Replacement of HLR / Seafield / Portobello Rd Roundabout

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 24 Nov 2008, 14:19

It seems to me that the diversion is totally inadequate for the amount of traffic going through it. This morning's accident raises an important issue - access for the emergency services.

Surely it would not be unreasonable to expect that these roadworks should be given a high priority - and by that I mean contracting the workers to work longer hours and paying overtime so that the work progresses more quickly. It is a major disruption, but perhaps the PTB reckon that people travelling eastwards out of Edinburgh have been putting up with roadworks and delays for so long that they are used to it??

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 24 Nov 2008, 14:45

Marya wrote:The partial closure of the High Street was discussed at last night's Community Council meeting. ............................

Mention was also made of the fact that many folk mistakingly believe that the High Street will be closed entirely and that this could lead to loss of trade for local shopkeepers.

Heard it announced on the Traffic News on Radio 2 at 11.45 am today that 'Portobello High Street is closed to traffic due to the roadworks at King's Road roundabout'.

You weren't the only one avoiding the diversion this morning SD. Traffic on Brighton Place was heavy again.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 24 Nov 2008, 17:04

Probably all the people seeing the tailback and trying other routes
Oh the joys of motoring!
What should be a simple journey into Leith is being made more and more difficult, diversions, traffic lights ( see the mini roundabout vanished )
closed roads

The closed roads through Craigentinny get me wondering, as I understand it was to stop " rat runs" but we have them every day down Bellfield St, Straiton Place, Bath St, very few seemt o stick to the posted 20mph
but then again we have that thing of contradictory signage

How is it decided what is acceptable as a rat run and whats not

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 24 Nov 2008, 18:02

Directing all rush hour traffic onto a handful of routes probably makes sense to someone - especially if you want to punish folk for voting against the revenue raising congestion charge

What used to be fairly routine journeys have become quite a challenge. The dart across Ferry Road from an unsignalled minor side street ( now that the Newhaven Road junction is also being dug up), gives quite an adrenaline rush and then there's the 'Guess which street leading to Leith Walk is closed today?' puzzle to solve.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 24 Nov 2008, 18:11

Feel sorry for all these people who are having such problems dealing with the diversions in Porty.

Everyone has a horror story, Im just thankful that ive not been having any problems with the diversions.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 24 Nov 2008, 19:33

Diversions can be lethal for the emergency services. Just think about it - you've had an accident/heart attack/analphalatic shock and the ambulance has to play "here we go round the mulberry bush". I wouldn't be surprised if fire engines took the shortest route - i.e right through the traffic cones if there is a real emergency, especially when they know that the workers are only there for a few hours each day.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 24 Nov 2008, 19:44

seashell wrote:It seems to me that the diversion is totally inadequate for the amount of traffic going through it. This morning's accident raises an important issue - access for the emergency services.

Having consulted the Orb today, im under the impression that when such big diversions, and ones that are going to be in place for a significant period of time, the emergency services are fully consulted.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 24 Nov 2008, 19:57

I'm sure that is procedure and I really wouldn't expect anything else.

I just wouldn't like to risk my life on it. If the nearest ambulance is a Morrisons and there is an emergency in the High Street at 17.30 - well, I'm sure you can do the maths.

I wonder if the emergency services have power of veto?

My parents-in-law had a horrific example of such planning going wrong, when the house next door to them went on fire and 2 small children died - because there was a diversion in place and the fire engine was delayed.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 24 Nov 2008, 20:04

seashell wrote:I'm sure that is procedure and I really wouldn't expect anything else.

I just wouldn't like to risk my life on it. If the nearest ambulance is a Morrisons and there is an emergency in the High Street at 17.30 - well, I'm sure you can do the maths.

I wonder if the emergency services have power of veto?

My parents-in-law had a horrific example of such planning going wrong, when the house next door to them went on fire and 2 small children died - because there was a diversion in place and the fire engine was delayed.

Having worked with the fire brigade in few potentially major incidents, its fair to say that in the case of the Kings Road roundabout im sure the boys [and girls] would have little hesitation is going straight through the cones & blue string.

I would doubt the emergency services would have a veto, will check the Orb the morra though see what I can find on the subject.

I remember last year there was a crash outside the landrover garage just before the roudabout. At the time I was with several crews taking part in a small excerise, the call came through for them and the place was abandoned. I was left on my jim-bob trying to stop youths stealing the hoses that were left attached to the building. In the case of an emergency its drop everything and go.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 25 Nov 2008, 09:54

I got the half seven 21 from Porty High Street this morning. The cars were tailed all the way back to where that mini roudabout was at Kwick Fit, but it only took three cycles of the signals to get through it all. Not as bad as first thought.

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 25 Nov 2008, 11:41

Have they put the mini roundabout back at Kwik Fit?
It was there at the weekend, all white and round, then yesterday i noticed it was gone, all black and they had lights going at that junction

Maria · Post by **Maria** » 25 Nov 2008, 12:21

The completion date for the work is now the end of March. Looks like the diversion is going to be here for a bit longer than first anticipated.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 25 Nov 2008, 13:06

Marya wrote:The completion date for the work is now the end of March. Looks like the diversion is going to be here for a bit longer than first anticipated.

They have been saying that for a while. I wrote about it in my posting on this thread on 18th October, here is what I wrote.

michael_traill wrote:
chris wrote: Anybody with council involvement know anything?
Ive just checked on the Orb just now and all I can see is a statement in the weekly reports:

Seafield Roundabout | Removal of Roundabout | See separate Seafield Roundabout Information | Until 01/04/09
But when I go to the other information it hasnt been updated to include information about any more planned road closures.

Grunk · Post by **Grunk** » 25 Nov 2008, 13:36

I still reckon June.

Sweepstake anyone?

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 25 Nov 2008, 15:02

Which year though?

Grunk · Post by **Grunk** » 26 Nov 2008, 08:56

The council really has to start employing the Amish. We'd have had the new junction raised in an afternoon and a pig roast to celebrate.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 26 Nov 2008, 11:41

And some lovely quilting!

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 26 Nov 2008, 13:31

...And Kelly McGillis

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 26 Nov 2008, 13:56

Harrison Ford might pop along too.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 26 Nov 2008, 14:11

I've been through the junction a few times since Monday and, to be fair, they seem to be cracking on with things.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 26 Nov 2008, 22:17

The Scottish tribe surely ought to be known as the Hamish.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 26 Nov 2008, 22:55

Porty wrote:The Scottish tribe surely ought to be known as the Hamish.

GROAN!

Good one, Porty.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 29 Nov 2008, 22:30

Cllr Hawkins was going around all the Portobello shops traders today, with news of a meeting on Monday night - about the proposed delays to the roundabout works. I think it's fair to say that this came of somewhat of a shock and that the roadworks do *not* help businesses. The thought of them going on until March is pretty awful.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 29 Nov 2008, 23:03

seashell wrote: The thought of them going on until March is pretty awful.

This has been known for sometime now, and it is a bad thought.

Under the terms of the contract they can work from 7am to 10pm, Monday to Friday and 8am to 7pm on a Saturday. Perhaps there should be more later working in order to get the project running at full speed.

seashell · Post by **seashell** » 30 Nov 2008, 21:16

I said the very same thing a week ago, Michael.

seashell wrote: Surely it would not be unreasonable to expect that these roadworks should be given a high priority - and by that I mean contracting the workers to work longer hours and paying overtime so that the work progresses more quickly. It is a major disruption, but perhaps the PTB reckon that people travelling eastwards out of Edinburgh have been putting up with roadworks and delays for so long that they are used to it??

And the fact that the contract *does* allow longer working hours doesn't mean to say that those hours are actually being worked. Going home on Friday and Saturday at about 5pm. 3 out every 4 number 26 buses were only going as far as Eastfield. Could this be Lothian Buses cunning way of making up lost time due to the roadworks??? Not much fun when you are waiting in the freezing cold, I can tell you.

The whole thing is a complete shambles and I hope Cllr. Hawkins and the traders are able to kick some serious council butt. Edinburgh is virtually a no-go area these days if you are using public transport.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 30 Nov 2008, 21:31

I must have glossed over your posting seashell.

Good to see the workies out today for a while though cracking on with things. Good bit of overtime for the boys..lol

PortyConvert · Post by **PortyConvert** » 02 Dec 2008, 19:31

I had not long missed a 26 this morning - so i thought i would walk through the roadworks to the next stop and overtake the bus stuck in the industrial estate... so off i set - i followed the pedestrian signs along from the Pitz - but i soon realised i had been led on a route to .... traffic ?! I ended up chancing it over Harry Lauder road - but its clear that no consideration has been made for pedestrians!!

Oh and i didn't catch up with the bus

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 02 Dec 2008, 19:41

I'm not making this up I promise. Someone published some research recently on whether or not one should walk when they just missed a bus. Those that opt to do so are wrong something like 90% of the time. Sorry- I know that won't help.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 02 Dec 2008, 20:05

PortyConvert wrote:I had not long missed a 26 this morning - so i thought i would walk through the roadworks to the next stop and overtake the bus stuck in the industrial estate... so off i set - i followed the pedestrian signs along from the Pitz - but i soon realised i had been led on a route to .... traffic ?! I ended up chancing it over Harry Lauder road - but its clear that no consideration has been made for pedestrians!!

Oh and i didn't catch up with the bus

The very subject of pedestrians was mentioned in one of Councillor Childs mailing list emails:

What about us pedestrians?

It is intended to change the pedestrian route through the area of the site between Portobello High Street and King's Road shortly. The new route will be more direct and people will no longer have to walk through the grassed area. Unfortunately, it was not possible to retain the existing signalised pedestrian crossing on Seafield Road East next to Seafield Roundabout throughout the construction of the new junction. It was kept in operation for as long as possible but had to be removed some time ago to suit the traffic management layout required at the site for the next phase of the roadworks to progress. Unfortunately, implementation of this phase was subsequently delayed due to the problems that occurred when attempts were first made to bring traffic passing through the site under the control of temporary traffic signals. This resulted in the revised plans for the completion of the roadworks that were implemented on Saturday morning.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Dec 2008, 22:44

What about us pedestrians?

It is intended to change the pedestrian route through the area of the site between Portobello High Street and King's Road shortly. The new route will be more direct and people will no longer have to walk through the grassed area. Unfortunately, it was not possible to retain the existing signalised pedestrian crossing on Seafield Road East next to Seafield Roundabout throughout the construction of the new junction. It was kept in operation for as long as possible but had to be removed some time ago to suit the traffic management layout required at the site for the next phase of the roadworks to progress. Unfortunately, implementation of this phase was subsequently delayed due to the problems that occurred when attempts were first made to bring traffic passing through the site under the control of temporary traffic signals. This resulted in the revised plans for the completion of the roadworks that were implemented on Saturday morning.

So? What about us pedestrians???

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 02 Dec 2008, 22:50

Epykat wrote:

What about us pedestrians?

It is intended to change the pedestrian route through the area of the site between Portobello High Street and King's Road shortly. The new route will be more direct and people will no longer have to walk through the grassed area. Unfortunately, it was not possible to retain the existing signalised pedestrian crossing on Seafield Road East next to Seafield Roundabout throughout the construction of the new junction. It was kept in operation for as long as possible but had to be removed some time ago to suit the traffic management layout required at the site for the next phase of the roadworks to progress. Unfortunately, implementation of this phase was subsequently delayed due to the problems that occurred when attempts were first made to bring traffic passing through the site under the control of temporary traffic signals. This resulted in the revised plans for the completion of the roadworks that were implemented on Saturday morning.

So? What about us pedestrians???

Doesnt that refer to pedestrians at the roadworks? I said the subject of pedestrains was mentioned and indeed it was.

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 02 Dec 2008, 22:53

It might refer to pedestrians but it doesn't come up with any solutions for getting them across the road. As PC said, you have to chance it over Harry Lauder Road. Pedestrian access has been appalling since the beginning.

BeachBum · Post by **BeachBum** » 02 Dec 2008, 22:54

Epykat wrote:It might refer to pedestrians but it doesn't come up with any solutions for getting them across the road. As PC said, you have to chance it over Harry Lauder Road. Pedestrian access has been appalling since the beginning.

I never said it came up with solutions, i said the subject was mentioned

SoupDragon · Post by **SoupDragon** » 02 Dec 2008, 23:45

Blue String not good enough for you Epy?

I stopped to let a poor woman with a push chair try and get acroos Harry Lauder Rd
The car behind was not sympathetic, unless he was tooting in encouragement

It is appalling that there so little provision for pedestrians
through these works

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 03 Dec 2008, 10:42

I suppose they're thinking that if pedestrians HAVE to walk (perish the thought!) to Craigentinny then they can get over the road and walk through the industrial estate (that's the way most of the kids get to school). However, I for one would not walk that route either on my own or in the dark so it's a no go for me at least.