I think it is far more likely that the old FRB will be repaired (easier to do once 90 odd percent of the traffic is off it) and then incrementally re-opened to general traffic - following demands from motorists outraged at queues on the new bridge.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
"Queensferry Crossing project ‘months behind schedule’ "
(805 posts)-
Posted 7 years ago #
-
Since the FRB will presumably need to stay open for mopeds, learner drivers, tractors and any other vehicles banned from motorways, I suspect it will in effect be open to all traffic from day one. It will be signposted as 'local traffic and non-motorway traffic' but will nevertheless be available to all and sundry, perhaps with a weight limit.
Potentially this usage could be discouraged by making the A904 underpass strictly buses/taxis only (thereby forcing other non-motorway traffic up to the signalled roundabout), although it's difficult to see how this could be enforced other than by a number plate recognition system.
Unless they are expecting non-motorway vehicles to go all the way up to Kincardine?
Posted 7 years ago # -
"... then incrementally re-opened to general traffic"
That sounds very plausible, but I bet that the clamour to reopen the old bridge comes much sooner than anyone had expected.
Posted 7 years ago # -
i reckon they'll reopen the old bridge to motorists for "local access only"
then just leave everyone to interpret that as they see fit
edit: as you also just said, panyagua !
Posted 7 years ago # -
I went to the monthly update on progress at the visitor centre this morning.. The presenter (Ewan) said that the existing bridge was expected to have tiny motor traffic levels (300 per hour?), and investigations/plans had begun for it's use for other additional purposes - he cited light rail transit/tram! It was also expected to be repaired, and planned to be used as a back-up if Queensferry Crossing is closed for more than 8 hours.
The engineering behind the new bridge is impressive though...
Planned to be open in May, and will have a weekend walk-over prior to that, but with no bikes/skateboards!
Posted 7 years ago # -
Planned to be open in May, and will have a weekend walk-over prior to that, but with no bikes/skateboards!
But we already have a route (roughly) planned!
Posted 7 years ago # -
Said they were expecting thousands to want to walk across, so were going to do it by ticket ballot.
Posted 7 years ago # -
It's 2.5km long, with two lanes (and a hard shoulder) in each direction - they could fit 100 000 people on it! They have to be able to give a single lane of it to cyclists.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Previously previously
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1154990814592583&substory_index=0&id=155045337920474
Posted 7 years ago # -
"Thank you for your email dated 25th November regarding the opportunity to cycle the Queensferry Crossing prior to the official opening.
At this stage, we do not have any further information available with regards to the opening celebrations for the Queensferry Crossing or the events which could take place prior to opening. However, scoping work is underway and we are looking at the full range of options and opportunities available in order to satisfy the significant interest and requests we have received already.
As the Queensferry Crossing is now scheduled to open to traffic in May 2017, we do not anticipate that any further information will be available with regards to the opening celebrations or public access events until towards the end of 2016."
Posted 7 years ago # -
Anyone else find the new bridge to be a dull, ugly, gracelessly utilitarian structure compared to the other two neighbouring bridges? Or is it just me?
Posted 7 years ago # -
I wonder if the FO used the wrong bridge deliberately as rail bridge is more interesting and also by using the wrong bridge creates a talking point adds history.
I do prefer the look of the older bridges, but the real disappointment over the new bridge is can’t walk across it (or cycle) because they insists on 6 lanes. I would have through one lane could be used for walking or cycling. Does it need a hard shoulder in both directions.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Does it need a hard shoulder in both directions
If you don't plan on breaking down or getting a flat tyre, ever, then of course not.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Question is, how long will it be before the hard shoulders are re-appropriated as running traffic lanes?
Posted 7 years ago # -
Or maybe you are only allowed to break down while travelling south to north?
(Sorry, Ed1, your point is a valid one, it was just the way you put it...)
Posted 7 years ago # -
"If you don't plan on breaking down or getting a flat tyre, ever, then of course not."
Well yes but.
Existing road bridge doesn't, I'm sure there have been problems due to breakdowns, but it's all about the fantastically 'traffic flow' (until the next bottleneck).
Posted 7 years ago # -
Anyone else find the new bridge to be a dull, ugly, gracelessly utilitarian structure compared to the other two neighbouring bridges? Or is it just me?
Probably not *just* you, but I, and most people I know who have expressed an opinion, find it an interesting, attractive and graceful example of form following function.
Eye of the beholder, and all that.
That's from an aesthetic point of view; I'm as disappointed as anyone here at the lack of active travel provision.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I asked only because it occurred to me as I gazed upon the new structure from the train window this morning. Indeed it has occurred to me more than once.
Something about those concrete pillars: like big cigarettes stood on end. The FRB is much more pleasing to the eye.
Posted 7 years ago # -
like big cigarettes stood on end
Noooooo. Now you've put that image in my mind, I'll never be rid of it. Nice reminder of the toxic emissions emanating from it though.
Like the image I have of the black revolvers on the side of the Parliament building.
Posted 7 years ago # -
dull, ugly, gracelessly utilitarian structure does at least equate to relative value for money as opposed to a grandiose radical interpretation of the cable-stayed bridge style currently in vogue
Posted 7 years ago # -
"a grandiose
radicalinterpretation of the cable-stayed bridge style currently in vogue"That is also true! (Minus the "radical" bit).
Posted 7 years ago # -
Like the image I have of the black revolvers on the side of the Parliament building.
Those are clearly Scalextric controllers.
Posted 7 years ago # -
No, they're phasers from Star Trek.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Those are clearly Scalextric controllers.
During a tour of the Parliament I attended years ago, they were revealed to be nicknamed "trigger stones".
Posted 7 years ago # -
"trigger stones"
Phasers.
Posted 7 years ago # -
Anyone else find the new bridge to be a dull, ugly, gracelessly utilitarian structure compared to the other two neighbouring bridges? Or is it just me?
I think a lot of people found the current road bridge to be the same when it was first built; when compared to what had come before. But then a lot of people back then were also super impressed by just how striking and modern the new structure was, bright age of the white heat of technology and all that. Until I was 7, I lived almost literally in the shadow of the road bridge, could see it right outside my bedroom window. It's always been there, I've never seen the Forth without it, I'm used to it and it looks right, like it's meant to be there and always has been. Looking at old photos, pre-road bridge, the Forth looks somehow "wrong".
I don't see the new bridge as an architectural triumph by any means, but we might need to reserve judgement a bit and reflect on when it too is 30 or 40 years old to really compare it to how we see the "old" bridge now.
Posted 7 years ago # -
I personally see the FRB as quite an elegant design. It fits into a tradition spanning back (I know) to San Francisco's Golden Gate, Brooklyn Bridge, etc.Similarly the Humber and Severn bridges seem elegant.
The new bridge just looks ugly. I'm sure it's an impressive engineering feat, but it just doesn't do it for me with what resemble long used Bacofoil tubes sticking out of the firth. It would be a large turkey you could wrap with a sheet of foil that size.
It's not that cable stayed bridges are inherently ugly. There are a number of beautiful examples around. Just this one seems very uninspiring.
There's a nice looking cable stayed bridge (Pont de Normandie).
Posted 7 years ago # -
The Stirling one is over-iconic on an unsuitable site (IMO).
These are mostly better -
https://www.istructe.org/structuralawards/categories/pedestrian-bridges
Posted 7 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
