BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

[oasis]

Quite a few road schemes going on at the moment in the county. Here is a space to talk about anything from the road layouts, capacity, current and future/proposed road schemes in Berkshire.

Here are a few that have been completed more recently:

1) Reading M4 Junction 11 expansion: new bridges built which have expanded the multi-lane gyratory, completely encircling the old junction. New footbridges etc, which seem very seldom used!

2) Maidenhead, Stafferton Link. Completing a circular route around the town centre.

3) Calcot, Reading A4 improvement works: widened carriageway and new junctions completed in 2015.

And a few examples of current schemes under construction:

1) Reading/Wokingham M4 Junction 10 improvements

2) Shinfield (south of Reading) bypass for the A327: a single-carriageway road built to the north and east of Shinfield, access to new development land and a university research park. The completion date has come and gone with reported unexpected ground conditions etc, not sure when they will open this fully. Nevertheless, the new dual carriageway bridge over the M4 has been in place and opened to the public.

3) Winnersh Relief Road Phase 1: New road passing to the south and west of the village of Winnersh, between Reading and Wokingham. Access to development land currently for housing and a school.

4) Wokingham northern distributor road: access to all the new housing developments north of the town, eventually forming a (albeit relatively small) road between Winnersh and the A329(M) junction.

5) Wokingham southern distributor road

6) M4 smart motorway. Junction 12-3

7) Reading South Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) route: addition of a third lane for public transport to the dual carriageway A33. Being completed in phases, currently being built adjacent to the Madejski Stadium up to Kennet Island.

Proposed schemes:

1) Arborfield (south of Reading) bypass for the A327: another single carriageway road which will bypass Arborfield cross, passing to the south-west of the village. Recently submitted planning permission.

2) Winnersh Relief Road Phase 2: linking phase 1 of the relief road to the A329 east of Winnersh, thereby eventually forming a route from Lower Earley to Wokingham, bypassing the Winnersh Crossroads.

3) Reading East Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) route: proposals are for a new road link from the end of the A3290 to Reading's Inner Distribution Road... but currently only proposed for public transport (!). Previously in the 1980's this was the line of the 'Cross Town Route' which would have linked the A329(M) motorway right into the heart of Reading. Should this proposed road be opened to public vehicles?

4) Reading Third Thames Bridge: been talked about for what seems like an eternity, with various disagreements over the decades between Oxfordshire, Wokingham and Reading councils. This scheme is probably a long way off, but more news has surfaced in recent years about this (especially each time there is gridlock in Reading due to the lack of river crossings). The most recent indications for a route would be between the end of the A3290 (Thames Valley Park) over the Thames to join the A4155 at Caversham Park Village.

Feel free to add more schemes and proposals!

[oasis]

According to local sources, the second Cow Lane Bridge in Reading is about to be widened to allow two way traffic flow.

This route has historically been a major traffic bottleneck due to the two consecutive single-file tunnels under the railway tracks, each controlled by traffic lights.

[WHBM]

6) M4 smart motorway. Junction 12-3

I get the impression this will cost more than all the rest put together.

Originally a 2-lane motorway, it was widened to 3 quite soon after construction in the late 1960s but a lot of the bridges and viaducts have had to do without a hard shoulder from that work, thus they all need complete rebuilding for the extra lane.

[jackal]

£586.4 to £862.4 million for the smart motorway scheme. Here's its thread:

viewtopic.php?f=1&t=32563&hilit=junctions+3+12

[iansergeant]

Regarding Cow Lane, the article below says that work was due to start last week:

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/readin ... e-13537494

I hope to drive past in the near future to look. This is a classic example of how awkward landowners can block an infrastructure scheme for years.

[ChrisH]

The business case for the Third Thames Bridge has been published.

Consultants working for a consortium of local authorities looked at three options:

1. Single-carriageway two lane bridge
2. As above, but tolled
3. Four lane bridge with bus lanes, and further bus priority elsewhere in Reading

The costs are estimated between £110 million (option 1) and £160 million (option 3), although it's not clear how much of that difference relates solely to the wider bridge, and how much to complementary measures.

Surprisingly, the modelling indicates relatively low traffic flows on the bridge, peaking at 1200 vehicles per hour per direction. One traffic lane would provide for that comfortably, if the junctions at either end had enough capacity.

The route of the bridge would be from the top of the A3290 in Thames Valley Park, across to the junction of the A4155 and Caversham Park Road. No further northern extension has been proposed, although the modelling indicates that a good deal of traffic (including HGVs) would divert from the A4074 NW of Reading to this bridge, via unsuitable country lanes and suburban streets.

My view is that the bridge should be four lanes, and that tied in should be a Caversham northern bypass. The sticking point will be that South Oxfordshire DC don't want this bridge or any development of their land, which abuts Reading very closely. The areas to the north of Reading/Caversham could accommodate a lot of development and new housing (which we desperately need in this area) but only if suitable infrastructure is put in.

[A303Chris]

Living as I do in Woodley, the majority of Wokingham's schemes are only to facilitate development and not necessarily increase capacity. The Shinfield and Arborfield by passes are being to built to accommodate the growth from the proposed strategic development locations of Shinfield / Three Mile Cross and Arborfield Garrision. Both are single carriageway and the existing A327 between them and south towards Eversley are not being improved so will just clogg up. Wokingham's transport model is based on the assumption that new residents will use the the bus or cycle from the new developments, forgetting there in the middle of nowhere and therefore car use will be high. I'm a cyclist, and would not cycle along these road at night and the bus takes the cook tour.

The Winnersh bypass again is facilitate over 500 new homes and it will be still be quicker to use the direct existing A329 Reading Road, given it will be shorter and will go through fewer signalised junctions.

The Wokingham Northern distributor again is to facilitate development of 2,500 houses and does not provide a bypass.

The junction 10 improvements involved reducing the A329(M) to one lane which causes chaos at peak times, while the current works are just maintenance works to the bridges.

Reading schemes are all bus based and involve no extra road capacity for cars.

There are no proper schemes like grade separation and new lengths of dual carriageway which are required to accomodate growth in traffic and properly facilitate growth. There all sticky plaster schemes, which do not improve the driving experience.

Sorry to be down beat, but none of these are big improvement schemes

[ChrisH]

Living as I do in Woodley...

As a fellow Woodley resident I have to agree with you. In my view the area needs some serious improvements, viz:

New roads:
- Third Thames Bridge and Caversham bypass up to Wallingford / A4074 – dual carriageway
- Napier Road / A3290 link – at least providing eastbound general traffic route to flush cars out of Reading town centre
- Expressway from A329(M) to M3 / A331 junction – to give a through route across the conurbation (alternative to M31)
- Local link from M4 J12 to J11 to pick up local traffic and support developments

Upgrades:
- A33 to Basingstoke – dual carriageway
- B3270 Lower Earley Way and Bader Way – dual carriageway

[oasis]

Living as I do in Woodley...

As a fellow Woodley resident I have to agree with you. In my view the area needs some serious improvements, viz:

New roads:
- Third Thames Bridge and Caversham bypass up to Wallingford / A4074 – dual carriageway
- Napier Road / A3290 link – at least providing eastbound general traffic route to flush cars out of Reading town centre
- Expressway from A329(M) to M3 / A331 junction – to give a through route across the conurbation (alternative to M31)
- Local link from M4 J12 to J11 to pick up local traffic and support developments

Upgrades:
- A33 to Basingstoke – dual carriageway
- B3270 Lower Earley Way and Bader Way – dual carriageway

These would be amazing and help traffic congestion in the area, in my personal opinion.

[SteveA30]

According to BBC South news, the Shinfield bypass opened at 6am today. They didn't mention it in the evening show though.

The A33 D2 bypass south of Reading is due to be sabotaged by 2 rbts for new developments at some point.

[A303Chris]

Living as I do in Woodley...

As a fellow Woodley resident I have to agree with you. In my view the area needs some serious improvements, viz:

New roads:
- Third Thames Bridge and Caversham bypass up to Wallingford / A4074 – dual carriageway
- Napier Road / A3290 link – at least providing eastbound general traffic route to flush cars out of Reading town centre
- Expressway from A329(M) to M3 / A331 junction – to give a through route across the conurbation (alternative to M31)
- Local link from M4 J12 to J11 to pick up local traffic and support developments

Upgrades:
- A33 to Basingstoke – dual carriageway
- B3270 Lower Earley Way and Bader Way – dual carriageway

Well living in Woodley all my life, am a sad 48 year old now, and doing my "O" level Geography project in the mid 80's on transport together with working for Berkshire CC in the 90s so much of what you note was planned. Some of this are shown on plans I scanned in three years ago on this thread

The preferred option for the Third Thames Bridge was a route down from the A4074 13 bends of death at Cane End to a new roundabout at the Oxford Road / Portman Road junction, where the dual carriageway Cross Town Route would have gone joining onto the A329(M) at Sutton Seeds.

After the M31 was dropped the original proposal was to link the A329(m) with the M3 junction 4 and proposed Blackwater Relief Road, however this was dropped when the Crowthorne / Sandhurst bypass was built.

The proposals for the Kennet Valley Development showed a dual carriageway link from the A33 at Island Road to Sainsburys at Calcot, that's why the Kennet Island / Island Road / A33 junction is so big. This was dropped when the south east plan was quashed in 2010 by the collation government. Also local politicians didn't like the development and created a fuss.

The original proposals for Woodley Airfield and Lower Early published in the early 1970's showed Lower Early Way and Bader Way, dual carriageway. In fact the Badar Way would have carried on along Mohawk Way, Beggars Hill Road under the railway and joined the A4 at the Charvil wee waif roundabout, there by creating a eastern bypass of the Reading conurbation. Unfortunately these were watered down to what we have now.

The A33 was going to be dual carriageway to Basingstoke, Berkshire did there bit , Hampshire then decided there bit was nit needed.

Its a shame we never seem to do infrastructure right here. I go to France on holiday and see there road building and think why cant we do this here. If they build a bypass, its nearly always grade separated even if the new road is single carriageway.

[A303Chris]

According to BBC South news, the Shinfield bypass opened at 6am today. They didn't mention it in the evening show though.

The A33 D2 bypass south of Reading is due to be sabotaged by 2 rbts for new developments at some point.

Your kidding me. Hopefully the large site doesn't make it in the local plan allocation. Why do we destroyed perfectly good high class roads by roundabouts. Why cant Grade separated junctions be built as in France and Spain.

[oasis]

Grade separated roads seems to be more common in most other countries, including in East Asia from personal experience of travelling.

A local example of a road that should have been grade separated is the Jennets Park Roundabout in Bracknell. Essentially, a free flowing dual carriageway, all the way from the M4/A329m, got a new roundabout to access the new housing development. This roundabout has subsequently been signallised too! I regularly see the queues from this new roundabout backing up into Bracknell.

They should have planned the junction to make sure that the main route was free flowing from the start.

[WHBM]

Your kidding me. Hopefully the large site doesn't make it in the local plan allocation. Why do we destroyed perfectly good high class roads by roundabouts. Why cant Grade separated junctions be built as in France and Spain.

This is the skill of the developer.

1. Major proposal sold to local council, outline only, on basis of additional property tax revenue, additional grants from central government which are based on population, compliance with government building targets, which in itself attracts additional government money, etc. It's a bonus for the councillors if the proposed development appears likely to attract residents who will vote the "right" way in future elections.

2. Developer writes up cost of grade separated and roundabout junctions, and tells council it now looks unviable if grade separation is required. Extra £50m and no additional developer revenue. Miraculously, money was available for the councillors' favourite Section 106 Agreement projects to be incorporated. Developer has another competing proposal in another council area, competing for their funds, for which plans are casually shown to councillors. Council starts to worry and asks for reports.

3. Developer goes to "independent" traffic planning consultancy (paid for by developer) who miraculously produces traffic flow plan which shows roundabouts will have no impact.

4. Council says "Phew, that's alright then".

[SteveA30]

There must be someway of counteracting this effective blackmailing.

[ChrisH]

The original proposals for Woodley Airfield and Lower Early published in the early 1970's showed Lower Early Way and Bader Way, dual carriageway. In fact the Badar Way would have carried on along Mohawk Way, Beggars Hill Road under the railway and joined the A4 at the Charvil wee waif roundabout, there by creating a eastern bypass of the Reading conurbation. Unfortunately these were watered down to what we have now.

I realised this recently, although now that I have bought a house in Loddon Park which would be on that route, I would obviously oppose any development in my back yard It would certainly help alleviate the surprisngly heavy traffic down the very narrow Sandford Lane.

[jackal]

There must be someway of counteracting this effective blackmailing.

You'd mitigate the worst effects if consultancies were at least held accountable for their often wildly optimistic congestion forecasts, e.g. by being excluded from future government contracts.

[Fenlander]

Developer: we want to build a couple of thousand houses please.
Existing town: we need a bypass, and more schools and doctors already, sort that first before you massively enlarge the town.
Council: OK developer you can do that as long as you build a bypass and a new school to keep the town happy.
Developer: Fair enough, we'll build the school after x00 houses and open the bypass after y00
Council: deal.
Town: yay, we're getting what we need, happy days.
< a short time passes, the developer builds the bypass first as access only to the building site, curiously there's no sign of the school being built and x00 houses are nearing completion>
Developer: about that school, we don't want to build it, we'd rather build more houses and we're almost at x00 houses
Council: tough, you agreed to it, you do it.
Developer to council: OK we'll stay at x00 minus a few and move on to our new development elsewhere.
Developer to town: hey, we've got your shiny new bypass ready to go but we can't open it as the council says we have to build y00 houses first and we haven't.
Council: here's a thought, how about we drop all that x00 and y00 business about the school and bypass and you open the bypass now?
Developer: have a backhander, err S106 money, for education instead of building the school and you've a deal.
Town: hurrah, we have our bypass, now about that new school...
Developer: nothing to do with us, the council have the money.
Council: here's a couple of portacabins for the existing schools.

[Reading]

As yet another resident of Woodley I think the biggest mistake was allowing more developments to have access form the Lower Earley relief road, it should have been kept as a through route with developments coming off Cutbush lane only (or King St Lane foe the new one). I think I have access to videos of the motorcycle toyrun going back for nearly 20 years - they certainly show the changing character of that road. At the beginning it looks like a rural fast A road with no pavements and no entrances from Daneshill to the Moathouse, now it might as well be Rushey Way. If they build roundabouts for a huge new Grazely newtown, the A33 will go the same way

PS here is a link to a vid of the new road - https://www.wokinghampaper.com/shinfiel ... pens-late/

[A303Chris]

The original proposals for Woodley Airfield and Lower Early published in the early 1970's showed Lower Early Way and Bader Way, dual carriageway. In fact the Badar Way would have carried on along Mohawk Way, Beggars Hill Road under the railway and joined the A4 at the Charvil wee waif roundabout, there by creating a eastern bypass of the Reading conurbation. Unfortunately these were watered down to what we have now.

I realised this recently, although now that I have bought a house in Loddon Park which would be on that route, I would obviously oppose any development in my back yard It would certainly help alleviate the surprisngly heavy traffic down the very narrow Sandford Lane.

Hello neighbour, I live on Headley Road East. Sandford Lane has increased in traffic markedly in the last 2 years given the J10 mess with the A329(m) down to one lane and more people using it as a way out of Woodley. Its my way in and out to go to and from Maidenhead, Windsor and Bracknell, all can be reached within 25 minutes from the end of Sandford Lane.