Norwich Northern Bypass Update

[jackal]

Actually a single carriageway link was rejected in favour of a dualled link:

Considering the results of the economic appraisal it is recommended that future work focus on a dual carriageway scheme with a bridge to cross the Wensum valley. The single carriageway scheme does not appear to address the problems or offer a good level of value for money; and the tunnel option has very high costs, offers low or poor value for money and presents significant environmental concerns.

It is considered there is a strong case to progress and it is recommended that further work be undertaken to
develop a DfT compliant business case for a NWL. This would need to consider and appraise a wide range of
potential options and packages of improvement.

https://www.norfolk.gov.uk/roads-and-tr ... stern-link

[Berk]

.... but it was broken off from the Northern Bypass to allow that to go ahead (without objections).

[Derek]

I hadn't heard about that, but an S2 connection would be pointless for sure. I can't see it happening any time soon though, the route would have to be quite long, around Lyng and Lenwade. That's a lot of expensive D2 as well as going through some very nice countryside and past a lot of expensive houses with rich people in.

Anyway, I went for a drive on it today. It's not fully open yet and not connected to the A47 at the wonderful Postwick multi nodal intersection and so is a wonderful example of a high quality road going from somewhere of no interest to a place of near irrelevance via Norwich Airport. It's interesting to note that although the northern section is now fully operational, the impact on the traffic levels around Hellesdon, Middleton's Lane etc is minimal if any despite having being touted as a relief for the area. Perhaps the most notable feature is as you pass through the quite large GSJ under the A140 going west you immediately have to stop for a roundabout.

Oh and there's a nice view of the Norwich airport and air museum

Derek

[Bryn666]

They've missed a trick by not getting Alan Partridge to open it... socially embarrassing man opens embarrassing road scheme.

[jackal]

At least it's dualled, and the main intermediate junction grade separated no less. The main bottleneck has been there for a while (Postwick).

[Bryn666]

Looking at the map of it I can't say it looks all that impressive - it's got the dreaded roundabout for a 90 degree turn although there appears to at least be an airport service road there so it isn't totally pointless, there's a roundabout immediately west of the A140 GSJ as Derek points out, and without looping back to the A47 to fully close the ring it doesn't look all that useful either.

The fact its called the northern distributor gives away the modus operandi of the road as simply an engine for sprawl which will play right into the hands of "we told you new roads are bad" campaigners and set back proper infrastructure provision even further.

[jackal]

Yeah, I'm not keen on that roundabout, though I've seen worse

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.97026 ... 312!8i6656

[Derek]

Yeah, I'm not keen on that roundabout, though I've seen worse

The near pointless roundabout by the airport won't be like that for long. The area to the north and east is to become warehousing shedscape "development" and this will be the main access to it.

... without looping back to the A47 to fully close the ring it doesn't look all that useful either.

Without the connection west, the entire western section after the A140 is pointless, even when the inevitable sprawl gets built. Traffic from the new suburban wonderland will nearly all want to get into Norwich and isn't going to be interested in driving around the northern edge.

Even when (if?) the western connection gets built it will be taking such a long detour it probably won't actually be quicker for reaching the A11 than going east, although Postwick will offer a significant deterrent I suppose.

The fact its called the northern distributor gives away the modus operandi of the road as simply an engine for sprawl which will play right into the hands of "we told you new roads are bad" campaigners and set back proper infrastructure provision even further.

Norfolk CC have always made a big thing about this and have long made it clear that it isn't intended to be a bypass, but is designed to open the countryside to the north to "development", as if it's a good thing. So yes, it's a poster road for traffic inducing road building. Proof if ever there was any needed that new roads create traffic, especially when they're designed to do so.

Derek

[jackal]

Did you really all expect a local authority to come up with a 25km long fully grade-separated scheme? Would that even be a good investment for the taxpayer given it's not a strategic route?

It's not perfect but still it's 20km of new high speed dual carriageway that will take a lot of through traffic out of the city, and more still when the final 5km is built. It could certainly have been a lot worse. I'm looking at you, A1237.

[Bryn666]

Looking at the route I'm not even convinced it will relieve all that much in the city.

This is a development corridor, not a bypass. All it is going to be is a dualled A1237.

[Rational Plan]

Nothing wrong in building a new road that enables a city to expand and build thousands of new houses. Norfolk is high growth county and Norwich it's only real city. The criteria for road funding now seems to be open land for new business parks and housing and strategic routes, especially to ports and airports.

[roadtester]

Oh and there's a nice view of the Norwich airport and air museum

Which are clearly visible in this fly-through video from about a month ago:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hX944OkMlqk

I think it looks quite impressive from the aerial shots but I agree with all of the other comments about the problem of terminating/linking to the A47 at the western end.

[Berk]

What problem is there?? A scheme to improve the A47 between North Tuddenham and Easton is currently being prepared. If the developers have any sense, you would have a GSJ somewhere along the middle of that stretch, heading north-eastwards, connecting up with the NDR at the terminal roundabout.

From what I can make out it won’t trash any homes, and villages, or much in the way of countryside. But it would if you drew the route a lot tighter, more to the east, close to Easton itself (which is what I feel some people are suggesting).

[jackal]

Looking at the route I'm not even convinced it will relieve all that much in the city.

This is a development corridor, not a bypass.

The modelling (and common sense) says it will take journeys between the A47, A140, A1067 and A1151 away from the city. If it looks like a bypass...

All it is going to be is a dualled A1237

... which would solve most of the problems with the A1237, especially when combined with one or two NNDR-style GSJs.

[Berk]

I feel junctions should be banned on development routes, or developers have to self-fund at premium rates. If they had to pay £10m for a junction that costs £1m (or £100m for a £10m version), surely they would think again.

[Johnathan404]

I was reminded recently that towards the end of their run the Highways Agency were told they had to support economic growth by encouraging new developments. Just to help them wasn't enough.

I don't know for sure that the same has been asked of Highways England, but I do know that the policy changes HA had to make haven't been reversed, and of course local authorities will be even more on the side of growth.

I can understand why no government agency (or government-owned company) would want to be seen to be obstructing development with ridiculous penalty charges. The planning system and local area plan should be able to resist inappropriate proposals anyway. However, I agree that in a perfect world Highways England should be serving as a counterbalance to the developers, by warning of the affects of poor planning on the road network.

You will not see any authority issuing penalty charges for as long as they have been told that they must be 'on side'.

[Berk]

Hmmmm, I can see the logic there. What I actually had in mind was a sliding scale, so that full charges only apply on new construction, gradually falling away after a few years.

That should allow for a more phased, balanced approach. After all, who benefits if there’s a binge load of development, and the new link road gets all snarled up with lorries and commuters trying to enter the industrial park at shift times?? Especially if it’s also close to a residential development.

[Bryn666]

The point I was making is a road either is built to allow sprawl or it is built to bypass a built up area.

History shows they cannot be both without becoming total disaster areas - see the A1237, any 1930s arterial road that is now littered with impossible to fix at grade junctions and surrounded by houses, any motorway junction surrounded by shed developments, etc.

As soon as the NDR is developed up and the queues start, traffic will return to the roads it supposedly bypasses and the cycle will start again.

You're being taken for a ride if you believe these roads are about improving traffic when they will actually generate loads of it instead. This isn't an anti-roads argument, It's an anti development at any cost argument.

We need to protect new rural corridors from sprawl and encourage more brownfield redevelopment with active travel options at the heart of them otherwise we are just building more problems for the future. I bet there's no provision for anyone who doesn't own a car, or doesn't want to use their car for everything factored in to any development plans along the route.

[Derek]

The point I was making is a road either is built to allow sprawl or it is built to bypass a built up area.

I would argue that the bypass potential for the new road is there already. There's very little traffic coming from the west clogging up Hellesdon, Middleton's lane etc, it's mostly all local or coming in from the north. As I said before, hardly any of it is taking the "bypass" for obvious reasons, the traffic is city bound.

History shows they cannot be both without becoming total disaster areas - see the A1237, any 1930s arterial road that is now littered with impossible to fix at grade junctions and surrounded by houses, any motorway junction surrounded by shed developments, etc.

I was thinking last night about the at grade junctions on the NDR, most of them are not huge and are likely to become very real pinch points once the road picks up its full traffic load. The radial routes it crosses at these junctions are already very busy at peak times.

As soon as the NDR is developed up and the queues start, traffic will return to the roads it supposedly bypasses and the cycle will start again.

The only real potential for a bypass which would have a significant effect on existing traffic levels is the bit that doesn't exist, the western section. The old A47 through Costessy, the outer ring at Sweet Briar and through to the boundary is hell on earth now and isn't going to be helped by the new out of town mall thing they're building near Drayton Road. The western section is going to become a real issue very quickly but don't expect anything to happen for at least 10 years. Meantime massive car-based suburban sprawl will be feeding even more traffic into the city and no, there is no alternative transport options being offered.

You're being taken for a ride if you believe these roads are about improving traffic when they will actually generate loads of it instead. This isn't an anti-roads argument, It's an anti development at any cost argument.

We need to protect new rural corridors from sprawl and encourage more brownfield redevelopment with active travel options at the heart of them otherwise we are just building more problems for the future. I bet there's no provision for anyone who doesn't own a car, or doesn't want to use their car for everything factored in to any development plans along the route.

The NDR is just a part of the half baked approach to development shown by Norfolk CC. It's almost as if there's some land owner who stands to make a killing which the NDR has facilitated... Normal for Norfolk indeed.

Derek

[jackal]

For modelling etc purposes this is the alignment assumed for the western link:

It's centrepiece is a 660m bridge over the Wissum valley (steel composite box girder shown):

The scheme cost (2010 prices) is £104m, or £161m with 55% optimism bias. BCR=2.3.