London - Norwich "radial" road - M11, Harlow, in the Lee Valley

[Mikeya]

Hello all

Search as I may I couldn't find what I thought was an existing thread on here about the intention to build what was to become the M11 through the Lee (or Lea) Valley from London rather than the constructed route through the Roding Valley. I've scanned and posted on Flickr a c1958 street plan of Harlow New Town that shows the 'proposed radial road' running across the west and north of Harlow and showing how the town's road network was intended to be connected in - and we all know the effect the 'eastern' routing has had on Harlow's traffic for many a long year since the original plans were effectively ditched! Here's the link - if I try to post it directly here it is too degraded to really make sense!

https://www.flickr.com/photos/36844288@ ... ateposted/

[B1040]

We had a slightly later version of that map - with the A11 bypass marked in as built.
I think the London Orbital cut across the South West of our map as well.

[KeithW]

There is some mention of this on the Motorway Archive Site
http://www.ukmotorwayarchive.org.uk/en/ ... &CFTOKEN=0

and on Roads.org
https://www.roads.org.uk/motorway/m11

[roadphotos]

I've seen similar maps before. As many people who live in the Harlow area know when the new town was built in the 1950s it was thought that the M11 was going to be constructed to the west and north of Harlow so the whole town was planned with this in mind. This is why all of the industrial estates are on the wrong side of the town (to the north and west of Harlow), they were supposed to have direct access to the M11. Unfortunately when the M11 got built in the late 1970s it went to the east of Harlow which meant that everything had to go through the town to get from the motorway to the industrial estates. This is what can happen when you plan a town over 20 years before the major artery that serves it is constructed, you just have to go with the information that you have at the time which in this case has been proven to be incorrect. Also in all the years since the M11s construction nobody has built a link road from the motorway around the town to correct this, even the planed new junction 7a only takes more traffic into the wrong side of Harlow

[Big Nick]

The official history of Harlow New Town talks about how the plans for the road network changed as the Ministry dithered..

[Truvelo]

There's stuff in the Wiki including junction layouts. The whole M11, including the Cambridge Bypass section, is different to what was originally planned.

[Berk]

Are you saying the DoT plans came after the GLC plans?? Based on the Wiki article.

It strikes me that the GLC didn’t really flourish as a roads authority. Most of the plans it proposed were roundly rejected. Considering the fact that London neighbours a lot of counties, it didn’t seem to reach out to them when it came to proposing plans.

In fact, I can’t think of a single GLC-devised scheme that ever saw the light of day.

[Truvelo]

The Wiki article appears to be wrong. The plans I have for the Lea Valley route are all drawn for MoT or the relevant London Borough and not GLC or its predecessor. These plans are from the early 60s so GLC wouldn't have been around then.

It's been a number of years since I looked at the correspondence in detail and I can't remember who initially promoted the scheme. Chris is the person who can tell you.

[Berk]

Surely it would be Essex, or one of the county boroughs??

As you know, London boroughs only came in with the GLC.

[Chris5156]

The Wiki article appears to be wrong. The plans I have for the Lea Valley route are all drawn for MoT or the relevant London Borough and not GLC or its predecessor. These plans are from the early 60s so GLC wouldn't have been around then.

Yes, it is wrong. The idea of a new major radial Route up the Lea Valley appears in Abercrombie’s proposals in 1944, and may be in Bressey too. The line of the “Norwich Radial” was protected in the first county development plans from the early 1950s onwards as a future trunk road scheme.

The MOT was at an advanced stage of planning and had even bought some properties on the line of the Lea Valley Route when, in about 1965, there was a reassessment and the idea of using the Roding Valley instead won favour.

Possibly what the wiki article is referring to is the fact that, while the two options were being weighed up, the MOT preferred the Roding Valley and the GLC wanted them to retain the original Lea Valley Route. Obviously, since it was the Ministry’s project, they got their way, but there’s occasional references in GLC documentation to the over-provision of trunk roads around Woodford and the lack of a radial in the Lea Valley.

[WHBM]

In fact, I can’t think of a single GLC-devised scheme that ever saw the light of day.

I believe the A2 Rochester Way Relief Road, Eltham to Blackheath, was a GLC scheme. I seem to recall Ken Livingstone talking about it as such.

[Chris5156]

In fact, I can’t think of a single GLC-devised scheme that ever saw the light of day.

I believe the A2 Rochester Way Relief Road, Eltham to Blackheath, was a GLC scheme. I seem to recall Ken Livingstone talking about it as such.

It was, yes. If we’re discounting roads initiated by the LCC, and only including those started from scratch by the GLC, you could also include the A1055 Watermead Way.

[KeithW]

The Wiki article appears to be wrong. The plans I have for the Lea Valley route are all drawn for MoT or the relevant London Borough and not GLC or its predecessor. These plans are from the early 60s so GLC wouldn't have been around then.

Yes, it is wrong. The idea of a new major radial Route up the Lea Valley appears in Abercrombie’s proposals in 1944, and may be in Bressey too. The line of the “Norwich Radial” was protected in the first county development plans from the early 1950s onwards as a future trunk road scheme.

The MOT was at an advanced stage of planning and had even bought some properties on the line of the Lea Valley Route when, in about 1965, there was a reassessment and the idea of using the Roding Valley instead won favour.

Possibly what the wiki article is referring to is the fact that, while the two options were being weighed up, the MOT preferred the Roding Valley and the GLC wanted them to retain the original Lea Valley Route. Obviously, since it was the Ministry’s project, they got their way, but there’s occasional references in GLC documentation to the over-provision of trunk roads around Woodford and the lack of a radial in the Lea Valley.

As I recall the MOT were more interested in a road from South Woodford to carry vehicles to Chigwell , Theydon Bois and Harlow with an eye to carrying it up to Stump Cross the Cambridge Western Bypass and the A604 to Huntingdon. The initial priority was getting vehicles out of London.

This is what the Motorway Archive site has to say.

In August 1962 the Ministry of Transport, the Rt Hon Ernest Marples, appointed W S Atkins & Partners as consultants to investigate a proposed motorway between Temple Mills in east London and Bishop's Stortford in Hertfordshire. Its purpose was twofold:



to make up a deficiency in the national road network linking London with Norwich, and the general communication system between the north of England, the Midlands, the East Coast ports, and Thames and Channel crossings.
To take in good time remedial action to improve a rapidly deteriorating traffic situation in north-east London.
But the terms of reference did not preclude consideration of routes other than those specified. In the event, the project was subsequently extended beyond Bishop's Stortford to Stump Cross, 18 kilometres south of Cambridge, and an alignment through the Roding Valley in the London urban section was adopted in place of one through the Lea Valley (proposed initially by the Ministry and the County Surveyors concerned) in order to achieve savings in excess of £10 million.

In all, route alternatives covering 480 kilometres were examined before a draft scheme was published by the Ministry in 1966. This met with numerous objections, as a result of which the Ministry modified their proposals and republished them in December 1968. In July of the following year a public inquiry was held at Epping at which further objections to the project were voiced, not least of them being concerned with the inevitably intrusive effect of the proposed motorway on the Roding Valley, the neighbouring residential areas and their sports and recreational grounds. But the scheme did provide the most acceptable solution to a difficult problem, and the outcome proved successful. In the autumn of 1969 W S Atkins & Partners began the final design of the route.

One of the largest motorway projects ever to be engineered by a single consultant, this section of the M11 ran a distance of 63.6 kilometres northwards from Redbridge in east London to Stump Cross, where it temporarily rejoined the A11 south of Cambridge prior to the completion of the Cambridge Western By-pass. When complete, it cost over £40 million. The Eastern Road Construction Unit were responsible for designing the extension by-passing Cambridge on the west side to link it via the A14 Trunk road to the A1 for traffic to the north and East Midlands.

South of Cambridge, construction was divided into four contracts. Contract 1, mainly urban, ran from Redbridge to Loughton, Essex, a distance of nine kilometres; and 2, entirely rural, from Loughton to S Harlow (13 kilometres). Contract 3 continued across open country to just east of Bishop's Stortford in Hertfordshire (15 kilometres); and 4, still rural, temporarily concluded the motorway at Stump Cross (27 kilometres). Contract 3 was the first part to commence and be completed followed by Contracts 1 and 2. Contract 4, in two sections, 4A and 4B, commenced shortly after for completion in 1979.

As a side note I was an early user of that section in 1979 but even then the extension too meet the Cambridge Western bypass was under construction. Ah the good old days when the Huntingdon viaduct was the best thing since sliced bread

[WHBM]

Notably a series of local access roads, borough schemes I think and not continuous, have since been built up the Lea Valley. Orient Way/Watermead Way/Mollison Avenue. Beyond London/M25 the A10/A414 improvements pretty much parallel the route as well.

The Lea Valley itself has changed a lot since the time the scheme was first proposed. It used to be a lot of commercial market gardens, and also 1930s/50s light industrial factories. The agriculture has gone, so too have the factories, replaced by substantial amounts of warehousing and distribution. Only the extensive reservoirs seem to remain as before. Both old and new gave rise to substantial commercial vehicle movements up and down.

The M11 route adopted does seem to be the better alignment, as it ties in to the "corner" of the North Circular at Redbridge, distributing from there both south and west on improved roads, as well as south-west on the improved A12. It does give me a freeflow route from Wapping/Canary Wharf all the way to the M25 (takes just 20 minutes) and beyond.

[Scratchwood]

Having walked along parts of the Lea Valley and the Roding Valley, I'm not sure which I'd have preferred to have put the M11 into! The noise from the M11 does ruin what would otherwise be a very pleasant and otherwise relatively unspoilt area along the Roding Valley near Loughton and Debden, whereas the Lea Valley was more built up and has all the man made reservoirs anyway

If the M11 had followed the River Lea down into London, it would also have more easily reached Hackney Wick where the M11 was meant to terminate