A2 Dover Access (RIS3)

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

While scrolling through the document for the list of schemes being considered under RIS3, I found that NH are planning to improve the A2 at Dover, likely between the traffic signals at Lydden and the Eastern Docks. Dualling of the A2 as it bypasses Dover is a given considering the nature of improving access to Dover via the A2, but does anyone have an idea of how this'll be achieved? I've come up with a few ideas of what such a scheme would entail:

• online dualling of the A2 without GSJs, which would be fairly straightforward,
• online dualling of the A2 which includes new GSJs, which would be more difficult to achieve, especially at Whitfield,
• offline dualling of the A2 except for Jubilee Way and includes new GSJs, which would be the most expensive and environmentally taxing option to build.

I'd like to see what other people's thoughts are on the proposed improvements. I'd say it go well in-hand with the proposed improvements to Brenley Corner which would go hand-in-hand with this scheme as well. As for the third hypothetical option, my idea is that the A2 would be redirected along the existing A256 north of Whitfield before then rejoining the current alignment east of Whitfield. There's a potential for a very nasty idea with this option though, which would include having the A2 branch off of the new roundabout which wa built as a part of the new development by the A256, but this seems like a far-fetched idea.

[Mapper89062]

I wouldn't have thought an offline improvement would be needed, as the A2 is on a modern, high-standard single carriageway route here.

Rerouting north of Whitfield seems weird too: you've got a GSJ that now faces the wrong way round, a tiny roundabout to access a development that you're shoving all the A2 traffic through, and is much further.

In all likelihood this scheme will be online dualling from Lydden to Whitfield and the Whitfield bypass to the A258. Jubilee Way will have to remain S2, which is not ideal but at least you'll separate all the local traffic heading into Dover from the port traffic before the D2 ends.

I think the only question here is whether the route will still have to go through the two sets of traffic lights at Lydden and the Whitfield roundabout or if there will be some GSJs.

I'd suggest a combined GSJ replaces the Lydden Hill and Coxhill traffic lights, Coldred Hill is either LILOed or bridged without slips, and at Whitfield roundabout something like this could work:

The services could be relocated easily, and you'd need to CPO two or three properties on the north-west side, but since these are already backing directly onto a busy D2 I don't think it would be too controversial.

[jackal]

RIS3 schemes have been moved back to RIS4, and in any case Labour have a 15-20 point lead and are likely to cancel everything. So this scheme won't be happening any time soon.

HE described the scheme as follows: "Upgrading sections of the A2 to improve traffic flow and resilience between Lydden Hill and Dover in Kent". This does confirm that they were thinking of a relatively large scheme such as those described above. Likewise, the budget was listed as £399m last year.

As for what they'd if this did go ahead, an online route seems fairly straightforward between Lydden Hill and Dover. I don't know if they'd include GSJs, but as Mapper says, there is space.

The challenging bit is the connection to the port via the Jubilee Way viaduct. I've suggested (first link) that "they could dig out an offslip to go directly into the port, bypassing the viaduct entirely." So you'd have three lanes on the viaduct as at present, but demand for the downhill lane would be lower as port traffic would diverge prior to the viaduct; this would also remove a major conflict at the Eastern Docks rbt. Alternatively it might be that they can bolt on an extra lane to the viaduct itself.

[MotorwayGuy]

Even if they don't grade separate the existing junctions, I'm surprised the short S2 sections between Lydden Hill and the A258 roundabout haven't been filled in. The only reason the very short section between the A258 and A256 hasn't been dualled is probably to avoid replacing the lightly-used Dover Road overbridge.

[jackal]

Even if they don't grade separate the existing junctions, I'm surprised the short S2 sections between Lydden Hill and the A258 roundabout haven't been filled in. The only reason the very short section between the A258 and A256 hasn't been dualled is probably to avoid replacing the lightly-used Dover Road overbridge.

It looks like the section east of Lydden Hill has about 17k, while the section between the A256 and A258 has about 27k. So there could be a coherent smaller scale scheme just dualling the latter.

[Gareth Thomas]

Even if they don't grade separate the existing junctions, I'm surprised the short S2 sections between Lydden Hill and the A258 roundabout haven't been filled in. The only reason the very short section between the A258 and A256 hasn't been dualled is probably to avoid replacing the lightly-used Dover Road overbridge.

I suspect it was due to that bridge - perhaps they couldn't get the land, or the cost of rebuilding that bridge was considered too much? But it is annoying when you have more or less three lanes (two plus the sliproad) merging into one.

As for the main topic, I'd say they'd probably go for Option 1 - simply upgrading the existing road. The Whitfield Roundabout would be the only problem, but I doubt there's much they can do there as it is a fairly built up area. Otherwise though the A2 could "simply" be upgraded to dual carriageway up until the A258.

Jubilee Way should say as it is though. Not only would dualling it involve demolishing and building a new bridge, but that last section goes down a steep hill and keeping all the traffic in one lane would stop idiots from overtaking and cutting off the lorries using that section.

[Phil]

RIS3 schemes have been moved back to RIS4, and in any case Labour have a 15-20 point lead and are likely to cancel everything. So this scheme won't be happening any time soon.

Do you have any proof for this - other than playing party politics on here.

Yes its acknowledged that upon coming into power in 1997 (Thats over 25 years ago now!) Labour did cancel virtually all planned road schemes but its complete nonsense to say that the same will happen should Labour win the next general election.

Besides let me remind you its a Conservative Government that has shoved virtually all road schemes into RIS4 so they can hardly be said to be any better when it comes to showing commitment to road schemes

[jackal]

RIS3 schemes have been moved back to RIS4, and in any case Labour have a 15-20 point lead and are likely to cancel everything. So this scheme won't be happening any time soon.

Do you have any proof for this - other than playing party politics on here.

Yes its acknowledged that upon coming into power in 1997 (Thats over 25 years ago now!) Labour did cancel virtually all planned road schemes but its complete nonsense to say that the same will happen should Labour win the next general election.

Besides let me remind you its a Conservative Government that has shoved virtually all road schemes into RIS4 so they can hardly be said to be any better when it comes to showing commitment to road schemes

The only party politics here are yours. It's simply an iron law of politics that a new government cancels or pauses road schemes not yet under construction. No government spends money and political capital building their opposition's projects for them if they can help it.

The same applied in 2010 for instance, when many major schemes were withdrawn or suspended by the incoming Conservative-LD govt. Several of these were revived over the following years and constructed as RIS schemes, including the A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon, A1(M) Leeming to Barton, and Catthorpe Interchange.

[Phil]

RIS3 schemes have been moved back to RIS4, and in any case Labour have a 15-20 point lead and are likely to cancel everything. So this scheme won't be happening any time soon.

Do you have any proof for this - other than playing party politics on here.

Yes its acknowledged that upon coming into power in 1997 (Thats over 25 years ago now!) Labour did cancel virtually all planned road schemes but its complete nonsense to say that the same will happen should Labour win the next general election.

Besides let me remind you its a Conservative Government that has shoved virtually all road schemes into RIS4 so they can hardly be said to be any better when it comes to showing commitment to road schemes

The only party politics here are yours. It's simply an iron law of politics that a new government cancels or pauses road schemes not yet under construction. No government spends money and political capital building their opposition's projects for them if they can help it.

The same applied in 2010 for instance, when many major schemes were withdrawn or suspended by the incoming Conservative-LD govt. Several of these were revived over the following years and constructed as RIS schemes, including the A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon, A1(M) Leeming to Barton, and Catthorpe Interchange.

Indeed - so why did you say / imply that it was just a future labour administration which would scrap road schemes then!

If you had just pointed out that road schemes were under threat WHOEVER happens to win the next election then there would be no issue with your comments - because its obviously the case that a new administration may wish to reconsider any plans it inherits.

However as originally written you comment smacks of the "Labour hate roads / cars" nonsense beloved of some who support rival parties.

[roadtester]

Ever since I first travelled the then new Dover bypass in 1977 as a nipper I thought “this looks like a scheme that was conceived as a (possibly at grade) dual carriageway but someone has scaled it back and singled bits of it to save money”.

[jackal]

Indeed - so why did you say / imply that it was just a future labour administration which would scrap road schemes then!

If you had just pointed out that road schemes were under threat WHOEVER happens to win the next election then there would be no issue with your comments - because its obviously the case that a new administration may wish to reconsider any plans it inherits.

Clearly there is much more of a threat to any governments' road programme from a change of government than there would be from a continuation of the same government. You surely realise this.

However as originally written you comment smacks of the "Labour hate roads / cars" nonsense beloved of some who support rival parties.

It was a statement of the obvious, and you're tilting at windmills.

[Glenn A]

Ever since I first travelled the then new Dover bypass in 1977 as a nipper I thought “this looks like a scheme that was conceived as a (possibly at grade) dual carriageway but someone has scaled it back and singled bits of it to save money”.

It was odd that this by pass was mostly S2 and had a set of traffic lights. Money was tight in the mid seventies, there were numerous other road projects at the time, and making the Dover by pass mostly S2 was to save money. Obviously it was an improvement over the traffic choked route through Dover, but still done on the cheap as the improvements to the A20 and the completion of the M20 were over a decade away. However, the entry into Dover still looks excellent even if it is S2.

[Phil]

It was a statement of the obvious

Proof please - because unless you can provide proof of that statement in terms of current official labour party policy documents / statements from the labour party leadership then its simply your own political prejudices being presented as fact - which has no place on this forum.

[Phil]

Ever since I first travelled the then new Dover bypass in 1977 as a nipper I thought “this looks like a scheme that was conceived as a (possibly at grade) dual carriageway but someone has scaled it back and singled bits of it to save money”.

It was odd that this by pass was mostly S2 and had a set of traffic lights. Money was tight in the mid seventies, there were numerous other road projects at the time, and making the Dover by pass mostly S2 was to save money. Obviously it was an improvement over the traffic choked route through Dover, but still done on the cheap as the improvements to the A20 and the completion of the M20 were over a decade away. However, the entry into Dover still looks excellent even if it is S2.

Indeed - but traffic volumes through Dover were a fraction of what they are now. Photos of the port in the early 1980s are quite revealing with the Jubilee way launching out over the water while the ships themselves were less than half the capacity of current ones. https://twitter.com/phoebe_wthomson/sta ... 43/photo/4

Plus foot passenger traffic was also much higher than today.

[jackal]

It was a statement of the obvious

Proof please - because unless you can provide proof of that statement in terms of current official labour party policy documents / statements from the labour party leadership then its simply your own political prejudices being presented as fact - which has no place on this forum.

"I'm dead against political prejudices. Also water isn't wet unless it says so in Labour party documents".

Believe what you like, chief - I'm out of this one.

[Glenn A]

Ever since I first travelled the then new Dover bypass in 1977 as a nipper I thought “this looks like a scheme that was conceived as a (possibly at grade) dual carriageway but someone has scaled it back and singled bits of it to save money”.

It was odd that this by pass was mostly S2 and had a set of traffic lights. Money was tight in the mid seventies, there were numerous other road projects at the time, and making the Dover by pass mostly S2 was to save money. Obviously it was an improvement over the traffic choked route through Dover, but still done on the cheap as the improvements to the A20 and the completion of the M20 were over a decade away. However, the entry into Dover still looks excellent even if it is S2.

Indeed - but traffic volumes through Dover were a fraction of what they are now. Photos of the port in the early 1980s are quite revealing with the Jubilee way launching out over the water while the ships themselves were less than half the capacity of current ones. https://twitter.com/phoebe_wthomson/sta ... 43/photo/4

Plus foot passenger traffic was also much higher than today.

Odd, though, that the other by passes on the A2 were D2, but Dover was mostly S2 with a set of traffic lights, and the port was one of the busiest passenger ports in the country. I suppose only someone who planned the by pass and the minister who approved it can answer that one.

[KeithW]

Odd, though, that the other by passes on the A2 were D2, but Dover was mostly S2 with a set of traffic lights, and the port was one of the busiest passenger ports in the country. I suppose only someone who planned the by pass and the minister who approved it can answer that one.

As others have suggested I suspect whatever the original plans were the road was scaled back as it neared completion. Jubilee Way is restricted to 2 lanes up and 1 down anyway and of course in 1976 the pound had been devalued. The government had secured a short term loan from the USA to be able to meet its bills but that loan had to be paid back by Dec 1976. To ensure they had enough liquidity they approached the IMF to secure a longer term loan. As a condition of getting this the government had to agree to substantial cuts in public spending. I think part of those cuts was downgrading the plans for the last leg of the A2 into Dover. It didnt help that inflation was running at 16.54% at the time.

There were substantial gaps in M20 construction. When I first went to Kent in 1979 I stayed for a few days in a hotel near Charing used by construction workers working on J9 to J13 which was completed Dec 1981. The expectation was when that was complete they would move on to J8 to J9. It didn't happen. Maidstone to Ashford only opened in May 1991.

On the A1 we were stuck with the mess at Hatfield until Dec 1986.

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

Going back on topic, dualling Jubilee Way wouldn’t be too hard - IIRC, there’s provision for dualling the Jubilee Way where it briefly splits into a dual carriageway by the bridge which takes traffic down to the Docks. The only real issues with dualling Jubilee Way is the bridge leading down to the Docks and the Upnor Road bridge, otherwise it’d be a fairly simple endeavour. Any improvements to the A2 should be grade separated, and given that Dover is an incredibly strategic part of the country given that it connects Britain to the Continent, any improvements to the A2 should be high quality and built to a high standard and ideally, as a motorway - M2 or A2(M) would be fitting for such a case, however Jubilee Way restricts such dreams from coming to fruition, which would probably bring public outcry either way given that it’s next door to Dover Castle and wouldn’t matter regardless if it was a motorway or not, but I think we can all agree that this scheme should provide high quality route to replace the current route.

[KeithW]

Going back on topic, dualling Jubilee Way wouldn’t be too hard - IIRC, there’s provision for dualling the Jubilee Way where it briefly splits into a dual carriageway by the bridge which takes traffic down to the Docks. The only real issues with dualling Jubilee Way is the bridge leading down to the Docks and the Upnor Road bridge, otherwise it’d be a fairly simple endeavour. Any improvements to the A2 should be grade separated, and given that Dover is an incredibly strategic part of the country given that it connects Britain to the Continent, any improvements to the A2 should be high quality and built to a high standard and ideally, as a motorway - M2 or A2(M) would be fitting for such a case, however Jubilee Way restricts such dreams from coming to fruition, which would probably bring public outcry either way given that it’s next door to Dover Castle and wouldn’t matter regardless if it was a motorway or not, but I think we can all agree that this scheme should provide high quality route to replace the current route.

There is a high quality grade separated D3/D2 road all the way from the M25 to Dover in the form of the M20/A20, there is very little chance that either National Highways or the DfT would finance a major upgrade of the M2/A2 at this point. The bottleneck for both the M20 and M2/A2 is the Dartford Crossing which is effectively a single point of failure which is why they are pushing hard for the Lower Thames Crossing.

At this moment the queue for the northbound traffic via Dartford stretches all the way back to the A2, the last thing anyone wants to do is send more traffic to it.

There is however a traffic hot spot at the Whitfield Roundabout which is what needs to be tackled in the short term and it should be relatively low cost project and is expected to happen in RIS 3. The M2 already exists in the form of the Medway Towns bypass.

[AnOrdinarySABREUser]

There is a high quality grade separated D3/D2 road all the way from the M25 to Dover in the form of the M20/A20, there is very little chance that either National Highways or the DfT would finance a major upgrade of the M2/A2 at this point. The bottleneck for both the M20 and M2/A2 is the Dartford Crossing which is effectively a single point of failure which is why they are pushing hard for the Lower Thames Crossing.

Given that the LTC will induce a lot of traffic to use the A229, which is ill-equipped to handle the amount of traffic it'll face in a decade or so and that the proposed scheme won't do much when taking the strategic importance of the A229 into account, I think that the M2 and A2 deserves to be a high-quality corridor, maybe not as high-quality as the M20, but enough to provide extra capacity for the LTC. Logically, steps would be taken to grade separate the A2 at Dover as well as part of this scheme, and given that the traffic volumes between the A20 west of Aycliffe and Jubliee Way are similar, (17,175 AADT compared to 14,470 AADT, although Jubilee Way has had a higher AADT in the past) shouldn't grade separation of the existing A2 north and east of Dover be considered as well under this scheme? This doesn't take into account the issues with the LTC, but that it is a story for another time.

At this moment the queue for the northbound traffic via Dartford stretches all the way back to the A2, the last thing anyone wants to do is send more traffic to it.

Quite. However, building the LTC won't solve all of the issues at Dartford - traffic volumes are still expected to rise even with the LTC. This is what makes this scheme difficult to discuss - it's hard to wager that the M2/A2 corridor should be high-quality but then dismiss the issues at Dartford, which needs desperate addressing. Going on a tangent, an option named A14 has been subject to discussion amongst activist groups opposed to the LTC - an example of this is here. It's an interesting alternative to the current proposals and I think that it'll take traffic away from Dartford, but I'm definitely concerned about whether or not it'll adversely affect traffic heading up or down the M25 through Dartford, and whether it'll have a similar impact as the LTC in terms of traffic, in that it becomes, quite counter-intuitively, a traffic generator.

There is however a traffic hot spot at the Whitfield Roundabout which is what needs to be tackled in the short term and it should be relatively low cost project and is expected to happen in RIS 3. The M2 already exists in the form of the Medway Towns bypass.

I hope that, if improvements to the Whitfield Roundabout are being considered under this scheme, then they should be grade-separated. I saw the sketch above by Mapper89062 who proposed an option to grade-separate traffic at the Whitfield Roundabout:

However, I don't think that this would be ideal. While the urban environment surrounding the A2 here poses a challenge to providing a grade-seperated roundabout or dumbbell, I don't think it'd be too hard. By realigning the A2 slightly to the west coming out of the Whitfield Roundabout, NSL can be retained throughout. I haven't finished my sketch on this yet, which I'll post soon. Personally, I think that it'd be best to make it a fork-half-dumbbell hybrid to avoid weaving issues with the Honeywood Interchange to the east of the Whitfield Roundabout.