Loss of 70 parking spaces on Regent Street and Malborough St

[splurgh]

[wangi]

[wangi]

[seanie]

Home Zones generally require a fair amount of off street parking to free up space. You'd struggle to make it work given the existing streets. Echelon parking might be a possibility, but it takes up more carriageway than double sided parallel parking, and if single sided doesn't generate any more parking spaces.

[wangi]

[seadog6161]

The matter will be one of the first items in the Neighborhood Partnership meeting on Wednesday evening 6.30pm at The White House on Niddrie Mains Road. This is open to the public.

The plans are not yet a done deal and have to go through a formal process and go through the infrastructure committee etc. However as a Regent Street resident I feel that the plans are not properly thought out as they are surely making more parking problems elsewhere. I urge anyone who wants to stop these plans to make their views heard.

Neither do I believe Regent Street needs to be one way as we all make way for each other quite happily with occasional inconvenience but nothing more. Making the street one way and effectively widening it through one side being cleared of parked cars will only encourage cars to drive faster - endangering kids, pedestrians etc.

Councillors - please take note.

[seanie]

That's one of the reasons the Council weren't keen on making it one-way in the past. There appears to be quite a lot of pressure on the Council to do something about these streets in particular, but what can be done seems pretty limited; there are lots of vehicles, with limited parking space on narrow streets. You can't widen the streets, and the potential for off street parking looks pretty limited. So you're pretty much left with restricting parking in some way which, whilst maybe tackling some of the problems with these streets, is clearly going to have knock on effects.

[Puerto bella]

Agree - the knock on effects dont seem to have been evaluated as part of this exercise.
I too have been pondering why such a strong focus on those two streets: Regent and Marborough - have been trying to think about whether there has been a fire where they've had difficulties ?
Maybe there are lots of council connections in those streets that hold sway over the rest of us, who knows.
Why still no traffic counts though to really get to the bottom of what's going on, I dont understand why that's not happened.

[seanie]

People using their Council connections to make it more difficult for them to park?
I think the problem may simply be they're genuinely narrow streets, with parking on both sides, that struggle to function. They're pretty quiet because of that but it's still a problem.

[Puerto bella]

That's the key - they are quiet because passage is made difficult so the converse is that other streets are busy because passage is easy. We never get a balance only extremes.

[seanie]

Well we have a street pattern laid out about 200 years ago, so working within those constraints what's to be done. I've heard a few people mention Home Zones, and they're appealing in many ways, but I can't see that being workable without a massive reduction in parking. I think the realistic options are;

a) what we've got,
b) what we've got with reduced parking,
c) what we've got in terms of parking but a one-way system,
d) a one-way system and with reduced parking.

[wangi]

[seanie]

Any consensus on a preferred alternative?

[Puerto bella]

Interesting that this will go the same way it did over a decade ago when Slicker and co raised it many mnay years ago. Nothing's new.

[Porty]

Yep it is the same problem. It seems to me there is no solution that will please or satisfy everybody, no obvious remedy.

I imagine PCC would find it difficult to reach consensus.

Letter to Council advising them why they suck, is my guess.

[bearcub]

[Makaveli]

Every time I read about the rat running issue the one solution that keeps coming back to me is getting rid/synchonising the pedestrian crossing outside the town hall with the junction lights. Once again this morning the pedestrian lights were on red and the junction lights were on green - this equalled standstill!!!!

I don't see why the council don't give this a shot first as it would take some of the pressure off the high street.

[Puerto bella]

Agree Makaveli - I hope you have put this suggestion in - or my facebook group on Portobello Traffic Nightmares - we have quite a number of members including one of our local councillors and MSP. Please feel free to join people.

[Skeely]

I'm all for the reduction in car parking spaces. All those cars make it difficult to cycle on the pavement.

<ducks>

[Skeely]

Seriously though, I think increasing traffic flow on the High Street is a rotten idea. Reducing traffic flow instead would encourage traffic to use Milton Rd / Harry Lauder Road, making Porty much more pleasant at rush hour.

[Makaveli]

But what about all the folk that don't go near Sir Harry Lauder? I have no need to go to Sir Harry Lauder or Milton Road for the morning nursery run and I know plenty others that are the same as us. Sir Harry Lauder is for folk coming in off the A1 and has more than enough traffic on it as it is.

What Porty needs is to look at ways to keep the traffic flowing without encouraging more traffic. An almost impossible task I am sure you would all agree but I do firmly believe that by altering the sequence of the pedestrian crossings at peak times you could ease a lot of Porty's traffic build up.

Personally I would get rid of the pedestrian crossing at the town hall as I really don't see the need for it with a traffic light junction so close to it.

[Puerto bella]

I think maybe they should be looking at a much wider area than just the Bath St to Bellfield section - its foolish to change one part without examining the impacts on the whole. They've started here and that's fine but the impacts could be catastrophic in places if it carries on in such a blinkered way.

[Franck]

Make both of the street cul-de-sacs like they did in Rosefield Avenue.One blocked off at the north end, one at the south.Remove a couple of spaces at each end to allow turning.

[Chas]

[wangi]

Really? What's the problem currently with Regent St & Marlborough that would be solved by that... There is little space for fire engines to travel down the road; however they do not really suffer from "rat running" since the same lack of space makes them slow.

It was rat running east-to-west Bellfield - Straiton - Bath St that was a big point of concern by local residents at the start of this process. That has been ignored. The consultation proposed three options; none of which included loss of parking on Regent & Marlborough. The proposal doesn't bear any resemblance to the consultation. Further the choice of options in the consultation were very poor - leading to a split of the support for one-way along Straiton. Council takes that as showing no support for one-way, rather than considering the two options together to demonstrate 2/3rd wanted it...

Much is made of the unsafe nature of Regent St & Marlborough St due to the restricted road space and how that means fire engines will be unable to quickly tend to a fire. But what do the fire service actually feel about it? It came out on Monday night that they were not too concerned - sure the fire engines might not make it down the streets, but they have hoses and access to hydrants.

The proposal should be scrapped. A proper exercise is needed, on the wider issues, where residents are truly consulted and help formulate the solution.

[Puerto bella]

Well said

[Porty]

What about making both Bath and Bellfield street one waywith both being tha same way. Exeptions for emergency and refue vehicles.

[Puerto bella]

Wangi - did you go to the meeting?
I heard from a reliable source that there is to be a proper traffic assessment/ analysis done and a door to door survey for a much wider area - lets hope that those inform debate and decent conclusions about what's to be done.

[seanie]

What's the rationale for Straiton Place being two-way?

From the report it looks as if the concern is that, if one-way, it will become more of a rat run as the traffic can speed up. But it can only really be a rat run east to west, so what's the problem with it being one-way west to east?

[seanie]

Just to understand what's required to accommodate vehicles and parking I did some research. Here are passing widths;

[seanie]

I also looked at echelon parking;

[seanie]

The dimensions for the last two were taken from guides to Home Zones, although there's too much parking for them to really qualify as such. But it shows you need wide streets to accommodate echelon parking.

Just by way of comparison, Brighton Place is about 12.4m. If you halved the size of the pavements and made the road one-way, then you could just fit in echelon parking at 30 degrees on one side and parallel parking on the other. If you didn't have bends in the carriageway to slow traffic you could squeeze a few more in, but overall the parking wouldn't be that much different from double sided parallel parking.

[seanie]

Maybe if we looked across Portobello as a whole, there may be streets wide enough to accommodate echelon parking in an attempt to alleviate pressure on the narrower streets, but the narrower streets themselves won't accommodate it.

[seanie]

Here are the dimensions for the parking;

[wangi]