CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

QBC video audit...

(83 posts)

No tags yet.


  1. chdot
    Admin

    "What ride?"

    Well there was a bit of a Twitter storm after CEC announced that the QBC was officially open.

    Various twits (some CCE members, more not) basically said it wasn't fit for purpose - mostly because of the parking but also because Teviot is still being dug up (the reason the original 'launch' was postponed) and the fact that the new entrance at KB looks nowhere near finished - so it's still impossible to gauge the effectiveness of one of the key purposes of the QBC!

    Andrew Burns joined in arguing that it was 'a step forward'.

    I asked if he would go for a ride with critics.

    The ENews (and others) asked if they could come too!

    AB asked to be contacted by email.

    I suspect a 'public' ride would become a bit of a circus.

    I hope he will ride the route some morning between 8 and 9. Alone would actually be more useful for him to get a better idea of the issues - random (or perhaps not that random) illegal parking, poor surfaces in a few places and the fact that the cycle lane goes round parking bays in some places but not others.

    I suggested #QBCfail but no-one else took it up!

    The reality is of course that this really is an advance (for Edinburgh) and the best Quality design (for Edinburgh).

    No-one made them include the word Quality (coined under last administration), but they are still using it - apparently with pride.

    Unfortunately (not least in the week of the 'Go Dutch' conference) "Quality" and the defence of the QBC, looks like a bad joke.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  2. DdF
    Member

    QBiC could and should be better in many respects, but the only objective evidence so far suggests that it is already resulting in increased cycle use. Other objective evidence would be welcome.

    http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/2012/11/more-bikes-again-and-qbic-helps/

    The problem has never been technical but political. The cyclist side has pressurised hard, but councillors (who rely on votes) are also extremely strongly pressured by shop owners etc and are worried about motorist votes (there are still many more car trips than bike trips in Edinburgh - even at the very best spokes count point, bikes are 27% of all vehicles).

    Hopefully the fact that cycle use is continuing to rise, together with continued & increasing lobbying, will embolden councillors to further improvements here and elsewhere, and to stick to their budget decision. That is what has happened up to now. Bikes used to be 1% of journeys to work in Edinburgh, and now are 7%, whereas cycle use has changed little in UK or Scotland as a whole.

    Another point - not all councillors understand cycling as a form of transport, and not all are happy with Edinburgh's unique "5% of the transport budget for cycling" decision. One senior councillor has been heard to ask why spend this money if there is nothing but negativity about the outcome.

    Criticism in a positive and constructive manner is of course absolutely vital. For all its faults, if the council decided to remove QBiC (as some commenters have virtually suggested) I suspect that the result would be this!

    Posted 8 years ago #
  3. chdot
    Admin

    "One senior councillor has been heard to ask why spend this money if there is nothing but negativity about the outcome."

    Perhaps he's asking the wrong question.

    The money has to be spent wisely not timidly.

    "but councillors (who rely on votes) are also extremely strongly pressured by shop owners etc and are worried about motorist votes"

    True, but as this forum demonstrates - most people who ride bikes also own/have access to a car(s).

    So I suggest councillors are behind the times and/or failing/refusing to show sufficient leadership.

    I have no problem with business owners on the side of busy roads lobbying and having their points of view taken into account. However there is sufficient evidence from elsewhere that businesses benefit from less/slower traffic and easier access by bike and foot.

    Obviously some individual business may suffer - but if the Council actually cared it wouldn't have made such a shambles in places like Leith Walk - businesses have gone bust there and the surviving ones won't even get the 'tram benefit'. It's hard to believe that most of the surviving businesses rely (mostly) on people arriving by car.

    On the QBC the traders' case would be strengthened if more of them demonstrated a willingness to abide by the (parking) law.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  4. chdot
    Admin

    In terms of the Quality/Dutchness of the QBC I forgot to mention the fact that not all is 20mph (obviously because L&BP wouldn't enforce it).

    In the Netherlands I think it's safe to say that roads with a 30mph limit would have segregated cycle lanes.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  5. minus six
    Member

    It doesn't bother me whether or not Edinburgh Council stick to their 5% budget commitment.

    At the end of the day, all that's done, or planned to be done, is cosmetic.

    There's no formal reallocation of road space to protect cyclists, anywhere in Edinburgh.

    This isn't a step change in the right direction.

    It is misdirection, and a complete waste of money.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  6. Min
    Member

    One senior councillor has been heard to ask why spend this money if there is nothing but negativity about the outcome.

    This is the head-against-a-brick-wall moment that we in the UK are apparently doomed to for all time. Councillors ignore all advice from Dutch builders, build a pile of unusable cack, cyclists complain about it then get told they are not getting anything ever again. It is why many people are against cycle infrastructure - we are just up against so much ignorance it is untrue.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  7. Claggy Cog
    Member

    The QBC is laid on a route from one part of the university to another, ergo bound to be used by poor students who cannot afford cars, and therefore go between campuses by bike. Many university courses do not start at 0900 and finish at 1700 i.e. rush hour and therefore really as cyclists won't be affected by the "rush" hour per se and therefore the route is less dangerous outwith peak travelling time due to there being far fewer cars. Where the bike lane goes around the designated parking it is far too close to the parked cars ensuring that any cyclist travelling in it can be effectively doored or should someone pull out in their car over the bike lane, they will be in the ideal spot to be knocked off. I really don't think that there would be howls of protest or sit ins by cyclists should CEC decide to remove the painted broken lines because we are just a bunch of whingers who don't deserve to be considered in planning, whether it be good or bad, and woe betide us should we suggest how it could be managed better!!

    Posted 8 years ago #
  8. Claggy Cog
    Member

    One senior councillor has been heard to ask why spend this money if there is nothing but negativity about the outcome.

    Does this logic apply to the tram fiasco then? Have they really spent huge sums of money on anything that has had a really positive outcome or reaction? No. I thought not.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  9. Min
    Member

    I think if they hadn't trumpeted so much about it being so world class and quality, they wouldn't have been up for so much derision. Plus the "Avoid the QBC" route seems to be getting the publicity on campus just to highlight the embarrassment a little more.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  10. chdot
    Admin

    "the "Avoid the QBC" route seems to be getting the publicity on campus just to highlight the embarrassment a little more."

    Posted 8 years ago #
  11. PS
    Member

    Time for the DIY approach?:
    au francais

    (Hat tip to inrng.com)

    Posted 8 years ago #
  12. chdot
    Admin

  13. chdot
    Admin

    Incidentally it's almost exactly 40 years since 3 people painted yellow lines in (pre-pedestrianised) Rose Street.

    They got done for stealing parking cones (can't remember why they needed them).

    Posted 8 years ago #
  14. chdot
    Admin

    "
    Cllr. Andrew D Burns (@AndrewDBurns)
    18/11/2012 20:46
    @CyclingEdin Ha! Twitter storm indeed. Becoming a bit more frequent for me these days (on all sorts of subjects) and raise interesting >more

    Cllr. Andrew D Burns (@AndrewDBurns)
    18/11/2012 20:48
    @CyclingEdin <more: questions about my ability to respond to every weet? I do not want to succumb to 'staff' operating my twitter account!

    "

    Posted 8 years ago #
  15. chdot
    Admin

    The new video

    Posted 8 years ago #
  16. chdot
    Admin

    And now there is a dissertation!

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=7761&replies=14#post-92065

    Posted 8 years ago #
  17. chdot
    Admin

    Some background info that might interest some people.

    Spokes detailing how it tried to get improvements to QBC (with some success) -

    http://www.spokes.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/1105-QBC-RG-NOTE-OF-DISCUSSION-WITH-COUNCIL-OFFICIALS1.pdf

    Posted 8 years ago #
  18. chdot
    Admin

    "
    I caused a bit of a twitter-storm, when in response to some fairly robust criticism of the new route, I tweeted that I thought it was "at least a step in the right direction" :-(

    Needless to say, I was challenged to cycle the route and find out for myself the error of my assertions!

    "

    http://andrewburns.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/cycling-boost-for-edinburgh-with-new.html

    Posted 8 years ago #
  19. chdot
    Admin

    On the day he went there were several enforcers in action -

    This was NOT because he was going to be there.

    Will be interesting to know how often they repeat it.

    Meanwhile on Twitter -

    "
    Ben Miller (@fairlynuts)
    17/12/2012 21:57
    Refreshing, thoughtful comments from @AndrewDBurns on new bike corridor. Odd no mention of parking on the lane though?

    "

    "
    Cllr. Andrew D Burns (@AndrewDBurns)
    17/12/2012 21:58
    @fairlynuts Ben, thanks - was purely down to cycling it in the morning rush-hour .. I will go back and have a look off-peak as well, Andrew.

    "

    Posted 8 years ago #
  20. DaveC
    Member

    "On the day he went there were several enforcers in action -

    (see picture above)

    This was NOT because he was going to be there. "

    Aye right... I bet they follow him on twitter and preceeded his arrival.

    Posted 8 years ago #
  21. chdot
    Admin

    There are quite a few comments on AB's blog post (some of the commenters seem familiar...)

    His replies are interesting -

    "

    The difference of view(s) on all of this, amongst cyclists (of which I am most definitely one), is at the heart of what led to my original tweets and subsequent ride/post above.

    I'm not sure it can be resolved in an exchange of blog comments, but I am genuinely interested in whether this (relatively significant??) divergence amongst cyclists is actually helping the wider cause of encouraging more cycling?

    Needs to be discussed in a pub methinks ;-)

    Andrew

    "

    Pub discussion would be interesting!

    Might be worth trying to get him to come to a PY (coffee) morning - it's on his way to work!

    Posted 8 years ago #
  22. chdot
    Admin

    Just been looking at original QBC thread -

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=7331

    It includes a link to a blog post which concludes -

    "

    Thanks Caroline - and I have to agree with her. While it seems Edinburgh's policy could be revolutionary and really prioritise space on the roads for cyclists, we actually have very poor quality provision, that puts lives in danger, and prioritises high speed motor traffic over anything else.

    "

    http://drpetermatthews.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/bike-to-work-week-what-my-council-is.html

    Posted 8 years ago #
  23. SRD
    Moderator

    (some of the commenters seem familiar...)

    not just the ones who used their own names ;)

    Posted 8 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin