It’s almost like they had a mechanism to regulate demand on a limited resource, and now they don’t. Ha ha
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Infrastructure
Sheriffhall Roundabout consultation etc.
(212 posts)-
Posted 3 years ago #
-
Hilarious that the government didn't foresee this. Classic tragedy of the commons scenario.
---
Unison spokesperson said: “There are simply not enough spaces in the car parks. You often see queues from Sheriffhall right into the hospital about half an hour sometimes more. The free for all has backfired because people come in and chance their luck. Then you see parking attendants redirecting them to the car parks at the back. Everybody and their granny tries to get in. It's very hit or miss. It seemed to work out better when staff had permits.”
---
No sh1t Sherlock!
Posted 3 years ago # -
“
It's very hit or miss. It seemed to work out better when staff had permits
“
Yes but.
SG abolished parking charges. Why does that mean that hospitals can’t/don’t use permits/booking?
Posted 3 years ago # -
It's an SG policy which is transforming hospital visits across the country. I can't think of any other example which has created such behavioural change in such a short time. Impressive - shows that car users can be easily manipulated and makes me hopeful for the new LEZs in our Scottish cities. People happy to sit for half an hour going nowhere. ;-)
One patient, who asked not to be identified, says he now gets a bus to Ninewells for appointments instead.
Felt guilty with shame of not staying queued with his fellow motorists maybe? I guess they will quickly build bigger 'free' car parks. :-)Posted 3 years ago # -
Sadly in Edinburgh, car drivers can only be influenced in one direction. Towards queues for free parking.
The report states ridiculous fact/lie that doctors are arriving five hours early for shift just to get parked.
Given how small Edinburgh is I imagine doctors could walk from their houses to the hospital in about 2 hours max?
Also bizarrely, the so called journalist writing the article never seems to stop to query any of this, except the Dundonian who was too ashamed to be named for catching the bus along the Perth Road.
Posted 3 years ago # -
How about ‘free parking if you retrospectively apply for it in triplicate’?
‘This must be done between 6 & 7 days after paying for parking ONLY’.
Posted 3 years ago # -
Braess' Paradox was explored and quite well explained in Tom Vanderbilt's book, Traffic. I'd give you the page reference but Tulyar is enjoying my copy too much to return it.
And possible tangentially related to Yet Another Costa, but I came across this video today about Braess's Paradox and it explains it really rather well:
Posted 2 years ago # -
https://www.gofundme.com/f/sheriffhall-overarching-objectors
A Public Inquiry into the £120 million proposed A720 Sheriffhall Roundabout redevelopment will be held in January.
A group of those objecting (mainly) on environmental grounds has organised together, and are crowdfunding with the aim of hiring expert help, including a legal team.
If you are able to, please do consider supporting.
Full disclosure - I'm one of those objecting.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Potentially relevant?
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
Promoter's expert has withdrawn his conclusion that #Sheriffhall traffic forecasting is compatible with @Edinburgh_CC 's policy to reduce car kms by 30%
@EdinburghGreens @CllrCMiller @AlysGreens“
https://mobile.twitter.com/rupe_nash/status/1621164415554039810?
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
Colin Beattie, Scottish National Party MSP for Midlothian North and Musselburgh, also commented in favour of the planned development, saying that the new flyover would improve cycling and public transport links.
“The current proposals have been reviewed to see whether they needed to be changed to provide better facilities for active travel and public transport, and it was determined that the current design is the most appropriate,” Mr Beattie said. “Transport Scotland further confirmed that there are extensive footway and cycleway facilities, which means that pedestrians and cyclists will not have to cross the roundabout physically.”
“
https://www.midlothianview.com/news/sheriffhall-flyover-report-due-by-june
“
which means that pedestrians and cyclists will not have to cross the roundabout physically
“
I’m not even sure what they think they mean.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Looks like the UK Government has been missing a trick. Seems all they need to do is assure SNP MSPs "that the current design is the most appropriate" and they will happy leave it at that.
Posted 1 year ago # -
@chdot. I think this driver was attempting a physical roundabout crossing:
Posted 1 year ago # -
“
Future of Edinburgh's Sheriffhall Roundabout £120m upgrade set to be announced
Critics say Sheriffhall will become a "spaghetti junction" if the project goes ahead - but transport chiefs argue its vital to address traffic issues on a "key route in the region”.
“
Posted 11 months ago # -
No unexpectedly, they are ignoring the key issue of too much traffic for any network. The roads south of the roundabout can be logjammed well before the bypass crossings. This seems only likely to get worse with more house building in progress.
Posted 11 months ago # -
In other news, planners, politicians and transport "experts" fail to understand, or wilfully ignore, induced-demand
"... but more traffic is a good thing, right? Even if logged-jammed. I mean, think of the economic benefit of the masses being addicted to expensive motors, all sitting for hours doing nothing bar looking at their smartphones..."
Posted 11 months ago # -
Not Sheriffhall but Gowkley Moss, and a bit of history:
https://www.wussu.com/roads/r02/r0206071.htm
A701 protest walk - Gowkley Moss - Sunday 9th June 2002
Route walk against Midlothian Council's road-building on the A701
On behalf of A701 No Alignment Action Group (NAAG):
"Goodbye Midlothian, Hello Greater Edinburgh"
NAAG believes that this project -
- Is a waste of scarce financial resources while other Council services are being cut.
- Shows continuing priority for expenditure on road-building while the Council's stated priority is for new rail infrastructure.
- Is a Trojan Horse for further development in the Green Belt.
- Contravenes Scottish Executive and DETR roundabout design guidelines.
They built it anyway. But not quite. Here is what we could have had:
https://api.bgs.ac.uk/sobi-scans/v1/borehole/scans/items/803477
which is why the roundabout as currently formed has on its northern-eastern edge the stump of an unbuilt road - a twenty-year old A701 Relief Road, as it were.
I don't see any reason why Sheriffhall shouldn't be seen as a 2023 equivalent trojan horse.
Posted 11 months ago # -
The A701 relief road is back on the agenda of course, albeit on a different alignment (& incredilbly one that looks even worse for active travel between Midlothian & the city)
https://www.a701reliefroad.co.uk/
I honestly believe Midlothian Council won’t be satisfied until it’s utterly impossible to travel between Midlothian CEC except by motor vehicle (very slowly)
Posted 11 months ago # -
“
"These politicians could have decided to reduce inequalities by investing in public transport and in our streets, but instead they decided to worsen inequalities and increase climate emissions by spending public funds on schemes that will further benefit the more affluent.
"We’re fed up with Scotland's political class mouthing empty platitudes about ‘net zero’ and ‘anti-poverty’ yet decade after decade making deliberate decisions to build new infrastructure that makes the country’s climate failure more and more certain, and neglects to provide fairer access to transport for the country’s poorest."
“
Posted 8 months ago # -
“
NEW REPORT FINDS SCOTLAND’S ‘DIRTY DEALS’ FUELLING CLIMATE AND POVERTY FAILURES
…
Transform is calling for Parliamentary inquiry and immediate halt to new road schemes
“
Posted 8 months ago # -
“
Ms Hyslop said: “The Scottish Government is committed to delivering the grade separation of Sheriffhall roundabout, as part of its £300 million commitment to the Edinburgh and South East Scotland City Region Deal.
“Following publication of the draft Orders and Environmental Statement, Transport Scotland received a significant number of objections to the proposed scheme.
“Although Transport Scotland engaged widely with objectors, it was unable to resolve all objections. In view of this, a Public Local Inquiry was held from 31 January to 8 February 2023.
“As with all trunk road projects, this is the appropriate statutory forum for considering objections received and not withdrawn. The independent Reporter has now presented their recommendations to the Scottish Ministers and this is under active consideration.
“
Posted 6 months ago # -
The Bypass is objectively safe, as assessed by the rigorous European Roads Assessment Programme. You can check out the safety rating of all UK strategic roads using the attached map and dashboard (warning - time sink, also doesn't seem to like Chrome):
http://rsfmaps.agilysis.co.uk/
The risk of a fatal or serious collision on the Bypass is 10.8 per billion vehicle kilometres. By way of comparison, the risk of such a collision on the A702 (Fairmilehead to Lothian Road) is 188 per billion vehicle kilometres.
The people arguing for 'improvements' to the Bypass also successfully argued for the Spaces for People measures on Comiston and Morningside Roads to be removed, despite them being the more 'dangerous' roads.
Posted 6 months ago # -
@chdot: From the article linked in your post:
Tory MSP for the Lothians Miles Briggs claims the collapse of the SNP’s agreement at Holyrood with the Scottish Greens provides an opportunity for the government to move forward with the scheme with less resistance.
So basically, pure "culture wars" opportunism.
Furher down in the article Mr Briggs is quoted as saying:
The Sheriffhall upgrade would help with safety and congestion
I think all of us on this forum know why the congestion claim is highly dubious Induced demand and all that), but safety? How does modifying infrastructure to encourage/enable drivers to travel at higher speeds increase safety? He's got hold of KSI figures for the whole of the bypass and seems to be suggesting that most of them occur in or around the Sherriffhall roundabout. Direct experience of congestion on local roads caused by drivers trying to avoid delays caused by serious crashes suggests that a high proportion of such incidents occur west of Sheriffhall, and particularly on the section between Lothianburn and the M8 junction i.e. the bits where the junctions are already grade-separated.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Yes to all that.
From above
“
The independent Reporter has now presented their recommendations to the Scottish Ministers and this is under active consideration.
“
Are the “recommendations” public?
Posted 5 months ago # -
@chdot - no. The job of the Reporter is to conduct the inquiry and then write a report, including recommendations, for consideration by Ministers. It is Ministers that make the final decision. They do not have to follow the Reporter's recommendations. The report is normally published alongside the ministerial decision.
Posted 5 months ago # -
Thanks
Suspected as much
“normally“?
Posted 5 months ago # -
It is standard practice for the report to be published, but I'm not sure that it is a legal requirement.
Posted 5 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
