The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.
There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).
Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.
Note that as well as leaving Goodwood unmolested it ensures that the road doesn't enter the National Park.
It's hard to believe that none of the professionals charged with devising routings (at HE, two councils and at least two consultancies) have noticed this. I have to assume that the Strategic Development Location (i.e. planned housing site) marked in red is considered of a higher priority than the bypass.
So with these sensible solutions thrown into the skip what exactly are we likely to end up with? Minor tinkering to the junctions on the existing bypass to provide extra stacking space at each of the bottlenecks
How would you like your grade separations, Sir? Big and complex.
Note that as well as leaving Goodwood unmolested it ensures that the road doesn't enter the National Park.
It's hard to believe that none of the professionals charged with devising routings (at HE, two councils and at least two consultancies) have noticed this. I have to assume that the Strategic Development Location (i.e. planned housing site) marked in red is considered of a higher priority than the bypass.
Houses win over roads.
Never mind that you can't properly access them. That's someone else's problem for 20 years later.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
jackal wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 20:18
I had essentially the same idea and posted this on p. 8:
No, I think you looked at a different post. I suggested building a whole new southern route all the way to Crossbush, getting rid of all the nasty bits in one go
jackal wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 20:18
I had essentially the same idea and posted this on p. 8:
No, I think you looked at a different post. I suggested building a whole new southern route all the way to Crossbush, getting rid of all the nasty bits in one go
I would encourage you to write or e-mail HE with your proposal. They’ll probably retort that acquiring land would be too expensive, but isn’t that what they’ve just done around Huntingdon and Cambridge??
Maybe in 2025 someone else will have a brainwave..
jackal wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 20:18
I had essentially the same idea and posted this on p. 8:
No, I think you looked at a different post. I suggested building a whole new southern route all the way to Crossbush, getting rid of all the nasty bits in one go
Seems I was looking at Peter350's drawing also posted on Aug 20.
jackal wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 20:18
I had essentially the same idea and posted this on p. 8:
No, I think you looked at a different post. I suggested building a whole new southern route all the way to Crossbush, getting rid of all the nasty bits in one go
I would encourage you to write or e-mail HE with your proposal. They’ll probably retort that acquiring land would be too expensive, but isn’t that what they’ve just done around Huntingdon and Cambridge??
Maybe in 2025 someone else will have a brainwave..
In the longer term HE may wish to do something to that kind of level to improve the A27, but I think they will probably just stick to smaller separate projects at various points along the road for the time being. As for the land being too expensive, there are numerous other examples of new roads just as lengthy as the A14C2H project that required considerable areas of land to build on. To name one, the Aberdeen bypass.
HE dismissed the £500m community proposals as too expensive, so I doubt they have a few billion lying around to throw behind a vastly larger scheme at the last possible moment. They're running a deficit already.
Not to mention it would necessitate the cancellation of the much needed Arundel improvement, due to start construction in two years. This for the sake of some huge speculative project sure to have a ten year lead-in time, and prone to cancellation with every change of policy or government over that period. A bird in hand and all that.
Would it really be billions though? Even at £50m per km it works out to around £950m. It's about 12 miles of completely flat road, with the viaduct over the Arun being the only significant feature. Would it really cost that much?
I agree it's too late now, but I am puzzled why HE had two schemes a few miles apart, linked by a shabby DC and never thought of linking them. I have read the options report for Arundel and that definitely doesn't include anything like this. I just wonder why, when to me it seems an obvious solution.
Herned wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 09:21
Would it really be billions though? Even at £50m per km it works out to around £950m. It's about 12 miles of completely flat road, with the viaduct over the Arun being the only significant feature. Would it really cost that much?
I agree it's too late now, but I am puzzled why HE had two schemes a few miles apart, linked by a shabby DC and never thought of linking them. I have read the options report for Arundel and that definitely doesn't include anything like this. I just wonder why, when to me it seems an obvious solution.
The Cambridge to Huntingdon scheme is costing around £1.5bn and is 21 miles of new road, so I doubt a new 12 mile road along the A27 would cost as much as £1bn. Not only that, but A14C2H is to be D3M whereas there would probably not be a new road as wide as that along the south coast making it even cheaper.
The two recently costed Chichester schemes each came to £500m for maybe 30% of the length you're proposing. It would surely be well north of £1bn and probably closer to £2bn.
jackal wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:15
The two recently costed Chichester schemes each came to £500m for maybe 30% of the length you're proposing. It would surely be well north of £1bn and probably closer to £2bn.
But building something totally offline would be much cheaper. What has come in at £100m per km lately? (ignoring Stonehenge)
jackal wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 11:15
The two recently costed Chichester schemes each came to £500m for maybe 30% of the length you're proposing. It would surely be well north of £1bn and probably closer to £2bn.
But building something totally offline would be much cheaper. What has come in at £100m per km lately? (ignoring Stonehenge)
The Northern route is also totally offline - still £500m for a few miles. That's the best comparison we have. Newbuild GSJed DCs are a rarity in SE England nowadays, but the expectation would be around £100m/mile (A120 to Marks Tey is another).
PS The depicted route would be well in excess of 15 miles were it to be turned into a safe, buildable design that respects contours, environmental sites, settlements, etc. Hence £100m/mile (not per KM).
In hindsight I suspect the majority of locals and councils will wish they'd just supported option 2 planned in RIS1 - this solved the majority of the issues with local and long distance traffic. If this has been supported then it would probably be under construction now!
jackal wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 18:20
Hence £100m/mile (not per KM).
The A358 dualling is a similar length and is estimated around £400m. And would involve a lot more earth moving and traffic management. I don’t see how a dual carriageway in a completely flat landscape can cost £100m per mile. Tunnels cost that much
Something seriously needs to be done about the A27 - it took me over three hours yesterday evening to cover the 80 odd miles from Eastbourne to Southampton. Looking at Google this morning it actually suggests taking the M23 to the M25 and then coming back down the M3 is a quicker route by 20 minutes, despite being over 60% longer and adding to congestion around London...
jackal wrote: ↑Wed Jan 23, 2019 18:20
Hence £100m/mile (not per KM).
The A358 dualling is a similar length and is estimated around £400m. And would involve a lot more earth moving and traffic management. I don’t see how a dual carriageway in a completely flat landscape can cost £100m per mile. Tunnels cost that much
I should think the cost of land around Chichester is much higher than it is near Taunton or in rural Cambridgeshire.
