CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure

CEC's road resurfacing priorities

(75 posts)

123

  1. HankChief
    Member

    Think this deserves its own thread.

    I've been in correspondence with the Council about the state of Gogar Station Road (GSR) highlighted by Greenroofer's video last week, within the Must be Summer thread.

    Must be summer

    The response has been that whilst it is a mess it doesn't rate high enough to get fixed, due to the assessment process that is used.

    I've asked for more details on this process and GSR's assessment but basically it takes the rating of the road itself and then applies a multiplier which is increased due to things like traffic volume, being on a bus route or being in the city centre.

    From what I can gather the multiplier doesn't take into account the volume of cycle traffic or any risk assessment for the safety of those cyclists.

    For those that don't know it, GSR links the A8 cycle path with the Canal path just to the West of the bypass. It's well used by cars (as a rat run) and cycles, but is narrow and despite being a 40 limit is a pretty hostile place to cycle (especially on dark commutes in winter). It's a challenge to find a route between/over the bumps / holes and keep awareness of what the traffic is doing around you.

    Whilst GSR is just an example of where the road needs fixed, the wider problem is that cyclists' safety isn't forming part of the current assessment.

    I am being told that CEC are currently looking into updating the multiplier system to ensure that it is fit for purpose. Any views on what we can do to put our case across?

    The alternative is that CEC have to use the limited cycling budget to fix the roads that both we (and cars) use. http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9540

    Posted 11 years ago #

  2. wee folding bike
    Member

    I know how to get the road mended.

    You need the Pothole Optimised Peregrination Experience.

    There is always a lovely smooth road after that.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  3. Roibeard
    Member

    wfb wins the word of the day award!

    I now know why a peregrine falcon is so called...

    Robert

    Posted 11 years ago #

  4. wee folding bike
    Member

    In more serious news the female peregrine has gone missing at the Falls of Clyde.

    http://blogs.scottishwildlifetrust.org.uk/fallsofclyde/2013/05/26/single-parent/

    Posted 11 years ago #

  5. TheBuddster
    Member

    Hi Hank Chief. GSR goes through both the SW & West N'hood areas. I work for SW. Which team have you been dealing with on this? Is there a section which is giving you particular concerns?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  6. HankChief
    Member

    Hi Buddster,

    Thanks for your reply. The only bit that needs sorting is the 1/2 mile stretch between the (traffic light controlled) bridges over the railway and the Gogar Burn (by the RBS Headquarters) at the North end of the road.

    It's in the West catchment area, so I've been dealing with them.

    There's another video by Greenroofer which shows a clearer picture of the worst of the conditions

    http://www.naden.de/blog/bbvideo-bbpress-video-plugin -->

    [+] Embed the video | Gogar Station Road

    " target="_blank">Video Download    		Get the Video Player

    We did a traffic count earlier in the month and whilst a very limited sample does give an indication of the level of use. 27 bikes and over 350 vehicles between 8am & 9am.

    My argument has been that it's not very safe for the current cyclists and off putting for any potential cyclists, who would otherwise have a safe route to/from the canal.

    There is also the more general point about why isn't cyclists volumes/safety being taken into account in the general formula.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  7. TheBuddster
    Member

    My understanding of the resurfacing priorities, and I'm not a Roads Officer myself mind, are that the the size of the works generally means its needs to come from the central capital budget which N'hoods can influence but don't have direct control of. However, the N'hood teams do have direct control of the patching work which is carried out.
    Do you know if an inspector been out to look at the road section in question?
    My understanding is that our teams will put sections forward for patching if they require the work. The only issue there is that it might be a low priority in terms of when the work would actually get carried out. So it may be getting put forward for patching but the officers may just be managing you expectations by saying its not going to be anytime soon.
    I will check this tomorrow with our team so don't quote me on it just yet but I think this might be the case. Unfortunately this issue isn't in my area so I'm unable to get involved in specifics but I will check the process on this.
    Is that at all helpful?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  8. gembo
    Member

    @ wee folds

    That pothole optimisation process you refer to coincides with papal visits to allow the pope mobile easy flow to the masses.

    I know a boy called peregrine. @ roibeard. But perry for short.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  9. HankChief
    Member

    Thanks Buddster - very helpful to get some clarity about how the process works.

    The deterioration of previous patching is now causing a lot of the current problems.

    The response I got from the West team was

    Following the recent request for Gogar Station Road to be reassessed for inclusion in the capital programme for resurfacing, I can advise that unfortunately it has not been rated sufficiently for inclusion. This location will continue to be monitored as part of the annual walkabout inspection regime.

    What does an assessment involve?

    I guess that an inspector riding a bicycle along it at rush hour isn't part of it, although I'm happy to lend them a bike if they want this experience.

    On the plus side, Cllr Jim Orr has been helpful in asking the Roads Renewal Manager to

    estimate when Gogar Station Road can be expected to be repaired (if at all) and to copy us all in. I hope that we can investigate ways of scheduling this repair some time soon and will see what I can do to make this happen.

    However, I'll wait until it has been fixed before I celebrate.

    IMHO, GSR is a key example of how the current rating system is failing a significant section of road users, namely cyclists.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  10. wee folding bike
    Member

    easy flow to the masses.

    I see what you did there.

    New pope, new chance for road repair. Glasgow are mending the road near my work. Which is nice. The ridged stage after taking the old surface off wasn't fun on 100 psi Kojaks.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  11. cc
    Member

    Good luck with Gogar Station Road. I agree about the council's prioritisation of road resurfacing seeming to fail cycling. My own example is the council's own "quiet family route" through the Grange - there are some deep potholes and some areas where there's just no road surface left, just a rutted mess (several parts of Relugas Road). Does the council really think that children and families should be guided straight into these potholes and ruts? At the moment it would seem that it does.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  12. gembo
    Member

    There are potholes everywhere so the prioritisation has to fix some and leave others. The prioritisation doesn't seem perfect. In SW we get kept informed by the Buddster, I don't think the prioritisation is any better than other areas but we are better informed. One aspect of the repairs seems to be that closing the road to fix them bumps them down the list?? Alas ravelrig road which is atrocious at bottom of steep hill was closed, I think for rail track power lines but the opportunity to fix the surface did not get taken up.

    on the plus side, lots of new patches of properly repaired Tarmac popping up randomly across edinburgh

    Posted 11 years ago #

  13. SRD
    Moderator

    sadly, the buddster is leaving: http://thebuddster.com/2013/05/26/aloha-goodbye-and-hello/

    I think the council should promote him to show all the 'teams' how to do social media effectively. Maybe we could start a petition?

    Posted 11 years ago #

  14. TheBuddster
    Member

    Spoke to our Roads Team this morning. My basic run through of the process of resurfacing and patching are roughly correct (with a few caveats which I won't go into).

    In terms of more detail on assessment, weighting and scoring of resurfacing work I've emailed the central team to see if they have anything which documents this process which I can share. Our guys have said there is a scoring system in the process for prioritizing which roads are done first. This takes into account a number of factors such as footfall, bus routes, etc. They do not know if cycling is included in this. This should be included in the info I get from the central team.

    I'll let you know once I hear back from the team.

    Gembo is right in that we have a lot of roads to maintain so it may be that this route is further down the list that other more high volume routes. I'm sure the info you get from Cllr Orr will clarify this.

    SRD don't start a petition! If I get promoted I might have to deal with more than just the SW! ;-)

    Posted 11 years ago #

  15. chdot
    Admin

    "This takes into account a number of factors such as footfall"

    Assume that is particularly about pavements. There have been plenty of examples of 'nice new pavements' where hardly anyone walks.

    Also, over many years, CEC has resurfaced a lot of cul-de-sacs (some people prefer 'correct' spelling) - often just before the end of financial years...

    Will be VERY good if you can get 'roads' to factor in cycle use much more.

    Poor surfaces, particularly potholes, aren't just potential puncture/buckled wheel creators they can - by direct action or cyclists' avoiding tactics - lead to injuries (potentially very serious).

    Posted 11 years ago #

  16. DdF
    Member

    The Council maintenance regime does give extra weightings for cycling.

    The council approved the following policy back in 2010 and as far as I am aware this is the current situation...

    http://www.edinburghnp.org.uk/media/122371/Proposals_for_a_new_system_of_prioritisation_of_roads_and_footway_investment.pdf

    In the initial draft a weighting was included for bus-use, for obvious reasons; and of course this also benefits cycling.

    There was a consultation on the draft, to which Spokes responded. We supported the above but alsoproposed a weighting for roads with significant cycle use but which are not on bus routes. The council agreed to this. See para 3.28 of the report.

    Obviously identifying which roads this applies to is problematic, but Spokes put forward some criteria, which again were agreed - including all sections of road containing onroad cycle lanes and all roads which are part of the Council's 'family network'. There is also scope for additional roads to be added, but this has to be done on objective criteria or all roads could be added - in which case the weighting would be worthless!

    Unfortunately, of course, just because a road has an extra weighting does not mean it always reaches sufficiently far up the list!

    Posted 11 years ago #

  17. Greenroofer
    Member

    There's also something else: when patching is done, it needs to be done in a way that doesn't make things worse for cyclists. Some parts of Gogar Station Road are an unspeakable collection of patches on top of patches on top of patches, and are thus incredibly bumpy. They probably won't send you over the handlebars, but they are uncomfortable, and navigating a route through them with a scrap metal truck up your rear end is entertaining, to say the least.

    To be fair, some of the recent patching has covered a larger area in one go, but even here it's only covered the centre of the lane (roughly the 'primary position'), so it's not actually improved things for cyclists. You've got to be really assertive to ride in primary on a road where the only reason to do so is to get to the smoother tarmac.

    So (1) we need a way to get roads like this up the priority list and (2) when they are patched we need this to be done in a way that improves things for cyclists.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  18. HankChief
    Member

    Thanks for the input.

    I do acknowledge that we will all have our own 'pet' bit of road that needs fixing and with a limited budget not everyone can be satisfied. I'll leave to one side the bigger question of whether the Council are spending enough on fixing the roads.

    The report that DdF references to is very interesting, and does highlight the multitude of additional weightings that are applied. To be honest it becomes quite baffling as to what a 'good enough' score is and whether some roads could ever get a high enough score to be fixed whatever their condition because of so many in better condition get extra weighting. It would be interesting to see a categorisation of all roads by the additional weighting they receive.

    It's great that Spokes got the additional considerations in 3.28, especially the last part

    c. other road sections as identified by the Cycle Officer - for example on the basis any counts that may be conducted in the future.

    However, I'd be interested to know whether this option has been used by the Cycle Officer in the last 2 years and whether GSR ticks the right boxes for it to get the extra weighting under the current system. In my communication with various councillors and officials this hasn't been mentioned.

    All in all though, I can see why the Council are considering overhauling the system. I continue to think that GSR is a key example of how the current system isn't working.

    If/when they do change it, they will need to look at Q5 (p14) which doesn't appear to consider injury to cyclists in their consideration - exactly what we fear about GSR.

    5. Will exclusion cause danger?
    Here, the assessor should be thinking "If this Scheme is not included in this year's maintenance list, would danger be increased before next year's assessment?"

    Rating 0 = Definitely no increase in danger.
    Rating 1 = No increase in danger levels should be expected
    Rating 2 = Slight possibility of rise in minor damage to vehicles
    Rating 3 = Possibility of rise in more serious damage to vehicles
    Rating 4 = High risk of injury to pedestrians / damage to vehicles
    Rating 5 = Too dangerous to be excluded from the maintenance list this year.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  19. Snowy
    Member

    Interesting stuff. Of course, echoing the discussion on the parking thread, are bikes not also vehicles? I used Colinton Road this morning and the surface was so poor that my bike computer leapt clear of its mounting, for the first, and definitely its last, time. I'm certainly classing that as minor damage to a vehicle.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  20. TheBuddster
    Member

    Hi Snowy. When you say

    ..Colinton Road...the surface was so poor..
    is that due to un-repaired potholes? If so what section so I can pass to our inspectors?

    You can now view the roads and footways being proposed under the Capital Resurfacing Scheme 2013/14 online at:
    Council Papers Online
    Its on the Road and Footway Additional Capital Investment Budget report as Appendix C. Also Appendix D is the criteria by which these schemes are assessed.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  21. mgj
    Member

    Any set of priorities that doesnt involve resurfacing Leith Walk is clearly wrong; and I can see nothing in this about Leith Walk, but maybe I'm looking in the wrong place.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  22. Min
    Member

    Leith Walk is supposed to be getting redone entirely, not just resurfaced.

    http://citycyclingedinburgh.info/bbpress/topic.php?id=9687#post-104326

    Posted 11 years ago #

  23. HankChief
    Member

    Thanks Buddster.

    When it says East Hermiston, East of Gogar Station Road on p15, do they mean the dead end road in Hermiston village. Google maps calls it Calder Road, so I guess it was the old road.

    I'm interested to see just how bad a dead end road can be for it to take precedence over GSR.

    I might just head that way tonight for a look.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  24. Snowy
    Member

    Hi Buddster
    Yes, the evil section is the eastbound lane at the T-junction just before you get to Tesco Holy Corner. There are several nasty craters in the space of a few yards. I was too busy trying to asssess the traffic edging out of the t-junction and the traffic trying to barge past me, to manage to levitate over the craters. At 120psi it causes a heck of a jolt and my bars nearly went sideways, closest I've come to stacking it in a while. Farewell Cateye Velo 2.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  25. HankChief
    Member

    Well I went to Hermiston on the way home to check out this mythical road that is so bad the Council are spending our money to resurface...

    As per p15 of the above report, I found the road leading to East Hermiston (farm) to the East of Gogar Station Road as per the description. It does appear to be the old Calder Road which is now a dead end with a farm and a few barns/warehouses at the end.

    Google/Streetview

    East Hermiston

    There are a couple of patches where the surface isn't great but it's not in that bad a state and at the end of the day it is on a dead end road (except for bikes who can cut through to the Calder Junction on the bypass).

    I will ask for more formal confirmation that this is indeed the road that is being prioritised over GSR, but if it is then the current system is far worse that I imagined.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  26. chdot
    Admin

    "except for bikes who can cut through to the Calder Junction on the bypass"

    That's one I never knew about!

    http://www.cyclestreets.net/journey/28675109

    Posted 11 years ago #

  27. HankChief
    Member

    @DdF - I've just been comparing the version you shared with the version included in that included in Appendix D of 7.10 in the version TheBuddster shared.

    The latest version doesn't mention anything about cycle routes getting an additional weighting for assessing roads.

    It could be just an abbreviated version but it also might explain why in my correspondence nobody knew about whether there was any weighting for cycle routes.

    I feel another letter coming on...

    Posted 11 years ago #

  28. DdF
    Member

    @HankChief Yes, this definitely needs sorted out and clarified. Either they have not included the cycle weighting or the recent Committee report is an abbreviated version - either is possible. My suspicion is the former, not for any evil reason but because they've not yet got round to deciding which non-bus roads qualify, but that is purely a suspicion.

    The report which I gave the link to is the current official policy, I am 99%/100% certain.

    Spokes will raise this apparent contradiction at next council cycle forum or possibly by email before, but certainly would be great meantime if your own feeling turns into an actual letter!

    Meanwhile I'm currently totally occupied with the dismal situation over Princes St future (latest news on Spokes website) and the spokes summer mailout, so can't give this one too much thought just now!

    Posted 11 years ago #

  29. HankChief
    Member

    Don't worry this time my letter has been sent to all Transport Committee Members...

    I copied in Cllrs Burns & Cardownie for good measure as well.

    Posted 11 years ago #

  30. chdot
    Admin


    Presentation to TIC

    Posted 11 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

123

Reply »

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin