Summary of May 2005 User Survey on the Roseburn Urban Wildlife Corridor Following on from the user survey conducted by FRUWCA and Blackhall Community Association in December 2004, which yielded much interesting and useful data, a further seasonal update was conducted in May 2005 to measure the increased use of the corridor outwith the winter months. Users Surveys completed Thurs 12th May 2005 8am – 5.30 pm 1031 360 Sat 14th May 2005 8am – 5.30 pm 1137 333 Totals 2168 693 (N.B. The usage figures for a 24 hour period will be higher still, as it was not possible to record usage before 8 am and after 5.30 pm.) Only 11% of those surveyed in May said they had also completed the December survey, so this survey represents a new body of opinion, but gives remarkably consistent results, with a clear message - the proposal to run the tram along the Roseburn Corridor is deeply unpopular with the general population. • Frequency of use: The survey showed that the great majority (79%) are regular users, with 51% answering “most days” and 28% answering “1-2/week”. • Purpose: There is almost a 50:50 split between people using the corridor to go to/from work (33%) or shopping (15%) and recreational users. Several were multiple purpose users (e.g. walking dog + shopping) • Almost everyone (96%) said that trees/wildlife/tranquility are important aspects of the cyclepath/walkway to them, with an even higher percentage (98.5%) rating safety/absence of traffic and location/accessibility as important aspects. • The age profile of users is very wide, with the majority falling into the 36-60 age bracket (53%), followed by 19-35s (27%) and 11% being 61+. • More people now know about the tram proposals (67%), but the overwhelming majority, 74% of those questioned were not in favour of the tram running along the Roseburn Corridor, and 7% were unsure. Apart from the obvious impact of the tram on the Corridor, the proposed speed of the tram was an important issue for a large number of people. • 70% said that the introduction of such a scheme would affect their usage of the walkway, with a further 4% unsure. As found in the December survey, the origin and destination questions highlight the widespread benefit this amenity provides to users travelling within Edinburgh and beyond, with origins and destinations from as far afield as Musselburgh, Dalkeith, Kirkliston, Linlithgow, Broxburn, and Kirkcaldy featuring alongside Leith, Silverknowes, Pilton, Craigleith, Gorgie/Dalry, Bruntsfield, Sighthill, Newington, Ratho and South Queensferry among a very wide range of city areas represented. RC34,45,usersurvey02 ROSEBURN CORRIDOR USER SURVEY May 2005 Supplementary data The following data was extracted from answers given by SIP area users: Q7 – Did you know there is a plan to run trams along the Roseburn Urban Wildlife Corridor (this cycle/walkway)? Yes No 12.5.05 21 14 14.5.05 11 14 33 (54%) 28 (46%) Q8 – The proposal is for a twin track tram (8m/26ft wide) plus a cycle/walkway (3m/10ft wide) to run the length of the Roseburn Corridor, with trams travelling at speeds of up to 50mph in places. Are you in favour of this? Yes No 12.5.05 1 32 14.5.05 3 25 4 57 (93%) Q9 – Would the introduction of such a scheme affect your usage of the walkway? Yes No Don’t know 12.5.05 29 3 1 14.5.05 20 3 1 49 (86%) 6 (11%) 2 (3%) RC34,45,usersurvey,socialinclusion03 Statement from Seonaid Mackay, Blinkbonny Road. 13 June 2005 Resident since 1935 Embankment landslip - relates to points 2 (Vibration operation) and 29 (Construction Vibration) Embankment is understood to have been made of earth, stones and cinders etc. In the past when there were fewer trees and bushes (when the railway was operational) earth would wash down the sides of the embankment in the rain. Holes 2 –3 feet across could appear, which the railway company would have to repair (in the 1940s and 50s). Stonethrowing / Security - relates to point 6 (security - vandalism and burglary) Stonethrowing Following the closure of the railway line, gangs would sometimes use the line as a shortcut to Tynecastle football ground and to the town (in the late 1960s and early 1970s). They would throw stones into neighbouring gardens. This resulted in broken windows, damage to greenhouses and injury to one of my dogs, resulting in blindness. At this time there were fewer trees and a much lower hedge. (Before the railway closed, the railway company maintained security). As a result many of the residents encouraged the growth of trees on the boundary – both leylandii etc and allowing the hawthorn to grow. Since these trees have grown up there have been very few problems with stone throwing. Security There were a number of burglaries in houses bordering the line in the 1960s and 1970s (eg no 8, 10 and 24 Blinkbonny Road). These were considered to have been facilitated by access from the walkway. Again residents have allowed and encouraged the boundary hedge to grow in height and thickness, in order to provide security. Drainage - relates to point 26 (drainage) The London Midland and Scottish Railway maintained a drainage system on the railway corridor. At that time, hedges were maintained at 4 –5 feet with a grassy bank. There were fires in dry weather. The drainage system, hedges and grass on the embankment were not really maintained after the 1950s. And after the railway closed in the 1960s there was no maintenance. In the 1960s, in times of heavy or persistent rain, water and mud would flow off the embankment onto neighbouring properties. Residents complained to the Council, but no action was taken for several years. Eventually complaints to the Council (new owners of land), through MP and Councillors were successful. Minor repairs were undertaken, but the problems recurred in very wet weather. In the 1980s the Council installed a better drain from (running from behind 12 Blinkbonny Road to behind 12 Blinkbonny Ave). Problems with drainage started to recur from 1995 onwards. This was particularly apparent at properties including 24 Blinkbonny Road, 12 Blinkbonny Road and 10 Blinkbonny Avenue where water flowed out of the ground. In February 2005 this drain was renewed from 16 Blinkbonny Road to the Craigleith Drive Bridge. This repair has been partially successful, however some water still seeps on to neighbouring land. It appears that the drains installed in the past have only been partially successful and have quickly deteriorated, requiring replacement within 10 years. Blackhall Community Association And Friends of Roseburn Urban Wildlife Corridor Cyclepath/Walkway Survey Results Volunteers from the above organisations carried out a survey at the Maidencraig access point on the Roseburn corridor on Thursday 16th and Saturday 18th December in a bid to ascertain the numbers of people using that portion of the corridor, and their reasons for doing so. The information gathered only provides a snapshot in time, but is nonetheless a useful indicator of usage patterns and amenity benefit and offers information that is not otherwise available. There is no quantification in monetary terms or in amenity value of the Roseburn Urban Wildlife Corridor in any of the accompanying documents to the Tram Line (One) Bill. There is no mitigation for the loss either. This survey seeks to address that in some small part. Survey periods: - Thursday 16th December, 8am – 1pm (5 hrs). Terminated early due to heavy rain, which made gathering the required information impossible. - Saturday 18th December, 9am - 4.30pm (7.5 hrs). Terminated when darkness fell. Survey methods: 1. Tally chart to count cycle and pedestrian movements. 2. Survey form which passers-by were asked to complete. The questions were aimed at finding out the number of people who use the cyclepath/walkway, the frequency of use, purpose, the features they rated as important, their origin and destination that day, and how many other people in their family use the cyclepath/walkway in order to gauge how many other people would be affected by any changes. There was also a section for respondents to add their own comments, and many did so. The results display the heavy usage of the existing cycle/walkway by a large number of people, and for a variety of reasons. Given that the days in question were dark, wet and windy, the volunteers were surprised and delighted by the large number of people who were willing to stop and complete surveys. Approx. 25 people (mainly cyclists) who could not afford the time to stop even took the trouble to return completed responses by post. The usage figures should be regarded as base numbers, which can be extrapolated to give an idea of the level of usage the corridor enjoys along its full length and the greatly increased numbers likely to use it when the days are longer and the weather better. It is interesting to note the wide variety of origins and destinations of users – this is truly a city-wide asset, which also pulls in users from as far afield as Musselburgh, Penicuik, Winchburgh, South Queensferry, Dunfermline and Dalgety Bay. A table of results has been produced showing the responses to all the questions, and a separate comments section is also attached. Main results: - The great majority of those surveyed (86%) use the cyclepath/walkway either most days or at least 1-2/week. - Of the features which people were asked to rate, the amenity features came out highest, with absence of traffic (70%) way out in front. - That the great majority of users (69%), who would be greatly affected by the introduction of a tram system along this route, consider their knowledge of the tram proposals to be vague or non-existent.