http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Topic: “Traffic chaos prompts calls for Rosyth bypass“ en Sun, 31 May 2026 10:51:00 +0000 http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-337337 Fri, 11 Sep 2020 15:05:23 +0000 Snowy 337337@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I think it's indicating Many Other Transport Solutions </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-337325 Fri, 11 Sep 2020 11:47:17 +0000 acsimpson 337325@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Is this some secret government plan to require bikes to have MOTS?</p> <p>Welcome boothym </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-337293 Thu, 10 Sep 2020 22:47:07 +0000 boothym 337293@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><blockquote>This section of the A985 is to have a shared use cycleway installed over the next couple of weeks.</blockquote></p> <p>Went along this way last month, good to see they've added the cycleway. Narrows a bit at the Limekilns end - it's like removing a fence post to make it wider was too much hassle for them.</p> <p>Amusingly SLOW has been painted upside down...</p> <p><a href="https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KMEpQrbx-a6OuSvHBYhbt4Ft1D4uqF5B/view" rel="nofollow">https://drive.google.com/file/d/1KMEpQrbx-a6OuSvHBYhbt4Ft1D4uqF5B/view</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-324166 Mon, 09 Mar 2020 17:16:06 +0000 acsimpson 324166@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I assume it's a bit of widening too but segregation seems unlikely and probably not require unless it gets busier. They are moving pedestrians onto a closed lane for the duration.</p> <p>I like this paragraph and not just because of the precision of the approximation:<br /> <blockquote>This work will benefit around 12,214 road users, travelling on this route each day by improving safety for cyclists and promoting active travel.</blockquote> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-324158 Mon, 09 Mar 2020 16:36:32 +0000 crowriver 324158@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Not before time. Scary section of road heading west to Limekilns etc. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-324154 Mon, 09 Mar 2020 15:55:16 +0000 CocoShepherd 324154@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><strong>Breaking news:</strong></p> <p><a href="https://www.google.com/maps/dir/56.0358736,-3.4607332/56.0354861,-3.4579275/@56.0355514,-3.4572286,14z/data=!4m2!4m1!3e1">This section</a> of the A985 is to have a shared use cycleway installed over the next couple of weeks.</p> <p>A couple of signs and possibly (though unlikely given the width of the pavement) a painted line along the length of the 0.1 mile stretch to separate people on foot from those on bikes. <a href="https://trafficscotland.org/news/story.aspx?id=17025">Costing £51,000</a>. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-323603 Sat, 29 Feb 2020 00:15:50 +0000 acsimpson 323603@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Sorry. I'm too late to edit but I did of course mean leaves. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101&page=2#post-323585 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:38:28 +0000 CocoShepherd 323585@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Ha ha @acsimpson don't be so ridiculous... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323582 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 19:17:42 +0000 acsimpson 323582@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@bax, only time will tell. I'm sure they'll be great until at least the first Autumn when the leafs are left to rot in situ. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323579 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:07:30 +0000 minus six 323579@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>"The proposed "Greenways" shall not present a barrier to suitably designed minor street links between adjacent housing sites.</em></p> <p>surely what they mean is, the "greenways" will be so shoddy that nae &lt;rule2&gt; would ever consider using it, so nae worries there, my fellow lodge brethren ! </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323578 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 18:07:12 +0000 CocoShepherd 323578@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Well spotted. That's a positive I guess. Now is it too much to ask that they connect it to Rosyth station/the park &amp; choose?</p> <p>Slight tangent but the A985 is really going to be horrible. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323574 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 17:42:50 +0000 acsimpson 323574@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Oh... Now that's interesting. In additon to 03 - SUPERSEDED MASTERPLAN LAYOUT there is also 03A - MASTERPLAN LAYOUT which I assume is the newer one. I didn't spot it before but the updated one does appear to have a greenway beside the railway for most of the length of the site. Unfortunately it also appears to have lost a section of parkland. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323568 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 16:49:04 +0000 CocoShepherd 323568@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I'm not 100% sure but it seems like they are building houses pretty much right down to Rosyth. Which would mean a new by-pass won't actually be built. Either that or it would need to be squeezed into a really tiny band of land and would intersect a couple of those prized Greenways. This is according to plans that a councillor has just sent me. Happy to send to anyone interested.</p> <p>So goodness only knows what drivers will do the next time the Queensferry Crossing is closed.</p> <p>Edit: similar planning file available on the planning portal, named as 03 - SUPERSEDED MASTERPLAN LAYOUT, a drawing published 19th Dec 2016. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323558 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 16:03:32 +0000 acsimpson 323558@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Cocoshepherd, yes I agree. I did a little more digging after my last post and that seems to be the case. The only hope is around the meaning of the word barrier in the sentence<br /> <em>"The proposed "Greenways" shall not present a barrier to suitably designed minor street links between adjacent housing sites.</em></p> <p>If they mean it's not an administrative barrier then things look better at least for travel around the site. eg the minor road at the south of Dalmeny park where the spine path almost maintains continuity across the road. However if they mean a physical barrier then we really are doomed.</p> <p>Unfortunately the route through the site on Grange road appears to be taking a leaf out of Aberdour Road's book. ie Large roundabouts with cycle lanes that force you to turn your back on motor traffic before you can cross the road. As bax says this is allowing bikes on the pavement not providing a cycle path. It shouldn't be so hard for them to provide one safe continuous cycle path from the South boundary to the North Boundary. Even if this is along the railway at the eastern perimeter of the site. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323547 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 14:23:55 +0000 CocoShepherd 323547@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@acsimpson</p> <p>Apologies, didn't realise that the link wouldn't work. I've had a good dig around the planning application and several of the documents. The Travel Plan appears to relate to the development of surrounding roads (Grange and Limekilns Rds) to accommodate construction vehicles, and modification of some junctions on Queensferry Road. Also, the roundabouts at Pitreavie and the Kings Road primary school are to have traffic lights installed. A huge proportion of the objections list increases in traffic as a main concern so the Travel Plan is I think in response to those objections.</p> <p>From what I've seen, these Greenways aka pavements <em>are </em>the proposals for reducing dependency on private car use. But as you point out they'll be slower than using the road so really there wouldn't appear to be any benefit to them = not really any incentive for people to stop using their cars.</p> <p>Call me cynical but active/sustainable transport just seems like more of a box ticking exercise for the council.... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323544 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 13:49:37 +0000 acsimpson 323544@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@Coco, just like the Edinburgh portal you can't link to specific documents. You do seem to be able to link to the planning application though: <a href="https://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&amp;keyVal=OIFLV3HFIDK00" rel="nofollow">https://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&amp;keyVal=OIFLV3HFIDK00</a></p> <p>Failing that the reference number is 16/04155/EIA.</p> <p>The approval document has condition 29 which sounds more positive than your quote above:<br /> <blockquote>29. The Travel Plan required under condition 3(y) shall set out proposals for reducing dependency on the private car and shall identify measures to be implemented, the system of management, monitoring, review, reporting and the duration of the plan. The Travel Plan shall be agreed in consultation with Transport Scotland as the Trunk Roads Authority. The land use shall not be brought into operation until the Travel Plan has been agreed and is in operation.<br /> Reason: To be consistent with the requirements of Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) and PAN 75 Planning for Transport.</blockquote></p> <p>@bax, While I share your frustrations at Fife's penchant for degrading giveway markings at every driveway (and signpost) it looks to me like these paths will at least not cross any driveways. Instead they will just be pointless paths which are slower than staying on the road as you have to give way at every road crossing. There might be a few sections which are away from roads and very pleasant for getting about the site but they certainly haven't been designed with active travel through the site in mind. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323542 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 13:29:07 +0000 Murun Buchstansangur 323542@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Dunfermline - the anti-Holland. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323538 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 12:54:59 +0000 CocoShepherd 323538@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>From the Council, page 23 of <a href="https://planning.fife.gov.uk/online/files/A7DA5A7B6D15424969C4852AEFD20175/pdf/16_04155_EIA-103_-_TRANSPORT_ASSESSMENT-2066035.pdf">this planning document</a>:</p> <p>"Proposed Street Hierarchy is acceptable in principle, but a number of the large parcels of land would appear to have only one means of vehicular access. The housing sites shall be provided with multiple points of vehicular access with the proposed street network and with adjacent sites. The proposed "Greenways" shall not present a barrier to suitably designed minor street links between adjacent housing sites."</p> <p>Says it all? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323528 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 11:18:09 +0000 minus six 323528@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p><em>So basically cyclists are supposed to use the pavements. </em></p> <p>with give way markings at every single household driveway</p> <p>standard dunfermline practise </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323526 Fri, 28 Feb 2020 10:32:07 +0000 CocoShepherd 323526@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I asked Fife Council about the plans for active transport links in the new Broomhall development in Dunfermline. They are happy to confirm that there will be a network of:</p> <p>2-3 m wide Adopted Greenways- dedicated pedestrian &amp; cycle routes.</p> <p>So basically cyclists are supposed to use the pavements. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323364 Wed, 26 Feb 2020 16:00:06 +0000 acsimpson 323364@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Crossford kids go to school in Dunfermline do they not? That alone should be good enough reason for the council to want to build a path. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323312 Wed, 26 Feb 2020 08:40:08 +0000 CocoShepherd 323312@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>The local community Council have drawn up some plans for a path linking Crossford to Dunfermline. In relative terms it would be spectacular: completely segregated from the road and wide enough for bikes to pass one another. But in reality its just a one mile long path. The smart thing to do would be to team up with the marketing department of a professional developer to produce a shiny brochure full of inspirational pictures and artistic quotes. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323307 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 23:04:28 +0000 acsimpson 323307@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That's a shame it's only a few years since Fife were goading CEC by saying they will be the first council to spend 10% of their transport budget on cycling. I guess the new administration isn't so proactive.</p> <p>What path are you looking at? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323304 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 20:50:41 +0000 CocoShepherd 323304@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>There are now two big housing developments due to be built west of Dunfermline, the above Broomhill development and one west of Crossford. Combined total of between 2000 and 4000 houses. You'd think that Fife Council could come up with some sort of sustainable transport suggestions to include with these proposals but I can't find out if they have. Emails to question the local councillors have fallen on deaf ears. Actually my local community council are trying to drive forward a ~1 mile long segregated bike lane project to link up with Dunfermline but FC have left it to residents to provide/source funding. They just aren't interested. Building new bypasses however, now you're talking... </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323303 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:28:50 +0000 chdot 323303@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>I wonder how it will all fit in with this -</p> <p><a href="https://climatechange.fife.scot/wp-content/uploads/sites/42/2020/02/Climate-Fife-–-Sustainable-Energy-and-Climate-Action-Plan-2020-2030.pdf" rel="nofollow">https://climatechange.fife.scot/wp-content/uploads/sites/42/2020/02/Climate-Fife-–-Sustainable-Energy-and-Climate-Action-Plan-2020-2030.pdf</a> </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323302 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 18:27:11 +0000 Baldcyclist 323302@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>Hmm, I wonder who the first to complain will be if they close off the current access road from the roundabout? </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323299 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 17:47:33 +0000 cb 323299@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>My favourite bit from that PDF is the screen grab from "The Good Life" on p33.<br /> Didn't know Felicity and Richard were local residents. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323298 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 17:01:29 +0000 CocoShepherd 323298@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>@acsimpson</p> <p>In order to allay your concerns, a control+F search confirms that the word 'cycling' appears not once but twice within the 79-page document. Also the rights-of-way throughout the site will remain as such and are being branded as Principle Green Routes. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323297 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 16:53:03 +0000 acsimpson 323297@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>That's a fine snapshot in time:</p> <p><em>"Dunfermline’s outstanding location has the opportunity to be further enhanced by the proposed new multi-modal Forth<br /> crossing.<br /> As well as providing additional car capacity, the new bridge could provide Light Rapid Transit (L.R.T) links to Dunfermline from the international airport and Edinburgh’s western business and financial headquarters."</em></p> <p>It's slightly depressing that the only image in the first 30 pages which doesn't appear to be taken within 50miles of the site is the one of a busy cycle path. Given the flora I would guess it's from Australia.</p> <p>I didn't see any mention of active travel routes while skimming through it but instead repeated suggestions from the maps that they would happily replace the existing cycle paths in Dunfermline with light rail. I can't imagine why the current campaigners are asking for roads rather than light rail.</p> <p><em>"...capacity to become a city neighbourhood of equal stature to Edinburgh’s 'Stockbridge..."</em> But just in case it doesn't they'll connect it to the motorway to ensure it can be just another commuter suburb of Edinburgh. </p> http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=20101#post-323296 Tue, 25 Feb 2020 16:43:42 +0000 CocoShepherd 323296@http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/ <p>It is certainly heavily laden with tosh.</p> <p>A favourite of mine, seemingly on education, is:</p> <p>"This enables the development of localised, flexible and diverse learning environments, that change the physical space that is required in which to teach and offers the possibility of learning beyond institutional (often fortified) walls." Whoever came up with that must've been proud of themselves.</p> <p>I also love how they are re-branding buses as Rapid Transit Connections.</p> <p>I found this a few weeks ago as I've been on at the council etc. asking for some cycle lanes along the A985, the chances of which I think will be detrimentally affected by the opportunity to build a new bypass despite there being NO MONEY ANYWHERE FOR ANYTHING. </p>