Kessock Bridge Detour!

meanredspider

LMAO - just found out the route I'm going to have to take for the next 17 weeks from tomorrow as they repair/resurface the Kessock Bridge. For reference, here's a picture of the bridge



So, the route (just so we can cross the road) is effectively going to take you from bridge road level, down to sea level (where the lifeboat station is in this picture) then back up to bridge level on the other side (120ft drop then a steep 120ft climb (ooh - new Strava segment :twisted: )) - then across the the bridge, then back on yourself, under the bridge again and finally join back up with the path in Inverness. I'm guessing it will add a mile and 120ft climbing to my ride each way - just to cross the road! At least it will deter the peds and nodders and keep them in their cars.

They're also adding a bus lane to the A9 (one whole carriageway) but they seem to have forgotten that there are no buses!!! (4 a DAY from where I live - none of which would get me to work before 10am)

daxplusplus

Wow - I see what your up against when it gets windy - I didn't realise it was quite so exposed.

daviesee

Bright side - You won't be stuck in the traffic. :P

rubertoe

can we have another picture, my computer is saying NO.

meanredspider

DaxPlusPlus wrote:

Wow - I see what your up against when it gets windy - I didn't realise it was quite so exposed.

Yup - the bridge broadly goes from NW to SE so the prevailing W wind tends to whip across it. North-easterlies also cause problems. There's a big hill to the left of where this photo is taken which tends to funnel the wind.

The wind almost never blows from the SE - when it does, it's a Strava-fest

gosport_commuter

17 weeks? I'm doing my JOGLE in 14, ffs, does that mean I get a building site to look at when I venture across in May?

meanredspider

gosport_commuter wrote:

17 weeks? I'm doing my JOGLE in 14, ffs, does that mean I get a building site to look at when I venture across in May?

I'm afraid so

rolf_f

But think how nice it will be having tarmac on it at last!

campbellrae1

Slightly off topic, but where is the bus lane going to start and finish? Seems pretty pointless as I honestly don't think I have ever seen a bus on that stretch of road...

meanredspider

campbellrae1 wrote:

Slightly off topic, but where is the bus lane going to start and finish? Seems pretty pointless as I honestly don't think I have ever seen a bus on that stretch of road...

Tore to N Kessock. I didn't see any signs indicating it yet. I think communications have been pretty poor. There's very little detail on the Web

eric.s

I sometimes cycle over the bridge too. In the past, if for some reason I was going to be using the cycle path on the southbound side of the bridge, I'd dismount and walk across the A9 just east of the top of Old Craigton Road. In busy traffic you might have to wait a few minutes. In exceptionally busy traffic I'd scramble down the embankment and walk under the bridge a few metres east of the expansion joint, but this is more awkward now as you have to go on the steep ground around the area that they've build the high fence around. Either of those options were less inconvenient than cycling down Old Craigton Road, round by the lifeboat station and up again.

As you say, nothing much seems to have been published anywhere, but I understand Transerv have said pedestrians won't be allowed to cross the A9 at the top of Old Craigton Road during the works. Seems a wee bit surprising as IIRC you could cross there during previous bridge works, though perhaps it's a bigger job this time round. (As for my other shortcut, I imagine the area just east of the expansion joint will be part of the fenced off 'building site' area.)

The TRO details the bus lane and some banned right turns. Doesn't seem to say anything about the cycle paths though.

At south end of the bridge, again I understand Transerv have said pedestrians won't be allowed to cross the road there during road works either, again different to past roadworks I think. Personally I think I'd rather hop onto the road and go round the roundabout and along Longman Road, rather than go all the way round by the stadium.

meanredspider

With respect to the bus/HGV lane, will buses & HGVs be required to use it? And will cars be able to overtake (I guess on the inside)? There are often massive queues of cars stuck behind slow-moving vehicles along the A9 south. If from Tore they still can't get past, it'll be immensely frustrating.

Almost a week after the traffic lights have been switched on, traffic going north hasn't worked out that you can now use both lanes to go straight on (despite big signs saying so). Honestly, I despair of the awareness of the average driver. Yesterday there was a massive queue in the outside lane and I was the only person using the inside lane to go straight ahead.

Again - it's really poor communication

eric.s

I don't think buses and HGVs are *required* to use it. Drivers can overtake on the inside, but the question of overtaking might be academic if you observe the 50 limit that they're having from a mile south of Tore onwards.

Interestingly, although the Transerv press release said it was the northbound side of the bridge that was getting resurfaced first, this morning it was the southbound carriageway that was closed, with contraflow on the northbound. Maybe that's just for some initial preparatory works, but if it turns out that this whole 17 week block of works is on the southbound side, then presumably only the southbound-side cycle path will be shut. In which case there won't be an issue for cycling. (Though of course the plan is to eventually do both sides, so it's coming sooner or later.)

meanredspider

Yup - I've done that route by car a couple of times this morning. Not a single bus or HGV evident but frustrated lines of cars stuck behind a granny doing 35mph whilst the outside lane is empty. Plenty of people just ignoring the restriction (it's stupid at the weekend - I've already written to TranServ to ask that it's only weekday only)

They're preparing the southbound side - cleaning the road and fitting the fluorescent "cats eyes" to mark the lanes etc. They are definitely doing the northbound side first.

meanredspider

Shambles for cyclists this morning. Footpath closures extremely poorly signed leading to all sorts of confusion. I had a bit of a rant at some TranServ management types on the bridge then discovered I was being filmed for a BBC documentary :oops: I don't think I'll sign a "release" for it (they tried to get me to sign one but I noticed it was for a C5 programme on Bariatric Surgery! :? )

The detour adds 1.5 miles and 250ft of climbing to my journey (the "downhill" journey in is now 17 miles and 835ft of climbing). Given the bridge itself is only 0.6 mile long, that's quite impressive.

It's half-term up here this week so it's relatively quiet. It'll be interesting to see what it's like next week...

suzyb

meanredspider wrote:

It's half-term up here this week so it's relatively quiet. It'll be interesting to see what it's like next week...

Is that how I managed to get to work 15 minutes early this morning. Since when did the schools get holidays in February.

Gotta love "rural" roadworks. Same thing happens around here although not quite as bad. Worse detour was when they closed the main road heading out of Carluke. Road closure was a mile long stretch, detour was about 5 miles long, a lot more hilly and in places barely wide enough for the HGVs they were sending along it.

meanredspider

suzyb wrote:

Gotta love "rural" roadworks. Same thing happens around here although not quite as bad. Worse detour was when they closed the main road heading out of Carluke. Road closure was a mile long stretch, detour was about 5 miles long, a lot more hilly and in places barely wide enough for the HGVs they were sending along it.

You can really tell that it's TranServ that are running the job. Bikes? Pedestrians? They were trying to persuade people out of their cars but making the crossing 2.5x as far and adding in a steep hill isn't going to achieve that. On the positive side, there were no peds or nodders

eric.s

Today I went later in the morning and wasn't too inconvenienced. I dismounted and walked across the A9 just past the top of Old Craigton Road, then joined the road at the layby just before the roundabout, and rode round the roundabout and along Longman Road. Hopefully they won't actually put up barriers to stop you crossing the A9, they never have in the past. They probably advise against it because of health and safety etc, but at the end of the day it's not a motorway so pedestrians shouldn't be banned from crossing. Obviously it's never ideal to have to dismount and walk, but quicker than the diversion.

I imagine what I've just described will be unsatisfactory in the morning peak, which I assume is when you use the bridge. Particularly once the schools are back.

meanredspider wrote:

They were trying to persuade people out of their cars but making the crossing 2.5x as far and adding in a steep hill isn't going to achieve that.

Whatever they do it's going to be a bit inconvenient while the N-bound-side cycle path is closed. Maybe there'll be a better opportunity to promote cycling in when they do the other side (2014?)

meanredspider

I don't mind the detour myself - the extra miles and climbing will do me good. It's the shambolic nature of it and the obstacles on the path that's just poor.

For sure I don't fancy crossing the road at peak of the rush hour. I also got the impression that there will be works/vehicles beyond the bridge itself making access to the path on that side impossible too.

eric.s

The wind had blown one of the 30 limit signs over this morning, it blocked most of the width of the path, this was a bit before 8 am. On the downhill bit where you'd normally go fairly fast. More sandbags needed to weigh them down I think...

sketchley

I've cycled that bridge on the way to Jog, scared the hell out of me in high wind on the cycle lane. Some of our group took the road and two of them got clipped by wing mirror of car on close passes.... The cycle lane itself, IIRC, wasn't the best either..... Hopwfully they'll improve stuff, it is national cycle route 1 after all, anyone spoken with sustrans to get thier opinion on works or to find out if they've had input into design?

I don't think i'd enjoy that bridge every day on commute!

meanredspider

eric.s wrote:

The wind had blown one of the 30 limit signs over this morning, it blocked most of the width of the path, this was a bit before 8 am. On the downhill bit where you'd normally go fairly fast. More sandbags needed to weigh them down I think...

It was cleared up by the time I went through. Have to admit that my legs are feeling the extra miles and climbing - especially as it's the MTB & Spikers this week (covering of snow at home this morning). By tonight I'll have done about 105 miles and 1800m of climbing in 3 days. Nasty headwind too this morning.

Sketchley wrote:

Hopwfully they'll improve stuff, it is national cycle route 1 after all, anyone spoken with sustrans to get thier opinion on works or to find out if they've had input into design?

I don't think i'd enjoy that bridge every day on commute!

Not sure but they do have plans to improve the barriers. I'll be happier if they aren't perfectly designed to captapult you into the path of vehicles like the current ones are! I don't mind the bridge too much. Cross-winds are an issue as can be nodders & peds in the warmer months. Think I'm KoM in one direction and 2nd place in the other.

eric.s

Well done, a 17 mile each way commute on a MTB would be a bit too much for me!

When the crosswind's particularly strong, I deliberately choose the path on the windward side of the bridge. In prevailing southwesterlies this is the usual N-bound-side path, but in strong northeasterlies I'll cross and use the S-bound-side path. I find the problem with the wind is not so much its strength, but rather the sudden fluctuations/vortexes caused when a high sided vehicle passes immediately upwind of you. On the windward path you have a nice steady wind (except when passing the two pillars). I've crossed without dismounting in winds over force 8, though you feel like you're leaning at 45 degrees sometimes. Something like a buff to protect your ear and the side of your face from the windchill is helpful.

Part of the problem getting past slower cyclists and pedestrians is the noise of the wind and traffic. I've sat behind them pinging my bell or even shouting (politely), and through no fault of their own they can't hear.

meanredspider

eric.s wrote:

Well done, a 17 mile each way commute on a MTB would be a bit too much for me!

When the crosswind's particularly strong, I deliberately choose the path on the windward side of the bridge. In prevailing southwesterlies this is the usual N-bound-side path, but in strong northeasterlies I'll cross and use the S-bound-side path. I find the problem with the wind is not so much its strength, but rather the sudden fluctuations/vortexes caused when a high sided vehicle passes immediately upwind of you. On the windward path you have a nice steady wind (except when passing the two pillars). I've crossed without dismounting in winds over force 8, though you feel like you're leaning at 45 degrees sometimes. Something like a buff to protect your ear and the side of your face from the windchill is helpful.

Part of the problem getting past slower cyclists and pedestrians is the noise of the wind and traffic. I've sat behind them pinging my bell or even shouting (politely), and through no fault of their own they can't hear.

Thanks - I am praying for warmer weather on Friday (I'm not in tomorrow) so I can use the road bike - it feels like a magic carpet in comparison! I've been backing off the speed to save my legs. The fitness will return

Absolutely - it's very very difficult on the leaward side especially as trucks pass you. That's a bit of a concern for the next few months as the prevailing wind is normally from the west (last summer being odd as it was reversed). In the strong wind it's the unnerving feeling that your helmet wants to blow off that I find odd.

And you're right - though, more often than not, it's because they have an iPod playing. There's been almost nobody on the bridge this week (that slope up to Craigton seems to be a disincentive)

snorri

I would appeal to any cyclists inconvenienced by these road works to complain to Transport Scotland, their MSP, and Scotland Transerv
There has already been considerable correspondence with these people, but Transport Scotland is adamant, everything is fine.
The diversion is signposted in a rather haphazard manner (an outdated map was used for the planning) which visitors will find confusing.
This blog refers http://zenbikermaniac.blogspot.co.uk/p/ ... ridge.html
Transport Scotland have had the signing checked by "an experienced cyclist I can trust" and assure us all is well.
While some energetic cyclists may welcome the steep climb up from the Lifeboat Station on the diversion route as a training exercise, spare a thought for the less fit who will have to push their bikes up this hill. The length of path closed off is some 3.3Km, and the diversion route is 5.6km, the added distance and steep gradient adding considerably to journey times.
See Twitter @highlandcyclists and
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_i ... st?fref=ts

For 18 months prior to these works commencing we have had press releases appealing to us to get out of our cars or at least car share in order to avoid motor traffic chaos when the works were in progress. As a cyclist, I though "I'm alright Jack", but a week before works commenced the diversion for cyclists was announced, and apart from peak hours it is now probably more convenient to take my car across the bridge rather than cycle.

I say again, if inconvenienced by these works please make your feelings known to local councillors, MSPs and Transport Scotland.

meanredspider

@snorri. I have complained to Transerv (Douglas Laird - Bridges Manager) about a number of aspects of this and also involved my MP - not sure what else I can do. I came off my bike on the detour this morning (diesel I guess) but it's a little bit tenuous to link it to the works (although, it's true that I wouldn't have been there had it not been for the bridge detour). Apart from adding time & miles to my journey, there's not too much else I can complain about now.

snorri

I have PMd you meanredspider

snorri

Sketchley wrote:

national cycle route 1 after all, anyone spoken with sustrans to get thier opinion on works or to find out if they've had input into design?

Yes, Sustrans informed, but they can do little in the face of Transport Scotland intransigence.
The new crash barriers should be more cycle friendly, and the handrail is being made higher to help prevent cyclists toppling in to the sea(not that any have fallen over), but there will be no weather shield to offer some protection from the side winds, and path width will remain sub-standard..

snorri

Any chance of a progress report from regular commuters?
The last word from Transerv is that they continue to encourage active travel modes(walking and cycling) and this has led to a 50% increase in traffic on the joint user paths.

meanredspider

snorri wrote:

Any chance of a progress report from regular commuters?
The last word from Transerv is that they continue to encourage active travel modes(walking and cycling) and this has led to a 50% increase in traffic on the joint user paths.

Nothing much to report. They've added a few "Please Drive Carefully" (or something) signs to the Tore/Munlochy junction road. Fat good they are. That road continues to get busier and busier.

I only ever see one pedestrian on the bridge (same middle-aged lady in a brown coat and a couple of bags). I've not seen a single other pedestrian or cyclist on the Stadium Road detour since I started commuting - daily I see people crossing at the roundabout thought (ie "dangerous" shortcut). I've flagged this to Douglas Laird.

When they say there's a 50% increase, is that from 2 to 3? Seriously, the weather has probably had far more impact. Most of the winter months I see nobody on that route at all. During the milder weather last week (road bike for me) there were more cyclists but there would have been anyway.

I only saw the the walking lady this morning.

snorri

Thanks for the update.
Here is the quote from Transerv.
'The figure I quoted of a 50% increase in numbers is based on anecdotal evidence from my site team who are monitoring these conditions. '
As we were told no traffic records existed prior to commencement of the works, it is difficult to understand where this 50% comes from :roll: