Traffic diversions

boliston

Are you saying that there is no physical barrier closing the road, just "road closed" signs?

The road I live on was "closed" for 15 weeks last year while they were replacing water mains and there were "road closed" signs at each end - however a lot of the time you could still drive along the road, as it was just narrowed in places rather than completely blocked. It was quite funny watching people turn around just because the sign said "road closed".

arcon5

Send an invoice to the company. Worst they can do is say no.

You have my sympathy op, people round here just like to disagree with everything

rolls99

Latest update.


First, the "status".


1) Only "Road closed" signs.


The road has never been so much as dug up - and the reason is now only becoming clear.


According to information received by the company, a local councillor has put information on their Facebook page:


The Company has apparently been able to undertake "Survey work unhindered" since March 2015, and has now "Determined" it won't be putting pipes UNDER the road, but OVER it.


Now, there was evidence they were probably going to do this prior to March 2015 (because of structured visibly constructed) and so it has now taken the company 7 months to decide they won't be doing what they said they would and another 6 months to do what it took them 7 to decide.


In other words, apart from "Survey" work without the hindrance of normal traffic it's taken them 7 months to determine the are not going to dig up the road....


Since the road is single carriageway A-road, why does a company need it closed for 7 months to determine it will run pipes under or over it?


Yet another councillor (in an article in the local rag) says "The Council could not refuse the request" and has put "Tough conditions on it" - for instance "Only five months instead of 6".


The upshot is, it is hard to see how the closure of the road (or rather how it being open) would have in any way impeded to alleged "Survey work" because it's quite simple; you either go under or over the road and do it, it's a known quantity and to say it takes 7 months to determine you're not going to seems a bit of a cheek.


Incidentally, the actual traffic order pertaining to the closure is very specific of course, and gives the reason for the closure (to install pipes under the road).


Since this demonstrably has not happened, yet, even if the company concerned could argue they had to "Survey" how does surveying the road take 7 months, and, is there any recourse in that they have not done a "jot" of what they supposedly were to get the road closed to begin with?

Herzlos

You could certainly send them an invoice for your time + fuel for the 7 months of unnecessary detours. They'll never pay it but they'll probably burn a few hundred quid in lawyers time replying to each of you.

But if the road was physically open, was there anything stopping you just using it?

Have you contacted your local MP/councellor directly? Attended any meetings?

Facebook isn't the way to be contacting them, you should be writing to them and asking for face to face meetings, attending any public meetings to question it.

I'd also be writing to the CEO of this company, and posting publicly on their facebook wall - If they are a big brand name they probably don't want the world knowing about how they are flaunting laws to screw over residents.

societys_child

arcon5 wrote: »

You have my sympathy op, people round here just like to disagree with everything

I think that most now have some sympathy, but drip feeding info doesn't help.

Is the name of the council, the road and the company still a secret?

rolls99

I'll be honest and say (and perhaps I should have been a bit clearer) that - slightly "tongue in cheek", what would the consensus be on the view that in such situations, there'd be an argument for such companies being held liable for people's extra costs;


Its more to do with the fact the road closure is solely for their benefit and no one elses.


What's alluded to in the posts, to be honest, in the area is what most people would say "Not surprised" to, and some of the information I've only literally found out either yesterday or today.


Pretty much what I've said is in the public domain and certainly being mentioned with concern by Councillors on the likes of Facebook, so we shall see what happens.


I'd prefer not to name names on the forum as it only adds to the view one way or another.


The principle is, by the same token if, say some shopping centre had a diversion near it put in place for months, in order to be able to make some alteration - fine; but when after the full closure they turn round and say "We've changed our minds but still need the road closed"....

Johno100

Well the OP can be all 'cloak and dagger' if they wish, that doesn't mean anybody else has to be.

A two minute google.

http://www.linlithgowgazette.co.uk/news/local-news/bo-ness-road-to-stay-closed-for-another-five-months-1-3932765

Bo’ness Road is to remain shut for another five months after INEOS in Grangemouth confirmed it applied for an extension.

The A904 road, at the junction with Inchyra Road and Wholeflats Road, has already been closed for five months and the petrochemical giant has asked Falkirk Council for it to remain so until March 2016.

During the current period of closure, INEOS state it has successfully undertaken survey work and inspections which have enabled the company to move forward with its complex £300 million ethane supply project.

Originally the new pipes were to go under the road, but the pipework connecting the storage tank to the manufacturing plant will now be routed over the road instead.

The company has had permission from Falkirk Council to build a pipebridge.

Councillor Craig Martin, spokesman for the road team, said: “The council could not refuse the request, but we have put tough conditions on the closure.

“We want to see the work completed as soon as possible so the council will visit the site to keep track of how quickly the work is being done. We also granted the company only five months closure, not six.”

rolls99

Johno100 wrote: »

Well the OP can be all 'cloak and dagger' if they wish, that doesn't mean anybody else has to be.

A two minute google.

http://www.linlithgowgazette.co.uk/news/local-news/bo-ness-road-to-stay-closed-for-another-five-months-1-3932765

Well now the cat's out the bag so to speak, a little more googling begins to reveal the story in more depth. Incidentally of course Ineos can't avoid "Creating" petrol as a side product of what they actually do (it isn't the be all and end all) - but whatever it is of course a fact that in the end the more fuel people use the more they sell (and, ironically some filling stations within spitting distance of the refinery charge more for fuel than elsewhere), and 12 months of many thousands of vehicles adding on a few miles per day soon adds up.


Personally I think the reason for the closure (as stated originally) was fair enough, but, the issue here is that it is only now coming clear what has been happening. I doubt anyone could argue whatever survey work has been carried out surely didn't warrant a 7 month road closure - and there was simply no mention of this in the original TTO - it was for actually laying pipework.


And even when allowing maximum "Benefit of the doubt" for a company who fit and maintain many miles of pipework all the time, to say a year is needed to run a few feet across a road takes the biscuit.


It is not visible on the (old) Google streetview, but the actual pipework is there, now, in situ and has been since 2014 - running up preplaced gantry framing at each side of the road.


They simply do not have space in the current pipe runs, and so (from a convenient access standpoint) a high level crossing looked to be on the cards all along, and every time someone passed it, this was what was visibly taking place - only to then be told "We are putting it under the road" (?) - and then after 7 months a u turn.

bigjl

If the road is only signed as closed and not physically closed I would just use it.

Unless it is actually a private road.

AdrianC

The most likely result, should Mr Plod spot you and take exception would be...

TS50 - Failing to comply with traffic sign (excluding ‘stop’ signs, traffic lights or double white lines) or
TS70 - Undefined failure to comply with a traffic direction sign

Both would be three point fixed penalties.