in infrastructure, etc. GOOD. Result. Support them in this.
Government: planned to CUT funding for cycling, only averted due to huge pressure, a demo outside St Andrews House, etc. Has now restored funding, but it appears somewhat grudgingly, and with a "not a penny more" attitude. Notably no announcements for cycling funding in any of the wads of cash they found down the back of the sofa recently or were handed by Westminster.
Another, bigger demo is held: POP. So Alex Salmond mentions "pushing at an open door", Keith Brown claims he is giving "a lot of money" for cycling, but when asked for more, just hot air is produced.
Ergo: The Scottish government has no intention of giving any more money to cycling, regardless of what it says it wants. What it wanted to do was cut the money for cycling, remember?
Now where have we seen this approach from the Scottish government before? Edinburgh trams ring any bells?
Posted 11 years ago # -
"But making drivers less likely to get killed or seriously injured is making life more dangerous for everyone around them"
http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=7360#post-76336
Posted 11 years ago # -
"Edinburgh already has a pedestrian culture. A huge number of people walk in the city as it is relatively compact."
Yes and even less of a priority than 'cycling'.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Yes and even less of a priority than 'cycling'.
At least the segregated infrastructure is already in place...
Posted 11 years ago # -
"At least the segregated infrastructure is already in place..."
Pedestrians' segregated infrastructure as it exists at present suffers from isolation, with discrete clusters of pavement surrounding blocks of buildings which require the use of crossings to move between them across often busy-roads. Despite being subject to very few restrictions on their presence on any road (just the bypass and motorways) and not being legally compelled to stop by red signals they still feel a requirement to always defer to motor vehicles.
Posted 11 years ago # -
"At least the segregated infrastructure is already in place..."
True, but I see no plans to ensure better, smoother, flowing of this economIcally important traffic - people going to work, shopping, tourists etc.
Posted 11 years ago # -
Is the Royal Mile / George IV bridge junction the only one in Edinburgh where pedestrians get more turns at crossing than cars?
Posted 11 years ago # -
You mean same number of turns(?)
N-S, ped, E-w, ped, repeat
Think so (but won't be equal timings).
Posted 11 years ago # -
Traffic light sequencing is a software issue. The lights can very easily be re-programmed. For example, to allow "bus priority" on roads that carry a couple of buses a day. Or to allow pedestrian priority, but then that might upset the great god traffic flow and Must Not Be Done Under Any Circumstances Lest The Earth Grind To A Halt.
Posted 11 years ago # -
It is the only one I know about. (rant incoming) Most crossings at junctions I use have either no pedestrian lights at all or those horrible horrible filter sequences that mean peds are standing there waiting because there is a massively long filter light to allow one bus to turn left with nothing else happening and so they start to cross. Just as the right/on filter comes on.
Hideous system for everybody and very dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists if you are at the front and the lights change and they all plough into the road in front of you.
East end of Princes Street is one particularly bad example as it is so huge but George Street has some really really ludicrous ones. I tried to time one once from standing in the middle of George St to go south but gave up after 3 minutes of waiting and no left turning vehicles at all.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@cb - also the case on High Street/North Bridge junction further down the Mile.
Robert
Posted 11 years ago # -
Economically important traffic is made up of people, it is about prioritising the mode. We know from international studies that active modes of travel give greater economic returns than motorised.
@Cb Where the High St crosses the Bridges also prioritises pedestrians over motor vehicles. Are Tourist more important than residents?
Given that the council is facing high fines for excessive air pollution levels, we could well see an increase in pressure for modal shifts.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I have added a few images of the “Quality Bike Corridor”, just in case anyone it not familiar with it.
Posted 11 years ago # -
New review - well worth a read!
http://drpetermatthews.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/bike-to-work-week-what-my-council-is.html
Posted 11 years ago # -
One thing that could easily be done is an illegal parking hotline. I'd like to be able to text, phone or email the parking enforcement company whenever I see a delivery van parked on a double yellow line, and summon a scooter to do something about it within minutes.
Posted 11 years ago # -
@cc That would be spectacular!
Posted 11 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
