What's happened to the A13 in Basildon?

[qwertyK]

So today it's been announced Essex CC have had to reduce the A13 between Five Bells and Pitsea to 40mph due to the conditions of the carriageway.

Anyone local to this part of essex or who uses the route able to paint a picture of how bad it is?

https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/241830 ... nts-anchor

Must be absolutely terrible for this to happen, as someone has pointed out actually solving the problem would decimate the council's highway budget

Elsewhere I've read there are entire surfaces of tarmac/asphalt missing and people are swerving to avoid holes

This was from six years ago https://www.essexlive.news/news/a13-pot ... ys-1242932

[Runwell]

Marshy ground. Concrete foundations weakened over time so they start to move and break up (a few replaced in previous years already under urgent weekend closures). Throw in heavier vehicles and heavy road use. And you get this.

Good luck trying to find a permanent fix for this section without turning the place in to a long term car park.

[qwertyK]

Marshy ground. Concrete foundations weakened over time so they start to move and break up (a few replaced in previous years already under urgent weekend closures). Throw in heavier vehicles and heavy road use. And you get this.

Good luck trying to find a permanent fix for this section without turning the place in to a long term car park.

You wonder if it would be cheaper to keep the section open whilst they build a new alignment using improved construction methods if they did want a long term solution.

Having experience with potholes in essex and how the council dont' deal with them it's scary to think they are responsible for such a major road.

That section of the A13 has always seemed hideous when i have driven down it, very low standard, really comes apparent when you travel along the new section thurrock built.

I guess maybe to get out of the issue of costs essex would have to re-trunk their section so NH could fund it

[Runwell]

Nowhere to build a realigned road on the current site, due to the railway line on one side and housing estates along part of the other side. Only option is to build a new road to the south of the existing route and railway line, but the presence of the RSPB zone means any new road would need a tunnel. The days of ECC having big PFI projects 25 years ago are long gone.

Not really the case that ECC don't deal with the potholes, albeit their methods can be scrutinised. Like all other authorities there simply is no money to even come close to at least standing still.

NH may be taking control of the section across to Stanford soon, but doubt they will reach any further when most traffic from there on is local.

[Ben302]

used to drive this route a fair bit in the late 90's and the original concrete pavement before it was overlaid with SMA, seemed in fairly good condition. A few places had repairs but was no worse than say Kelvedon on the A12. When it was overlaid, a few lears later and repeatedly since, the joints became more pronounced. Maybe it should get the same treatment as the Chelmsford bypass (removing the top layer of surface and re-grooving the surface)

[Chris5156]

Not really the case that ECC don't deal with the potholes, albeit their methods can be scrutinised. Like all other authorities there simply is no money to even come close to at least standing still.

I think a lot of people still don’t understand how bad things are. We hear a lot about funding for social care, and how solutions keep being promised in Westminster but nothing gets done. What is much less talked about is what’s happening to local authorities as a result.

Here in Hampshire, the County Council now spends north of 80% of its budget on education and social care. That leaves 20% to be divided between social housing, the fire brigade, parks, leisure services, public transport, the running of the council itself and everything else. It’s a wonder potholes get filled in at all. They are warning that they’re about a year from bankruptcy, as are Kent CC and others. I expect Essex are in a similar situation.

A number of big councils have failed in the last few years, of which Birmingham was the latest. A lot was made of their over budget IT system and equal pay claims being made against them, but you can bet Westminster were keen not to discuss the contribution that the lack of social care funding made to the situation.

[c2R]

Not really the case that ECC don't deal with the potholes, albeit their methods can be scrutinised. Like all other authorities there simply is no money to even come close to at least standing still.

I think a lot of people still don’t understand how bad things are. We hear a lot about funding for social care, and how solutions keep being promised in Westminster but nothing gets done. What is much less talked about is what’s happening to local authorities as a result.

Here in Hampshire, the County Council now spends north of 80% of its budget on education and social care. That leaves 20% to be divided between social housing, the fire brigade, parks, leisure services, public transport, the running of the council itself and everything else. It’s a wonder potholes get filled in at all. They are warning that they’re about a year from bankruptcy, as are Kent CC and others. I expect Essex are in a similar situation.

A number of big councils have failed in the last few years, of which Birmingham was the latest. A lot was made of their over budget IT system and equal pay claims being made against them, but you can bet Westminster were keen not to discuss the contribution that the lack of social care funding made to the situation.

There's a list on wikipedia of councils that have issued s.114 notices - there are a lot of councils also looking how to manage unplanned budget shortfalls (e.g. as a result of instability in the energy market, increased staffing costs owing to inflationary pressures, and changes in the taxation system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_114_notice

This report from government makes depressing reading: https://committees.parliament.uk/public ... 9/default/

[Runwell]

used to drive this route a fair bit in the late 90's and the original concrete pavement before it was overlaid with SMA, seemed in fairly good condition. A few places had repairs but was no worse than say Kelvedon on the A12. When it was overlaid, a few lears later and repeatedly since, the joints became more pronounced. Maybe it should get the same treatment as the Chelmsford bypass (removing the top layer of surface and re-grooving the surface)

One of the problems on this section in recent years is a number of concrete slabs, certainly on the eastbound side, had to be replaced under weekend closures. The foundations had weakened, and as a result the concrete slabs began to move under the weight of traffic, and eventually crack. I believe they replaced the slabs with a membrane substance that presumably adapts much easier to movement. I would presume some other slabs are in a similar position. I'm not sure retexturing is a possibility. The drainage is in a very poor state as well and the road often floods. Also not unusual to see piles of sand where the surface has broken up.

[qwertyK]

used to drive this route a fair bit in the late 90's and the original concrete pavement before it was overlaid with SMA, seemed in fairly good condition. A few places had repairs but was no worse than say Kelvedon on the A12. When it was overlaid, a few lears later and repeatedly since, the joints became more pronounced. Maybe it should get the same treatment as the Chelmsford bypass (removing the top layer of surface and re-grooving the surface)

One of the problems on this section in recent years is a number of concrete slabs, certainly on the eastbound side, had to be replaced under weekend closures. The foundations had weakened, and as a result the concrete slabs began to move under the weight of traffic, and eventually crack. I believe they replaced the slabs with a membrane substance that presumably adapts much easier to movement. I would presume some other slabs are in a similar position. I'm not sure retexturing is a possibility. The drainage is in a very poor state as well and the road often floods. Also not unusual to see piles of sand where the surface has broken up.

Are there not any other roads elsewhere similar where it's been built on marsh land etc ?

At rainham I believe it's at least partially elevated

[Phil]

Are there not any other roads elsewhere similar where it's been built on marsh land etc ?

At rainham I believe it's at least partially elevated

Ironically elevated roads across Marshland aren't a problem - because they are supported by a bridge deck mounted on piles driven down to sold geology.

In fact where roads (or railway) are built over unstable ground modern best practice is to build what is know as a ground level bridge - which as its name suggests use piles to support a bridge deck type structure thus avoiding the dodgy ground below taking any of the load.

There are also some housing estates built in a similar manor - piles supporting a concrete raft upon which the buildings are placed.

[Ben302]

Are there not any other roads elsewhere similar where it's been built on marsh land etc ?

At rainham I believe it's at least partially elevated

The A289 in the Medway Tunnel area including the GSJ with Maritime Way was built on a piled concrete foundation owing to the road being below sea level and on a river bed. Evidence of this are the two horizontal expansion joins with in the GSJ and on the western side of the tunnel portal, the latter of which is constantly being relaid and sealed whereas the eastern joint has fared well requiring little maintenance.

[qwertyK]

Are there not any other roads elsewhere similar where it's been built on marsh land etc ?

At rainham I believe it's at least partially elevated

Ironically elevated roads across Marshland aren't a problem - because they are supported by a bridge deck mounted on piles driven down to sold geology.

In fact where roads (or railway) are built over unstable ground modern best practice is to build what is know as a ground level bridge - which as its name suggests use piles to support a bridge deck type structure thus avoiding the dodgy ground below taking any of the load.

There are also some housing estates built in a similar manor - piles supporting a concrete raft upon which the buildings are placed.

Yeah long term I suppose the only way they could probably deal with it is elevating it but the cost would be tremendous not to mention the traffic chaos. Unless they could somehow keep the original road open whilst building above it or to the side of it or something.

[KeithW]

In fact where roads (or railway) are built over unstable ground modern best practice is to build what is know as a ground level bridge - which as its name suggests use piles to support a bridge deck type structure thus avoiding the dodgy ground below taking any of the load.

A technique used rather successfully by George Stephenson on the Liverpool Manchester railway was floating the railway on a bed of bound heather.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chat_Moss

[Bryn666]

Not really the case that ECC don't deal with the potholes, albeit their methods can be scrutinised. Like all other authorities there simply is no money to even come close to at least standing still.

I think a lot of people still don’t understand how bad things are. We hear a lot about funding for social care, and how solutions keep being promised in Westminster but nothing gets done. What is much less talked about is what’s happening to local authorities as a result.

Here in Hampshire, the County Council now spends north of 80% of its budget on education and social care. That leaves 20% to be divided between social housing, the fire brigade, parks, leisure services, public transport, the running of the council itself and everything else. It’s a wonder potholes get filled in at all. They are warning that they’re about a year from bankruptcy, as are Kent CC and others. I expect Essex are in a similar situation.

A number of big councils have failed in the last few years, of which Birmingham was the latest. A lot was made of their over budget IT system and equal pay claims being made against them, but you can bet Westminster were keen not to discuss the contribution that the lack of social care funding made to the situation.

There's a list on wikipedia of councils that have issued s.114 notices - there are a lot of councils also looking how to manage unplanned budget shortfalls (e.g. as a result of instability in the energy market, increased staffing costs owing to inflationary pressures, and changes in the taxation system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_114_notice

This report from government makes depressing reading: https://committees.parliament.uk/public ... 9/default/

Remember localism? The Tories don't, despite it being their flagship policy. They've strangled local authorities to near death and are now confused why everyone's angry about it.

[trickstat]

I think a lot of people still don’t understand how bad things are. We hear a lot about funding for social care, and how solutions keep being promised in Westminster but nothing gets done. What is much less talked about is what’s happening to local authorities as a result.

Here in Hampshire, the County Council now spends north of 80% of its budget on education and social care. That leaves 20% to be divided between social housing, the fire brigade, parks, leisure services, public transport, the running of the council itself and everything else. It’s a wonder potholes get filled in at all. They are warning that they’re about a year from bankruptcy, as are Kent CC and others. I expect Essex are in a similar situation.

A number of big councils have failed in the last few years, of which Birmingham was the latest. A lot was made of their over budget IT system and equal pay claims being made against them, but you can bet Westminster were keen not to discuss the contribution that the lack of social care funding made to the situation.

There's a list on wikipedia of councils that have issued s.114 notices - there are a lot of councils also looking how to manage unplanned budget shortfalls (e.g. as a result of instability in the energy market, increased staffing costs owing to inflationary pressures, and changes in the taxation system) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_114_notice

This report from government makes depressing reading: https://committees.parliament.uk/public ... 9/default/

Remember localism? The Tories don't, despite it being their flagship policy. They've strangled local authorities to near death and are now confused why everyone's angry about it.

To be pedantic, social housing, parks & leisure are district/borough responsibilities when there are 2 tiers.

[WHBM]

NH may be taking control of the section across to Stanford soon, but doubt they will reach any further when most traffic from there on is local.

It's actually a major through long distance route from East London to Colchester and similar. Far more straightforward than A406/M11/M25/A12. I'm surprised after all the expenditure, and long sections of D3, that it is not NH already.

[trickstat]

NH may be taking control of the section across to Stanford soon, but doubt they will reach any further when most traffic from there on is local.

It's actually a major through long distance route from East London to Colchester and similar. Far more straightforward than A406/M11/M25/A12. I'm surprised after all the expenditure, and long sections of D3, that it is not NH already.

I assume the junctions are the main reason that A13/A130 has the edge over A13/M25/A12?

[WHBM]

I assume the junctions are the main reason that A13/A130 has the edge over A13/M25/A12?

It's also notably shorter, and avoids the M25 congestion. If heading NE from London the sections heading SE, all the M25 and the first part of the Chelmsford bypass, are at right-angles to the way you want to go.

[Runwell]

NH may be taking control of the section across to Stanford soon, but doubt they will reach any further when most traffic from there on is local.

It's actually a major through long distance route from East London to Colchester and similar. Far more straightforward than A406/M11/M25/A12. I'm surprised after all the expenditure, and long sections of D3, that it is not NH already.

I'm sure, with Thurrock's major municipal issues, they'd be delighted to offload the rest of their managed sections to NH. Whichever direction you take the route from though, there's never been any inclination to sign the route as a long distance alternative to the A12-M25. Perhaps there will be a rethink when the Fairglen interchange is revamped in the next few years, although I would be surprised. All the revamps to the A13 in the last decade or so have been connected to London Gateway, and not further afield, keeping the investment within Thurrock.

Using A13-A130 avoids the issues at J28. However, the A130 up towards A12 J17 suffers very long queues in rush hour, including a completely inadequate junction that easily gridlocks, and should have been improved when the A130 bypass was constructed. Otherwise it would be a slam dunk no-brainer compared with chancing Brook Street roundabout.

It's ironically this aforementioned section of the A13 that is the one really poor leg now between Lakeside and Howe Green, what with its (westbound) level crossings immediately adjacent to the junction and short exits, regularly the scene of lorries pulling straight out on to the A13. Am very surprised westbound still runs at NSL. Not sure NH would be too chuffed in taking that section on, plus the crumbling Pitsea flyover that has Tesco staff regularly clearing up concrete from the car park.

[qwertyK]

NH may be taking control of the section across to Stanford soon, but doubt they will reach any further when most traffic from there on is local.

It's actually a major through long distance route from East London to Colchester and similar. Far more straightforward than A406/M11/M25/A12. I'm surprised after all the expenditure, and long sections of D3, that it is not NH already.

I'm sure, with Thurrock's major municipal issues, they'd be delighted to offload the rest of their managed sections to NH. Whichever direction you take the route from though, there's never been any inclination to sign the route as a long distance alternative to the A12-M25. Perhaps there will be a rethink when the Fairglen interchange is revamped in the next few years, although I would be surprised. All the revamps to the A13 in the last decade or so have been connected to London Gateway, and not further afield, keeping the investment within Thurrock.

Using A13-A130 avoids the issues at J28. However, the A130 up towards A12 J17 suffers very long queues in rush hour, including a completely inadequate junction that easily gridlocks, and should have been improved when the A130 bypass was constructed. Otherwise it would be a slam dunk no-brainer compared with chancing Brook Street roundabout.

It's ironically this aforementioned section of the A13 that is the one really poor leg now between Lakeside and Howe Green, what with its (westbound) level crossings immediately adjacent to the junction and short exits, regularly the scene of lorries pulling straight out on to the A13. Am very surprised westbound still runs at NSL. Not sure NH would be too chuffed in taking that section on, plus the crumbling Pitsea flyover that has Tesco staff regularly clearing up concrete from the car park.

Oh there's a crumbling flyover too.

Yeah the level crossing always makes me laugh.

When was the section between Stanford and Basildon/Pitsea opened, I can't find it on the wiki.

Long term like I said they could build an elevated section - this could connect quite nicely onto the already elevated section at Pitsea (though from what you describe it sounds like we could need a new flyover), or you have to have the section divert slightly north at Five Bells, skirting the golf course, then building a tunnel of approx 1.7 miles through Pitsea/Vange before coming out at Bowers Gifford and onto the existing alignment.

The money this would take, would not be feasible unless like you say there is a concerted effort made to direct traffic heading towards the M25 onto the A130/A13, along with increased development in the area, and NH taking on the route.