Road Building Plans to be Halted?

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
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7500
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Big L »

trickstat wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 09:13 A Government cannot break the law as it currently exists....
Unless in a "specific and limited way" of course.
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by trickstat »

Uncle Buck wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 09:18
hoagy_ytfc wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 03:45
Uncle Buck wrote: Fri Feb 12, 2021 01:45). I just don’t understand why, if the government wants to build a road programme, somebody can sue them to stop it!
What the heck? You don’t think the government should be held to the law like (in theory at least) everyone else is?!
That is not what I said. I am not saying that the government should not be subject to the law, I am saying that the laws which have been passed in recent decades, designed supposedly to allow greater transparency and public involvement in government processes, have really just made it harder for elected politicians to take decisions in the broad community interest, forcing them to spend time in courts, in front of unelected judges, defending their departments from actions brought by NIMBYs and activists. Most people in Village X might benefit from the construction of a bypass, but they can’t take the government to court to force them to build one. The Save Village X Campaign can however sue to protest that their right to privacy is being violated, while Greenpeace can sue to protest that the government hasn’t “taken environmental considerations into account”. The wider public interest is constantly disadvantaged in a system which is designed to think in terms of the rights of organised vocal minorities.
It may be the case that it is almost impossible to make a change that would stop these bodies taking the Government to court without also removing the right for people whose lives are going to be directly affected by a new road to take their own action.

Hypothetically, it could be the case that the bypass provides a minor benefit to the majority of the people in the village but has more significant negative impact for a significant minority.

If the Government's own laws state that environmental considerations need to be taken into account, they should be open to challenge on that account if it is ever felt that they haven't been considered.
Glenn A
Member
Posts: 9751
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 19:31
Location: Cumbria

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Glenn A »

I know we should invest more in the railways, but since most transport is road based in this country, we desperately need improvements to the road network, and contrary to what The Guardian and its middle class tree hugger readership think, by passes actually improve air quality by removing traffic from built up areas.
I sometimes like to visit a hotel called The Anchor in Haydon Bridge in Northumberland for a meal. Until the village was by passed by the A69 in 2008, the village was clogged with traffic, the houses along the road were grey with pollution( you can still see evidence of this now), and sitting outside The Anchor for lunch would have been unbearable with the noise and pollution, Now, about 90% of traffic has been removed from Haydon Bridge and the quality of life is vastly better.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19179
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by KeithW »

trickstat wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 10:33

It may be the case that it is almost impossible to make a change that would stop these bodies taking the Government to court without also removing the right for people whose lives are going to be directly affected by a new road to take their own action.

Hypothetically, it could be the case that the bypass provides a minor benefit to the majority of the people in the village but has more significant negative impact for a significant minority.

If the Government's own laws state that environmental considerations need to be taken into account, they should be open to challenge on that account if it is ever felt that they haven't been considered.
This discussion seems to assume that bypasses are built by the government acting as a monolithic national organisation, it is not. A large percentage of bypasses are local authority roads which in many cases the local population have been demanding be built for many years. One current campaign is to get approval for a Darlington Northern Bypass. This would take traffic from the A66 to the A1(M) northbound bypassing Great Burdon and Harrowgate. This plan has been lead by the Tees Valley Combined Authority.

I live in another such community, Marton-In-Cleveland,

50 years ago the A172 was busy enough that the next town south - Stokesley was bypassed. Marton was not and since then the local authorities, mainly Redcar and Cleveland and North Yorkshire have approved new housing south and east of the council boundary and bypassed Nunthorpe to speed it on its way. The result is the road now has an AADF of over 25k passing through the middle of our town.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.53101 ... authuser=0

For decades we were promised that an East Middlesbrough bypass would remove this traffic, that was scuppered a few years ago when those keen housebuilders of Redcar and Cleveland allowed houses to be built on the land that had been intended for that purpose.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.53312 ... authuser=0

This is what it looked like in the 1960's
http://images.francisfrith.com/c10/450/08/M132033.jpg

Let me assure we locals would do almost anything to get a bypass, things have now progressed to the stage where residential streets are being used as rat runs by commuters.

The congestion is appalling, a few years ago when a neighbour had a heart attack the only way to get her to the hospital, which is 2 miles down the A172, in time to save her life was to send the air ambulance.
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by trickstat »

KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 14:42
trickstat wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 10:33

It may be the case that it is almost impossible to make a change that would stop these bodies taking the Government to court without also removing the right for people whose lives are going to be directly affected by a new road to take their own action.

Hypothetically, it could be the case that the bypass provides a minor benefit to the majority of the people in the village but has more significant negative impact for a significant minority.

If the Government's own laws state that environmental considerations need to be taken into account, they should be open to challenge on that account if it is ever felt that they haven't been considered.
This discussion seems to assume that bypasses are built by the government acting as a monolithic national organisation, it is not. A large percentage of bypasses are local authority roads which in many cases the local population have been demanding be built for many years. One current campaign is to get approval for a Darlington Northern Bypass. This would take traffic from the A66 to the A1(M) northbound bypassing Great Burdon and Harrowgate. This plan has been lead by the Tees Valley Combined Authority.
Strictly speaking, the Government with a capital G is a single monolithic national organisation, but the only bypasses it would be responsible for would be on trunk routes. However, you are quite right that a very large number of bypasses will be built by the relevant local authority, either a county council or a single-tier borough or district.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19179
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by KeithW »

trickstat wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 15:00 Strictly speaking, the Government with a capital G is a single monolithic national organisation, but the only bypasses it would be responsible for would be on trunk routes.
This is simply incorrect, the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own national road authorities. This is why we keep discussing Highways England, Transport Scotland, DfI Roads etc.
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by trickstat »

KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 16:04
trickstat wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 15:00 Strictly speaking, the Government with a capital G is a single monolithic national organisation, but the only bypasses it would be responsible for would be on trunk routes.
This is simply incorrect, the devolved administrations of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own national road authorities. This is why we keep discussing Highways England, Transport Scotland, DfI Roads etc.
Ok, English trunk routes.
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17456
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Truvelo »

KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 14:42 I live in another such community, Marton-In-Cleveland,

50 years ago the A172 was busy enough that the next town south - Stokesley was bypassed. Marton was not and since then the local authorities, mainly Redcar and Cleveland and North Yorkshire have approved new housing south and east of the council boundary and bypassed Nunthorpe to speed it on its way. The result is the road now has an AADF of over 25k passing through the middle of our town.
I can imagine 50 years ago something spectacular was planned for Marton. The A66 Middlesbrough Bypass originally terminated on Longlands Road. Was this a temporary terminus? If so I can see it being extended south to join the A171. The railway provides a natural route for it to follow. The A174 Parkway/Stokesley Road junction would need its east facing slips closed to prevent weaving but I can see this being a realistic proposition in the era when the car was king.
Attachments
marton.jpg
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35717
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Bryn666 »

A link to the A174 at least following the railway would provide the relief for old A172 Keith described.

Then you could start improving the old A172 so people can walk/cycle to their friends or school and reduce a lot of traffic that is generated by the severance of a major road discouraging any other means of travel than driving.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19179
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by KeithW »

Truvelo wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 16:58
KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 14:42 I live in another such community, Marton-In-Cleveland,

50 years ago the A172 was busy enough that the next town south - Stokesley was bypassed. Marton was not and since then the local authorities, mainly Redcar and Cleveland and North Yorkshire have approved new housing south and east of the council boundary and bypassed Nunthorpe to speed it on its way. The result is the road now has an AADF of over 25k passing through the middle of our town.
I can imagine 50 years ago something spectacular was planned for Marton. The A66 Middlesbrough Bypass originally terminated on Longlands Road. Was this a temporary terminus? If so I can see it being extended south to join the A171. The railway provides a natural route for it to follow. The A174 Parkway/Stokesley Road junction would need its east facing slips closed to prevent weaving but I can see this being a realistic proposition in the era when the car was king.
You have it pretty much spot on. The main aim was to funnel traffic from east Cleveland and North Yorkshire from the Swans Corner roundabout (A171 and A1043) down a new road running alongside the railway to the A66. I suspect when it comes to slip roads the A174/Stokesley road would have remained as is with it being a major route to the Wilton Site, Teesport and British Steel. I suspect that there may not have even been junction between the east Middlesbrough bypass and the Parkway. The plan was that Stainton Way would be extended to meet the bypass south of the parkway. You can see the space left here.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.53271 ... authuser=0

If you are on the Stokesley road it is pretty much as quick to go west to the A19 and along the A66, we know there was provision made to make the A174/A19 a full blown GSJ, the remains of the ramps can still be seen.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.52888 ... authuser=0

I havent seen any detailed plans as Cleveland County Council was abolished in 1996 before planning got that far and later plans never got into any more detail than general alignments.
See
https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/loca ... wn-3715275

Frankly I dont think this was ever likely to happen in between 2007 and 2009, the Mayor and Middlesbrough Council didnt want it and even if they had there was no money to pay for it. Redcar and Cleveland council would as before block it. The whole scheme was a cynical ploy to keep the locals quiet until after the 2007 elections and then quietly drop the idea. Any realistic chance of it happening disappeared along with Cleveland County Council.

As for the A66 the termination was simply with Borough Road, the section of A172 from there to the A1085 at the Longlands was the only part of the East Middlesbrough bypass ever built. From there it would have followed the railway to Swans Corner. There is a current idea of extending it up as far as Ladgate Lane but that is in my opinion a waste of time, Ladgate Lane (the old A174) struggles with the traffic it has now. Its only real use would be as a better access road for James Cook University Hospital from the A66.

The solution most likely to help is that put forward by the TVCA. They want to dual the railway from Middlesborough to Nunthorpe and reopen the old line Guisborough line to the the western edge of the town. There they propose building, a large park and ride facility to take commuters into Middlesbrough, it would also have a bus station and cycle racks so it would be a multi modal facility to serve the towns of East Cleveland. The old alignment is still available so it could be done at a reasonable cost.
Glenn A
Member
Posts: 9751
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 19:31
Location: Cumbria

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Glenn A »

Don't get me wrong, I am a big railway fan, but roads carry most traffic in this country and most households own at least one car. so road improvements are vital and roads like by passes improve the quality of life in by passed settlements. I very much doubt anyone who lives in Hindhead would welcome the A3 back, and this is one by pass that was done sensitively, with a tunnel going under the Devil's Punchbowl and part of the old road being grassed over. Also for all it created a furore with Swampy and friends in the nineties, the M3 Winchester by pass improved the environment around the A33 massively and part of the old road was grassed over.
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17456
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Truvelo »

KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 19:02 As for the A66 the termination was simply with Borough Road, the section of A172 from there to the A1085 at the Longlands was the only part of the East Middlesbrough bypass ever built. From there it would have followed the railway to Swans Corner.
The East Middlesbrough Bypass proposal was known as the Marton Motorway in the 1960s. This seems something worth investigating. A172(M) perhaps :)
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
jcb336
Member
Posts: 206
Joined: Fri Jan 28, 2005 20:27
Location: Ingleby Barwick

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by jcb336 »

M19 posted this link on an old thread in 2014 if it helps.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jrjamesar ... otostream/

Back in the 70s I was for a time an elected member of Cleveland County Council which was in favour of the Marton motorway and also of Middlesbrough Borough Council which was opposed to it. At that time Langbaurgh Council was in favour. By the time the resources might have been available in the 90s Middlesbrough unitary authority was mildly in favour of it but the new Redcar and Cleveland Council was opposed. After an election a non-Labour coalition in Redcar reviewed the whole scheme but dropped it IIRC when the National Trust said they would not sell the land required at Ormesby Hall. As KeithW says this is when Mayor Mallon appeared to give support to the scheme. So another election and Labour control again in Redcar. Another full scale review and again the scheme was rejected and again for the National Trust reason. Redcar then gave planning permission for housing on the previously reserved land at Swans Corner, while Middlesbrough gave planning permission for housing blocking the proposed link with Stainton Way. KeithW has provided a link to the Gazette coverage of the last Redcar decision.
John Butler
User avatar
hoagy_ytfc
Member
Posts: 632
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 00:10

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by hoagy_ytfc »

Uncle Buck wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 09:18 ...unelected judges...
Oh gosh, it could be getting worse - if I'm correct in inferring that you would prefer judges to be elected? And therefore be political?!

Happy to be corrected on what your use of that phrase meant, though.
Uncle Buck
Member
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 23:33

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Uncle Buck »

hoagy_ytfc wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 23:30
Uncle Buck wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 09:18 ...unelected judges...
Oh gosh, it could be getting worse - if I'm correct in inferring that you would prefer judges to be elected? And therefore be political?!

Happy to be corrected on what your use of that phrase meant, though.
Again, I have used plain English words in relation to planning law and again you have misinterpreted these to accuse me of wanting to live in a dictatorship! What I am saying is that important planning decisions should be taken by politicians, accountable to voters for the overall effects of their actions, rather than judges, who are bound only to consider the issue in terms of the case before them and the rights of the plaintiff. Elected judges is a silly idea. Let’s not clog up the rest of this thread.
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by trickstat »

Uncle Buck wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 02:27
hoagy_ytfc wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 23:30
Uncle Buck wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 09:18 ...unelected judges...
Oh gosh, it could be getting worse - if I'm correct in inferring that you would prefer judges to be elected? And therefore be political?!

Happy to be corrected on what your use of that phrase meant, though.
Again, I have used plain English words in relation to planning law and again you have misinterpreted these to accuse me of wanting to live in a dictatorship! What I am saying is that important planning decisions should be taken by politicians, accountable to voters for the overall effects of their actions, rather than judges, who are bound only to consider the issue in terms of the case before them and the rights of the plaintiff. Elected judges is a silly idea. Let’s not clog up the rest of this thread.
For me, when you have a first past the post electoral system, this is far from a perfect system. For example, there is little incentive for a government to consider the views of those in a constituency that always votes in a member of the opposition party when considering changes that may benefit journey times for an adjacent marginal constituency.
M19
Member
Posts: 2248
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2001 05:00
Location: Rothwell, Northants

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by M19 »

jcb336 wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 23:29 M19 posted this link on an old thread in 2014 if it helps.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jrjamesar ... otostream/

Back in the 70s I was for a time an elected member of Cleveland County Council which was in favour of the Marton motorway and also of Middlesbrough Borough Council which was opposed to it. At that time Langbaurgh Council was in favour. By the time the resources might have been available in the 90s Middlesbrough unitary authority was mildly in favour of it but the new Redcar and Cleveland Council was opposed. After an election a non-Labour coalition in Redcar reviewed the whole scheme but dropped it IIRC when the National Trust said they would not sell the land required at Ormesby Hall. As KeithW says this is when Mayor Mallon appeared to give support to the scheme. So another election and Labour control again in Redcar. Another full scale review and again the scheme was rejected and again for the National Trust reason. Redcar then gave planning permission for housing on the previously reserved land at Swans Corner, while Middlesbrough gave planning permission for housing blocking the proposed link with Stainton Way. KeithW has provided a link to the Gazette coverage of the last Redcar decision.
I forgot I found this.

This represents the sort of infrastructure that we need to support growth rather than the random “edge blobbing” of housing estates around towns linked with a tiny road with thousand of roundabouts that all of a sudden becomes a bypass.

I find the government’s housing growth agenda depressing as there is no real strategy behind it. The last New Labour government’s policy was far from perfect but at least it had more logic and strategy to it in terms of regional planning promoting regeneration - the Urban Task Force research, Urban white Paper and related planning policies. This and half decent funding has made towns and city centres feel better like better places to go to. That is at least before they more years of austerity enforced underinvestment. Heck I’ve been to Middlesbrough a few times and it feels much nicer place to be than Northampton and Kettering town centre where I moved to. The latter I think were less organised to fully exploit the regeneration opportunities that they still have, which are now much harder to get funding for. The missing part really was national spatial policy in terms of the how much should go where.

We definitely to get back to a balance in development on brownfield and greenfield and make sure that the infrastructure that supports it is adequate. Critically we need to go back to regional planning and have a spatial national layer - it’s the only way that we can start thinking more smartly about infrastructure at local, regional and national levels that works. Catch phrases such as “levelling up”, “Northern Powerhouse” and “Midlands Engine” to me just appears to be lip service and says a lot about how policy has shifted to a muddle through and placate agenda than tackling key issues head on. And that involves decent highways among other things.
M19
User avatar
Big Nick
Member
Posts: 4348
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 08:27
Location: Epping, Essex

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Big Nick »

Truvelo wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 19:20
KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 19:02 As for the A66 the termination was simply with Borough Road, the section of A172 from there to the A1085 at the Longlands was the only part of the East Middlesbrough bypass ever built. From there it would have followed the railway to Swans Corner.
The East Middlesbrough Bypass proposal was known as the Marton Motorway in the 1960s. This seems something worth investigating. A172(M) perhaps :)
A66(M) Whitby to Whitehaven? :D
Glenn A
Member
Posts: 9751
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 19:31
Location: Cumbria

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by Glenn A »

Big Nick wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:39
Truvelo wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 19:20
KeithW wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 19:02 As for the A66 the termination was simply with Borough Road, the section of A172 from there to the A1085 at the Longlands was the only part of the East Middlesbrough bypass ever built. From there it would have followed the railway to Swans Corner.
The East Middlesbrough Bypass proposal was known as the Marton Motorway in the 1960s. This seems something worth investigating. A172(M) perhaps :)
A66(M) Whitby to Whitehaven? :D
Interesting, but I don't think the Lake DIstrict National Park would be happy.
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8715
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: Road Building Plans to be Halted?

Post by trickstat »

Glenn A wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 12:10
Big Nick wrote: Sun Feb 14, 2021 11:39
Truvelo wrote: Sat Feb 13, 2021 19:20
The East Middlesbrough Bypass proposal was known as the Marton Motorway in the 1960s. This seems something worth investigating. A172(M) perhaps :)
A66(M) Whitby to Whitehaven? :D
Interesting, but I don't think the Lake DIstrict National Park would be happy.
The North Yorkshire Moors NP might not be too chuffed either!
Post Reply