Evidently it is.Phil wrote: At least those to the north of London have the A14 while the A34 & A43 provides some releif to those living to the west of London. Is it really too much to ask for those to the south of London to have a similar facility?
A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Moderator: Site Management Team
- sotonsteve
- Member
- Posts: 6079
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
TBH, the big exception (apart from the Arundel by-pass) that is being made by most in the area (from what I was told by my relatives) is the potential of closing local junctions off, which in their opinion would cripple the local area, they were saying it would triple their journey time to Arundel and double to Chichester.
The issue is, that regardless of how it is dress up as a trunk road, unless they bypass all the major settlements completely, which is unlikely when it would affect a national park, there will always be a need to provide for local traffic and limit speeds through urbanised areas as is the norm with almost all trunk roads.
The issue is, that regardless of how it is dress up as a trunk road, unless they bypass all the major settlements completely, which is unlikely when it would affect a national park, there will always be a need to provide for local traffic and limit speeds through urbanised areas as is the norm with almost all trunk roads.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
How could they possibly have such detailed journey times when option selection is still ongoing? Local journey times will usually decrease under such schemes.Boring82 wrote:TBH, the big exception (apart from the Arundel by-pass) that is being made by most in the area (from what I was told by my relatives) is the potential of closing local junctions off, which in their opinion would cripple the local area, they were saying it would triple their journey time to Arundel and double to Chichester.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
They are basing it on the route they have directly to the A27 and the route they would need to take if they weren't able to use the A27 and had to go cross country.jackal wrote:How could they possibly have such detailed journey times when option selection is still ongoing? Local journey times will usually decrease under such schemes.Boring82 wrote:TBH, the big exception (apart from the Arundel by-pass) that is being made by most in the area (from what I was told by my relatives) is the potential of closing local junctions off, which in their opinion would cripple the local area, they were saying it would triple their journey time to Arundel and double to Chichester.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
That is very rarely the case. While A-road upgrades don't usually get the same kind of LAR provision as A-road–to–motorway upgrades, it is rare that any towns or significant villages would lose their access to the new road completely and would find no local provision put in place. It's scaremongering, panicking and nimbyism because people don't want change and they can't accept that anyone else but themselves has any business doing anything.Boring82 wrote:They are basing it on the route they have directly to the A27 and the route they would need to take if they weren't able to use the A27 and had to go cross country.
-
- Member
- Posts: 449
- Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2005 19:11
- Location: Leatherhead
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
The A30 in Cornwall has a new LAR on the Bodmin - Indian Queens scheme (as far as Victoria junction)
Formerly ‘guvvaA303’
-
- Member
- Posts: 45
- Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 20:36
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Maybe I'm just too used to the M27, but the Brighton bypass whilst impressive, has gradients & bends on it that just feel ever so slighty substandard. Not by much (especially when you consider how poor the rest of the route is) but it is noticable, to my eyes at least.SteveA30 wrote:What Worthing needs is a 'Brighton', one of the best designed D2 bypasses in Britain. It doesn't need a 'Shrewsbury', one of the worst designed D2 bypasses.
These could be official Sabre words from now on.
A Brighton, good. A Shrewsbury, bad.
I can hear forum members gasping in horror as i type this.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
The road itself is okay, apart from the awful junction with the A23 at Patcham, though it could do with a crawler lane between Stanmer and Coldean, as it has between Patcham and Dyke Road (junction with the A2038). The real problem is the lack of west-facing slips at Stanmer, which means huge jams occur when the Albion play at home, as traffic heading east, either to get to park and rides or other car parks, or head into that part of Brighton, has to use the Falmer slip road, along with people trying to park at the university or drop fans off for a match. The same problem though not on the same scale, happens at Holmbush, where there are no east-facing slips.QuietInRealLife wrote:Maybe I'm just too used to the M27, but the Brighton bypass whilst impressive, has gradients & bends on it that just feel ever so slighty substandard. Not by much (especially when you consider how poor the rest of the route is) but it is noticable, to my eyes at least.SteveA30 wrote:What Worthing needs is a 'Brighton', one of the best designed D2 bypasses in Britain. It doesn't need a 'Shrewsbury', one of the worst designed D2 bypasses.
These could be official Sabre words from now on.
A Brighton, good. A Shrewsbury, bad.
I can hear forum members gasping in horror as i type this.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Certainly it's substandard if you compare it to a motorway - the gradients and curves that will be permitted (and indeed are possible) on an A-road are quite different.QuietInRealLife wrote:Maybe I'm just too used to the M27, but the Brighton bypass whilst impressive, has gradients & bends on it that just feel ever so slighty substandard. Not by much (especially when you consider how poor the rest of the route is) but it is noticable, to my eyes at least.
What I don't know is whether the Brighton Bypass involved many relaxations of the standards to allow it to scale even steeper hills and sharper corners than normal. I wonder if we have a member who knows?
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
You're not comparing 'apples with apples' here though are you ?QuietInRealLife wrote:Maybe I'm just too used to the M27, but the Brighton bypass whilst impressive, has gradients & bends on it that just feel ever so slighty substandard. Not by much (especially when you consider how poor the rest of the route is) but it is noticable, to my eyes at least.SteveA30 wrote:What Worthing needs is a 'Brighton', one of the best designed D2 bypasses in Britain. It doesn't need a 'Shrewsbury', one of the worst designed D2 bypasses.
These could be official Sabre words from now on.
A Brighton, good. A Shrewsbury, bad.
I can hear forum members gasping in horror as i type this.
One is a motorway built for necessity around mainly industrial ports, the other is a HQ dual carriageway carefully built around the edges of a National Park.
Strange comparison
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
From discussion on Chichester thread:
Surely the 90s bypass proposals weren't on such a ridiculous line, i.e.:Truvelo wrote:Which sounds like a rehash of the early 90s proposals where two options were proposed - a bypass or throughpass, both of which were to be fully GSJ'd. I suspect this time round the throughpass would include at-grade junctions.
Such a circuitous route would simply fail to attract any A27 traffic. Presumably it is just a spoiling tactic to try to maintain the gridlocked status quo.Jack Delbridge, chair of the A27 Bypass not Throughpass action group wrote:Our alternative is that we should have a bypass. ... The obvious route is along Long Furlong to Findon and then through to the Steyning bypass.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
At the time the A27 Brighton & Hove by-pass was built the South Downs National Park did not exist! In fact the A27 provided a useful boundary for those drawing up the park at least a decade after the road had opened as it avoided the need to worry too much about the complexity of the built up area - which is actually a rather odd shape thanks to hilly nature of the terrain and the way it has traditionally spread out from the valleys heading down to the sea.Mart wrote:
You're not comparing 'apples with apples' here though are you ?
One is a motorway built for necessity around mainly industrial ports, the other is a HQ dual carriageway carefully built around the edges of a National Park.
Strange comparison
The Southwick tunnel also has nothing to do with the National Park - it was built because the National Trust refused point blank to have a deep cutting through their land - which runs across the top.
- Johnathan404
- Member
- Posts: 11478
- Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Indeed the alignment of the Brighton Bypass is horrendous, but suitable when you consider that the traffic levels are relatively low (compared to the given example of the M27) too.
Having said that, the climbs on the M27 between J9 and J12, although difficult to engineer out, hardly make it a perfect example of motorway alignment either. Then you have a lane drop on both uphill approaches to J4 too.
Having said that, the climbs on the M27 between J9 and J12, although difficult to engineer out, hardly make it a perfect example of motorway alignment either. Then you have a lane drop on both uphill approaches to J4 too.
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
There's an interesting Q&A in the stakeholder meeting report that's just been uploaded:
This doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about the effectiveness of the scheme.Q: What are the budget parameters you’re working within?
A: As set out in the Roads Investment Strategy the budget is between £50
million and £100 million. This total includes CPOs (Compulsory Purchase
Orders).
Q: What’s the difference between the different dualling options?
A: The top end dualling would include service roads alongside the dualled
A27, the minimal level of dualling would be narrow widening with direct access
maintained onto the A27.
Q: We’re concerned about the budget constraints. We don’t want an
unsatisfactory result that happens to fall within budget; we want to
ensure all options are being looked at as MPs may be able to campaign
for more funding.
A: The current stage is option identification so all options within and just
beyond budget are being considered.
Q: Is it likely you will come up with above budget options?
A: Yes, we do currently have options both within and outside of the budget.
Q: Dualling is surely the only way of achieving the objectives.
A: We are considering all deliverable options.
Q: At pinchpoints, underpasses would really help through traffic,
meaning we only have to deal with local traffic at the surface level.
A: We’re not prevented from looking at any solution if it’s cost effective and it
works. We haven’t ruled it out but these types of solutions tend to be very
expensive.
-
- Member
- Posts: 133
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2011 21:42
- Location: Southampton / Eastbourne
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Indeed, I wonder what the actual plans will consist of? I can't see the existing route being fully dualled somehow.jackal wrote:There's an interesting Q&A in the stakeholder meeting report that's just been uploaded:
This doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about the effectiveness of the scheme.Q: What are the budget parameters you’re working within?
A: As set out in the Roads Investment Strategy the budget is between £50
million and £100 million. This total includes CPOs (Compulsory Purchase
Orders).
Q: What’s the difference between the different dualling options?
A: The top end dualling would include service roads alongside the dualled
A27, the minimal level of dualling would be narrow widening with direct access
maintained onto the A27.
Q: We’re concerned about the budget constraints. We don’t want an
unsatisfactory result that happens to fall within budget; we want to
ensure all options are being looked at as MPs may be able to campaign
for more funding.
A: The current stage is option identification so all options within and just
beyond budget are being considered.
Q: Is it likely you will come up with above budget options?
A: Yes, we do currently have options both within and outside of the budget.
Q: Dualling is surely the only way of achieving the objectives.
A: We are considering all deliverable options.
Q: At pinchpoints, underpasses would really help through traffic,
meaning we only have to deal with local traffic at the surface level.
A: We’re not prevented from looking at any solution if it’s cost effective and it
works. We haven’t ruled it out but these types of solutions tend to be very
expensive.
I've seen some suggestions that the A283 from Shoreham to Washington should be upgraded via the A24 and A280 Long Furlong and then rejoining A27 at Clapham & Patching! Now that would be some detour!
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
As far as I'm aware that's just a spoiler 'suggestion' from an anti-upgrade group. It's obviously not viable on any level.GeekyJames wrote:Indeed, I wonder what the actual plans will consist of? I can't see the existing route being fully dualled somehow.jackal wrote:There's an interesting Q&A in the stakeholder meeting report that's just been uploaded:
This doesn't exactly fill me with confidence about the effectiveness of the scheme.Q: What are the budget parameters you’re working within?
A: As set out in the Roads Investment Strategy the budget is between £50
million and £100 million. This total includes CPOs (Compulsory Purchase
Orders).
Q: What’s the difference between the different dualling options?
A: The top end dualling would include service roads alongside the dualled
A27, the minimal level of dualling would be narrow widening with direct access
maintained onto the A27.
Q: We’re concerned about the budget constraints. We don’t want an
unsatisfactory result that happens to fall within budget; we want to
ensure all options are being looked at as MPs may be able to campaign
for more funding.
A: The current stage is option identification so all options within and just
beyond budget are being considered.
Q: Is it likely you will come up with above budget options?
A: Yes, we do currently have options both within and outside of the budget.
Q: Dualling is surely the only way of achieving the objectives.
A: We are considering all deliverable options.
Q: At pinchpoints, underpasses would really help through traffic,
meaning we only have to deal with local traffic at the surface level.
A: We’re not prevented from looking at any solution if it’s cost effective and it
works. We haven’t ruled it out but these types of solutions tend to be very
expensive.
I've seen some suggestions that the A283 from Shoreham to Washington should be upgraded via the A24 and A280 Long Furlong and then rejoining A27 at Clapham & Patching! Now that would be some detour!
It sounds like the plan will either be dualling with service roads for local access, narrow dualling without service roads (so property frontages retained), or more local improvements. Given the £50m-£100m cost and response above there is very little chance of any grade-separation.
The current scheme is clearly far short of what is required. Probably the best thing would be if HE keep their £50-100m, and come back later when they have ~£500m for a grade-separated bypass or partially-tunnelled route.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Consultation now open: https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... provement/
- RichardA35
- Elected Committee Member
- Posts: 5716
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 18:58
- Location: Dorset
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Option 1 is reminiscent of the at-grade improvements scheme that was offered at Chichester and rejected by just about everybody.jackal wrote:Consultation now open: https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... provement/
Perhaps tinker with a couple of junctions (with developer money?) and, as you said earlier, keep their funding for a "proper" scheme.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Yes, I think there'd be more value in a £5m-£10m safety orientated scheme at one or two black spots and use the rest to develop a bypass or tunnel. The road in Worthing is one long S2 bottleneck so it's hard to see how fiddling with the junctions will wring out enough extra capacity to justify spending £69m. It's still by any measure going to be a disaster as a strategic route.
Re: A27 Worthing and Lancing improvement
Agreed. This converts a mess into a more elaborate mess. I'd probably rather fix other problems on the A27 and come back to Worthing when the case for a proper bypass is unarguable.jackal wrote:Yes, I think there'd be more value in a £5m-£10m safety orientated scheme at one or two black spots and use the rest to develop a bypass or tunnel. The road in Worthing is one long S2 bottleneck so it's hard to see how fiddling with the junctions will wring out enough extra capacity to justify spending £69m. It's still by any measure going to be a disaster as a strategic route.
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk