Aberdeen Bypass Route Announced

[novaecosse]

The latest horror story courtesy of the P&J
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/ne ... awpr-site/

I would rather the AWPR opened late.

[WHBM]

The main contractor is Aberdeen Roads Limited, which is a consortium of Balfour Beatty, Carillion and Galliford Try.

An interesting combination.

Balfours, the UK's largest contractor, are generally pretty hot on Health & Safety - their corporate strapline for some years has been "Zero Harm", always prominent on their sites, and even on every letter you get from them. Carillion are UK's No 2, and have some well-publicised financial issues at present and a collapsed share price. The third party was actually Morrison, the Edinburgh-based contractor, who were absorbed by Galliford Try during the project.

JVs are assembled on projects like this as no single contractor likes to be exposed wholly to the risks of one large project going wrong. Apparently the Aberdeen project is already headed for a significant loss, which all three have had to make provision for in their accounts. This is a bit surprising as the oil industry collapse, and thus the extent to which local trade contractors would be able to increase, or willing to decrease, their prices has altered a lot since the project started. Did they run into any technical problems ?

JVs also typically parcel out the various functions among the participants dependent on who has capacity, in a sort of "I'll do the accounting, you do the labour hire" etc approach. I wonder who is in the lead on Health & Safety audits, and how strong they are over those who are bonused, and earn promotion prospects, on project profitability.

[darkcape]

Did they run into any technical problems ?

JVs also typically parcel out the various functions among the participants dependent on who has capacity, in a sort of "I'll do the accounting, you do the labour hire" etc approach. I wonder who is in the lead on Health & Safety audits, and how strong they are over those who are bonused, and earn promotion prospects, on project profitability.

From experience of working on JVs, health & safety is normally stricter - because each contractor boasts of how good their safety record is, and how if you don't adopt their policy and standards they won't consider themselves responsible if there is an accident. Carillion, for example, has the strictest scaffolding policy that I've seen out of the main contractors, which in JVs is forced upon other contractors.

The job has had multiple near-misses as well as the injuries reported, such as material collapse and failure. Problems-wise, despite it being in Aberdeen, apparently snow & extreme flooding wasn't foreseen and has impacted the job. Rumours are that there are major issues with the client - I wouldn't be surprised to see a court case at the end.

[novaecosse]

Flooding I can understand.

Snow? It snows in Aberdeen most years and it's been fairly mild in terms of snowfall for the last 4-5 years.

[WHBM]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a court case at the end.

Over claims ?

[novaecosse]

I wouldn't be surprised to see a court case at the end.

Over claims ?

Designer and Contractors usually end up suing each other, once Arbitration falls apart.

[iainh124a]

September 24th: Foveran to Tipperty (Bridgend) (part of the Balmedie to Tipperty road) partially opened today as a diversion from the original A90. The road is now on the to-be southbound carriageway as a single lane in each direction.

Looking north from Foveran Bridge:

September 2017: Foveran to Tipperty (Bridgend) stretch now open on one carriageway of AWPR (Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route) Balmedie to Tipperty section looking north by Iain Henderson, on Flickr

Looking south from Foveran Bridge:

September 2017: Foveran to Tipperty (Bridgend) stretch now open on one carriageway of AWPR (Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route) Balmedie to Tipperty section looking south by Iain Henderson, on Flickr

Video of Northbound journey towards Tipperty:


Video of Southbound journey towards Foveran:

[novaecosse]

Two observations...

I wouldn't have given myself the maintenance liability of a contraflow buffer zone on a single carriageway.

Slipform concrete pavement with a thin surface course... why not slipform a concrete centre barrier?

[FurryBoots]

I was up that way recently and noticed that a concrete central barrier is being built on the AWPR but an armco-type barrier is being used on the Balmedie-Tipperty part of the project. Anyone know if there is there a reason for this?

[SuperLez]

September 24th: Foveran to Tipperty (Bridgend) (part of the Balmedie to Tipperty road) partially opened today as a diversion from the original A90. The road is now on the to-be southbound carriageway as a single lane in each direction.

Looking north from Foveran Bridge:

September 2017: Foveran to Tipperty (Bridgend) stretch now open on one carriageway of AWPR (Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route) Balmedie to Tipperty section looking north by Iain Henderson, on Flickr

Looking south from Foveran Bridge:

September 2017: Foveran to Tipperty (Bridgend) stretch now open on one carriageway of AWPR (Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route) Balmedie to Tipperty section looking south by Iain Henderson, on Flickr

Video of Northbound journey towards Tipperty:


Video of Southbound journey towards Foveran:

Great vids!

At last! A bit of AWPR that we can now actually drive on! Even if it is only a couple of miles of coned off S2. But its a start!

[SuperLez]

Two observations...

I wouldn't have given myself the maintenance liability of a contraflow buffer zone on a single carriageway.

Slipform concrete pavement with a thin surface course... why not slipform a concrete centre barrier?

The lack of overtaking opportunities would be a concern with me. A fair bit of farm traffic uses this stretch and it is quite possible to be stuck behind a tractor for a fair bit of time.

[SuperLez]

I was up that way recently and noticed that a concrete central barrier is being built on the AWPR but an armco-type barrier is being used on the Balmedie-Tipperty part of the project. Anyone know if there is there a reason for this?

Couldn't help but notice this myself. Maybe something to do with the actual AWPR proper being a special road? Otherwise, I'm scratching my head in complete puzzlement.

[orudge]

Could it be because they were designed as two separate projects and the barriers were specified as part of those individual projects?

[novaecosse]

Could it be because they were designed as two separate projects and the barriers were specified as part of those individual projects?

Possibly, but both are being built and maintained under the DBFO, so I would have reduced the ongoing maintenance liability a double sided corrugated beam comes with.

Hopefully it's been erected on the correct Z-posts.

[GrahameCase]

Quick Q - if it’s being built using the DBFO model does this mean we’ll be left with the ludicrous position we have on the new M8 where there is no Emergency Roadside Telephones ?

[SuperLez]

Could it be because they were designed as two separate projects and the barriers were specified as part of those individual projects?

I thought that both the AWPR and Balmedie-Tipperty projects had been merged into one single humungous scheme. So I would have thought that the procurement processes for the schemes would have been merged together into a single central pot.

We know that the design standards for motorways are a good bit higher than they are for AP roads. As the AWPR is a special road that is to be open to Classes I and II of traffic only, are the m/way standards being followed for this part of the project? And are concrete barriers part of the package for new build motorways and repairs/upgrades?

[SuperLez]

Quick Q - if it’s being built using the DBFO model does this mean we’ll be left with the ludicrous position we have on the new M8 where there is no Emergency Roadside Telephones ?

I don't honestly know if there will even be a requirement for emergency phones for this scheme as it isn't a motorway, even though only Classes I and II of traffic can use it. I do know that there will be emergency laybys provided every mile or so however.

[orudge]

I thought that both the AWPR and Balmedie-Tipperty projects had been merged into one single humungous scheme. So I would have thought that the procurement processes for the schemes would have been merged together into a single central pot.

I believe they did remain separate schemes until 2011 or so once the final legal challenge was defeated and the government announced they’d be procured together. I don’t know at what point the decision regarding barrier types, etc, was made, but I wonder if it was done as part of the design work when the projects were separate, and was then procured on that basis. I don’t know if the contractors/operators would be able to vary it in that case?

Anyway, it’s certainly exciting to see a decent length of new road open (if only as a contraflow)!

I don't honestly know if there will even be a requirement for emergency phones for this scheme as it isn't a motorway, even though only Classes I and II of traffic can use it. I do know that there will be emergency laybys provided every mile or so however.

I think I’m right in saying the Brechin bypass has emergency phones, but I don’t think much/any of the rest of the A90 north of Perth has any.

[SuperLez]

I thought that both the AWPR and Balmedie-Tipperty projects had been merged into one single humungous scheme. So I would have thought that the procurement processes for the schemes would have been merged together into a single central pot.

I believe they did remain separate schemes until 2011 or so once the final legal challenge was defeated and the government announced they’d be procured together. I don’t know at what point the decision regarding barrier types, etc, was made, but I wonder if it was done as part of the design work when the projects were separate, and was then procured on that basis. I don’t know if the contractors/operators would be able to vary it in that case?

Anyway, it’s certainly exciting to see a decent length of new road open (if only as a contraflow)!

I've noticed that both the A9 Kincraig-Dalraddy and the Queensferry Crossing both have Armco barriers fitted. So B-T probably is working off a different design plan to the rest of the AWPR.

I don't honestly know if there will even be a requirement for emergency phones for this scheme as it isn't a motorway, even though only Classes I and II of traffic can use it. I do know that there will be emergency laybys provided every mile or so however.

I think I’m right in saying the Brechin bypass has emergency phones, but I don’t think much/any of the rest of the A90 north of Perth has any.

Are there not a couple between Dundee and Perth? Or is my memory playing tricks on me again?

[novaecosse]

Are there not a couple between Dundee and Perth? Or is my memory playing tricks on me again?

Yes, you're not losing your marbles