Major Roads Network Consultation
Re: Major Roads Network Consultation
This consultation closes at 11:45pm on 19 March 2018 - I don't think that was mentioned on page one. Any early birds replied yet? Anything to highlight?
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.
-
Steady rider
- Posts: 2749
- Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm
Re: Major Roads Network Consultation
There were 31.3 thousand miles of major road in 2014, making up 12.7 per cent of total road length in Great Britain. By comparison there were 214.5 thousand miles of minor road, making up the remaining 87.3 per cent of total road length.
The consultation suggests about 4000 to 5000 miles of major roads may come into the scheme and receive funding. These roads are already main roads that will be funded to a large extent.
It is targeting say 4.5k of roads from 245k in total.
Many minor roads need urgent repairs, many other A roads may also need improvements. I recall minor roads in the 1960's where in better condition than today. The total spend on roads needs to be examined by the transport select committee.
The consultation suggests about 4000 to 5000 miles of major roads may come into the scheme and receive funding. These roads are already main roads that will be funded to a large extent.
It is targeting say 4.5k of roads from 245k in total.
Many minor roads need urgent repairs, many other A roads may also need improvements. I recall minor roads in the 1960's where in better condition than today. The total spend on roads needs to be examined by the transport select committee.
Re: Major Roads Network Consultation
Steady rider wrote:Looks to be a 45 mins journey by bus. It looks like the numbers /costs issues may not stake up, perhaps? Any cost analysis of the suggested rail option.
Re-opening the rail line to passengers was originally mooted about ten years ago and was going to cost c.£15m. Its now been costed at c.£150m. They need to lay new rails even on the sections that have rail for freight use, because the freight rails can't cope with the speeds of suburban passenger rail use, and they want to re-open/re-build the station at Pill. There will be no stops between Pill and Temple Meads Station in Bristol (which is waay out of the city centre, where I work). There were originally supposed to be regular and frequent trains running on it by now, but no they're not even thinking about breaking ground on it for another couple of years.
Personally, I suspect that after all this, and all the fees paid to consultants, etc, nothing will happen.
Re: Major Roads Network Consultation
This consultation closes Monday night.
The main points I plan to make are:
1) An objective that recognises the need for cycling infrastructure on long-distance routes. For instance, Guidance on Walking and Cycling to be included, comparable to the Strategic Network, but there be some workable process to enforce it, quoting Highways England A63 proposed ban of cycling as an example of current weakness. These points come under the Proposal's objective of supporting all users.
2) A plan to keep large motor vehicles on the Strategic and Major Road Networks as much as possible. I'd like to see Local Authorities to be expected to monitor (via automatic number plate recognition) motor vehicle usage of 'rat runs' and enforce restrictions on such abuse. I don't see anything in the Transport Investment Strategy that supports the idea controlling inappropriate use of small roads; the Proposal's 'Support Economic Growth and Rebalancing' objective doesn't do it. The objective 'Support the SRN' in the Proposal, hints at the other direction, in that it observes the current 'seamless' passage of users between the current Local and the Strategic Network.
The main points I plan to make are:
1) An objective that recognises the need for cycling infrastructure on long-distance routes. For instance, Guidance on Walking and Cycling to be included, comparable to the Strategic Network, but there be some workable process to enforce it, quoting Highways England A63 proposed ban of cycling as an example of current weakness. These points come under the Proposal's objective of supporting all users.
2) A plan to keep large motor vehicles on the Strategic and Major Road Networks as much as possible. I'd like to see Local Authorities to be expected to monitor (via automatic number plate recognition) motor vehicle usage of 'rat runs' and enforce restrictions on such abuse. I don't see anything in the Transport Investment Strategy that supports the idea controlling inappropriate use of small roads; the Proposal's 'Support Economic Growth and Rebalancing' objective doesn't do it. The objective 'Support the SRN' in the Proposal, hints at the other direction, in that it observes the current 'seamless' passage of users between the current Local and the Strategic Network.