BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

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

User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by A303Chris »

I will put my head above the parapet. I worked as the Transport Development Control manager at various Thames Valley Councils between 1997 and 2015 before I was offered a big pay rise to come to the dark side, private practice.

Working both sides of the fence, both are to blame for the poor infrastructure currently built. On the Council side as has been said, economic arguments are always raised when discussing site allocations. The Berkshire Way one is a classic, it only needed west on and off slips given other routes to the town. The way the roundabout needed lights was the sheer weight of traffic which uses it to cut across to the A3095. Traffic models are produced which do not accurately reflect flows, but are used to ensure the land can be allocated.

I know plenty of models where the assumptions of journey origin destinations are wrong.

On the other side of the fence where I represent a developer who hasn't been allocated we will argue that the assumptions in the respective model are wrong when other sites have been accepted. In one promotion we were recommending a GSJ but the local authority said it was not required. They would not support it as it would have had implications on other sites they were promoting. A developer therefore has gone with a roundabout when we all know it will cause delays but they are not gone to spend money when they don't have to.

The whole system is a joke. I would love to know how the French / Spain do it as the number of single carriageway bypasses I have seen with GSJ junctions is unbelievable compared to here
The M25 - The road to nowhere
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by A303Chris »

Fenlander wrote: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.
That is so close to the truth !!!!!!
The M25 - The road to nowhere
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

A303Chris wrote:
Fenlander wrote: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.
That is so close to the truth !!!!!!
Is that what happened with the secondary school that was meant to be built in lower earley and ended up as the police station ? Or there is the Bugs Bottom primary in Caversham that was built on instead and now they are arguing about building a primary on reserved parkland. or the wonderful(ly bad) idea of decking over part of the IDR making it 1 way and the developers of Chatham place paying for a new swimming pool (I really hope the 1 way IDR plan wasn't anything to do with you)
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by A303Chris »

Reading wrote:
Is that what happened with the secondary school that was meant to be built in lower earley and ended up as the police station ? Or there is the Bugs Bottom primary in Caversham that was built on instead and now they are arguing about building a primary on reserved parkland. or the wonderful(ly bad) idea of decking over part of the IDR making it 1 way and the developers of Chatham place paying for a new swimming pool (I really hope the 1 way IDR plan wasn't anything to do with you)
The Loddon Valley Police station was always in that location and was in the Lower Earley masterplan from 1973. I know that as I designed the roundabout that provides the main access. The issue with Lower Earley and the secondary school was that when it was designed there was sufficient spare capacity at Alfred Suttons boys and girls and Maiden Earliegh to accommodate the pupils. Therefore it was decided not to progress with it, although 2 primary schools were built. However Berkshire in there wisdom closed the Alfred Suttons schools in the mid 80's due to falling numbers, not realising in a few years, the other schools would reach capacity.

When I started at RBC the decision by the authority to progress the one way IDR was all ready in place. I argued that if they were going to make it one way then clockwise would be better than anti clockwise given you would not be turning across opposing flows. However, I also pointed out that for example egressing Napier Road and going east would involve a 2 mile additional drive, and there were several others. The transport model threw up loads of issues occurring outside the borough at Sonning for example, however the independent examination was held to try and save face but in the end they concluded that it would not just work. Neighbouring authorities had strong objections to it. This is the problem with the Berkshire unitaries, they are two small to deal with strategic issues and become very parochial.
The M25 - The road to nowhere
oasis
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 19:08

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by oasis »

As I understand, the land that was meant to be Lower Earley's secondary school was built on by developers in the 1990s, and is now the housing development accessed via Moorhen Drive.
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

oasis wrote:As I understand, the land that was meant to be Lower Earley's secondary school was built on by developers in the 1990s, and is now the housing development accessed via Moorhen Drive.
That was my understanding as well - whilst a student in 1990 i lived at the bottom of Beach Lane for a while and that whole area was bare shrubland and I was told it was reserved for a school.

It looks like the Police station is now going to take over from the town centre entirely with the TC site being demolished and replaced with just a shop type counter somewhere.

I actually gave evidence to the Independent transport enquiry on behalf of motorcyclists, interestingly since then RBC have backtracked on almost everything they said they were doing with regard to motorcycling
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

A Reading question - tonight (and several times recently) Reading has completely gridlocked for no discernible reason. However one of the exasperating factors seems to be vehicles from the A33 going East onto the IDR blocking the YBJ here https://goo.gl/maps/R8foa66tkwL2 and/or vehicles going anticlockwise on the IDR blocking the down slip here (where it says salvation army) https://goo.gl/maps/kNNGHoFkv5r (causing the roundabout above to truly gridlock), with the volume of traffic and a circular high volume road with few escapes it takes little for this to then propagate into total standstill gridlock.

Ignoring the other junctions - is there anything that could be easily done here to stop the issue ? Chris is exempt from answering unless he wants to due to past vested interest
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15744
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Chris Bertram »

Reading wrote:... exasperating factors ...
exacerbating factors. You're welcome, I don't charge for this service :wink:
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

Sorry my spelling is so bad auto correct guessed wrong

But as an aside anyone got any idea how to solve the conflicts on that junction - a biking mate is convinced loads of extra box junction at the bottom of the on ramp would, I am not sure that is even a legal use for a YPJ (to protect a merge)
User avatar
DavidB
Member
Posts: 1249
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2002 20:32
Location: Berkshire

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by DavidB »

Reading wrote:A Reading question - tonight (and several times recently) Reading has completely gridlocked for no discernible reason.
The reason for last night's gridlock was a set of temporary traffic lights for Thames Water work in Church Road, Caversham:

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/readin ... s-13904619

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/readin ... r-13906087

(yet another Woodley resident here BTW!)
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

It may be the reason given but i rode anticlockwise around the IDR at 6pm and it was blocked at the junction by cars coming across stopping clockwise cars proceeding, they were queued to the bottom of the IDR ramp and back. It took me 3 sequences of lights to thread a motorbike through that single junction, when i got to Watlington street the road towards the Prison was stationary and solid and 4 buses were blocking anyone getting across to go right around past the Pru - I got around them and Kings rd was literally empty.

So whilst some may claim the original trigger was some traffic lights 1.5miles away in Caversham, but people being muppets and disobeying YBJ caused the Gridlock (especially big buses blocking several lanes)
oasis
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 19:08

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by oasis »

The problem with Reading's roads is that they all converge onto one part: the inner ring road/Inner Distribution Road (IDR).

So you have all the peripheral traffic, cross-town traffic, and cross-river traffic, having to share the use of the ring road which is way under capacity for a town the size of Reading. Not to mention the number of junctions on the IDR which are not grade separated.

A traffic issue in one part of town (north, south, east or west) is often enough to bring the rest to a gridlock.

With the exception of the M4 allowing some east-west movement, there isn't really a dedicated north-south bypass as of yet, or a Caversham bypass for the north of Reading. Both of these built to a high capacity, I think, would really help the gridlock situation.
oasis
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 19:08

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by oasis »

Looks like funding for the South Reading MRT and the East Reading MRT schemes have been secured, although these projects will only benefit public transport and pedestrians/cyclists.

The East Reading MRT will involve a new bridge over the River Kennet.
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by A303Chris »

Reading wrote:A Reading question - tonight (and several times recently) Reading has completely gridlocked for no discernible reason. However one of the exasperating factors seems to be vehicles from the A33 going East onto the IDR blocking the YBJ here https://goo.gl/maps/R8foa66tkwL2 and/or vehicles going anticlockwise on the IDR blocking the down slip here (where it says salvation army) https://goo.gl/maps/kNNGHoFkv5r (causing the roundabout above to truly gridlock), with the volume of traffic and a circular high volume road with few escapes it takes little for this to then propagate into total standstill gridlock.

Ignoring the other junctions - is there anything that could be easily done here to stop the issue ? Chris is exempt from answering unless he wants to due to past vested interest
What causes the IDR to lock up is the slip road on the south side of the IDR (Mill Lane) which takes all the traffic on to London Street. If you are coming from West Reading / Town Centre and heading up to the A327 etc given the River Kennet this the only way up. The traffic lights at London Street / London Road / Crown Street are not synchronised very well and London Street was reduced to one lane from three when the contraflow bus lane was put in severely restricting capacity. This causes traffic to back up along London Street and Mill Lane, where the lane drop occurs and clog up the Southampton street roundabout creating a domino effect. I suggested when at RBC increasing London Street southbound to two lanes, but unfortunately this was ignored as the policy is to restrict capacity to encourage modal shift. Such a simple change would have massive advantages to the whole network
The M25 - The road to nowhere
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by A303Chris »

oasis wrote:Looks like funding for the South Reading MRT and the East Reading MRT schemes have been secured, although these projects will only benefit public transport and pedestrians/cyclists.

The East Reading MRT will involve a new bridge over the River Kennet.
Another suggestion I had when I was at RBC was to build the East reading MRT as a 7.3 metre wide two lane road and open it to vehicles, all be it with a congestion charge at peak times of say £1 in each direction. This would pay for the road but at £10 a week of £40 a month for two peak period times I sure regular people would use it given the speed which you would get from Vastern road to the A329(M) and you would probably save half of it in petrol from waiting in the queues.

However this was not progressed due to the green councillors in New Town saying the increase pollution would affect residents and the labour council agreeing. What is perverse about this is most pollution in New Town comes from stationary traffic on the London Road and Kings Road trying to get through Cemetery junction and this would considerably approve from a new road. Not to be political but the areas which would benefit being Caversham, Emmer Green , Woodley with easier journeys to and from the town all are conservative wards or conservative neighbouring districts. The idea that authorities would work together is long gone
The M25 - The road to nowhere
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

Yes Mr's Page and White have a lot to answer for
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15744
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Chris Bertram »

A303Chris wrote:... the policy is to restrict capacity to encourage modal shift.
Is this policy achieving what it aims to? Or is it just causing congestion? If the latter, at what point is failure admitted, and policy altered? Or is that not to be contemplated?
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
oasis
Member
Posts: 26
Joined: Wed May 10, 2017 19:08

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by oasis »

The east Reading MRT route will only be single lane over the river Kennet, so that it cannot be converted to a two lane general traffic route in the future.

I think this is very short sighted. Whilst they are building a brand new bridge, why deliberately restrict future development, even if it will be only used by more public transport initiatives such as trams, light rail, or buses?
Reading
Member
Posts: 2946
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 14:50

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by Reading »

Chris Bertram wrote:
A303Chris wrote:... the policy is to restrict capacity to encourage modal shift.
Is this policy achieving what it aims to? Or is it just causing congestion? If the latter, at what point is failure admitted, and policy altered? Or is that not to be contemplated?
Well Reading buses is doing very well - but has i now believe reached capacity for rush hours (the main No17 route which runs East/West across the town centre is running double deckers at 6min frequency that are rammed to capacity with not even standing room in rush hour, the trains to London are also rammed to capacity from 7am onwards until 9.30 and the roads gridlock still. So i have no idea what people are meant to modally shift to...
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: BERKSHIRE Road Schemes

Post by A303Chris »

Reading wrote:
Chris Bertram wrote:
A303Chris wrote:... the policy is to restrict capacity to encourage modal shift.
Is this policy achieving what it aims to? Or is it just causing congestion? If the latter, at what point is failure admitted, and policy altered? Or is that not to be contemplated?
Well Reading buses is doing very well - but has i now believe reached capacity for rush hours (the main No17 route which runs East/West across the town centre is running double deckers at 6min frequency that are rammed to capacity with not even standing room in rush hour, the trains to London are also rammed to capacity from 7am onwards until 9.30 and the roads gridlock still. So i have no idea what people are meant to modally shift to...
To both, Reading is jammed and has been said if you don't live at the end of bus routes you can not get on them. I cycle when I can but the problem with that is the roads are clogged and you take your life in your own hands. While Reading, Wokingham and West Berkshire have cycle routes they are not on desire lines and add a mile to my journey home. When wet and cold I want to get home as quick as possible.

Trouble is no authority will accept failure. The ironic thing is so many district councils have planning policy restricting car use, but at the same time the County Council transport authorities are cutting services as they are not viable nor do they take enough passengers. I've seen bus services subsidised for new developments only to end when a scheme ends. But trouble with bus services, is they take the cooks tour and take forever. I'm currently dealing with a planning application where the bus journey of 7 miles between two towns takes 1 hour 15 minutes compared to under 10 popping down the motorway. What would you do?

Reading like many other authorities are in "Utopia" mode but unfortunately can not see it will ever happen. Reading's planning policy aim for employment, education, leisure and retail all to be located on a development so there is no need for residents to travel. This may work in North Korea but it is never going to work in a free market economy. This morning I had to drive into Reading took 40 minutes at 7.50am as the traffic was bad. If I used the bus it is a minimum of 50 minutes and I'm restricted to when I can start and finish work due to the timetable.

They also throw the environmental aim as well but when all cars are electric or hydrogen powered that's going to disappear as well.
The M25 - The road to nowhere
Post Reply