Forth Replacement Crossing

Road construction, numbering, traffic signs, fantasy roads, general roads musings, road history, mapping. Discussions about driving in general are better placed in "Transport and Driving". See below for our separate forum for street furniture.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Potholes ate my car
Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 13:53

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Potholes ate my car » Thu Nov 03, 2011 12:14

Squigs wrote:Having read M80's comment regarding the 3 month look ahead documents on the Traffic Scotland, I came accross http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/files/documents/projects/forth-replacement/FRC-M9J1a.pdf. (I am sorry, I don't know how to shorten it, editor, please help?).

This Document gives the next 3 months work on the M9 Junction 1a works.

The remarkable thing about it is that it keeps mentioning the M901?

Is this a new number being allocated to the M9 Spur? Or perhaps as this document also mentions the M9 Spur, could the M901 be a link between M9 J1a and the M8 at claylands, thus allowing the M9 Mainline to continue on to the A90 at Scotston?

Of Course, the most likly explanation may be that I am simply totally wrong, if that is the case please put me out of my misery and correct me.


I noticed that as well - I managed to find this document which states:

Structure M901 is a new structure provided at M9 Junction 1a to carry the new M9
westbound to M9 Spur northbound slip road over the existing M9. It is located immediately
to the west of the existing Structure M906E and consists of three spans of 14.3m, 42.2m and
14.8m with a steel concrete composite deck on reinforced concrete piers and abutments.
The form of the structure has been chosen to be similar to the existing adjacent Structure M908E.


So it's not a road number at all, it's a big bridge :)

User avatar
Gav
Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 17:44

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Gav » Thu Nov 03, 2011 16:15

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh secret motorway ! Then I see that they have cunningly named the structures with an M prefix someone in there must have a sens of houmour and thought it would be nice to tease the sabristi amoung us.....

Anyways been watching this and it looks like they are starting on converting the M9 junction to full access - this will be fun indeed.

Having had a look at the southern bridge layout it beggers beyond belief at just how cheapskate they are, The M90 is extended across the bridge and ends at the roundabout a short section of A90 will exist to the M9 spur ? Why ? Would it not have been wise to complete it properly ?

http://www.transportscotland.gov.uk/fil ... nction.jpg

Simple solution bring the southern part of the old bridge to a half trumpet with the new road - limited exit slip road and bus gate? build a parallel road to the main line heading east from a new roundabout on the B8000. Link this to the A90 east of the M9 spur. Make full access from the M9 spur to the A90 - thus allowing traffic to use the M9 spur from the newly created full flow interchange on the M9 to head to Edinburgh. Simple solution and one that can add to the infrastructure relieve the traffic around the west end of Edinburgh.

What is being built is half hearted - why redo the bridge without addressing the inherant weaknesses around the south queensferry? You see the bus route from the A90 and how they are making the bus go to get to the bridge?
They need to see what they are doing and how this impacts the area - by having a proper access made then it would allow bridge diversions to be completed without complication. And by following the above we would be able to make it motorway all the way from the M9 spur to the bridge.


Last edited by Gav on Thu Nov 03, 2011 16:15, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Burns
Member
Posts: 2522
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 21:37
Location: Dundee
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Burns » Thu Nov 03, 2011 17:45

I still don't understand why there's going to be a small bit of all purpose A90 between the spur and the M90. I've seen the "catering for restricted traffic" argument but the minimal level of restricted traffic could just be directed off at the B924 junction to create a small motorway spur. Also, what about this? I'm sure a full sign with more restrictions has gone up since then making the A90 a special road anyway.

User avatar
FurryBoots
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 17:34

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby FurryBoots » Thu Nov 03, 2011 18:46

Yes, I see how the layout works now. The short stretch of A90 between the M90 and the M9 spur seems a bit ridiculous. Why bother spending all that money ensuring that the new road just to the north of the forth and the bridge itself have motorway status when you plan to leave a little gap at the end?

This artists impression of the South Queensferry junction shows that this is where the M90 ends. Those with good eyes will notice the colour of the panels on the sign on the approach to the roundabout. There's a horrible patch of green on the right :thumbsdown:

User avatar
si404
Member
Posts: 10295
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 13:25
Location: Amersham

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby si404 » Thu Nov 03, 2011 19:14

I don't get the whining about this - the road won't be any different, other than allowing class IV traffic for that short while.

That said, I don't know why the bus-only slips to the B800 can't be open to all and be for non-motorway traffic.
"The more a society seeks to enforce an idea, the more important it is to question it." Professor Dalibor Krupa

User avatar
FurryBoots
Member
Posts: 270
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 17:34

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby FurryBoots » Thu Nov 03, 2011 19:50

si404 wrote:I don't get the whining about this - the road won't be any different, other than allowing class IV traffic for that short while.

That said, I don't know why the bus-only slips to the B800 can't be open to all and be for non-motorway traffic.
Personally, I don't have an issue with the fact that the motorways will not be connected. As you point out, the road is the same quality so it makes no difference in that respect. I just don't understand why they're going to the trouble of extending the motorway to that point when they could've left the end of the M90 where it is and let non-motorway traffic use the bridge.

Potholes ate my car
Member
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2010 13:53

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Potholes ate my car » Fri Nov 04, 2011 09:33

Gav wrote:Make full access from the M9 spur to the A90 - thus allowing traffic to use the M9 spur from the newly created full flow interchange on the M9 to head to Edinburgh. Simple solution and one that can add to the infrastructure relieve the traffic around the west end of Edinburgh.



This would make a lot of sense - as I live just off Queensferry Road, coming in from the west means waiting at the Maybury junction, then either facing the queues at Barnton or taking the narrower road through Corstorphine (followed by the wait at Clermiston). All traffic heading for the likes of Granton and Leith has to do this. Being able to carry on from Newbridge to the M9 spur would be a much better option - it takes no time at all to get down from South Queesnferry on the A90.

User avatar
Chris5156
Assistant Site Manager
Posts: 12132
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: South London
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Chris5156 » Fri Nov 04, 2011 15:30

si404 wrote:I don't get the whining about this - the road won't be any different, other than allowing class IV traffic for that short while.

That said, I don't know why the bus-only slips to the B800 can't be open to all and be for non-motorway traffic.

It's just messy, that's all. Are you building a motorway or aren't you? Yes, the road will be continuous and no different in terms of traffic flow, but with a scheme this big and this expensive there's no reason not to get the details ironed out and make a clean, tidy job of it.
Chris
Dogsbody and bottle-washer, CBRD.co.uk

User avatar
Gav
Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 17:44

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Gav » Sat Nov 05, 2011 18:14

this is what I mean - get it solved from day one or we will end up with a piece meal that is the bypass layout. Get it right and it will serve for a long time instead of spending money and having a layout that doesnt meet all the requirements just some of them.... sad indeed.

Trebeck
Member
Posts: 2768
Joined: Fri Jan 27, 2006 23:09

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Trebeck » Mon Nov 07, 2011 09:56

I foresee another 'gap' (Cumberland, M8) that will need replaced in the near future.

User avatar
Glen
Social Media admin
Posts: 4259
Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 02:16
Location: Inverness, Scotland, European Union
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Glen » Mon Nov 07, 2011 13:50

Trebeck wrote:I foresee another 'gap' (Cumberland, M8) that will need replaced in the near future.

But it won't be a gap in anything, it will be the same standard of road throughout. Just that one part will have different restrictions applying to it.
Is there a gap in the London orbital route because one part has green signs and the rest has blue? The A74 and A8 are/were sections that were a lower standard of road, hence were a gap in a higher quality route.

booshank
Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 19:05

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby booshank » Mon Nov 07, 2011 14:18

Perhaps it would be a neater solution (and make more sense to the average road user rather than road geek) to "fill the gap" in places like the Dartford crossing by signing it as part of the connecting motorway but relax the rules to allow other types of traffic to cross. That would be a bit like the US interstates which have some of the usual rules relaxed in certain places (or indeed the relaxation of the usual rules against traffic lights etc that are sometimes found on motorways).

I suspect that would make more sense to the average driver even if it offended the roadgeek or planner.

User avatar
Steven
Site Manager
Posts: 13888
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 20:39
Location: Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Steven » Mon Nov 07, 2011 14:32

booshank wrote:Perhaps it would be a neater solution (and make more sense to the average road user rather than road geek) to "fill the gap" in places like the Dartford crossing by signing it as part of the connecting motorway but relax the rules to allow other types of traffic to cross. That would be a bit like the US interstates which have some of the usual rules relaxed in certain places (or indeed the relaxation of the usual rules against traffic lights etc that are sometimes found on motorways).

I suspect that would make more sense to the average driver even if it offended the roadgeek or planner.


The trouble is that a motorway is defined as a Special Road that allows Class I and II traffic - you can't "relax" the rules without fundamentally affecting what a motorway is.

It's why we have non-motorway Special Roads - they CANNOT be a motorway as they allow classes of traffic other than I and II, so, if you like, a non-motorway Special Road (which is what we have at the southern end of the new crossing) IS a motorway with relaxed rules...
Last edited by Anonymous on Mon Nov 07, 2011 15:25, edited 1 time in total.
Steven

Pathetic Motorways: tastier than a well-chewed slipper.

mehere
Member
Posts: 1120
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 08:12
Location: west yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby mehere » Mon Nov 07, 2011 15:14

Not been keeping any eye on this but have they actualy started works to bulld the new bridge and approach roads ?

mehere
Member
Posts: 1120
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 08:12
Location: west yorkshire
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby mehere » Mon Nov 07, 2011 15:14

Not been keeping any eye on this but have they actualy started works to bulld the new bridge and approach roads ?

booshank
Member
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2011 19:05

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby booshank » Mon Nov 07, 2011 16:18

Steven wrote:The trouble is that a motorway is defined as a Special Road that allows Class I and II traffic - you can't "relax" the rules without fundamentally affecting what a motorway is.

It's why we have non-motorway Special Roads - they CANNOT be a motorway as they allow classes of traffic other than I and II, so, if you like, a non-motorway Special Road (which is what we have at the southern end of the new crossing) IS a motorway with relaxed rules...


At the risk of setting the cat amongst the pigeons, perhaps the definition is too rigid. I don't think it would collapse just because a particular rule was relaxed at one or a handful of crossings any more than the concept of the US Interstate collapsed when there was a solitary traffic light on one in Wyoming or somewhere like that or when bicycles were permitted in some rural areas.

In any case, why does non-class I and II traffic have to cross the Forth and Thames estuary but not the Severn?

User avatar
Steven
Site Manager
Posts: 13888
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 20:39
Location: Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Steven » Mon Nov 07, 2011 17:10

booshank wrote:In any case, why does non-class I and II traffic have to cross the Forth and Thames estuary but not the Severn?


To be fair, Classes I, II, Ill, IV, VI, VII and IX are allowed across the Severn Bridge via either the M48 or the "footpath" along the south side of the bridge.
Last edited by Anonymous on Tue Nov 08, 2011 09:32, edited 1 time in total.
Steven

Pathetic Motorways: tastier than a well-chewed slipper.

User avatar
si404
Member
Posts: 10295
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 13:25
Location: Amersham

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby si404 » Mon Nov 07, 2011 23:14

The new Forth Bridge will only allow classes I and II. It's the bit between Scotstoun and Echline that also allows class IV that we're talking about when we go "why isn't the whole thing motorway?".
"The more a society seeks to enforce an idea, the more important it is to question it." Professor Dalibor Krupa

Rain
Member
Posts: 215
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2011 10:47

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby Rain » Tue Nov 08, 2011 07:30

It's not that complicated though, the bridge itself is going to be a motorway and so will have the usual motorway restrictions. The link from the M9 would be a motorway but traffic from the A90 has to be able to access the A904 so there will be a short section that isn't a motorway.

User avatar
6637
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 12:14
Contact:

Re: Forth Replacement Crossing

Postby 6637 » Tue Nov 08, 2011 08:38

Can someone expain why the non-motorway A90-A904 traffic can't use this route? :?
Attachments
90.png


Return to “British and Irish Roads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: doebag, Exabot [Bot], GrahamD, J--M--B, novaecosse, therock247uk and 12 guests