A47 Corridor improvement programme
Moderator: Site Management Team
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
A few CPOs, mostly in the SW corner, should make a GSJ possible.
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Or you put the A47 in an underpass, with no junction there, and build a link road from a nearby point on the A1101 to a new junction to one side.
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
- Chris Bertram
- Member
- Posts: 15771
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
- Location: Birmingham, England
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Not sure that this is a great part of the world to be considering underpasses.
“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!
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!
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
That's true!Chris Bertram wrote: ↑Sat May 28, 2022 09:16Not sure that this is a great part of the world to be considering underpasses.
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Somewhere in the 30 odd years I’ve lived here, I seem to recall a suggestion (not sure how serious) to reroute the south side A1101 along the line of Meadowgate Lane to a new junction by the former petrol stations. Whether that would have been some sort of LiLo or a new roundabout I can’t remember.
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
The DCO for Blofield to North Burlingham has been granted. The SoS actually turned this one around without extending the 3 month decision window. NH hope to start construction early next year.
The main controversy involved the 'protective provisions' that NCC had requested for the detrunking of the old road. NH considered these quite unreasonable, e.g.:
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... urlingham/
The main controversy involved the 'protective provisions' that NCC had requested for the detrunking of the old road. NH considered these quite unreasonable, e.g.:
It does read rather like NCC were "trying it on", aiming to extract funds through the planning process over and above the usual DfT allocation for a detrunked road. Apparently they were doing the same for the other A47 schemes. In any case this issue was resolved and there is now an agreement between NH and NCC.1. Onerous provisions – there are several elements of the protective provisions
which are onerous and extend beyond providing protection for the Local
Highway Authority. They provide NCC with an unacceptable level of control
over the delivery of the Blofield Project. In particular paragraphs 3, 4 and 5
impose pre-commencement conditions on the Applicant to be discharged
before works commence. The Applicant does not believe it is appropriate that
commencing any part of the works is dependent on such approvals being
received from NCC. The drafting could seriously prejudice the delivery of the
scheme in accordance with the current timetable.
In addition paragraph 27 allows NCC to require the removal, alteration or
demolition of any structures forming part of the scheme. The Applicant does
not understand why this is necessary and what mischief it is seeking to
address that is not already controlled by the provisions of both the articles and
requirements in the draft Development Consent Order. NCC has made no
submission to justify the provision.
2. Commuted sum – the proposal for a commuted sum to be paid is not agreed.
The Applicant believes it is not required to address any direct impact that the
scheme goes beyond what is necessary to make the scheme acceptable in
planning and highways terms.
The standard mechanism for provision of funding to a Local Highway Authority
should be adopted and a commuted sum should not be necessary. For
highways that are to be handed over to NCC, there could be double-counting
as those highways will be included in the budget calculations so that adequate
funding is provided from the Department of Transport to cover NCC's costs of
maintaining those highways it is responsible for. NCC has not submitted any
evidence to demonstrate that there will be any direct financial impact on NCC
as a result of the scheme or the proposed handover of assets. As no
evidence has been submitted the Applicant is unable to consider the proposed
calculation for the commuted sum included in the protective provisions. In any
event, the open ended nature of such a mechanism and the absolute
discretion afforded to NCC is unacceptable and may render the scheme
unviable
3. Maintenance period – the Applicant does not agree to the proposed 52 week
maintenance period which would mean that a commuted sum would not serve
any purpose as the responsibility for initial maintenance is already placed on
the Applicant - again an element of double-counting arises. However the
Applicant will ensure the assets handed to NCC are in a safe and serviceable
condition. All necessary remedial works and renewals will be delivered to
bring the assets up to that standard, prior to handover. The Applicant will
continue to work with NCC to agree the what works are required to bring the
assets up to that condition for handover. The Applicant will also provide NCC
with details as to the expected period of time during which each asset is likely
to remain in a safe and serviceable condition following handover, and
therefore not require major intervention by the Council.
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... urlingham/
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
It's impressive that the response uses the phrase mischief with regard to what the local authority might be up to!
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
The revised plans submitted during the hearing are here
It's another sticking plaster. With the Brundal roundabout remaining and the Acle street staying as it is, what will this actually resolved between Norwich and Yarmouth
It's another sticking plaster. With the Brundal roundabout remaining and the Acle street staying as it is, what will this actually resolved between Norwich and Yarmouth
The M25 - The road to nowhere
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Doesn't stop the Dutch.Chris5156 wrote: ↑Sat May 28, 2022 10:37That's true!Chris Bertram wrote: ↑Sat May 28, 2022 09:16Not sure that this is a great part of the world to be considering underpasses.
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
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
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
It duals and grade separates Blofield to North Burlingham. I'm not sure what more you could expect of a scheme called A47 Blofield to North Burlingham?
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
I get that but the two bottlenecks are the Brundal roundabout and the Acle straight. Improving 1.4 miles of road between the two bottlenecks, really does not resolve the major issues along the route.
The M25 - The road to nowhere
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
The section being improved is more of a bottleneck than the Acle Straight as a significant amount of traffic leaves at Acle. Of course it is much shorter so it is less well known.A303Chris wrote: ↑Thu Jun 23, 2022 11:40I get that but the two bottlenecks are the Brundal roundabout and the Acle straight. Improving 1.4 miles of road between the two bottlenecks, really does not resolve the major issues along the route.
It's rather similar to the A303 Sparkford scheme, which I suppose you would also dismiss as a 'sticking plaster' because the Podimore roundabout remains. But the reality is that nothing would ever get built if every scheme had to solve every problem on a corridor. These are really solid improvements that do what they do well. Your ire should be directed at the at-grade bodge jobs like A47 Wansford to Sutton.
- Mapper89062
- Member
- Posts: 166
- Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2021 21:25
- Location: on your map
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
We should be lucky we are getting what we are, as an earlier plan had a roundabout at the B1140 junction, which would only make it even less likely the Brundall roundabout ever got GSJed. Even if the proposed plan does still have bottlenecks adjacent to it, with this gap filled there might be more of a demand to upgrade other sections later on. This is what happened with a lot of major dual carriageway routes like the A11, A34 and A12, and seems to be gradually progressing with other roads such as the A303 and A27.
Just your average mapper, bringing you a map-focused take on today's world
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Apparently Blofield will start construction sooner than expected - October. Also a good picture of the queuing you get westbound approaching the SC section, as well as the "notorious crash blackspot" at the B1140 staggered crossroads, which will be grade separated:
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/local-coun ... rt-9092338
https://www.edp24.co.uk/news/local-coun ... rt-9092338
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
This has been amply demonstrated over the last few days due to an emergency closure of the A1064 at Acle, resulting in significant queues both on the eastbound dual carriageway approach to the A1064 roundabout and on the Acle Straight itself
However I would still expect a partial return to this situation once the North Burlingham bottleneck is removed
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Very likely. I’m sure the Acle Straight will need dualling as well, and other parts of the A47 would benefit too. But it seems quite fair that this length is being prioritised.skiddaw05 wrote: ↑Sat Jun 25, 2022 22:58This has been amply demonstrated over the last few days due to an emergency closure of the A1064 at Acle, resulting in significant queues both on the eastbound dual carriageway approach to the A1064 roundabout and on the Acle Straight itself
However I would still expect a partial return to this situation once the North Burlingham bottleneck is removed
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Just to note that The A47 Blofield to North Burlingham Development Consent Order 2022 hit legislation.gov.uk in the last couple of weeks: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/202 ... tents/made
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
More good news for the A47 as North Tuddenham to Easton was granted development consent today, also within the 3 month window. NH hope to have it open in winter 2025.
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... to-easton/
https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/lo ... ed-9208118
https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... to-easton/
https://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/news/lo ... ed-9208118
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
With the recommendation report for Wansford to Sutton sent yesterday, the Examining Authorities have finished their work on the A47 schemes. Here's a summary:
A47/A141 Guyhirn junction - Complete
A47 Blofield to North Burlingham - DCO granted, due to start 2023 subject to legal challenge
A47 North Tuddenham to Easton - DCO granted, due to start 2023 subject to legal challenge
A47/A11 Thickthorn junction improvement - SoS decision due this month
A47 Wansford to Sutton - SoS decision due January
A47 Great Yarmouth junction improvements - doesn't need DCO, to start 2023/24
A47/A141 Guyhirn junction - Complete
A47 Blofield to North Burlingham - DCO granted, due to start 2023 subject to legal challenge
A47 North Tuddenham to Easton - DCO granted, due to start 2023 subject to legal challenge
A47/A11 Thickthorn junction improvement - SoS decision due this month
A47 Wansford to Sutton - SoS decision due January
A47 Great Yarmouth junction improvements - doesn't need DCO, to start 2023/24
Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme
Looks like development consent has now been granted for Thickthorn as well.jackal wrote: ↑Wed Oct 12, 2022 09:41 With the recommendation report for Wansford to Sutton sent yesterday, the Examining Authorities have finished their work on the A47 schemes. Here's a summary:
A47/A141 Guyhirn junction - Complete
A47 Blofield to North Burlingham - DCO granted, due to start 2023 subject to legal challenge
A47 North Tuddenham to Easton - DCO granted, due to start 2023 subject to legal challenge
A47/A11 Thickthorn junction improvement - SoS decision due this month
A47 Wansford to Sutton - SoS decision due January
A47 Great Yarmouth junction improvements - doesn't need DCO, to start 2023/24