Hi all
Yes its me again asking more questions. One major question I would like to ask is about road protesters and what they actually acheive?
Well I know that recent 'camps' have been on the A650 Bingley, A27 Polegate both of which I don't think caused any real problems for the contractors as both roads had strong local support & in the case of Bingley lots of advanced prep work had been carried out so it would have been a real waste to scrap the project.
However, I do believe that some future projects like the M77 and M74 extensions and the second Tyne Tunnel approach roads seem to be in their sights.
I do believe that road builders / Highways Agency are much more accountable than they get credit for & controversial schemes are now put on the back burner for fear of 'upsetting people'. Road building has practically ground to a holt in London for example. So did the protests at Hackney Wick A12 contribute towards this as well as Ken Livingstone's transport plans?
The A34 Newbury bypass & M3 Twyford Down caused a real battle and cost a fortune in police bills. I think Newbury alone cost 13 Million for policing!
What do people think?
Jim
Road protesters - what do they actually acheive?
Moderator: Site Management Team
<< Yes its me again asking more questions. One major question I would like to ask is about road protesters and what they actually acheive? >>
Well, I think the main thing they have achieved is:
<< >>
They may not have stopped any individual road scheme, but their tactics have ensured that they have got press coverage for their cause, with the long term effect that the environmental and social effects of road schemes are considered far more than they were in the past.
<< 'upsetting people'. Road building has practically ground to a holt in London for example. >>
That I suspect is more due to NIMBYs than your stereotypical road protestor.
Any roadbuilding in London will be locally unpopular, even if it removes congestion from local roads, because of the inevitable destruction of either houses or of some of the few remaining bits of green space in London, and the resulting noise (I'd rather hear traffic swishing past than idling in a traffic jam, but still). By comparision most of the schemes road protestors protest about are locally popular (though not universally liked; the protestors often get a fair amount of local support).
<< The A34 Newbury bypass & M3 Twyford Down caused a real battle and cost a fortune in police bills. I think Newbury alone cost 13 Million for policing! >>
Interestingly, a leaflet I saw from some road protestors about a scheme in Essex (I'm sorry, I can't remember where) had a section saying that it probably wasn't even going to be a good road, and pointing out that the Newbury bypass has a very substandard junction on it that had already led to one death.
Well, I think the main thing they have achieved is:
<< >>
They may not have stopped any individual road scheme, but their tactics have ensured that they have got press coverage for their cause, with the long term effect that the environmental and social effects of road schemes are considered far more than they were in the past.
<< 'upsetting people'. Road building has practically ground to a holt in London for example. >>
That I suspect is more due to NIMBYs than your stereotypical road protestor.
Any roadbuilding in London will be locally unpopular, even if it removes congestion from local roads, because of the inevitable destruction of either houses or of some of the few remaining bits of green space in London, and the resulting noise (I'd rather hear traffic swishing past than idling in a traffic jam, but still). By comparision most of the schemes road protestors protest about are locally popular (though not universally liked; the protestors often get a fair amount of local support).
<< The A34 Newbury bypass & M3 Twyford Down caused a real battle and cost a fortune in police bills. I think Newbury alone cost 13 Million for policing! >>
Interestingly, a leaflet I saw from some road protestors about a scheme in Essex (I'm sorry, I can't remember where) had a section saying that it probably wasn't even going to be a good road, and pointing out that the Newbury bypass has a very substandard junction on it that had already led to one death.
<<few remaining bits of green space in London>>
It's all a question of what you're used to: London is actually one of the greenest capitals in the world. If you walk up to the Serpentine, you are sufficiently 'inland' not to be able to hear any traffic, and all you can see is green. London has fantastic parks (the Royal ones at least). Don't knock it. You want to see Paris--one of the most densely built cities in Europe. Having made that comparison, we mustn't get complacent either....
Paul
It's all a question of what you're used to: London is actually one of the greenest capitals in the world. If you walk up to the Serpentine, you are sufficiently 'inland' not to be able to hear any traffic, and all you can see is green. London has fantastic parks (the Royal ones at least). Don't knock it. You want to see Paris--one of the most densely built cities in Europe. Having made that comparison, we mustn't get complacent either....
Paul
Regards,
Paul
Paul
Grr.. NIMBYs! Don't get me going! To me they're much worse than road protesters in that they are hypocritical.
For instance.. slightly off subject, but in a village near me, the population is split on whether or not to have a phone mast. It's away from the village, so poses no health risk, butcertain people think it's an eyesore. Trouble is.. lots of those people have a mobile phone themselves. So it's hypocritical - simple as that.
To a certain extent, when you buy a car, you are indirectly accepting the responsibility and the risk that at some point, a road may be built where it isagainst your personal wishes, yet may be for the good of the many. That's why it really gets my goat when you see people protesting against road building.. yet arrive there in cars.
Rant over!
For instance.. slightly off subject, but in a village near me, the population is split on whether or not to have a phone mast. It's away from the village, so poses no health risk, butcertain people think it's an eyesore. Trouble is.. lots of those people have a mobile phone themselves. So it's hypocritical - simple as that.
To a certain extent, when you buy a car, you are indirectly accepting the responsibility and the risk that at some point, a road may be built where it isagainst your personal wishes, yet may be for the good of the many. That's why it really gets my goat when you see people protesting against road building.. yet arrive there in cars.
Rant over!
Jim: <<One major question I would like to ask is about road protesters and what they actually acheive?>>
I think mostly, even if they can't stop a particular scheme, they do make a point in general about road building. I don't have much of a problem with environmental protests on the whole - it's a very important factor in major construction projects.
<<Road building has practically ground to a holt in London for example.>>
What do you mean "practically"?! If Mr Livingston goes any more anti-car he's going to start cobbling streets again.
<<The A34 Newbury bypass & M3 Twyford Down caused a real battle and cost a fortune in police bills.>>
I think these two, and the M40 extension, were what really put the government off road building. It's because of this that "motorway" is a dirty word...
On the whole, I think it's safe to generalise that environmental protesters are more responsible for the cancelling of large or rural schemes while the urban ones are killed off by NIMBYs.
Stu: <<That's why it really gets my goat when you see people protesting against road building.. yet arrive there in cars.>>
That's not just hypocritical, it's quite laughable as well!
Chris
I think mostly, even if they can't stop a particular scheme, they do make a point in general about road building. I don't have much of a problem with environmental protests on the whole - it's a very important factor in major construction projects.
<<Road building has practically ground to a holt in London for example.>>
What do you mean "practically"?! If Mr Livingston goes any more anti-car he's going to start cobbling streets again.
<<The A34 Newbury bypass & M3 Twyford Down caused a real battle and cost a fortune in police bills.>>
I think these two, and the M40 extension, were what really put the government off road building. It's because of this that "motorway" is a dirty word...
On the whole, I think it's safe to generalise that environmental protesters are more responsible for the cancelling of large or rural schemes while the urban ones are killed off by NIMBYs.
Stu: <<That's why it really gets my goat when you see people protesting against road building.. yet arrive there in cars.>>
That's not just hypocritical, it's quite laughable as well!
Chris
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
stu531: <<That's why it really gets my goat when you see people protesting against road building.. yet arrive there in cars.>>
I once went to a public meeting a number of years ago about a road scheme where the Friends of the Earth representatives turned up in a car......
Simon
I once went to a public meeting a number of years ago about a road scheme where the Friends of the Earth representatives turned up in a car......
Simon
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!
Please contact me if you want to know more
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Please contact me if you want to know more
-
Fluid Dynamics
- Member
- Posts: 988
- Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2002 19:54
The beginning of the modern road protests of recent times was the Oxleas wood protests on the A205. The Thatcher Government had the roads policy "Roads to Prosperity" and part of this was dualling both the north and south circulars in full. The section between the A20/A2 and the Thames would have cut through Oxleas Wood near Woolwich before being taken over a bridgeat Gallions reach (still proposed I think but as a local route and not part of large scheme) where the road would hav continued to the A406/A13 junction.
Campaigns along the route led to the south circular schemes being dropped bar the Catford improvements - which itself was eventually dropped.
Does anyone have any info the the south circular plans of the roads to prosperity proposals?
Campaigns along the route led to the south circular schemes being dropped bar the Catford improvements - which itself was eventually dropped.
Does anyone have any info the the south circular plans of the roads to prosperity proposals?
jim: <<I would like to ask is about road protesters and what they actually acheive?>>
The only long-term thing they've really achieved is ensuring environmental impacts are considered as well, which isn't all bad. In the short-term they managed to hold up road-building schemes, but any work that needs to be done is slowly coming back onto the roads programme.
jim: <<So did the protests at Hackney Wick A12 contribute towards this as well as Ken Livingstone's transport plans?>>
Unlikely - Ken's so anti-car he'd have put a stop to them anyway. The protestors at Wanstonia were just a minority of environmental extremists and a few local people opposed to having their houses pulled down, or the green being lost... although if anyone's driven along the old A12 since the Eastway was completed (out of rush-hour), you'll see there's barely any traffic around at all - so it's surely been beneficial for most of the residents.
It would have been even more beneficial if free-flowing sliproads to the M11 were included instead of all the traffic being forced to use the Redbridge Roundabout (a scheme scrapped by Ken when he took charge of the roads in London). This would have ensured people didn't need to use the old road as a rat-run in the evening rush as traffic for the Redbridge Roundabout regularly queues up well past the Green Man...
mark: <<Interestingly, a leaflet I saw from some road protestors about a scheme in Essex (I'm sorry, I can't remember where) had a section saying that it probably wasn't even going to be a good road, and pointing out that the Newbury bypass has a very substandard junction on it that had already led to one death.>>
That's probably true - an extra ?13m would have sorted some of the junctions out nicely, had it not been spent on policing. I also suspect there have been many lives saved in Newbury itself as a result of the bypass opening...
stu531: << Grr.. NIMBYs! Don't get me going! To me they're much worse than road protesters in that they are hypocritical. For instance.. slightly off subject, but in a village near me, the population is split on whether or not to have a phone mast. It's away from the village, so poses no health risk, butcertain people think it's an eyesore. Trouble is.. lots of those people have a mobile phone themselves. So it's hypocritical - simple as that.>>
They're probably not worse than road protestors, but almost as bad. Having said that, I also opposed the mast near my village, despite having a cellphone on the grounds that it was an eyesore. I'm not against i being there in principle, but Orange have chosen a particularly tall, ugly lattice design. A thin concrete pole (like those talllampposts you sometimes get in the middle of roundabouts) would have been much easier on the eye. And forcing the companies to share masts would reduce the number of them, and their visual impact on the landscape.
Having said that, I wouldn't count myself as a NIMBY as such... for instance I'd rather see the A602 upgraded to motorway/dual carriageway standard (and I'm afforded spectacular views of the existing road from my house!) than an A120 extension from Puckeridge to Stevenage - which in my view would be largely unnecessary and would detract from the countryside futher north, as there's no real existing route for it to take... I guess it's more about compromise.
Chris.
The only long-term thing they've really achieved is ensuring environmental impacts are considered as well, which isn't all bad. In the short-term they managed to hold up road-building schemes, but any work that needs to be done is slowly coming back onto the roads programme.
jim: <<So did the protests at Hackney Wick A12 contribute towards this as well as Ken Livingstone's transport plans?>>
Unlikely - Ken's so anti-car he'd have put a stop to them anyway. The protestors at Wanstonia were just a minority of environmental extremists and a few local people opposed to having their houses pulled down, or the green being lost... although if anyone's driven along the old A12 since the Eastway was completed (out of rush-hour), you'll see there's barely any traffic around at all - so it's surely been beneficial for most of the residents.
It would have been even more beneficial if free-flowing sliproads to the M11 were included instead of all the traffic being forced to use the Redbridge Roundabout (a scheme scrapped by Ken when he took charge of the roads in London). This would have ensured people didn't need to use the old road as a rat-run in the evening rush as traffic for the Redbridge Roundabout regularly queues up well past the Green Man...
mark: <<Interestingly, a leaflet I saw from some road protestors about a scheme in Essex (I'm sorry, I can't remember where) had a section saying that it probably wasn't even going to be a good road, and pointing out that the Newbury bypass has a very substandard junction on it that had already led to one death.>>
That's probably true - an extra ?13m would have sorted some of the junctions out nicely, had it not been spent on policing. I also suspect there have been many lives saved in Newbury itself as a result of the bypass opening...
stu531: << Grr.. NIMBYs! Don't get me going! To me they're much worse than road protesters in that they are hypocritical. For instance.. slightly off subject, but in a village near me, the population is split on whether or not to have a phone mast. It's away from the village, so poses no health risk, butcertain people think it's an eyesore. Trouble is.. lots of those people have a mobile phone themselves. So it's hypocritical - simple as that.>>
They're probably not worse than road protestors, but almost as bad. Having said that, I also opposed the mast near my village, despite having a cellphone on the grounds that it was an eyesore. I'm not against i being there in principle, but Orange have chosen a particularly tall, ugly lattice design. A thin concrete pole (like those talllampposts you sometimes get in the middle of roundabouts) would have been much easier on the eye. And forcing the companies to share masts would reduce the number of them, and their visual impact on the landscape.
Having said that, I wouldn't count myself as a NIMBY as such... for instance I'd rather see the A602 upgraded to motorway/dual carriageway standard (and I'm afforded spectacular views of the existing road from my house!) than an A120 extension from Puckeridge to Stevenage - which in my view would be largely unnecessary and would detract from the countryside futher north, as there's no real existing route for it to take... I guess it's more about compromise.
Chris.
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
Chris M: << If Mr Livingston goes any more anti-car he's going to start cobbling streets again.>>
That's actually happened here in Bristol: Queen Square, which used to havea "ghost" dual carriageway running diagonally across it, has now not only had the dual carriageway removed but also had the cobbles restored around the sides of the square. And I can only say that it's a massive improvement, particularly since I walk across it regularly. They've also started using it for open-air events: there was a film screening there last week. A great public space has been restored to the city.
Guy
That's actually happened here in Bristol: Queen Square, which used to havea "ghost" dual carriageway running diagonally across it, has now not only had the dual carriageway removed but also had the cobbles restored around the sides of the square. And I can only say that it's a massive improvement, particularly since I walk across it regularly. They've also started using it for open-air events: there was a film screening there last week. A great public space has been restored to the city.
Guy
Guy: <<That's actually happened here in Bristol: Queen Square, which used to havea "ghost" dual carriageway running diagonally across it, has now not only had the dual carriageway removed but also had the cobbles restored around the sides of the square....A great public space has been restored to the city.>>
And a good thing too - for part of the 2000 celebrations, Leeds CC shut off the old Civic Square for about 2 years (sadly meaning it opened in late 2001, oops) to create the wonderfully named Millennium Square. It's a huge open area where concerts, parties, and things like the "Ice Cube" (a temporary outdoor ice rink set up in the winter) are held. And a wonderful scheme it is too!
What I do object to is where important thoroughfares start being shut off and, indeed, cobbled!
Chris
And a good thing too - for part of the 2000 celebrations, Leeds CC shut off the old Civic Square for about 2 years (sadly meaning it opened in late 2001, oops) to create the wonderfully named Millennium Square. It's a huge open area where concerts, parties, and things like the "Ice Cube" (a temporary outdoor ice rink set up in the winter) are held. And a wonderful scheme it is too!
What I do object to is where important thoroughfares start being shut off and, indeed, cobbled!
Chris
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
The scheme in Essex which had the protesters was the A130 off-line improvement between Chelmsford & the A127 just outside Southend Phases 1 & 2.
It is true to say that protesters don't stop a scheme but delay it & bring the wider issues such as surrounding land development and environmental impact more to the public eye. This has definately caused the Highways Agency to be very cagey about building new roads, especially motorways.
What gets me though is the A130 is actually a really great peice of road! & has not really been given the credit it deserves. It is as far as I know the only road (apart from the A1(M) at Braham) to be built with hard-shoulders and quality laybys. An interesting safety development in highway construction and few people (Sabrites exempt of cause) have seem to taken notice. What does annoy me is when important roads get built without hard-shoulders, just so they don't have that motorway tag on them.
A recent nasty accident on the A12 outside Colchester highlighted this to me. Forgive me while I go off on one, but roads like the A12 especially the 3 lane sections need hard shoulders for safety reasons. People can get killed without them if you break down or have to stop for some other reason.
Anyway back to the A130, now that I've calmed down a suppose what the protesters were concerned about is the wider aspects of this road becoming part of an outer London Orbital. See the ABD website, theyhave a proposal on this.
Well an outer London orbital is worthy of another discussion.
Jim
It is true to say that protesters don't stop a scheme but delay it & bring the wider issues such as surrounding land development and environmental impact more to the public eye. This has definately caused the Highways Agency to be very cagey about building new roads, especially motorways.
What gets me though is the A130 is actually a really great peice of road! & has not really been given the credit it deserves. It is as far as I know the only road (apart from the A1(M) at Braham) to be built with hard-shoulders and quality laybys. An interesting safety development in highway construction and few people (Sabrites exempt of cause) have seem to taken notice. What does annoy me is when important roads get built without hard-shoulders, just so they don't have that motorway tag on them.
A recent nasty accident on the A12 outside Colchester highlighted this to me. Forgive me while I go off on one, but roads like the A12 especially the 3 lane sections need hard shoulders for safety reasons. People can get killed without them if you break down or have to stop for some other reason.
Anyway back to the A130, now that I've calmed down a suppose what the protesters were concerned about is the wider aspects of this road becoming part of an outer London Orbital. See the ABD website, theyhave a proposal on this.
Well an outer London orbital is worthy of another discussion.
Jim
Speaking of the A130 and A120 and A127 - what is Essex doing building miles and miles of motorway-standard A-road suddenly? How on earth did it get permission for that lot when Leeds struggled for a decade trying to get a tram scheme (note *public transport*) funded?!
Bloody southerners...!
Chris
Bloody southerners...!
Chris
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
<<A recent nasty accident on the A12 outside Colchester highlighted this to me. Forgive me while I go off on one, but roads like the A12 especially the 3 lane sections need hard shoulders for safety reasons. People can get killed without them if you break down or have to stop for some other reason.>>
Yes, I completely agree - the A12 would be much safer if it were upgraded to motorway standard, complete with hard shoulders. However, in my opinion the two lane sections of the road tend to be worse (particularly the Chelmsford and Colchester bypasses) as they curve about all over the place. The Chelmsford bypass is a bit of a pet hate of mine - why, if the road to the north is three lane and dead straight for miles would anyone want to build such a substandard bypass...
Chris.
Yes, I completely agree - the A12 would be much safer if it were upgraded to motorway standard, complete with hard shoulders. However, in my opinion the two lane sections of the road tend to be worse (particularly the Chelmsford and Colchester bypasses) as they curve about all over the place. The Chelmsford bypass is a bit of a pet hate of mine - why, if the road to the north is three lane and dead straight for miles would anyone want to build such a substandard bypass...
Chris.
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
Yes road building in Essex does seem to be experiencing a bit a boom at the moment. The A130 is essentially a private road which is charging 'shadow' tolls to Essex CC for a 30 period.
Other schemes like the A120 and even the Colchester northern link road probably are in some way connected to massive house building projects. Didn't the government recently say they wanted a new town at Stansted? I wonder how much back room business is going on between them + propective house builders?
I would like to see the A12 certainly given hard shoudlers and a northern link road built around the top of Chelmsford and further improvements made to the town bypass.
Jim
Other schemes like the A120 and even the Colchester northern link road probably are in some way connected to massive house building projects. Didn't the government recently say they wanted a new town at Stansted? I wonder how much back room business is going on between them + propective house builders?
I would like to see the A12 certainly given hard shoudlers and a northern link road built around the top of Chelmsford and further improvements made to the town bypass.
Jim
<<Other schemes like the A120 and even the Colchester northern link road probably are in some way connected to massive house building projects. Didn't the government recently say they wanted a new town at Stansted? I wonder how much back room business is going on between them + propective house builders?>>
The A120 route isn't really connected to the proposed new town - in fact it's more to do with improving the existing route - the A120 is dreadful (you can spend ages using the route if you get stuck behind a HGV or someone slow), and I doubt it would be especially pleasant to live next to at the moment.
I think if the new town, or the airport expansiongets the go-ahead there will have to be further improvements to the A120 and M11 (which of course, the current works are designed incorporating space for).
The other thing is the "argument" between Herts and Essex over the east-west route through the two counties. Hertfordshire obviously has invested a good deal of money in the A414 over the last couple of decades, wheras Essex are improving the A120. Certainly at the very least the 414 should be extended to meet the M11 north of Harlow, so we don't have to drive through the middle of the town all the time...
Chris.
The A120 route isn't really connected to the proposed new town - in fact it's more to do with improving the existing route - the A120 is dreadful (you can spend ages using the route if you get stuck behind a HGV or someone slow), and I doubt it would be especially pleasant to live next to at the moment.
I think if the new town, or the airport expansiongets the go-ahead there will have to be further improvements to the A120 and M11 (which of course, the current works are designed incorporating space for).
The other thing is the "argument" between Herts and Essex over the east-west route through the two counties. Hertfordshire obviously has invested a good deal of money in the A414 over the last couple of decades, wheras Essex are improving the A120. Certainly at the very least the 414 should be extended to meet the M11 north of Harlow, so we don't have to drive through the middle of the town all the time...
Chris.
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
c2R : <<The A120 route isn't really connected to the proposed new town - in fact it's more to do with improving the existing route - the A120 is dreadful (you can spend ages using the route if you get stuck behind a HGV or someone slow), and I doubt it would be especially pleasant to live next to at the moment.>>
I believe the A120 will become trunk road when the new stretch is finished. The existing route is one that I would go a long way to avoid. It is congested through out the day and therefore has a knock on effect on roads like Parsonage Road (or is it lane) running to the Airport access road from the Four Ashes in Takeley.
<<I think if the new town, or the airport expansiongets the go-ahead there will have to be further improvements to the A120 and M11 (which of course, the current works are designed incorporating space for).>>
The DfT website on airport expansion details the extent of new roads (and railways) required if Stansted expands) - see here. Check out paras 9.17 to 9.22 and the map after para 9.9
Perhaps the more computer literate amongst us can link directly to the map but I couldn't do that.
Basically for a four runway airport, they are suggesting M11 widening from 6 to 8 (what about the two laned section to the north of 8?); a new link to the M11 north and new access roads to the A120 at Dunmow.
<<The other thing is the "argument" between Herts and Essex over the east-west route through the two counties. Hertfordshire obviously has invested a good deal of money in the A414 over the last couple of decades, wheras Essex are improving the A120. Certainly at the very least the 414 should be extended to meet the M11 north of Harlow, so we don't have to drive through the middle of the town all the time...>>
Hear hear! Both counties have done a lot of work on this scheme. However, I believe the route was abandoned on environmental grounds by Essex County Council. Hertfordshire still has it on their books, but are not actively working on the scheme because they need the cooperation of their neighbour to build the road. A link to the M11 would essentially sort out major traffic problems in that part of Hertfordshire, (in Sawbridgeworth and the surrounding villages), but much of it would be in Essex on the flood plain of the River Stort. My personal opinion is that significant development at Stansted will require schemes such as this to be built - however I've no doubt that any planning application for further expansion will endeavour to prove that this scheme is not necessary as increased passenger traffic can be carried on an expanded rail network. (Have you seen the railway between Stansted and Broxbourne - I believe there is little room for expanded services to Stansted on this twin tracked line as it is already operating at capacity).
Simon
I believe the A120 will become trunk road when the new stretch is finished. The existing route is one that I would go a long way to avoid. It is congested through out the day and therefore has a knock on effect on roads like Parsonage Road (or is it lane) running to the Airport access road from the Four Ashes in Takeley.
<<I think if the new town, or the airport expansiongets the go-ahead there will have to be further improvements to the A120 and M11 (which of course, the current works are designed incorporating space for).>>
The DfT website on airport expansion details the extent of new roads (and railways) required if Stansted expands) - see here. Check out paras 9.17 to 9.22 and the map after para 9.9
Perhaps the more computer literate amongst us can link directly to the map but I couldn't do that.
Basically for a four runway airport, they are suggesting M11 widening from 6 to 8 (what about the two laned section to the north of 8?); a new link to the M11 north and new access roads to the A120 at Dunmow.
<<The other thing is the "argument" between Herts and Essex over the east-west route through the two counties. Hertfordshire obviously has invested a good deal of money in the A414 over the last couple of decades, wheras Essex are improving the A120. Certainly at the very least the 414 should be extended to meet the M11 north of Harlow, so we don't have to drive through the middle of the town all the time...>>
Hear hear! Both counties have done a lot of work on this scheme. However, I believe the route was abandoned on environmental grounds by Essex County Council. Hertfordshire still has it on their books, but are not actively working on the scheme because they need the cooperation of their neighbour to build the road. A link to the M11 would essentially sort out major traffic problems in that part of Hertfordshire, (in Sawbridgeworth and the surrounding villages), but much of it would be in Essex on the flood plain of the River Stort. My personal opinion is that significant development at Stansted will require schemes such as this to be built - however I've no doubt that any planning application for further expansion will endeavour to prove that this scheme is not necessary as increased passenger traffic can be carried on an expanded rail network. (Have you seen the railway between Stansted and Broxbourne - I believe there is little room for expanded services to Stansted on this twin tracked line as it is already operating at capacity).
Simon
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!
Please contact me if you want to know more
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Please contact me if you want to know more
Grr, I just typed a large reply to this post, which it promptly lost!
<<However, I believe the route was abandoned on environmental grounds by Essex County Council. Hertfordshire still has it on their books, but are not actively working on the scheme because they need the cooperation of their neighbour to build the road>>
That was the situation last time I was updated on it. If I were HCC I'd extend the A414 dual carriageway section up to the county border, and then dump all the traffic on the nearest country lane in Essex, that way they'd be practically forced to do something about it! It does seem rather silly for Essex not to be so concerned with it, as it would remove a huge amount of through traffic from Harlow.
<<I've no doubt that any planning application for further expansion will endeavour to prove that this scheme is not necessary as increased passenger traffic can be carried on an expanded rail network.>>
As you say, it's laughable to suggest the current rails could take anymore traffic - if you drive over the level crossing at Dobb's Weir, near Nazeing you'll see what I mean - nine times out of ten you'll be waiting for the trains to go past (usually several at a time) - the line is practically at capacity, any more trains and the level crossing gates would be permenantly closed!
However, the plans I've seen for the new town north of Harlow (built on the Hunsdon airfield) show this link as being vital to be completed before construction of the town. Thankfully, I doubt the town will be built on this location as we've got enough new towns here already!
Chris.
<<However, I believe the route was abandoned on environmental grounds by Essex County Council. Hertfordshire still has it on their books, but are not actively working on the scheme because they need the cooperation of their neighbour to build the road>>
That was the situation last time I was updated on it. If I were HCC I'd extend the A414 dual carriageway section up to the county border, and then dump all the traffic on the nearest country lane in Essex, that way they'd be practically forced to do something about it! It does seem rather silly for Essex not to be so concerned with it, as it would remove a huge amount of through traffic from Harlow.
<<I've no doubt that any planning application for further expansion will endeavour to prove that this scheme is not necessary as increased passenger traffic can be carried on an expanded rail network.>>
As you say, it's laughable to suggest the current rails could take anymore traffic - if you drive over the level crossing at Dobb's Weir, near Nazeing you'll see what I mean - nine times out of ten you'll be waiting for the trains to go past (usually several at a time) - the line is practically at capacity, any more trains and the level crossing gates would be permenantly closed!
However, the plans I've seen for the new town north of Harlow (built on the Hunsdon airfield) show this link as being vital to be completed before construction of the town. Thankfully, I doubt the town will be built on this location as we've got enough new towns here already!
Chris.
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
c2R: (Re A414/M11 link) <<It does seem rather silly for Essex not to be so concerned with it, as it would remove a huge amount of through traffic from Harlow.>>
Though I've never seen any of these studies myself, I believe that very little of the traffic on the A414 west of Harlow actually travels all the way through to the M11 or beyond. The Chelmsford traffic would either have gone on the M25 much earlier (via the A10), or would have taken the old A414 through High Wych, Sawbo and Hatfield Heath. London bound traffic would have come from the Ware / Hertford area and would have gone down the A10. Traffic for Stansted and the north would either have gone up the A1184 (ex A11) or via the A10/A120 to queue through Little Hadham lights.
As a consequence, the places that would be relieved are towns like Sawbridgeworth rather than any significant change in Harlow itself. Therefore it remains a road largely in Essex built to help Hertfordshire.
<<As you say, it's laughable to suggest the current rails could take anymore traffic - if you drive over the level crossing at Dobb's Weir, near Nazeing you'll see what I mean - nine times out of ten you'll be waiting for the trains to go past (usually several at a time) - the line is practically at capacity, any more trains and the level crossing gates would be permenantly closed!>>
I recall reading somewhere that Broxbourne (railway!) junction was the cause of much delay on the line because it is not grade separated. Also the stopping trains delay the through services to Stansted. Now where have we heard the arguments that local traffic dirputs long distance traffic on some routes???
<<However, the plans I've seen for the new town north of Harlow (built on the Hunsdon airfield) show this link as being vital to be completed before construction of the town. Thankfully, I doubt the town will be built on this location as we've got enough new towns here already!>>
Ah, I've heard of this proposal, but if you've seen drawings you have the advantage over me. I'm not aware that this is a serious proposal which is being pursued at present.
As you say, there are enough new towns round here wothout another one!
Simon
Though I've never seen any of these studies myself, I believe that very little of the traffic on the A414 west of Harlow actually travels all the way through to the M11 or beyond. The Chelmsford traffic would either have gone on the M25 much earlier (via the A10), or would have taken the old A414 through High Wych, Sawbo and Hatfield Heath. London bound traffic would have come from the Ware / Hertford area and would have gone down the A10. Traffic for Stansted and the north would either have gone up the A1184 (ex A11) or via the A10/A120 to queue through Little Hadham lights.
As a consequence, the places that would be relieved are towns like Sawbridgeworth rather than any significant change in Harlow itself. Therefore it remains a road largely in Essex built to help Hertfordshire.
<<As you say, it's laughable to suggest the current rails could take anymore traffic - if you drive over the level crossing at Dobb's Weir, near Nazeing you'll see what I mean - nine times out of ten you'll be waiting for the trains to go past (usually several at a time) - the line is practically at capacity, any more trains and the level crossing gates would be permenantly closed!>>
I recall reading somewhere that Broxbourne (railway!) junction was the cause of much delay on the line because it is not grade separated. Also the stopping trains delay the through services to Stansted. Now where have we heard the arguments that local traffic dirputs long distance traffic on some routes???
<<However, the plans I've seen for the new town north of Harlow (built on the Hunsdon airfield) show this link as being vital to be completed before construction of the town. Thankfully, I doubt the town will be built on this location as we've got enough new towns here already!>>
Ah, I've heard of this proposal, but if you've seen drawings you have the advantage over me. I'm not aware that this is a serious proposal which is being pursued at present.
As you say, there are enough new towns round here wothout another one!
Simon
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!
Please contact me if you want to know more
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Please contact me if you want to know more
<<I believe that very little of the traffic on the A414 west of Harlow actually travels all the way through to the M11 or beyond>>
I think I'd dispute this (although I haven't seen any studies for the through traffic through Harlow itself)... My experience (I did some studying in London, and commuted from Hertfordshire) is that there is quite a bit of London through traffic that uses the route from the M11 as an alternative to taking the M25/A10 - I found that both routes tended to take a similar amount of time so ended up going one way and coming back the other, so it wasn't as boring...
<<it remains a road largely in Essex built to help Hertfordshire.>>
Yes, I think I'd agree with that - even if it was proved there was a lot of through traffic travelling through Harlow, it mainly goes through the industrial areas anyway. The road would also relieve pressure on the A120 through Herts for Stansted-bound traffic, and I guess the A10 at Cheshunt (which in my opinion needs something more drastic doing to it than a resurfacing...)
<<I've heard of this proposal, but if you've seen drawings you have the advantage over me. I'm not aware that this is a serious proposal which is being pursued at present.>>
You're right about that - happily the scheme seems to have been forgotton about - the obvious pinch point at the moment is the west of Stevenage development....
Chris.
I think I'd dispute this (although I haven't seen any studies for the through traffic through Harlow itself)... My experience (I did some studying in London, and commuted from Hertfordshire) is that there is quite a bit of London through traffic that uses the route from the M11 as an alternative to taking the M25/A10 - I found that both routes tended to take a similar amount of time so ended up going one way and coming back the other, so it wasn't as boring...
<<it remains a road largely in Essex built to help Hertfordshire.>>
Yes, I think I'd agree with that - even if it was proved there was a lot of through traffic travelling through Harlow, it mainly goes through the industrial areas anyway. The road would also relieve pressure on the A120 through Herts for Stansted-bound traffic, and I guess the A10 at Cheshunt (which in my opinion needs something more drastic doing to it than a resurfacing...)
<<I've heard of this proposal, but if you've seen drawings you have the advantage over me. I'm not aware that this is a serious proposal which is being pursued at present.>>
You're right about that - happily the scheme seems to have been forgotton about - the obvious pinch point at the moment is the west of Stevenage development....
Chris.
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
Did anyone notice that there was no news about any tree huggin against the M74 through Scotlands border country - an area which to me is highly scenic compared to the countryside surrounding the Newbury Bypass. I imagine that there were no protesters, but my conspiracy theory suggests this:
1) It was too far to drive there in that clapped out old campervan which chucks out 20 times more pollution than the cleanest car!
2) The nearest post office to cash the giro's that many of 'em live on was too far away!
3) They didn't havea cat in hell's chance of getting hold of their weekly supply of dope to keep "self polluted" and ever so mellow man!
Just a thought!
A19
1) It was too far to drive there in that clapped out old campervan which chucks out 20 times more pollution than the cleanest car!
2) The nearest post office to cash the giro's that many of 'em live on was too far away!
3) They didn't havea cat in hell's chance of getting hold of their weekly supply of dope to keep "self polluted" and ever so mellow man!
Just a thought!
A19
M19