"
@SpokesLothian: Road #maintenance priorities: #cycling issue postponed again. See 2.11 http://t.co/5weZkQHm82 @CyclingEdin @Cyclelaw1 @CyclingSurgeon @edfoc
"
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
"Road maintenance priorities: cycling issue postponed again"
(4 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
Cycle Prioritisation
2.11 In 2010, Spokes highlighted the issue that there was no prioritisation weighting for cyclists using carriageways. At present there are no usage figures available for cycle use on carriageways. It is, therefore, not possible to introduce prioritisation weightings for on-road cycle use.
2.12 This issue is currently being investigated to ensure that all areas of cycle use are reviewed at to enable the introduction of procedures that will benefit cyclists throughout Edinburgh. The findings will be reported to this committee at a date yet to be decided.It's a disappointment that there isn't any specifics for cyclists in the calculations. I do understand that it is hard and that you can't prioritise everything and they have adjusted the weightings to give smaller suburban/rural roads a chance (albeit still lower weightings than busy roads / bus routes) but the sub-committee to look at the prioritisation was set up in November last year and cycling angle was specifically raised by me when I went in front of the Transport Committee in June.
I would have hoped they could have come up with something ( to my simplistic mind, they could have asked their peers in other Metropolitan Councils what they do and picked the best one) or at the very least a commitment for when they will come back. I'm not sure when the 2014/15 repair/resurfacing programme is getting proposed but if this isn't incorporated soon it will be another year before they fix the 'right' roads.
Additional weighting to high cycle usage roads would be good, but how do you define. Family Cycle Network could have been a start - however, we just get this note
2.6 Introducing a top-sliced allocation for type 3 and 4 roads will also be beneficial for cyclists as it will ensure that the roads in the worst condition will be prioritised for resurfacing. Many type 3 and type 4 roads form part of the on-road sections of the Family Friendly Cycle Network.
The scoring condition that particular grieves me is this one:
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.
What it doesn't consider is the likelihood of injury to a cyclist. A bad road surface can significantly increase the risk to a cyclist either by them falling or colliding with another vehicle because of the need to change direction to avoid pot holes etc.
Putting the risk to cycling into this condition would bring to the attention to the surveyor that it's not just motorised vehicles that they should be considering, as it stands we're not treated as equals.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I'm sure we can all think of any number of roads needing repaired but I wonder where my street comes on their priority list? It's busier than most of those on the EEN list, has one bus route using less than half of it, a school, a nursery, lots of two and four-wheeled traffic and yet has been untouched for as long as I can remember in terms of remedial work. It gets dug up often enough, but never repaired!
As far as I'm aware, it's also an official emergency vehicle route, so you would think a smooth surface would be desired. Instead, it is rough, pot-holed, poorly-drained and has cycle lanes which are fading into obscurity due to lack of maintenance of the markings. Much of it is either unusable due to parking (even though most owners have driveways) or dangerous to wheels of the narrow kind.
Oh well, looks like I'll have to wait till priorities are changed again...
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
