What do you think? What ideas would you add?
- Improved signage to make safer for pedestrians, cyclist and motorists
- De-clutter pavements
- Cancel Trams, learn from other cities: trolley buses
- Abolish maximum 4 hour parking
- Take bus drivers off from fare taking: two doors - one off, one on
- Raised kerbs at bus stops, ramps make bus use difficult for wheelchair users
- Raise more money - workplace parking charges
- Reduce the need to travel to work, shops and work within walking distance – keep Edinburgh compact through brown field development
- Extend 20mph speed limits
- Dual Carriageway to Edinburgh Airport needs upgrading
- Hovercraft crossing to Fife
- Oyster Card for Edinburgh
- Lothian buses to introduce a Family Ticket
- Trams should use clean energy
- Cycling – upgrade cycle paths
- Question the student bus fare
- Question the one ticket price
- Extend dedicated bus lanes
- Access to transport – find a way to reduce cost for poorer people
- Link Haymarket Platform one to Airport tramstop
- More cross town buses with stops adjacent to tram line stops
- Joint ticketing to facilitate journeys by tram and bus
- Major extension of Haymarket Station to ease congestion in Princes Street area
- Extend the tram and increase in suburban Rail lines
- Extend Tram into South Suburban Railway via Morningside and Cameron Toll to RIE
- Proper separated Cycle Lanes on roads
- Pedestrianise Princes Street from Waverley Bridge to West end.
- Put Trams on the South Suburban Rail (see Dublin Dart)
- Consult knowledgeable people with long experience in designing and building Tramways and do not use “cheapest quote”
- More dropped kerbs for buggies and wheelchair users
- Modernise the outdated traffic lights system
- Enforce cycle lanes to see they are kept clear
- Extend bus priorities by simple traffic management measures
- Training of bus drivers to work the ramp system
- Extend dropped kerbs in shopping areas
- Question whether buggies should have a space on the bus
- Strict enforcement of delivering mixed use development that permits greater use of walk/cycling for home to leisure (education, health)
- A North By-Pass to take 40% vehicle traffic that is travelling through City Centre - congestion charging could address this cost
- Much cheaper integrated ticketing for bus travel - to allow people to use the different bus companies
- Road User charging
- Council needs to use the powers it already has to enforce better quality of workmanship, quicker reinstatement on utilities who dig up roads
- Recognise the increasing pollution problem and limit the adverse impact of transport pollution on residential areas and effect on Health
- Extend the off road transport network by using the previous suburban rail routes. Will this be popular with walkers and cyclists?
- Reduce the speed of tram so it can share road space with other transport traffic
- Put Lothian Buses into a Trust
- Give Lothian buses funding to study ways to increase passengers’ numbers whilst not increasing vehicle numbers on Princes Street. To include the use of smaller buses, trolley buses etc. Lothian buses must promise transparency over their conclusions.
- Introduce payroll tax on businesses of over 25 employees - proceeds to be ring fenced for public transport.
- Raise more money for transport - because without that, options are very limited. Nottingham uses workplace charging: excellent idea
- Reduce the need to travel - improve housing policy that does this.
- 20mph speed limit city wide, to make it better for walking/ cycling and safer
- De-clutter pavements – there are too many adverting boards put out by shops, bins, signs etc.
- Reduce the number of bus stops - buses could then move faster
- Are there the right numbers of traffic lights? Could traffic flow be improved by traffic system to reduce them?
- Consult with public by referendum?
- Extend tram/light rail from Roseburn to Granton using old rail tracks
- Institute a bike rent scheme/safe cycle lanes/dedicated cycle lanes
- Motorcycles - keep no charging to park
- Park and ride - encourage their use
- Transport Act 1986 needs updated and changed
- A council subsidised LPG car conversion scheme to get the cars that do use the city to be greener. Zoned by post code, nearer the city centre, better subsidies.
Hi Lesley,
ReplyDeleteThe solution to transport issues has been implemented in Holland with the concept of sustainable safety, apologies for the cut and paste job from http://hembrow.blogspot.com/ but the questions you raise have already been answered, all we need is the political will to spend money and make it happen,
Sustainable Safety is the name of the Dutch approach to achieve a better road safety (“Duurzaam veilig” in Dutch). The main objectives of this vision are preventing severe crashes and (almost) eliminating severe injuries when crashes do occur. It was introduced and quickly adopted by all road managers in 1992 and has since been very successful. In 2005 it was revised and extended. The approach began with establishing that the road system was inherently unsafe. The goal was to fundamentally change the system by taking a person as a yardstick. The physical vulnerability of a person, but also what a person can and wants to do (humans make mistakes and don’t always follow rules) were to be guidelines for design. There is now an integral approach to the road system which refers to ‘human’ (behaviour), ‘vehicle’ (including bicycles!) and ‘road’ (design). Roads and vehicles must be adapted to the human capabilities and the human has to be educated enough to be able to operate a vehicle on a road in a safe manner. The approach is pro-active, it wants to remedy gaps and mistakes in the traffic system before crashes occur. So Sustainable Safety is about a lot more than just infrastructure.
Sustainable Safety is based on five principles:
Functionality (of roads)
Homogeneity (of mass, speed and direction of road users)
Predictability (of road course and road user behaviour by a recognisable road design)
Forgivingness (of both the road and street environment and the road users)
State awareness (by the road user)
The principles are based on scientific research and theories from traffic engineering, biomechanics, and psychology. Since the 2005 revision the principles are also based on infrastructure, vehicles, intelligent transport systems, education and enforcement of laws and regulations.
Results of Sustainable Safety
Many countries have seen a considerable drop in traffic injuries and deaths since roughly the 1970s. Reasons were the introduction of seatbelts, drunk-driving laws, helmet laws for motorcyclists and mopeds, car cages and airbags. But in the Netherlands there also was a dramatic drop in injuries and deaths of the most vulnerable road users: cyclists and pedestrians. Traffic researches attribute this difference to the introduction of Sustainable Safety.
Ten years after the introduction researches found a traffic death and injury reduction of on average 6% per year. And that wasn’t the only positive outcome. When the costs of the measurements that had to be taken were compared with the benefits of the reduced traffic injuries and deaths it was found that the benefits outweighed the costs by a factor of four.
Students of the Northeastern University in Boston compared the Netherlands with the US. After analysing all they had learned on their study tour in the Netherlands in 2010 they found the following: “In the 1970’s, the Netherlands and the US had the same traffic fatality rate (fatalities per person). Both countries have seen dramatic decreases in traffic fatality rates over the past forty years […]. However, the Netherlands has put much more emphasis than the US on making their roads inherently safer. The result: the Netherlands has reduced its traffic fatality rate to less than half of the US traffic fatality rate; the Netherlands now has a traffic fatality rate that's only 23% of its 1970 rate, compared to the US whose traffic fatality rate is 54% of its 1970 rate.”
So the system of Sustainable Safety is undisputedly successful and separated cycle paths (albeit for specific roads and situations) are such an integral part of this system that they even need not be mentioned all the time.
Between February 2009 and March 2011 Greener Leith ran a project aimed at cutting transport related CO2 emissions in the area. Part of the project involved a consultation that asked Leithers to give their thoughts on the question What would help you walk, cycle or use public transport more in Leith? You can see the top ideas here: http://weloveleith.uservoice.com/forums/25863-future-travel-plan-for-leith
ReplyDeleteI hope that you - and indeed - all the parties will take on board some of these ideas for your manifesto in the next local elections.
@allytibbitt on behalf of @greenerleith
How can we fit cycle tracks into crowded towns and cities? It’s just not practical to have them on every road.
ReplyDeleteDanish traffic design works around separation principles depending on the speed, and volume of traffic.8 At speeds of up to 20mph, or 30mph on roads with less than 2,000 vehicles a day, mixing bikes and other vehicles is fine. As speeds and traffic volumes rise, paved shoulders, cycle lanes and ultimately fully separated cycle tracks are provided. Adopting these principles here would mean that most residential roads, as long as they’re not rat runs, would not be affected. It’s the big fast rural roads – where there is plenty of space to provide parallel tracks – and the urban throughways which blight many of Britain’s town centres that we’d like to see redesigned to give space back to people on foot and on bikes.
Cheers
Gary
That's a really great list of suggestions on the Greener Leith site Ally.
ReplyDeleteI'm pleased to see Labour looking at transport issues in the city, it's very encouraging. Some great comments above too on Sustainable Safety, and the Greener Leith suggestions are fantastic. I hope that such positive ideas will be considered for manifesto pledges and policies.
ReplyDeleteWhy no mention of FirstBus which is the only public transport operator for most of Rural West Edinburgh? Lothian Buses refuse to operate to Queensferry, Dalmeny or Kirkliston despite their claim to serve "Edinburgh" so get them out here to provide come competition.
ReplyDeleteGreat idea to start this blog Lesley and I do hope it brings some good ideas to improve our transport system.
ReplyDeleteI would like to suggest a reduction in the number of Private Hire Vehicles on our streets.
We have enough Black Cabs in our city to provide a Taxi Service which I believe is checked by means of a survey every couple of years.
At the moment Taxis are making around 50% of there journeys empty, this is due to the fact they have to move from one area of the city to the other to find work, this can only be adding to congestion and emmission levels.
Due to the numbers of these cars on our streets the earning potential for taxis is reducing, this is causing a reduction in the quality of service provided as the trade fails to attract the quality of driver we have previously enjoyed, enevitably vehicles will become older and we will see an all round poorer service.
There are lots of issues on your list regarding Lothian Buses however not a lot about our cities taxi provision.