Southern Link Road - work begins in earnest next week to beat the notorious traffic jams

Malvern Gazette: Cllr Simon Geraghty: "Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option". Cllr Simon Geraghty: "Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option".

A MULTI-MILLION pound improvement scheme on notoriously congested road in Worcester is to begin in earnest next week.

Work on the plan to improve and dual the entire length of one of the busiest routes in Worcestershire - the A4440 Southern Link in Worcester - will step up a gear.

An £8million scheme, which will upgrade the Ketch roundabout and dual-track the carriageway towards the Norton roundabout over the next 12 months to cut congestion and journey times, began a few weeks ago with preparatory works but more extensive works are set to start on Sunday (April 27).

Excavation, removal and surfacing of the current roundabout and splitter islands will be taking place over the next few weeks. Existing lighting columns will also be replaced with new tower lights, which are being positioned to reduce any impact to neighbouring properties.

Whilst this work takes place the width of lanes will be reduced with every effort being made to keep any disruption to motorists to a minimum.

Originally built in the 1980s, the Southern Link Road is one of the most heavily used in the county and the predicted growth in travel (particularly by car) is expected to result in a 30 to 40 per cent increase in journey times if nothing was done through the Powick to Whittington section of the route by 2026, which currently takes around 13-and-a-half minutes during the morning rush-hour periods.

The longer term vision, identified in the Worcestershire's Strategic Economic Plan (SEP), which is now with Central Government under consideration for funding would see the entire length of the route dual-tracked from Powick island through to the Whittington Roundabout, including the Carrington Bridge section.

Cllr Simon Geraghty, county council deputy leader and cabinet member for economy, skills and infrastructure, said: "The Southern Link Road is one of the busiest routes in Worcestershire and improving it is a key priority, which has now also been identified through the county's strategic economic plan submitted to central Government.

"With more than 30,000 vehicles using the A4440 each weekday and data showing a worsening situation over the coming years, sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option if we want to ensure Worcestershire is 'Open for Business'. We have a clear longer-term vision to dual-track the entire length of the route up to the Whittington Roundabout and this important first stage will bring immediate benefits when finished, whilst also forming part of the wider plan.

"Whilst the improvements works take place everything will be done to keep any disruption to motorists and residents to a minimum, however it's inevitable that some inconvenience will be experienced as things progress. "I'd like to thank people in advance for their patience and understanding whilst this work takes place."

Following discussions with residents and a 12-week engagement exercise undertaken earlier this year a number of mitigation measures have been agreed to minimise any impact for those living nearby. These include earth bunds, acoustic fencing to reduce noise and tree planting.

Anyone looking for further information can log on to www.worcestershire.gov.uk/ketch.

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:25pm Thu 24 Apr 14

yamoto says...

will it really improve it or more waste of money, untill northern link road completed we will always suffer !!!!!!!!
will it really improve it or more waste of money, untill northern link road completed we will always suffer !!!!!!!! yamoto
  • Score: 1

6:38pm Thu 24 Apr 14

lilboo says...

Oh god it's going to be chaos, dreading it! Why couldn't this work have been sysrted during the Easter half term or is that too simple a thought?
Oh god it's going to be chaos, dreading it! Why couldn't this work have been sysrted during the Easter half term or is that too simple a thought? lilboo
  • Score: -1

6:43pm Thu 24 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

With all the new development that's planned in the Norton area a big concern has surely to be that unless good at grade or grade separated crossings for pedestrians and cyclists are provided the Southern Link, like the A46 around Evesham, will form an all but impenetrable barrier for journeys into the City but other than the car.

My only hope is that the County Council will do more than pay lip service to their sustainable transport, environmental and public health policies in making sure the new development and wonderful countryside beyond it, is accessible by foot and bike. If integrated as part of the overall scheme any additional costs are marginal and will be more than paid back in savings in wider savings that can be realised by reducing rather than adding to traffic congestion in the City and the health benefits that can be gained form encouraging active travel and a reduction in local noise and air pollution that the existing and future residents living in the area will have to face.
With all the new development that's planned in the Norton area a big concern has surely to be that unless good at grade or grade separated crossings for pedestrians and cyclists are provided the Southern Link, like the A46 around Evesham, will form an all but impenetrable barrier for journeys into the City but other than the car. My only hope is that the County Council will do more than pay lip service to their sustainable transport, environmental and public health policies in making sure the new development and wonderful countryside beyond it, is accessible by foot and bike. If integrated as part of the overall scheme any additional costs are marginal and will be more than paid back in savings in wider savings that can be realised by reducing rather than adding to traffic congestion in the City and the health benefits that can be gained form encouraging active travel and a reduction in local noise and air pollution that the existing and future residents living in the area will have to face. i-cycle
  • Score: -3

7:06pm Thu 24 Apr 14

DeBrian Thronker says...

i-cycle wrote:
With all the new development that's planned in the Norton area a big concern has surely to be that unless good at grade or grade separated crossings for pedestrians and cyclists are provided the Southern Link, like the A46 around Evesham, will form an all but impenetrable barrier for journeys into the City but other than the car.

My only hope is that the County Council will do more than pay lip service to their sustainable transport, environmental and public health policies in making sure the new development and wonderful countryside beyond it, is accessible by foot and bike. If integrated as part of the overall scheme any additional costs are marginal and will be more than paid back in savings in wider savings that can be realised by reducing rather than adding to traffic congestion in the City and the health benefits that can be gained form encouraging active travel and a reduction in local noise and air pollution that the existing and future residents living in the area will have to face.
Have I seen you in these comment sections before? Could swear I recognise your name...
[quote][p][bold]i-cycle[/bold] wrote: With all the new development that's planned in the Norton area a big concern has surely to be that unless good at grade or grade separated crossings for pedestrians and cyclists are provided the Southern Link, like the A46 around Evesham, will form an all but impenetrable barrier for journeys into the City but other than the car. My only hope is that the County Council will do more than pay lip service to their sustainable transport, environmental and public health policies in making sure the new development and wonderful countryside beyond it, is accessible by foot and bike. If integrated as part of the overall scheme any additional costs are marginal and will be more than paid back in savings in wider savings that can be realised by reducing rather than adding to traffic congestion in the City and the health benefits that can be gained form encouraging active travel and a reduction in local noise and air pollution that the existing and future residents living in the area will have to face.[/p][/quote]Have I seen you in these comment sections before? Could swear I recognise your name... DeBrian Thronker
  • Score: 7

7:57pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Andy_R says...

lilboo wrote:
Oh god it's going to be chaos, dreading it! Why couldn't this work have been sysrted during the Easter half term or is that too simple a thought?
Nobody has really explained why, but the council are saying It's going to take a whole YEAR to put down a bit of tarmac, so you can expect this to last until at least next easter half term.
[quote][p][bold]lilboo[/bold] wrote: Oh god it's going to be chaos, dreading it! Why couldn't this work have been sysrted during the Easter half term or is that too simple a thought?[/p][/quote]Nobody has really explained why, but the council are saying It's going to take a whole YEAR to put down a bit of tarmac, so you can expect this to last until at least next easter half term. Andy_R
  • Score: 5

8:40pm Thu 24 Apr 14

gmoore1207 says...

how can you beat traffic jams when dual carriageway goes on to single track bridge these people are muppets stop wasting money do the northern link road cant do that to many top people live at bevery
how can you beat traffic jams when dual carriageway goes on to single track bridge these people are muppets stop wasting money do the northern link road cant do that to many top people live at bevery gmoore1207
  • Score: 6

8:48pm Thu 24 Apr 14

pudniw_gib says...

It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes.
I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.
It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes. I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project. pudniw_gib
  • Score: -10

9:13pm Thu 24 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

pudniw_gib wrote:
It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes.
I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.
Walking is also a great way of getting around for those shorter journeys or as a way of getting to public transport. That's why the County and City Council need to pay greater attention to ensuring we have a better integrated infrastructure, but also better planned development that means we are not as car reliant. Meanwhile the City are about to approve sites along the M5 corridor that go completely a giants their own planning policies and are all but impossible to get to without getting in a car.
[quote][p][bold]pudniw_gib[/bold] wrote: It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes. I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.[/p][/quote]Walking is also a great way of getting around for those shorter journeys or as a way of getting to public transport. That's why the County and City Council need to pay greater attention to ensuring we have a better integrated infrastructure, but also better planned development that means we are not as car reliant. Meanwhile the City are about to approve sites along the M5 corridor that go completely a giants their own planning policies and are all but impossible to get to without getting in a car. i-cycle
  • Score: -14

9:35pm Thu 24 Apr 14

The Doosra says...

gmoore1207 wrote:
how can you beat traffic jams when dual carriageway goes on to single track bridge these people are muppets stop wasting money do the northern link road cant do that to many top people live at bevery
English is not your first language then?
[quote][p][bold]gmoore1207[/bold] wrote: how can you beat traffic jams when dual carriageway goes on to single track bridge these people are muppets stop wasting money do the northern link road cant do that to many top people live at bevery[/p][/quote]English is not your first language then? The Doosra
  • Score: 0

9:44pm Thu 24 Apr 14

Andy_R says...

pudniw_gib wrote:
It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes.
I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.
I'm amazed how many people think that cars magically appear when roads are built. The real world doesn't work like a cargo cult, and traffic from the motorway is never going to be replaced by bikes. What we need are enough roads in the right places, so that people can get to where they want to go without delays. You are right about one thing though, this particular scheme is a total waste of money, but that's because the single lane bridge is the problem, not the roundabout, and the whole scheme will need to be dug up and re-done in as little as a couple of years time if the council gets the money they have applied for to dual the bridge.
[quote][p][bold]pudniw_gib[/bold] wrote: It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes. I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.[/p][/quote]I'm amazed how many people think that cars magically appear when roads are built. The real world doesn't work like a cargo cult, and traffic from the motorway is never going to be replaced by bikes. What we need are enough roads in the right places, so that people can get to where they want to go without delays. You are right about one thing though, this particular scheme is a total waste of money, but that's because the single lane bridge is the problem, not the roundabout, and the whole scheme will need to be dug up and re-done in as little as a couple of years time if the council gets the money they have applied for to dual the bridge. Andy_R
  • Score: 1

10:18pm Thu 24 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

Andy_R wrote:
pudniw_gib wrote:
It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes.
I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.
I'm amazed how many people think that cars magically appear when roads are built. The real world doesn't work like a cargo cult, and traffic from the motorway is never going to be replaced by bikes. What we need are enough roads in the right places, so that people can get to where they want to go without delays. You are right about one thing though, this particular scheme is a total waste of money, but that's because the single lane bridge is the problem, not the roundabout, and the whole scheme will need to be dug up and re-done in as little as a couple of years time if the council gets the money they have applied for to dual the bridge.
No one is saying that bikes will replace Motorway traffic. 60+% of all car journeys are less than 5 miles. The average distance of each car journey is not much more.

The dulling of the southern link is mainly being paid for by funding from developers that will substantially increase the number of households and population of the city. This means more cars. These will need to travel on the already congested City road network to get to work, shops, schools and other facilities thereby further adding to the congestion, parking and pollution problems in the city.

Yes we can build even more roads and car parks to cope with the additional pressures. It will cost £ millions.

There is however a better and cheaper way - make it easier to get around by foot, bike and public transport. Its what 'progressive' cities around the world have started to do.

With our ageing population and the recent dramatic drop in 18-25 year olds that don't have a licence, let alone a car either out of personal choice or an inability to afford it there's a reasonable chance that car ownership levels may drop anyway. The problem is that if you haven't got a car or can't afford one how are you going to get around in a city that is planned assuming everyone has access to a car.

The County Council and LEP are pushing for the dualling of the southern link on economic grounds. The reality is that its dependence on the city's expansion will increase congestion within the rest of the City and by assuming all have access to a car it means particularly the younger workforce they will need can't get to work unless alternative means of getting there are provided.

I sense the problem is that the key decision makers at the City and County are themselves car dependent and therefore can't see that a multi modal and integrated transport approach is what is really needed.

This isn't an anti-car strategy, but a pragmatic response to reducing congestion and the associated problems it brings. All road users will benefit.
[quote][p][bold]Andy_R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pudniw_gib[/bold] wrote: It wont work, road widening just leads to more cars and so on... We need a proper transport policy that encourages people onto public transport and bikes. I wonder what could have been done in this regard with the money that is going to be wasted in this project.[/p][/quote]I'm amazed how many people think that cars magically appear when roads are built. The real world doesn't work like a cargo cult, and traffic from the motorway is never going to be replaced by bikes. What we need are enough roads in the right places, so that people can get to where they want to go without delays. You are right about one thing though, this particular scheme is a total waste of money, but that's because the single lane bridge is the problem, not the roundabout, and the whole scheme will need to be dug up and re-done in as little as a couple of years time if the council gets the money they have applied for to dual the bridge.[/p][/quote]No one is saying that bikes will replace Motorway traffic. 60+% of all car journeys are less than 5 miles. The average distance of each car journey is not much more. The dulling of the southern link is mainly being paid for by funding from developers that will substantially increase the number of households and population of the city. This means more cars. These will need to travel on the already congested City road network to get to work, shops, schools and other facilities thereby further adding to the congestion, parking and pollution problems in the city. Yes we can build even more roads and car parks to cope with the additional pressures. It will cost £ millions. There is however a better and cheaper way - make it easier to get around by foot, bike and public transport. Its what 'progressive' cities around the world have started to do. With our ageing population and the recent dramatic drop in 18-25 year olds that don't have a licence, let alone a car either out of personal choice or an inability to afford it there's a reasonable chance that car ownership levels may drop anyway. The problem is that if you haven't got a car or can't afford one how are you going to get around in a city that is planned assuming everyone has access to a car. The County Council and LEP are pushing for the dualling of the southern link on economic grounds. The reality is that its dependence on the city's expansion will increase congestion within the rest of the City and by assuming all have access to a car it means particularly the younger workforce they will need can't get to work unless alternative means of getting there are provided. I sense the problem is that the key decision makers at the City and County are themselves car dependent and therefore can't see that a multi modal and integrated transport approach is what is really needed. This isn't an anti-car strategy, but a pragmatic response to reducing congestion and the associated problems it brings. All road users will benefit. i-cycle
  • Score: -13

11:48pm Thu 24 Apr 14

jdg says...

Putting a short section of dual carriageway, which will funnel into a roundabout onto a single lane bridge does not seem logical. When vehicles come off the Whittington roundabout, where are they going? Few ever seem to filter off at the Ketch towards Kempsey, so therefore go either over the bridge or into Worcester.They are either in the single lane section to Powick or hit another roundabout and a 30 mph limit. Both exits slow traffic, so I can not see how a dual section will ever improve that.
Putting a short section of dual carriageway, which will funnel into a roundabout onto a single lane bridge does not seem logical. When vehicles come off the Whittington roundabout, where are they going? Few ever seem to filter off at the Ketch towards Kempsey, so therefore go either over the bridge or into Worcester.They are either in the single lane section to Powick or hit another roundabout and a 30 mph limit. Both exits slow traffic, so I can not see how a dual section will ever improve that. jdg
  • Score: 21

11:59pm Thu 24 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

jdg wrote:
Putting a short section of dual carriageway, which will funnel into a roundabout onto a single lane bridge does not seem logical. When vehicles come off the Whittington roundabout, where are they going? Few ever seem to filter off at the Ketch towards Kempsey, so therefore go either over the bridge or into Worcester.They are either in the single lane section to Powick or hit another roundabout and a 30 mph limit. Both exits slow traffic, so I can not see how a dual section will ever improve that.
The Highways staff at the 'consultation' also had to admit that in designing the current project they hadn't taken into account the additional load on the highway network that all the planned development for Worcester would create.
[quote][p][bold]jdg[/bold] wrote: Putting a short section of dual carriageway, which will funnel into a roundabout onto a single lane bridge does not seem logical. When vehicles come off the Whittington roundabout, where are they going? Few ever seem to filter off at the Ketch towards Kempsey, so therefore go either over the bridge or into Worcester.They are either in the single lane section to Powick or hit another roundabout and a 30 mph limit. Both exits slow traffic, so I can not see how a dual section will ever improve that.[/p][/quote]The Highways staff at the 'consultation' also had to admit that in designing the current project they hadn't taken into account the additional load on the highway network that all the planned development for Worcester would create. i-cycle
  • Score: -1

12:19am Fri 25 Apr 14

Andy_R says...

in reply to i-cycle (the post was getting a bit long to quote all of it)...

The A4440 is part of an unfinished out of town ring road, so it's rarely used for short journeys, hardly anyone commutes from Whittington to St. Pauls! The traffic using it is far more likely to be going from the motorway to Malvern - not a journey that could feasibly be done by bike or on foot.

The same goes for traffic from the new Norton housing estate, it's too far from Worcester to realistically walk or cycle, surely even you would admit that hardly anyone who lives there will be pedalling up the huge hill on London road with a week's shopping in a basket! Any money spent on a cycle route going that way would be wasted.
in reply to i-cycle (the post was getting a bit long to quote all of it)... The A4440 is part of an unfinished out of town ring road, so it's rarely used for short journeys, hardly anyone commutes from Whittington to St. Pauls! The traffic using it is far more likely to be going from the motorway to Malvern - not a journey that could feasibly be done by bike or on foot. The same goes for traffic from the new Norton housing estate, it's too far from Worcester to realistically walk or cycle, surely even you would admit that hardly anyone who lives there will be pedalling up the huge hill on London road with a week's shopping in a basket! Any money spent on a cycle route going that way would be wasted. Andy_R
  • Score: 14

12:41am Fri 25 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

Andy_R wrote:
in reply to i-cycle (the post was getting a bit long to quote all of it)...

The A4440 is part of an unfinished out of town ring road, so it's rarely used for short journeys, hardly anyone commutes from Whittington to St. Pauls! The traffic using it is far more likely to be going from the motorway to Malvern - not a journey that could feasibly be done by bike or on foot.

The same goes for traffic from the new Norton housing estate, it's too far from Worcester to realistically walk or cycle, surely even you would admit that hardly anyone who lives there will be pedalling up the huge hill on London road with a week's shopping in a basket! Any money spent on a cycle route going that way would be wasted.
As previous;y stated I mostly agree with your first point. The majority is bypassing the City to go elsewhere.

Obviously you're not a cyclist or you would realise that there are in fact quite a few who cycle between Malvern and Worcester each day and even more that use the flatter routes through St Peter's and on to the City Centre and even up Redhill Lane to the top of London Road. No they won't be doing their weekly shop, like me I use the car for that.

I think someone recently quoted a figure of about of a quarter of car journeys being less than a mile. Even 'novice' cyclists would cover that sort of distance in about 10 minutes. I usually get to the other side of the City in less than 20 minutes. Its certainly an easy and pleasant way of building in the exercise we all need to keep ourselves fit and healthy. As has been found in other cities, if better and safer routes are provided then more will use them. Indeed as evidenced locally with the significant increase of cycling along the riverside since the Diglis Bridge was built.
[quote][p][bold]Andy_R[/bold] wrote: in reply to i-cycle (the post was getting a bit long to quote all of it)... The A4440 is part of an unfinished out of town ring road, so it's rarely used for short journeys, hardly anyone commutes from Whittington to St. Pauls! The traffic using it is far more likely to be going from the motorway to Malvern - not a journey that could feasibly be done by bike or on foot. The same goes for traffic from the new Norton housing estate, it's too far from Worcester to realistically walk or cycle, surely even you would admit that hardly anyone who lives there will be pedalling up the huge hill on London road with a week's shopping in a basket! Any money spent on a cycle route going that way would be wasted.[/p][/quote]As previous;y stated I mostly agree with your first point. The majority is bypassing the City to go elsewhere. Obviously you're not a cyclist or you would realise that there are in fact quite a few who cycle between Malvern and Worcester each day and even more that use the flatter routes through St Peter's and on to the City Centre and even up Redhill Lane to the top of London Road. No they won't be doing their weekly shop, like me I use the car for that. I think someone recently quoted a figure of about of a quarter of car journeys being less than a mile. Even 'novice' cyclists would cover that sort of distance in about 10 minutes. I usually get to the other side of the City in less than 20 minutes. Its certainly an easy and pleasant way of building in the exercise we all need to keep ourselves fit and healthy. As has been found in other cities, if better and safer routes are provided then more will use them. Indeed as evidenced locally with the significant increase of cycling along the riverside since the Diglis Bridge was built. i-cycle
  • Score: -6

1:00am Fri 25 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

"Simon says" Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option. But that is exactly what this little CONservative emperor is doing by continuously ignoring the most glaringly obvious need for the NORTERN LINK.
There just has to be a personal, political, or blind ignorance reason why Geraghty continuously supports spending many £millions on the Southern side and nothing on the vital Northern Link.
He needs publicly challenging.
"Simon says" Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option. But that is exactly what this little CONservative emperor is doing by continuously ignoring the most glaringly obvious need for the NORTERN LINK. There just has to be a personal, political, or blind ignorance reason why Geraghty continuously supports spending many £millions on the Southern side and nothing on the vital Northern Link. He needs publicly challenging. Jabbadad
  • Score: 9

9:03am Fri 25 Apr 14

Pomygranit says...

Jabbadad wrote:
"Simon says" Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option. But that is exactly what this little CONservative emperor is doing by continuously ignoring the most glaringly obvious need for the NORTERN LINK.
There just has to be a personal, political, or blind ignorance reason why Geraghty continuously supports spending many £millions on the Southern side and nothing on the vital Northern Link.
He needs publicly challenging.
All Geraghty is interested in is placating his Tory friends in Claines and he and Hardman will not say anything when Malvern Hills build on Crown East therefore ending any chance on a Northern Ring Road.

Geraghty is a waste of space does not represent the views of his constituents. Vote him out so he has to get a job (if he knows what one is)
Takes his expenses and does **** all.
[quote][p][bold]Jabbadad[/bold] wrote: "Simon says" Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option. But that is exactly what this little CONservative emperor is doing by continuously ignoring the most glaringly obvious need for the NORTERN LINK. There just has to be a personal, political, or blind ignorance reason why Geraghty continuously supports spending many £millions on the Southern side and nothing on the vital Northern Link. He needs publicly challenging.[/p][/quote]All Geraghty is interested in is placating his Tory friends in Claines and he and Hardman will not say anything when Malvern Hills build on Crown East therefore ending any chance on a Northern Ring Road. Geraghty is a waste of space does not represent the views of his constituents. Vote him out so he has to get a job (if he knows what one is) Takes his expenses and does **** all. Pomygranit
  • Score: -4

10:33am Fri 25 Apr 14

High Time says...

Pomygranit wrote:
Jabbadad wrote:
"Simon says" Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option. But that is exactly what this little CONservative emperor is doing by continuously ignoring the most glaringly obvious need for the NORTERN LINK.
There just has to be a personal, political, or blind ignorance reason why Geraghty continuously supports spending many £millions on the Southern side and nothing on the vital Northern Link.
He needs publicly challenging.
All Geraghty is interested in is placating his Tory friends in Claines and he and Hardman will not say anything when Malvern Hills build on Crown East therefore ending any chance on a Northern Ring Road.

Geraghty is a waste of space does not represent the views of his constituents. Vote him out so he has to get a job (if he knows what one is)
Takes his expenses and does **** all.
Nothing personal here then.
[quote][p][bold]Pomygranit[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jabbadad[/bold] wrote: "Simon says" Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option. But that is exactly what this little CONservative emperor is doing by continuously ignoring the most glaringly obvious need for the NORTERN LINK. There just has to be a personal, political, or blind ignorance reason why Geraghty continuously supports spending many £millions on the Southern side and nothing on the vital Northern Link. He needs publicly challenging.[/p][/quote]All Geraghty is interested in is placating his Tory friends in Claines and he and Hardman will not say anything when Malvern Hills build on Crown East therefore ending any chance on a Northern Ring Road. Geraghty is a waste of space does not represent the views of his constituents. Vote him out so he has to get a job (if he knows what one is) Takes his expenses and does **** all.[/p][/quote]Nothing personal here then. High Time
  • Score: 8

10:37am Fri 25 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Here here, but now they have the power of Dr Brian Gladman who has a petition supported by Robin Walker (no colusion there then with Graghty & Co) to continue to spend more money in the South.
WHAT ABOUT THE NORT of the City ?
We Need a petition on The Northern By Pass I will willingly join in on this campaign wonder whether Robin would sign that.??????i.
Here here, but now they have the power of Dr Brian Gladman who has a petition supported by Robin Walker (no colusion there then with Graghty & Co) to continue to spend more money in the South. WHAT ABOUT THE NORT of the City ? We Need a petition on The Northern By Pass I will willingly join in on this campaign wonder whether Robin would sign that.??????i. Jabbadad
  • Score: -6

10:46am Fri 25 Apr 14

CJH says...

The landed gentry of Bevere don't want to have us mere mortals invading their territory. I say stuff 'em. Do it anyway. Time for a revolution - anyone got a guillotine? ;-)
The landed gentry of Bevere don't want to have us mere mortals invading their territory. I say stuff 'em. Do it anyway. Time for a revolution - anyone got a guillotine? ;-) CJH
  • Score: 3

11:33am Fri 25 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

Jabbadad, It is very easy to start a petition and I encourage you to do this if you believe that there is strong support for completing the Worcester ring road. I don't personally see the two schemes as contradictory so I would be happy to support such a petition after I finish with my current one.

But I don't believe we can complete the Worcester ring road in a timescale that is capable of solving the problems caused _now_ by lack of capacity on the southern link road (A4440).

Not only will the cost be a great deal higher but it has to be built across rural land west and north of the city and this is certain to lead to huge opposition whatever route is suggested. It is also very clear that many in the north of the city don't want this to happen. So, even with a great deal of support, which I hope it would gain, I really cannot see this happening in the foreseeable future.

In contrast, improving the southern link road can be completed in a timescale that can impact on our current traffic problems. Moreover, since this is largely a 'brown field' development, it will be subject to far fewer objections.

In my view, given what is now happening, there is absolutely no doubt that the southern link road will become a dual carriageway, the only question being 'when?'. But what we are now seeing is the start of a whole series of of 'piecemeal' improvements that will cause very serious disruption over the next decade or more without ever providing an effective solution.

What is happening now reminds me of what my first boss said to me about government planning in the 1960s: "You will find that there is never the time nor the money to do anything properly, but there is always time and money to do it twice".

I started my petition because I wan't to avoid this - we need to do the job properly or not do it at all.
Jabbadad, It is very easy to start a petition and I encourage you to do this if you believe that there is strong support for completing the Worcester ring road. I don't personally see the two schemes as contradictory so I would be happy to support such a petition after I finish with my current one. But I don't believe we can complete the Worcester ring road in a timescale that is capable of solving the problems caused _now_ by lack of capacity on the southern link road (A4440). Not only will the cost be a great deal higher but it has to be built across rural land west and north of the city and this is certain to lead to huge opposition whatever route is suggested. It is also very clear that many in the north of the city don't want this to happen. So, even with a great deal of support, which I hope it would gain, I really cannot see this happening in the foreseeable future. In contrast, improving the southern link road can be completed in a timescale that can impact on our current traffic problems. Moreover, since this is largely a 'brown field' development, it will be subject to far fewer objections. In my view, given what is now happening, there is absolutely no doubt that the southern link road will become a dual carriageway, the only question being 'when?'. But what we are now seeing is the start of a whole series of of 'piecemeal' improvements that will cause very serious disruption over the next decade or more without ever providing an effective solution. What is happening now reminds me of what my first boss said to me about government planning in the 1960s: "You will find that there is never the time nor the money to do anything properly, but there is always time and money to do it twice". I started my petition because I wan't to avoid this - we need to do the job properly or not do it at all. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 3

11:39am Fri 25 Apr 14

skychip says...

Still haven't found out why the County Council is so against putting a Northern link road in. Would be good if someone could give us an answer.
Still haven't found out why the County Council is so against putting a Northern link road in. Would be good if someone could give us an answer. skychip
  • Score: -1

11:43am Fri 25 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

skychip wrote:
Still haven't found out why the County Council is so against putting a Northern link road in. Would be good if someone could give us an answer.
Can't afford it!
Grid lock at M5 Jtn 6?
[quote][p][bold]skychip[/bold] wrote: Still haven't found out why the County Council is so against putting a Northern link road in. Would be good if someone could give us an answer.[/p][/quote]Can't afford it! Grid lock at M5 Jtn 6? i-cycle
  • Score: 3

1:02pm Fri 25 Apr 14

TheRealFacts says...

Brian Gladman wrote:
Jabbadad, It is very easy to start a petition and I encourage you to do this if you believe that there is strong support for completing the Worcester ring road. I don't personally see the two schemes as contradictory so I would be happy to support such a petition after I finish with my current one.

But I don't believe we can complete the Worcester ring road in a timescale that is capable of solving the problems caused _now_ by lack of capacity on the southern link road (A4440).

Not only will the cost be a great deal higher but it has to be built across rural land west and north of the city and this is certain to lead to huge opposition whatever route is suggested. It is also very clear that many in the north of the city don't want this to happen. So, even with a great deal of support, which I hope it would gain, I really cannot see this happening in the foreseeable future.

In contrast, improving the southern link road can be completed in a timescale that can impact on our current traffic problems. Moreover, since this is largely a 'brown field' development, it will be subject to far fewer objections.

In my view, given what is now happening, there is absolutely no doubt that the southern link road will become a dual carriageway, the only question being 'when?'. But what we are now seeing is the start of a whole series of of 'piecemeal' improvements that will cause very serious disruption over the next decade or more without ever providing an effective solution.

What is happening now reminds me of what my first boss said to me about government planning in the 1960s: "You will find that there is never the time nor the money to do anything properly, but there is always time and money to do it twice".

I started my petition because I wan't to avoid this - we need to do the job properly or not do it at all.
"But I don't believe we can complete the Worcester ring road in a timescale that is capable of solving the problems caused _now_ by lack of capacity on the southern link road (A4440)."

What road do you think people travel on from Malvern to Kidderminster etc? The southern link road. During the morning rush hour, more traffic drives over the Carrington bridge from Malvern than from anywhere else. Do you think they are all going to work somewhere along the motorway or near Warndon Villages?

Obviously not, instead of risking the long delays around the pitiful one way systems in the town centre, people use the ring road to head to the north.

Complete the ring road - reduce the need for extra capacity on the southern link road.

It is so simple it scares me that some people are in charge of projects like this.
[quote][p][bold]Brian Gladman[/bold] wrote: Jabbadad, It is very easy to start a petition and I encourage you to do this if you believe that there is strong support for completing the Worcester ring road. I don't personally see the two schemes as contradictory so I would be happy to support such a petition after I finish with my current one. But I don't believe we can complete the Worcester ring road in a timescale that is capable of solving the problems caused _now_ by lack of capacity on the southern link road (A4440). Not only will the cost be a great deal higher but it has to be built across rural land west and north of the city and this is certain to lead to huge opposition whatever route is suggested. It is also very clear that many in the north of the city don't want this to happen. So, even with a great deal of support, which I hope it would gain, I really cannot see this happening in the foreseeable future. In contrast, improving the southern link road can be completed in a timescale that can impact on our current traffic problems. Moreover, since this is largely a 'brown field' development, it will be subject to far fewer objections. In my view, given what is now happening, there is absolutely no doubt that the southern link road will become a dual carriageway, the only question being 'when?'. But what we are now seeing is the start of a whole series of of 'piecemeal' improvements that will cause very serious disruption over the next decade or more without ever providing an effective solution. What is happening now reminds me of what my first boss said to me about government planning in the 1960s: "You will find that there is never the time nor the money to do anything properly, but there is always time and money to do it twice". I started my petition because I wan't to avoid this - we need to do the job properly or not do it at all.[/p][/quote]"But I don't believe we can complete the Worcester ring road in a timescale that is capable of solving the problems caused _now_ by lack of capacity on the southern link road (A4440)." What road do you think people travel on from Malvern to Kidderminster etc? The southern link road. During the morning rush hour, more traffic drives over the Carrington bridge from Malvern than from anywhere else. Do you think they are all going to work somewhere along the motorway or near Warndon Villages? Obviously not, instead of risking the long delays around the pitiful one way systems in the town centre, people use the ring road to head to the north. Complete the ring road - reduce the need for extra capacity on the southern link road. It is so simple it scares me that some people are in charge of projects like this. TheRealFacts
  • Score: -1

2:13pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

Yes, if it was deliverable in the foreseeable future, completing the ring road would be an alternative (end even better) way of solving the problems caused by lack of capacity on the southern link road.

But for reasons I have already given, I don't believe that this is feasible in the foreseeable future so dualling the southern link road remains the only practical solution to our current traffic problems.

And, given what is now happening, it seems to me that "the powers that be" have come to the same conclusion. My concern now is to get it done properly.
Yes, if it was deliverable in the foreseeable future, completing the ring road would be an alternative (end even better) way of solving the problems caused by lack of capacity on the southern link road. But for reasons I have already given, I don't believe that this is feasible in the foreseeable future so dualling the southern link road remains the only practical solution to our current traffic problems. And, given what is now happening, it seems to me that "the powers that be" have come to the same conclusion. My concern now is to get it done properly. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 6

2:16pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Dr Gladman, don't know where you were when the Southern Link Road was being proposed during the late 1970s and early 1980s, but there was an uproar but Geraghty and his cronies backed this scheme and over ruled the people, and again with the following widening behind Kilbury Drive, but again Geraghty pushed on. It only seems that when the Northern Link Road comes to the fore that they Geraghty & Co go quiet. The initial figures / estimates being mentioed were by today's costs very affordable. So Geraghty needs to explain why he is so adamantly opposed to the Northern Link Road. Could well be as said that CONservative cronies live en-route, or even Geraghty himself might be slightly affected? The whole public apart from CONservative NIMBYS know this County / West Midlands need a Northern Link Road.The CONservatives neeed to come clean over this issue.
Dr Gladman, don't know where you were when the Southern Link Road was being proposed during the late 1970s and early 1980s, but there was an uproar but Geraghty and his cronies backed this scheme and over ruled the people, and again with the following widening behind Kilbury Drive, but again Geraghty pushed on. It only seems that when the Northern Link Road comes to the fore that they Geraghty & Co go quiet. The initial figures / estimates being mentioed were by today's costs very affordable. So Geraghty needs to explain why he is so adamantly opposed to the Northern Link Road. Could well be as said that CONservative cronies live en-route, or even Geraghty himself might be slightly affected? The whole public apart from CONservative NIMBYS know this County / West Midlands need a Northern Link Road.The CONservatives neeed to come clean over this issue. Jabbadad
  • Score: -7

2:56pm Fri 25 Apr 14

TheRealFacts says...

Brian Gladman wrote:
Yes, if it was deliverable in the foreseeable future, completing the ring road would be an alternative (end even better) way of solving the problems caused by lack of capacity on the southern link road.

But for reasons I have already given, I don't believe that this is feasible in the foreseeable future so dualling the southern link road remains the only practical solution to our current traffic problems.

And, given what is now happening, it seems to me that "the powers that be" have come to the same conclusion. My concern now is to get it done properly.
But you are totally missing the point.. putting a stretch of Dual track in between two single track roads will not reduce any congestion! The bottleneck is not the stretch between the ketch roundabout and the norton roundabout!
[quote][p][bold]Brian Gladman[/bold] wrote: Yes, if it was deliverable in the foreseeable future, completing the ring road would be an alternative (end even better) way of solving the problems caused by lack of capacity on the southern link road. But for reasons I have already given, I don't believe that this is feasible in the foreseeable future so dualling the southern link road remains the only practical solution to our current traffic problems. And, given what is now happening, it seems to me that "the powers that be" have come to the same conclusion. My concern now is to get it done properly.[/p][/quote]But you are totally missing the point.. putting a stretch of Dual track in between two single track roads will not reduce any congestion! The bottleneck is not the stretch between the ketch roundabout and the norton roundabout! TheRealFacts
  • Score: 4

3:02pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

Yes, I am aware of the history, Jabbadad, although I don't see it in the same political terms as you do.

But let me assure you that my motives for supporting the dualling of the southern link road are entirely apolitical and are based on what I see as the only practical way forward given where we are now.

I do feel for those who have long wanted to see the ring road completed. This is a noble aspiration and one that I would support if I felt it could b e delivered in time to offer a solution to our current traffic problems. But, in my view, it can't.

I accept that, for many, this is a "bitter pill" to swallow.
Yes, I am aware of the history, Jabbadad, although I don't see it in the same political terms as you do. But let me assure you that my motives for supporting the dualling of the southern link road are entirely apolitical and are based on what I see as the only practical way forward given where we are now. I do feel for those who have long wanted to see the ring road completed. This is a noble aspiration and one that I would support if I felt it could b e delivered in time to offer a solution to our current traffic problems. But, in my view, it can't. I accept that, for many, this is a "bitter pill" to swallow. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 9

3:25pm Fri 25 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

TheRealFacts, I am not advocating what is now being done, which seems to me in danger of spending a lot of money to relatively little effect.

I am pushing for expedited funding to provide a continuous dual carriageway from the current location of the Powick roundabout to M5 junction 7. This would include access for local traffic at the current Ketch and/or Norton roundabouts and a suitable arrangement at Powick to concentrate (and disperse) traffic from (and to) the three main local routes at this point.
TheRealFacts, I am not advocating what is now being done, which seems to me in danger of spending a lot of money to relatively little effect. I am pushing for expedited funding to provide a continuous dual carriageway from the current location of the Powick roundabout to M5 junction 7. This would include access for local traffic at the current Ketch and/or Norton roundabouts and a suitable arrangement at Powick to concentrate (and disperse) traffic from (and to) the three main local routes at this point. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 2

10:08am Sat 26 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

"I am pushing for expedited funding to provide a continuous dual carriageway from the current location of the Powick roundabout to M5 junction 7. This would include access for local traffic at the current Ketch and/or Norton roundabouts and a suitable arrangement at Powick to concentrate (and disperse) traffic from (and to) the three main local routes at this point."

If you support this please consider voting for my petition at:

http://tinyurl.com/l
5yp2xc
"I am pushing for expedited funding to provide a continuous dual carriageway from the current location of the Powick roundabout to M5 junction 7. This would include access for local traffic at the current Ketch and/or Norton roundabouts and a suitable arrangement at Powick to concentrate (and disperse) traffic from (and to) the three main local routes at this point." If you support this please consider voting for my petition at: http://tinyurl.com/l 5yp2xc Brian Gladman
  • Score: 3

11:38am Sat 26 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

A BOTTLENECK is a BOTTLENECK in any apolitical language.
And since even the ordinary man / woman on the street (as they say) can see the problems and possible cures seemingly so much more clearly begs the questions.
DO WE HAVE CAPABLE PLANNERS?
DO WE HAVE ANY CLEAR THINKING?
SHOULD POLITICIANS, PART TIME EXPERTS ON ALL THINGS, BUT REALLY NOTHING, MAKE LOGICAL DECISIONS?
Answers on the back of a FAG packet to those in power at COUNY HALL.
A BOTTLENECK is a BOTTLENECK in any apolitical language. And since even the ordinary man / woman on the street (as they say) can see the problems and possible cures seemingly so much more clearly begs the questions. DO WE HAVE CAPABLE PLANNERS? DO WE HAVE ANY CLEAR THINKING? SHOULD POLITICIANS, PART TIME EXPERTS ON ALL THINGS, BUT REALLY NOTHING, MAKE LOGICAL DECISIONS? Answers on the back of a FAG packet to those in power at COUNY HALL. Jabbadad
  • Score: -1

11:45am Sat 26 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Or even to those in power at COUNTY HALL.
I really must get rid of this KEYBOARD It's spelling is quite poor.
Or even to those in power at COUNTY HALL. I really must get rid of this KEYBOARD It's spelling is quite poor. Jabbadad
  • Score: -5

12:05pm Sat 26 Apr 14

Andy_R says...

There's something wrong with your caps lock key too, Jabbadad.
There's something wrong with your caps lock key too, Jabbadad. Andy_R
  • Score: 4

12:22pm Sat 26 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Good to be the first smart a s.Andy
Good to be the first smart a s.Andy Jabbadad
  • Score: -13

5:50pm Sat 26 Apr 14

citykid says...

gmoore1207 wrote:
how can you beat traffic jams when dual carriageway goes on to single track bridge these people are muppets stop wasting money do the northern link road cant do that to many top people live at bevery
I agree
[quote][p][bold]gmoore1207[/bold] wrote: how can you beat traffic jams when dual carriageway goes on to single track bridge these people are muppets stop wasting money do the northern link road cant do that to many top people live at bevery[/p][/quote]I agree citykid
  • Score: 0

5:59pm Sat 26 Apr 14

citykid says...

Road should have been done when they built the carrington bridge, but no they knew best. All I can say is GOD Help us!!!!, it will make no difference it will still be chaos. Drivers using extra lane for overtaking like they do now, accidents waiting to happen and u never see any police about
Road should have been done when they built the carrington bridge, but no they knew best. All I can say is GOD Help us!!!!, it will make no difference it will still be chaos. Drivers using extra lane for overtaking like they do now, accidents waiting to happen and u never see any police about citykid
  • Score: 4

7:45am Mon 28 Apr 14

green49 says...

Cllr Simon Geraghty: "Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option".

Well well i see Cllr Simon Geraghty has appeared again, check his record out it would be far better if HE did nothing as then things would be done right, this road work will do nothing but cause more chaos, Cllr Simon Geraghty the budding Prodger god help us.
Cllr Simon Geraghty: "Sitting back and doing nothing is simply not an option". Well well i see Cllr Simon Geraghty has appeared again, check his record out it would be far better if HE did nothing as then things would be done right, this road work will do nothing but cause more chaos, Cllr Simon Geraghty the budding Prodger god help us. green49
  • Score: 1

10:43am Mon 28 Apr 14

Roger5 says...

Work started today: unclear signage as old road markings gone and not replaced, why?

Contractor vehicles blocking up viewpoint carpark, why?

Expect collisions!
Work started today: unclear signage as old road markings gone and not replaced, why? Contractor vehicles blocking up viewpoint carpark, why? Expect collisions! Roger5
  • Score: -1

6:28pm Mon 28 Apr 14

uptonX says...

Something has to be done to stop this keep happening. Arrogant idiots at Worcester council spraying public money about on their own ego massaging pet projects that cause huge damage to local business and worse which when all is done next year will certainly not have improved the situation and likely made it worse.
The deceit over this project has been incredible, just look at all the inaccuracies in the "before" pictures for the Ketch roundabout - and as for the "mature tree planting" in the "after" drawings, we just know that won't happen. Disgraceful. With the now invertible delays to ambulances and other emergency services that have to use that stretch of road their really need to be held to account for the resulting fatalities.
Something has to be done to stop this keep happening. Arrogant idiots at Worcester council spraying public money about on their own ego massaging pet projects that cause huge damage to local business and worse which when all is done next year will certainly not have improved the situation and likely made it worse. The deceit over this project has been incredible, just look at all the inaccuracies in the "before" pictures for the Ketch roundabout - and as for the "mature tree planting" in the "after" drawings, we just know that won't happen. Disgraceful. With the now invertible delays to ambulances and other emergency services that have to use that stretch of road their really need to be held to account for the resulting fatalities. uptonX
  • Score: 1

7:32pm Mon 28 Apr 14

i-cycle says...

uptonX wrote:
Something has to be done to stop this keep happening. Arrogant idiots at Worcester council spraying public money about on their own ego massaging pet projects that cause huge damage to local business and worse which when all is done next year will certainly not have improved the situation and likely made it worse.
The deceit over this project has been incredible, just look at all the inaccuracies in the "before" pictures for the Ketch roundabout - and as for the "mature tree planting" in the "after" drawings, we just know that won't happen. Disgraceful. With the now invertible delays to ambulances and other emergency services that have to use that stretch of road their really need to be held to account for the resulting fatalities.
Yep uptonX you're not the only one that's confused by our local government structure. This pet project has nothing to do with Worcester City Council. Its the County Council. No doubt the confusion is compounded by the Key County Councillor, Simon Geraghty also being the former Leader of Worcester City Council, Leader of the conservatives at the City and Deputy Leaders of the Conservatives the County.

There are lots of Councillors in Worcestershire that are both County and District councillors. Merge all the Councils in Worcestershire into one a single Unitary (just like the urban areas and several other Counties have or are about to do) and it would not only make it easier for the electorate and tax payer to know who's responsible for what, but it would, at a stroke save several £Million per year in just cutting out bureaucracy and confusion.
[quote][p][bold]uptonX[/bold] wrote: Something has to be done to stop this keep happening. Arrogant idiots at Worcester council spraying public money about on their own ego massaging pet projects that cause huge damage to local business and worse which when all is done next year will certainly not have improved the situation and likely made it worse. The deceit over this project has been incredible, just look at all the inaccuracies in the "before" pictures for the Ketch roundabout - and as for the "mature tree planting" in the "after" drawings, we just know that won't happen. Disgraceful. With the now invertible delays to ambulances and other emergency services that have to use that stretch of road their really need to be held to account for the resulting fatalities.[/p][/quote]Yep uptonX you're not the only one that's confused by our local government structure. This pet project has nothing to do with Worcester City Council. Its the County Council. No doubt the confusion is compounded by the Key County Councillor, Simon Geraghty also being the former Leader of Worcester City Council, Leader of the conservatives at the City and Deputy Leaders of the Conservatives the County. There are lots of Councillors in Worcestershire that are both County and District councillors. Merge all the Councils in Worcestershire into one a single Unitary (just like the urban areas and several other Counties have or are about to do) and it would not only make it easier for the electorate and tax payer to know who's responsible for what, but it would, at a stroke save several £Million per year in just cutting out bureaucracy and confusion. i-cycle
  • Score: 1

10:55pm Mon 28 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

HERE HERE.
HERE HERE. Jabbadad
  • Score: 0

2:13pm Tue 29 Apr 14

TheRealFacts says...

Why just sit here and moan on a comments section of the local newspaper... why not campaign, petition... rise up against the wasteful Councillors??
Why just sit here and moan on a comments section of the local newspaper... why not campaign, petition... rise up against the wasteful Councillors?? TheRealFacts
  • Score: 0

10:09pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Lew Smoralz says...

Brian Gladman wrote:
TheRealFacts, I am not advocating what is now being done, which seems to me in danger of spending a lot of money to relatively little effect.

I am pushing for expedited funding to provide a continuous dual carriageway from the current location of the Powick roundabout to M5 junction 7. This would include access for local traffic at the current Ketch and/or Norton roundabouts and a suitable arrangement at Powick to concentrate (and disperse) traffic from (and to) the three main local routes at this point.
And then Powick becomes the bottleneck that turns the dual carriageway into a giant car park!

What a vision :(
[quote][p][bold]Brian Gladman[/bold] wrote: TheRealFacts, I am not advocating what is now being done, which seems to me in danger of spending a lot of money to relatively little effect. I am pushing for expedited funding to provide a continuous dual carriageway from the current location of the Powick roundabout to M5 junction 7. This would include access for local traffic at the current Ketch and/or Norton roundabouts and a suitable arrangement at Powick to concentrate (and disperse) traffic from (and to) the three main local routes at this point.[/p][/quote]And then Powick becomes the bottleneck that turns the dual carriageway into a giant car park! What a vision :( Lew Smoralz
  • Score: 1

10:53pm Tue 29 Apr 14

anarchist says...

Lew Smoralz, you have that vision only because you have no idea how dual carriageways can be designed to effectively disperse and concentrate traffic to and from local roads without causing traffic jams.

The whole of the national road network depends on the effective concentration and dispersal of traffic flows. Traffic has to be concentrated and dispersed onto and from our motorways using urban roads (which are frequently dual carriageways) from which traffic is again concentrated and dispersed from and to local roads.

Without the ability to concentrate and disperse traffic flows in this way without causing traffic jams, the whole roads network would become totally dysfunctional.
Lew Smoralz, you have that vision only because you have no idea how dual carriageways can be designed to effectively disperse and concentrate traffic to and from local roads without causing traffic jams. The whole of the national road network depends on the effective concentration and dispersal of traffic flows. Traffic has to be concentrated and dispersed onto and from our motorways using urban roads (which are frequently dual carriageways) from which traffic is again concentrated and dispersed from and to local roads. Without the ability to concentrate and disperse traffic flows in this way without causing traffic jams, the whole roads network would become totally dysfunctional. anarchist
  • Score: 4

10:57pm Tue 29 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

Thank you, anarchist, I could not have said it better myself.
Thank you, anarchist, I could not have said it better myself. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 0

12:54am Wed 30 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Well anarchist at last another fan of Brian Gladman in his support for those in Authority who are just hell bent on pouring huge sums of money into a failed road system with the Southern Bypass. And while I recognise the analogy of traffic in, and then no more traffic in until some goes out, but I offer a simpler example with the old Half & Pint Pot, different examples but the same answers.
It has been mentioned many times in this paper that Worcester is able to get traffic reasonaably well into the City, but are hopeless in getting traffic out of the City, and until traffic leaves the City then no more can come in. SIMPLE.
I was stationed in London during 1956 / 8 and even then along some of the roads parralell to the Embankment they had reverse traffic flow with morning traffic coming into the city having a priority and after 4pm the same roads had the traffic flow reversed. And it worked.
And it Works in Seattle USA where they handle huge ammounts of traffic, and along some of the inner freeways they increase the use of lanes available for incoming traffic in the mornings and the reverse the procedure in the evenings. so say with 8 lanes they have 5 lanes of traffic used for morning incoming traffic And by simply using moveable concrete bollards from one lane to another they then have in the evenings 5 lanes going out. Plus they use multiple passenger only occupancy lanes, which includes busses and cars with more than one passenger.
But having said all this I recall in this paper one recent proposal wherebye a feeder road be built from Malvern to the M5 which of course would pretty well solve the daily queuing for the malver traffic,. At first to me this seemed a bit OTT until we read of the Millions again beinng spent on the Southern Links and which just might not solve the present day problems let alone 10 years ahead.
Then there are those who for political reasons are ignoring the most affective way of controlling the overall traffic flow for Worcester and the surrounding area and that is A NORTHERN BYPASS. which will definately do its job and also releive current taffic jams using the Southern Link Roads. And we know that our politicians here in Worcestershire have not even applied for funding for such a project. WHY?
Well anarchist at last another fan of Brian Gladman in his support for those in Authority who are just hell bent on pouring huge sums of money into a failed road system with the Southern Bypass. And while I recognise the analogy of traffic in, and then no more traffic in until some goes out, but I offer a simpler example with the old Half & Pint Pot, different examples but the same answers. It has been mentioned many times in this paper that Worcester is able to get traffic reasonaably well into the City, but are hopeless in getting traffic out of the City, and until traffic leaves the City then no more can come in. SIMPLE. I was stationed in London during 1956 / 8 and even then along some of the roads parralell to the Embankment they had reverse traffic flow with morning traffic coming into the city having a priority and after 4pm the same roads had the traffic flow reversed. And it worked. And it Works in Seattle USA where they handle huge ammounts of traffic, and along some of the inner freeways they increase the use of lanes available for incoming traffic in the mornings and the reverse the procedure in the evenings. so say with 8 lanes they have 5 lanes of traffic used for morning incoming traffic And by simply using moveable concrete bollards from one lane to another they then have in the evenings 5 lanes going out. Plus they use multiple passenger only occupancy lanes, which includes busses and cars with more than one passenger. But having said all this I recall in this paper one recent proposal wherebye a feeder road be built from Malvern to the M5 which of course would pretty well solve the daily queuing for the malver traffic,. At first to me this seemed a bit OTT until we read of the Millions again beinng spent on the Southern Links and which just might not solve the present day problems let alone 10 years ahead. Then there are those who for political reasons are ignoring the most affective way of controlling the overall traffic flow for Worcester and the surrounding area and that is A NORTHERN BYPASS. which will definately do its job and also releive current taffic jams using the Southern Link Roads. And we know that our politicians here in Worcestershire have not even applied for funding for such a project. WHY? Jabbadad
  • Score: -2

9:41am Wed 30 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

I hadn't realised that this was really a popularity contest, Jabbadad, but if it is, I will have to withdraw as I know that I can only lose given the strength of the opposition from the regulars here :-)

More seriously, I have lived in the United States and in the Netherlands so I have direct experience of how other countries (attempt to) solve their traffic flow problems. As you say, the US does use reversible lanes but I have yet to see them do this on a road which starts with one lane in each direction!

It seems to me that the comments about problems of traffic concentration and dispersal to and from the southern link road amount to a reasonable view that the A449 through Powick is inadequate a feeder road for either an improved southern link road or a northern bypass. I think this is a valid concern and I would not want to see the dualling of the southern link road progress without a very careful consideration of what realignment of this route would be necessary to ensure that it is an effective feeder route.

My support for the dualling of the southern link road is based on the recognition that the "powers that be" have decided to invest in this route. But they are doing so in what seems to me a series of 'piecemeal' measures that will prove very costly without ever being very effective in solving the congestion problems on the route.

I agree with those who feel that the northern bypass is a better solution but (for reasons that I have already given) I do not believe that this can _now_ be delivered in time to solve current and foreseeable future needs.

This being so, I want to see the work on the southern link road done properly since it seems to me that what is now being done is a classic example of my first boss's characterisation of government investment: "there is never the time nor the money to do anything properly but there is always time and money to do it twice'.

If you were to suggest that the past lack of strategic vision in failing to complete the ring road is an even better example, I would have to agree with you.
I hadn't realised that this was really a popularity contest, Jabbadad, but if it is, I will have to withdraw as I know that I can only lose given the strength of the opposition from the regulars here :-) More seriously, I have lived in the United States and in the Netherlands so I have direct experience of how other countries (attempt to) solve their traffic flow problems. As you say, the US does use reversible lanes but I have yet to see them do this on a road which starts with one lane in each direction! It seems to me that the comments about problems of traffic concentration and dispersal to and from the southern link road amount to a reasonable view that the A449 through Powick is inadequate a feeder road for either an improved southern link road or a northern bypass. I think this is a valid concern and I would not want to see the dualling of the southern link road progress without a very careful consideration of what realignment of this route would be necessary to ensure that it is an effective feeder route. My support for the dualling of the southern link road is based on the recognition that the "powers that be" have decided to invest in this route. But they are doing so in what seems to me a series of 'piecemeal' measures that will prove very costly without ever being very effective in solving the congestion problems on the route. I agree with those who feel that the northern bypass is a better solution but (for reasons that I have already given) I do not believe that this can _now_ be delivered in time to solve current and foreseeable future needs. This being so, I want to see the work on the southern link road done properly since it seems to me that what is now being done is a classic example of my first boss's characterisation of government investment: "there is never the time nor the money to do anything properly but there is always time and money to do it twice'. If you were to suggest that the past lack of strategic vision in failing to complete the ring road is an even better example, I would have to agree with you. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 1

12:40pm Wed 30 Apr 14

themooman says...

Jabbadad you bore me to tears - literally nobody cares what you think
Jabbadad you bore me to tears - literally nobody cares what you think themooman
  • Score: 4

1:08pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Oh Dear moonman, tell Simon I won't sleep in the afternoons now.
Oh Dear moonman, tell Simon I won't sleep in the afternoons now. Jabbadad
  • Score: -3

4:41pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Lew Smoralz says...

anarchist wrote:
Lew Smoralz, you have that vision only because you have no idea how dual carriageways can be designed to effectively disperse and concentrate traffic to and from local roads without causing traffic jams.

The whole of the national road network depends on the effective concentration and dispersal of traffic flows. Traffic has to be concentrated and dispersed onto and from our motorways using urban roads (which are frequently dual carriageways) from which traffic is again concentrated and dispersed from and to local roads.

Without the ability to concentrate and disperse traffic flows in this way without causing traffic jams, the whole roads network would become totally dysfunctional.
What a load of tosh! What sort of fools do you take the readers for?

The same number of cars, the same number of local roads... just wider main road until it meets the bottleneck at the bridge.

Undoubtedly a Highways Department employee, spouting such pompous nonesense!
[quote][p][bold]anarchist[/bold] wrote: Lew Smoralz, you have that vision only because you have no idea how dual carriageways can be designed to effectively disperse and concentrate traffic to and from local roads without causing traffic jams. The whole of the national road network depends on the effective concentration and dispersal of traffic flows. Traffic has to be concentrated and dispersed onto and from our motorways using urban roads (which are frequently dual carriageways) from which traffic is again concentrated and dispersed from and to local roads. Without the ability to concentrate and disperse traffic flows in this way without causing traffic jams, the whole roads network would become totally dysfunctional.[/p][/quote]What a load of tosh! What sort of fools do you take the readers for? The same number of cars, the same number of local roads... just wider main road until it meets the bottleneck at the bridge. Undoubtedly a Highways Department employee, spouting such pompous nonesense! Lew Smoralz
  • Score: -1

5:45pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

I have made it clear more than once that I am _not_ advocating what is now being done. I am advocating expedited funding for a southern link road that is a continuous dual carriageway from the Junction 7 of the M5 to the current location of the Powick roundabout. This will obviously include the duplication or the widening of the Carrington bridge.

While it is reasonable to question whether traffic concentration and dispersal at what is now the Powick roundabout can be made to work for such a scheme, it makes no sense whatsoever to talk about a bottleneck at what will be a dual carriageway bridge.

Making such a silly comment and throwing out wild allegations is a sure sign that you are running out of reasoned arguments to back your position.
I have made it clear more than once that I am _not_ advocating what is now being done. I am advocating expedited funding for a southern link road that is a continuous dual carriageway from the Junction 7 of the M5 to the current location of the Powick roundabout. This will obviously include the duplication or the widening of the Carrington bridge. While it is reasonable to question whether traffic concentration and dispersal at what is now the Powick roundabout can be made to work for such a scheme, it makes no sense whatsoever to talk about a bottleneck at what will be a dual carriageway bridge. Making such a silly comment and throwing out wild allegations is a sure sign that you are running out of reasoned arguments to back your position. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 2

6:21pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Jabbadad says...

Please don't talk down to us Dr Gladman, I see, hear that from those who think that there word, support or actioin should never be challenged many times. And despite what your petition is advocating it's still throwing good money after bad. And you don't have to be an obviously superior Doctor to know / recognise that.
Please don't talk down to us Dr Gladman, I see, hear that from those who think that there word, support or actioin should never be challenged many times. And despite what your petition is advocating it's still throwing good money after bad. And you don't have to be an obviously superior Doctor to know / recognise that. Jabbadad
  • Score: -2

7:17pm Wed 30 Apr 14

Brian Gladman says...

I am entirely happy to have my position challenged, Jabbadad. I wouldn't bother to comment here if this were not so. But don't expect me to accept without challenge the words of those who oppose my position (especially so when they do this by misrepresenting what I am advocating).

We will just have to disagree on the value of additional investment on the southern link road as I don't expect to change your position any more than you expect to change mine.
I am entirely happy to have my position challenged, Jabbadad. I wouldn't bother to comment here if this were not so. But don't expect me to accept without challenge the words of those who oppose my position (especially so when they do this by misrepresenting what I am advocating). We will just have to disagree on the value of additional investment on the southern link road as I don't expect to change your position any more than you expect to change mine. Brian Gladman
  • Score: 2

12:05pm Thu 1 May 14

Mr A Mazing says...

Is there anybody whatsoever (other than those who designed and are implementing this) who thinks this plan is going to make one single bit of difference to the traffic flow?
Is there anybody whatsoever (other than those who designed and are implementing this) who thinks this plan is going to make one single bit of difference to the traffic flow? Mr A Mazing
  • Score: 0

2:05pm Thu 1 May 14

chrism says...

Mr A Mazing wrote:
Is there anybody whatsoever (other than those who designed and are implementing this) who thinks this plan is going to make one single bit of difference to the traffic flow?
Yes. I think it might make it worse.
[quote][p][bold]Mr A Mazing[/bold] wrote: Is there anybody whatsoever (other than those who designed and are implementing this) who thinks this plan is going to make one single bit of difference to the traffic flow?[/p][/quote]Yes. I think it might make it worse. chrism
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree