Oxford to Cambridge expressway

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.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1381
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by Peter Freeman »

Stevie D wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 12:21 The downside to doing that is that is fundamentally dishonest, and leads to further problems:
1️⃣ ...
2️⃣ what you will get is a series of local relief roads that are totally unsuitable for use as an end-to-end expressway.
Not if you design and build them properly, with proper access control and thoughtful future-proofing.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19181
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by KeithW »

Stevie D wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 12:21 The downside to doing that is that is fundamentally dishonest, and leads to further problems:
1️⃣ when it becomes apparent that it is intended to be part of a bigger project and not just a local bypass, that feeds the argument that people pushing for new roads are trying to tarmac over the country and are not to be trusted, making it harder to get any new roads approved, and
2️⃣ what you will get is a series of local relief roads that are totally unsuitable for use as an end-to-end expressway.
The reality is that is the way most road improvements ARE delivered. This includes pretty much all the A1(M) between Darrington and the Darlington bypass and of course the Doncaster bypass was the first motorway bypass back in 1961 but by then the pattern had been well and truly set with the bypasses of Grantham, Stamford, Newark etc. As we speak this is happening on the A19 with the widening between Norton and Wynard and at Testos. It is how the A14 came into being which started with upgrades to the A45 and A604 with the whole route only getting a contiguous number in the 1990's

Here courtesy of Roads.org is the A1(M) Timeline
Nov 1995 J47-49 Walshford → Dishforth
Oct 1998 J14-17 Alconbury → Peterborough
Feb 1999 J44-45 Hook Moor → Bramham
Apr 2005 J46-47 Wetherby → Walshford
Jan 2006 J39-44 Darrington → Hook Moor
Dec 2009 J44-46 Bramham → Wetherby
Apr 2012 J49-51 Dishforth → Leeming Bar
I recall very well the protracted periods of time between different sections of the M20 being built and of course the last few miles from Folkestone into Dover was finally built as All Purpose

Then there is the A66 of course , the current proposed scheme is pretty much the only one that covered the entirety of the 'classic' section between Penrith and Scotch Corner.

Another major route done piecemeal that has changed through many years is the A13, then there are the bodges when the money ran out such as the M42/A42 where you have a link road between the M1 , M6 and M40 where the last few miles to the M1 are basic all purpose D2.
Veloel
Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 18:39

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by Veloel »

I'm a few months late to this part of the conversation, but while I do agree Oxford-Cambridge wasn't the best branding to sell the project to the wider public, I suspect it was absolutely the best branding to sell it to Westminster politicians, particularly with the Tories in government!
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19181
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by KeithW »

roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 24, 2021 23:23 Prescott's plans, if they were his rather than inherited from the previous administration, must have been very short-lived, because he cancelled plans to dual the A303 in 1998, according to this.

https://www.chardandilminsternews.co.uk ... dual-them/
That was pretty much a formality, by 1996 the government of John Major had pretty much gutted the grandiose Roads For Prosperity Scheme of which dualling the A303 was a part. Many if not most of the road improvements on that list have subsequently been carried out but not dualling the entire A303.
User avatar
RichardA35
Committee Member
Posts: 5692
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 18:58
Location: Dorset

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by RichardA35 »

KeithW wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 15:08
roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 24, 2021 23:23 Prescott's plans, if they were his rather than inherited from the previous administration, must have been very short-lived, because he cancelled plans to dual the A303 in 1998, according to this.

https://www.chardandilminsternews.co.uk ... dual-them/
That was pretty much a formality, by 1996 the government of John Major had pretty much gutted the grandiose Roads For Prosperity Scheme of which dualling the A303 was a part. Many if not most of the road improvements on that list have subsequently been carried out but not dualling the entire A303.
The late lamented Wessex Link DBFO was kept on ice then cancelled when the Salisbury Bypass failed to receive approval:

"Wessex Link DBFO Project incorporating:

A36 Salisbury Bypass
A303 Wylye to Stockton Wood Improvement
A303 Sparkford to Ilchester Improvement
A303 Ilminster Bypass Improvement
A36 Codford to Heytesbury Improvement
A303 Chicklade Bottom to Mere Improvement"
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19181
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by KeithW »

Veloel wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 15:07 I'm a few months late to this part of the conversation, but while I do agree Oxford-Cambridge wasn't the best branding to sell the project to the wider public, I suspect it was absolutely the best branding to sell it to Westminster politicians, particularly with the Tories in government!
There was a lot of discontent about it outside the Oxford Cambridge Arc amongst back bench MP's. The prevalent feeling was that spending huge amounts of public money on the grounds that this was one of the most prosperous areas in the country was not a message the conservative party membership wanted to take to the public. It was also clear that the priority was about boosting housing development rather than providing a strategic road. The current government seems actually to far more interested in keeping its new northern voters happy, hence the large scale investments in the North East,

A secondary problem was the requirement was and is less for a link between Oxford and Cambridge than between Eastern England, the Thames Valley and South West.

The one part of the Oxford Cambridge arc that is going forward is EastWest rail which actually has the potential to take a lot of freight off roads such as the A14, A428/ A421 and A43. Getting containers from Felixstowe to Oxford, Bristol or Cardiff without routing them via the congested railways of London or the M25 or A14 by road is a major plus for the relatively low cost rail scheme. It would be even better if it were electrified of course.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31459
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by roadtester »

KeithW wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 15:43 There was a lot of discontent about it outside the Oxford Cambridge Arc amongst back bench MP's. The prevalent feeling was that spending huge amounts of public money on the grounds that this was one of the most prosperous areas in the country was not a message the conservative party membership wanted to take to the public. It was also clear that the priority was about boosting housing development rather than providing a strategic road. The current government seems actually to far more interested in keeping its new northern voters happy, hence the large scale investments in the North East,
This is probably their thinking but it's badly mistaken.

A government that chokes growth in the economy's areas of high potential is handing investment and prosperity to rival countries on a plate and making everyone in the UK poorer.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Phil
Member
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by Phil »

roadtester wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 16:47

A government that chokes growth in the economy's areas of high potential is handing investment and prosperity to rival countries on a plate and making everyone in the UK poorer.
But thats the whole point - those traditional 'areas of high potential' (i.e. the SE of England) are running out of room (not to mention infrastructure like water supplies, sewage treatment, electricity supply network, etc) to accommodate more people!

As noted the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway was quite clear in that its main purpose was to facilitate development to feed the 'SE is where you need to be' monster - yet as Tory MPs in the likes of the Chilterns know only too well yet more housing developments and new towns squished into every available space that isn't Greenbelt, a SSI or AONB is a serious vote loser!

The Conservative Party have, post Brexit, trying to position themselves as a party committed to redistributing the wealth and opportunity away from the SE of England northwards. Its actually a cunning plan if they can pull it off - traditional Tory voters in the home counties get less development near them while those who switch allegiance at the last election 'up north' see grater prosperity / high quality employment / etc.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31459
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by roadtester »

Phil wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 23:54
roadtester wrote: Tue Jul 27, 2021 16:47

A government that chokes growth in the economy's areas of high potential is handing investment and prosperity to rival countries on a plate and making everyone in the UK poorer.
But thats the whole point - those traditional 'areas of high potential' (i.e. the SE of England) are running out of room (not to mention infrastructure like water supplies, sewage treatment, electricity supply network, etc) to accommodate more people!

As noted the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway was quite clear in that its main purpose was to facilitate development to feed the 'SE is where you need to be' monster - yet as Tory MPs in the likes of the Chilterns know only too well yet more housing developments and new towns squished into every available space that isn't Greenbelt, a SSI or AONB is a serious vote loser!

The Conservative Party have, post Brexit, trying to position themselves as a party committed to redistributing the wealth and opportunity away from the SE of England northwards. Its actually a cunning plan if they can pull it off - traditional Tory voters in the home counties get less development near them while those who switch allegiance at the last election 'up north' see grater prosperity / high quality employment / etc.
But you have to create wealth before you can redistribute it.

If I'm a high tech foreign investor keen to get close to the Oxford or Cambridge cluster and I'm effectively locked out of those areas, realistically my fall-back isn't going to be another part of the UK, it's going to be Munich or Silicon Valley or whatever.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Phil
Member
Posts: 2269
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by Phil »

roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 00:00

But you have to create wealth before you can redistribute it.

If I'm a high tech foreign investor keen to get close to the Oxford or Cambridge cluster and I'm effectively locked out of those areas, realistically my fall-back isn't going to be another part of the UK, it's going to be Munich or Silicon Valley or whatever.
The SE of England is effectively full and there is a pressing need to direct investments to areas where there is space to accommodate them. If it means some 'investors' are dissuaded then so be it. You don't solve a problem by sticking your fingers in your ears and hoping it will go away while you trouser some easy cash.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31459
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by roadtester »

Phil wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 00:16
roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 00:00

But you have to create wealth before you can redistribute it.

If I'm a high tech foreign investor keen to get close to the Oxford or Cambridge cluster and I'm effectively locked out of those areas, realistically my fall-back isn't going to be another part of the UK, it's going to be Munich or Silicon Valley or whatever.
The SE of England is effectively full and there is a pressing need to direct investments to areas where there is space to accommodate them. If it means some 'investors' are dissuaded then so be it. You don't solve a problem by sticking your fingers in your ears and hoping it will go away while you trouser some easy cash.
Well yes, we can throw away our leading position in several industries if we want to.

The fact is companies want to be close to where the intellectual action is in their industries.

That's why AstraZeneca moved its headquarters from the Northwest to the Cambridge biomedical campus.

If Cambridge doesn't work out, they're not going back to Cheshire. If they can't expand here, they'll be off to the US.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by jackal »

^
They were headquartered in London before the move to Cambridge.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31459
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by roadtester »

jackal wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 09:45 ^
They were headquartered in London before the move to Cambridge.
Ah yes, you are right. I'm a bit hazy on the precise migratory history of AstraZeneca's brass plate but certainly the main move of substance was of thousands of highly skilled, highly paid R&D/science jobs from Alderley Park in Cheshire to Cambridge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21833207

I don't think it alters the main point which is that if AstraZeneca isn't happy in Cambridge, its next move won't be back to Cheshire. It will probably be to somewhere outside the UK.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7541
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by jackal »

Yes, I quite agree with your main point.
User avatar
JohnnyMo
Member
Posts: 6982
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 13:56
Location: Letchworth, Herts, England

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by JohnnyMo »

roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:25
jackal wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 09:45 ^
They were headquartered in London before the move to Cambridge.
Ah yes, you are right. I'm a bit hazy on the precise migratory history of AstraZeneca's brass plate but certainly the main move of substance was of thousands of highly skilled, highly paid R&D/science jobs from Alderley Park in Cheshire to Cambridge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21833207

I don't think it alters the main point which is that if AstraZeneca isn't happy in Cambridge, its next move won't be back to Cheshire. It will probably be to somewhere outside the UK.
The other point is, I expect, it was easier to recruit/retain those workers with a site in Cambridge than Alderley Park.
Mean while fairly close by (easily commutable) GSK.

It is not a case of the SE or rest of UK, it is the SE or somewhere similar in Europe.
These industries tend to cluster together and that cluster normally has a reason, maybe historic as with Silicon Valley or a world leading research hub.
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31459
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by roadtester »

JohnnyMo wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 16:47
roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:25
jackal wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 09:45 ^
They were headquartered in London before the move to Cambridge.
Ah yes, you are right. I'm a bit hazy on the precise migratory history of AstraZeneca's brass plate but certainly the main move of substance was of thousands of highly skilled, highly paid R&D/science jobs from Alderley Park in Cheshire to Cambridge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21833207

I don't think it alters the main point which is that if AstraZeneca isn't happy in Cambridge, its next move won't be back to Cheshire. It will probably be to somewhere outside the UK.
The other point is, I expect, it was easier to recruit/retain those workers with a site in Cambridge than Alderley Park.
Mean while fairly close by (easily commutable) GSK.

It is not a case of the SE or rest of UK, it is the SE or somewhere similar in Europe.
These industries tend to cluster together and that cluster normally has a reason, maybe historic as with Silicon Valley or a world leading research hub.
Well yes - we have two world-leading research hubs, Oxford and Cambridge, which are about seventy miles apart.

There is no direct high quality road or rail link between these two major centres.

I think most people from other countries would consider this to be an incomprehensible state of affairs, and yet the necessity for these links is still being seriously questioned in the UK.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
JohnnyMo
Member
Posts: 6982
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 13:56
Location: Letchworth, Herts, England

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by JohnnyMo »

Phil wrote: Fri Jul 30, 2021 23:54
But thats the whole point - those traditional 'areas of high potential' (i.e. the SE of England) are running out of room (not to mention infrastructure like water supplies, sewage treatment, electricity supply network, etc) to accommodate more people!
Only because Nimby/Banana keep telling everyone the SE is full.
water supply, solvable. Off peak electricity pumping water into the region using reservoirs such as Rutland water as a short term store and forward facility rather than a long term seasonal facility.
electricity supply network. Many windfarm are in the southern North Sea, while the old coal fired power stations were in the coal fields.
accommodate more people. 1 Square Mile could have 125,000 properties, somewhere approaching 750,000 people. A town 2 miles in diameter, so everyone is within a mile of the centre, even if half the land isn't housing but shops, offices ... schools could a have over 1 Million people. I don't agree with 20 dwellings / acre but that is the current guidelines.
As noted the Oxford to Cambridge Expressway was quite clear in that its main purpose was to facilitate development to feed the 'SE is where you need to be' monster - yet as Tory MPs in the likes of the Chilterns know only too well yet more housing developments and new towns squished into every available space that isn't Greenbelt, a SSI or AONB is a serious vote loser!
I accept it is a vote loser, also addressing the supply side would curtail rising property prices, also a vote loser. Yes protect SSI and AONB but urban development is better for the environment than agri-industrial farming.
The Conservative Party have, post Brexit, trying to position themselves as a party committed to redistributing the wealth and opportunity away from the SE of England northwards. Its actually a cunning plan if they can pull it off - traditional Tory voters in the home counties get less development near them while those who switch allegiance at the last election 'up north' see grater prosperity / high quality employment / etc.
That sort of regional planning has been tried for the last 60 years, maybe longer and has not worked yet. I don't see it working now.
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
User avatar
JohnnyMo
Member
Posts: 6982
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 13:56
Location: Letchworth, Herts, England

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by JohnnyMo »

roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 16:52
JohnnyMo wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 16:47
roadtester wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 11:25

Ah yes, you are right. I'm a bit hazy on the precise migratory history of AstraZeneca's brass plate but certainly the main move of substance was of thousands of highly skilled, highly paid R&D/science jobs from Alderley Park in Cheshire to Cambridge.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-21833207

I don't think it alters the main point which is that if AstraZeneca isn't happy in Cambridge, its next move won't be back to Cheshire. It will probably be to somewhere outside the UK.
The other point is, I expect, it was easier to recruit/retain those workers with a site in Cambridge than Alderley Park.
Mean while fairly close by (easily commutable) GSK.

It is not a case of the SE or rest of UK, it is the SE or somewhere similar in Europe.
These industries tend to cluster together and that cluster normally has a reason, maybe historic as with Silicon Valley or a world leading research hub.
Well yes - we have two world-leading research hubs, Oxford and Cambridge, which are about seventy miles apart.

There is no direct high quality road or rail link between these two major centres.

I think most people from other countries would consider this to be an incomprehensible state of affairs, and yet the necessity for these links is still being seriously questioned in the UK.
ditto Manchester & Sheffield
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9851
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by owen b »

JohnnyMo wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 17:16 1 Square Mile could have 125,000 properties, somewhere approaching 750,000 people. A town 2 miles in diameter, so everyone is within a mile of the centre, even if half the land isn't housing but shops, offices ... schools could a have over 1 Million people. I don't agree with 20 dwellings / acre but that is the current guidelines.
:shock: Let's hope not. Luton is a fairly densely populated large town. According to data here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luton it has a population of 213k (2019) in 16.7 square miles, that's 12,800 per square mile. 750,000 in one square mile doesn't bear thinking about, that's 59 times as dense as Luton. Quite apart from anything else, average household occupancy is nowhere near 6 (ie. the 750,000 people in 125,000 properties per your suggestion).
Owen
User avatar
JohnnyMo
Member
Posts: 6982
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 13:56
Location: Letchworth, Herts, England

Re: Oxford to Cambridge expressway

Post by JohnnyMo »

owen b wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 17:33
JohnnyMo wrote: Sat Jul 31, 2021 17:16 1 Square Mile could have 125,000 properties, somewhere approaching 750,000 people. A town 2 miles in diameter, so everyone is within a mile of the centre, even if half the land isn't housing but shops, offices ... schools could a have over 1 Million people. I don't agree with 20 dwellings / acre but that is the current guidelines.
:shock: Let's hope not. Luton is a fairly densely populated large town. According to data here : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luton it has a population of 213k (2019) in 16.7 square miles, that's 12,800 per square mile. 750,000 in one square mile doesn't bear thinking about, that's 59 times as dense as Luton. Quite apart from anything else, average household occupancy is nowhere near 6 (ie. the 750,000 people in 125,000 properties per your suggestion).
:oops: I was thinking do I allow 2 or 3 people per property so somehow did both :oops: 2 people would be 250,000/ sq mile. as I said I don't think 20 dwellings / acre is desirable

Part of the Isle of Dogs is 90,000 people per km2 which is approaching 250,000/ sq mile.
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
Post Reply