Hate to use the slippery slope argument, but it's a slippery slope. Turn a blind eye to an increasing number using it and pretty soon there will be demands to reopen it to "local" traffic and more. Then induced demand kicks in and we're back to square one, with the roads either side of the bridges even more congested.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » General Edinburgh
“Forth Road Bridge to re-open tomorrow”
(57 posts)-
Posted 5 years ago #
-
Regardless of whether it makes sense for people to use it, either to queue jump (as I suspect is the case) or as a shortcut it should be simple to issue a fine. At the Edinburgh end at least bus lane use is decriminalised and fines issues from fixed camera sites already.
Although now I think about it I don't know if the same applies to trunk roads.
The tunnel story is fascinating and answers my question about what exactly they were building in the layby by the FRB exit ramp with all those polystyrene blocks anyway. Although I prefer the conspiracy theory that they have actually constructed a new secret bunker.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Turn a blind eye to an increasing number using it and pretty soon there will be demands to reopen it to "local" traffic and more.
I suspect, sadly, @Stickman has hit the nail on the head. A blind eye will be turned to an increasing amount traffic using it until it is normalised and can be be quietly reopened as a 'local' route, a.k.a. rat-run.
Posted 5 years ago # -
In other news I'm fairly certain that the work currently going on at the southern end of the path is a bike counter. There's been a stand with what I guess is a counter on it for a few weeks and today I noticed there are new channels cut across the path to presumably sense traffic.
Posted 5 years ago # -
couple of cops were at north end of FRB on friday morning, stationary car with flashing blues, to deter/catch drivers as a response to the recent wee bit of media publicity
Posted 5 years ago # -
@stickman, @urchaidh
Not in favour of rat runs per se, but in most cases they would make other's journeys/lives more unpleasant/unsafe.
Who do you see as being disadvantaged by car drivers using the FRB? I can't see anybody who could be.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@paddyirish:
At the moment and at these levels, no-one. But if more and more use it then there will be calls for it to reopen to local traffic, and then to all traffic.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@stickman, and if that happens, who would the victim be then? Drivers who want to travel to South Queensferry would travel there anyway and join at the same roundabout whichever bridge they use. I can't see how anyone would ever be inconvenienced by this. If you don't want to stop there, the QC is the quicker way.
To me the greater worry is that the FRB is used so little that they try to close it. The introduction of a cycle counter may be the first step in that process.
Posted 5 years ago # -
A couple of weeks ago I was merrily making my way North on the bridge when I heard someone shouting at me around about the South Tower. There was some geezer standing beside his van asking if the bridge was open....
Told him he should be on the new one over there and he'd probably best just get in and get across before someone sees him.....thought I'd see him trundle past me but....
He got back in his van and reversed all the way back to the start of the South side!!!!
Jeezo... gave me a giggle for the rest of my journey.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Who do you see as being disadvantaged by car drivers using the FRB?
... and if that happens, who would the victim be then?
The victims are the people who live near the next bottleneck aka Barnton (or indeed the whole of Edinburgh), suffering from increased congestion, increased noise, pollution, danger, etc. due to the induced demand (additional journeys) created by increasing the capacity at the bridge.
I agree about the risk of them closing off an underused bridge though.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@neddie- I don't see anyone heading from Fife to Barnton gaining by heading over the FRB and through S Queensferry. The difference in speed limits, the volume of local traffic and the roundabouts/lights to be negotiated will offset any "advantage" in driving a slightly shorter distance.
Even if there was an advantage, there is going to be gridlock at Barnton, there will be gridlock at Barnton whether drivers use one bridge or two.
The only scenario I can see is S Queensferry getting too much traffic in the case that an accident closes the QC - in that case, I assume the Highways people would direct the traffic over the FRB anyway.
In the scale of transport battles to be fought, IMO this doesn't even register.
Posted 5 years ago # -
At some point the old bridge will require a hefty repair of some sort, which will be the point that the operators ask themselves if it is financially feasible/desirable to make the investment or to commit to decommissioning and dismantling.
But rest assured they aren't keeping the old bridge open as a gesture of goodwill towards active travel.
Dismantling is an expensive business, especially over a busy shipping lane. I'll stick a finger in the air around £250 million - would love to hear of an actual educated guess though?
This is why I think successive administrations will just kick the can down the road, and as a happy side-effect we'll be able to enjoy cycling over the FRB for some time to come.
Posted 5 years ago # -
"Who do you see as being disadvantaged by car drivers using the FRB?
... and if that happens, who would the victim be then?"
The "victims" will be taxpayers who will have to pay out more for repairs, resurfacing, strengthening works, etc.
If it's just public transport, and occasional mopeds, etc. then the repairs will be needed less frequently, the bridge will last longer, the costs will be less and spread out over a longer timespan.....and so on.
Posted 5 years ago # -
The QC gets seeerrrious queues on the M90 and A90 at normal peak times, and worse when there's an accident or some other problem. Pelting down the back roads, over the FRB and into the usually fairly free-flowing traffic on the other side would be significantly quicker (and would certainly feel quicker, which is what seems to matter for most rat-running.) Even just peeling off the M90 northbound at Queensferry Junction and nipping across to the FRB would skip a few minutes of queue, as the slip road has a dedicated lane from all the way back at the A90 junction now.
Legitimise that and suddenly you'll clog up all the back and connecting roads with rat runners as well as inducing general demand, as well as making everyone's lives miserable by causing problems at the adjoining junctions by overloading then with significantly more traffic than they were designed to accommodate. You'd end up with two congested bridges, instead of one, and lots more bottlenecks either side making life more miserable for the 'local traffic' you're trying to help.
That's before you even start to talk about maintenance...
Posted 5 years ago # -
I suppose at the moment it provides a good short cut for those in the know and the other people go around the big bridge.
Posted 5 years ago # -
Hi JR / Amey
There's a flatbed lorry with a mountain of gravel on the back blocking the northside cycleway at 15:30 this afternoon.
Its a pain, because there's no need for it, but this is of minor import.
What is more important, is the ongoing situation on the eastside cycleway on the FRB itself.
We've reached the tipping point where there is very little actual cycleway left. If you add up all the fenced-off infrastructure and parked vehicles, cycle commuting is mostly happening on the pedestrian section now.
That pedestrian section is also doubling up as the moving channel for contractors vehicles travelling southbound, or standing stationary while loading / unloading at the fenced off areas, or two vehicles side by side while the occupants chat about their business.
In all these cases, the carriageway width is entirely blocked for cycle commuters and progress is either not possible, or barely possible. This is especially the case between 8-9am in the mornings, where I am guaranteed to face frustrating delays on FRB when commuting from Fife to Edinburgh.
Contractors views on this seems to be that cyclists should just get off and walk, without considering that clearly it takes much more width to walk your bike alongside, and in any case its not feasible or practical to walk for extended periods here every day as a daily commuter.
During February, I approached one of these vehicle blockages at the fenced off section at North Tower on my morning commute, and a contractor was standing there, quite literally foaming at the mouth, with both fists raised at me, just a foot away from my face. It took me about 20 seconds of "calm down" to get him to lower his fists. He ranted that a cyclist had scraped along the side of his van while passing. He didn't seem to understand that what another cyclist might have done was not something I could be held accountable for. I told his colleagues that I was going to let this incident pass, and I hoped it would give pause for reflection.
Because this is a situation that neither myself or the contractors should suffer on an ongoing daily basis. Contractors want priority to do their work, cyclists want to use the cycleway to get to work. We are getting in each others way with unnecessary friction. For that reason alone, I had sympathy for the situation in february, and made no formal complaint. i still have no interest in a complaint about that specific incident, and merely use it here as a singular example to illustrate the wider problem.
I would ask you, why does the west side cycleway remain shut during the week? Most of the contractors are parked on the east cycleway, most of the fenced off infrastructure is there, and most of the loading / offloading is happening there also.
Also, why is the majority of east side vehicle blockage happening during peak cycle commute hours 8-9am daily? Again, this presents unnecessary friction.
I recall that you're an old hand from the FETA days, and I can tell you that over my 12 years of daily commuting over FRB, the situation has never been as bad as it is now, and all this despite the irony of public perception being that cycling on FRB is all sorted out, after all, its a dedicated public transport corridor, right?
Since the contractors are here to stay, surely something can be done to reduce this friction.
yours fraternally,
bax
Posted 5 years ago # -
At this stage, what would be the issue with designating the inside lane as a bike (and moped??) lane? I guess getting folk on and off it might be tricky.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@bax, every point agreed on.
@jonty- assume you are talking about the road. On and off wouldn't be a problem, but not sure that it would be great to cycle on - the road is made of ~20m sections, split by a non-smooth separation. It means that every 20m or so you hit a bump which you felt in a car. I imagine it would jar considerably on a bike.
Maybe the inside lane of the road should be coned off and used for contractors vehicles...
Posted 5 years ago # -
@stickman, and if that happens, who would the victim be then?
If the entire premise for building a new bridge was that the FRB can't cope, structurally, with the levels of traffic it had, it would presumably be problematic for the bridge itself to open it up again to everyone.
Posted 5 years ago # -
it would presumably be problematic for the bridge itself to open it up again to everyone
The bridge is resting. Recuperating. Convalescing. It'll be back to new in a couple of years.
Posted 5 years ago # -
If officially opened to everyone there would be many more cars on the bridge, the current arrangement may work better
Posted 5 years ago # -
I think the assumption that "everyone" would use it is wrong.
Most drivers would work out that 70mph on the QC would beat 40 or 50mph on the FRB and a few extra vehicles going over would not be an issue. Perhaps a speed limit of 40mph on the FRB would make it an option for local traffic only.
Posted 5 years ago # -
And I still maintain that a virtually unused bridge will be closed within 10 years (less if a Tory government gets in) and that is a worse outcome.
Posted 5 years ago # -
I would agree that tend to think it will close at some point before another bridge with a cycle lane is built there may not be enough cyclists using the bridge to create the poltical presure to keep it open if a big repair bill comes. It will rust and creak in the wind and rain with no use or low use.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@bax, well said. I tweeted them a few weeks ago and got a corporate shrug of the shoulders:
https://twitter.com/TheForthBridges/status/975658505444216832I don't know if it's just one member of staff who is deliberately belligerent or if they have employed a few of them recently. There is definitely too much traffic on the bridge now.
The surface of the carriageway is OK to cycle on (so I hear). They say that it is unsuitable and the expansion joints could be a potential slipping hazard if you aren't paying attention. The barriers at the side though are even lower than the pedestrian path, though are apparently fine for motorbikes. I wouldn't personally use it while it's open to buses and other vehicles not expecting to find a bike there. I guess they have done a risk assessment based on carriageway in use vs empty cycle lanes and forgotten to reassess based on their being belligerent workies on the cycle path.
Incidentally how many people are now cycling down the slip road heading northbound? It's much more convenient if heading north/west than using the cycle path.
Posted 5 years ago # -
@ac also when cycling northbound on the reduced width sections of the eastside path, games of chicken now emerging between cyclist and some contractor vehicle drivers
some aren't giving any priority to the wayfaring cyclist
trouble is they see bike and assume you're just out on a leisure jolly, while they are conducting important bridge business
i will yield if i think they haven't seen me, or if its too late for them to adapt, but if they are assuming default priority i head straight at them
Posted 5 years ago # -
@paddyirish: You're still under the mistaken apprehension that traffic on and approaching the bridge ever gets anywhere near the speed limit around 9am and 5pm. You'd essentially be creating an eight-lane car park at peak times, with the bonus of clogging up a whole new set of junctions which weren't designed with that in mind.
Posted 5 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
