Campaign for Better Transport : Reopenings Fund

[philthetube]

Not a country, but take Lancaster. It's had awful congested roads for several decades. There were plans for by-passes and more bridges over the river as long ago as the 60s/70s. The woeful failure of local authority transport policy meant that the area North of Lancaster stagnated simply due to businesses not moving in nor expanding due to traffic that could take an hour to travel 3 or 4 miles. Traffic had to go into the congested city centre whether it wanted to or not because that was the only way to get to/from the motorway. There were NO alternative public transport initiatives over this time other than superficial changes to the local buses. If there was ever a strong case for a by-pass, it was Lancaster. Thankfully, it finally arrived a couple of years ago and it's transformed the area north of Lancaster with new businesses arriving and existing businesses expanding. It's a classic example of why Labour's ban on new roads was complete folly. There are places where new roads are needed just to ease the pain of the poor sods living and working in the area already if the local authorities don't have the gumption to come up with plans for better public transport.

Additionally when all these new businesses and expanded businesses are in place there will no longer be any tourists wanting to visit that area, double benefit.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Not a country, but take Lancaster. It's had awful congested roads for several decades. There were plans for by-passes and more bridges over the river as long ago as the 60s/70s. The woeful failure of local authority transport policy meant that the area North of Lancaster stagnated simply due to businesses not moving in nor expanding due to traffic that could take an hour to travel 3 or 4 miles. Traffic had to go into the congested city centre whether it wanted to or not because that was the only way to get to/from the motorway. There were NO alternative public transport initiatives over this time other than superficial changes to the local buses. If there was ever a strong case for a by-pass, it was Lancaster. Thankfully, it finally arrived a couple of years ago and it's transformed the area north of Lancaster with new businesses arriving and existing businesses expanding. It's a classic example of why Labour's ban on new roads was complete folly. There are places where new roads are needed just to ease the pain of the poor sods living and working in the area already if the local authorities don't have the gumption to come up with plans for better public transport.

Is this personal opinion / hearsay or can you show a link to a post completion study confirming your observations?

Please share if it exists however if building new roads did have the positive effects claimed of them then there would be a slew of study's/evaluations confirming the wisdom of this policy approach, however they are conspicuous by their absence. SACTRA http://webarchive.nationalarchives....ppr/documents/pdf/dft_econappr_pdf_022512.pdf was expected to rubber stamp "Roads to Prosperity" and came as a shock when it didn't.

Government seems to have been very shy since then about evaluating road building (I wonder why?) the only evaluation i've seen was done by the Welsh Government in 2007 concentrating on economic benefit of which it found no evidence. This report has subsequently been deleted from the public domain.

 

[The Planner]

Are you for, or against the Newtown bypass they are currently building?

 

[Gareth Marston]

Are you for, or against the Newtown bypass they are currently building?

No (and a consistent no that has upset a lot bypass believers here) - when the Normans pushed into Wales in the late 13th Century they constructed a defensive Motte and Bailey Castle at the narrowest part of the Upper Severn Valley - what became Newtown. It filled the Valley floor even in the 19th Century. Expanding it as a "new town" in the 1960's was a planning clanger as the town could only grow along the valley floor to the south west and north east so the whole town essentially sits in a narrow strip on land either side of the main road and railway lines going through it. This linear topography has exacerbated national traffic problems of single occupancy work commuters, school run mothers who could walk etc.

People here believe that Newtown's traffic problems are unique - which they are not and that the traffic problem's are an explanation for the towns economic stagnation. The seeds of the towns economic problems actually lie in the grant culture and low semi skilled work that those company's attracted to the new town brought with them in the 60's/70's/80's. The Development Board for Rural Wales sold Newtown as a place with cheap labour and a bung to relocate here. Once the bungs stooped and globalisation continued the lack of a skilled workforce has acted a barrier to firms. A lot of people also moved away when some of those firms who reallocated here moved away or stopped trading, the housing stock passed from DBRW control to Powys County Council, whereas back in the 1980's DBRW would insist you had a job to get the rental agreement PCC has been happy to accept people from the West Midlands who live on benefit as occupancy rate targets were their driving criteria to replace people who previously worked. This has further driven down skills and £ in the local economy affecting the local service sector.

So my primary objection is that the bypass will not be the economic miracle bullet it is hoped it will be as we haven't tackled the fundamental underpinning causes of economic stagnation. No one will beat a path to open a high paid factory in Newtown if the workforce skills are not here. Plus the induced traffic will just erode journey times on the single track built on cart-track A roads wither side of the town.

 

[B&I]

Not a country, but take Lancaster. It's had awful congested roads for several decades. There were plans for by-passes and more bridges over the river as long ago as the 60s/70s. The woeful failure of local authority transport policy meant that the area North of Lancaster stagnated simply due to businesses not moving in nor expanding due to traffic that could take an hour to travel 3 or 4 miles. Traffic had to go into the congested city centre whether it wanted to or not because that was the only way to get to/from the motorway. There were NO alternative public transport initiatives over this time other than superficial changes to the local buses. If there was ever a strong case for a by-pass, it was Lancaster. Thankfully, it finally arrived a couple of years ago and it's transformed the area north of Lancaster with new businesses arriving and existing businesses expanding. It's a classic example of why Labour's ban on new roads was complete folly. There are places where new roads are needed just to ease the pain of the poor sods living and working in the area already if the local authorities don't have the gumption to come up with plans for better public transport.

At a local level, such as this, why not direct businesses generating heavy road traffic to move to the parts of the Lancaster area better served by road ?

A large part of the underlying problem bere ia our free for all of a planning system. Maybe we should be building housing, industry around our transport system (including existing and potential railway lines), not vice versa

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

At a local level, such as this, why not direct businesses generating heavy road traffic to move to the parts of the Lancaster area better served by road ?

How well used is the 4.8 kilometre link road from the Heysham area to the M6?

 

[underbank]

At a local level, such as this, why not direct businesses generating heavy road traffic to move to the parts of the Lancaster area better served by road ?

A large part of the underlying problem bere ia our free for all of a planning system. Maybe we should be building housing, industry around our transport system (including existing and potential railway lines), not vice versa

Most of the traffic is to the Port at Heysham for the ferries to Ireland and Isle of Man. Pretty difficult and expensive to move an entire port to the other end of town I'd have thought!

Similarly, Morecambe is the other end of Town too, again, difficult to move a seaside resort, and tens of thousands of people living in the area, to the other side of town.

Sometimes, and Lancaster is one of them, a by-pass is the answer, other than re-routing the motorway!

 

[underbank]

How well used is the 4.8 kilometre link road from the Heysham area to the M6?

Extremely well used - that's the new by-pass I'm talking about. It's made a massive difference to the area, removing heavy lorries, vans, and thousands of cars from residential and rural areas. The number of road accidents on the residential and rural roads/villages has fallen as traffic levels are now down to the levels they were planned for. It's a win-win for the drivers and a win-win for the poor sods living in the congested areas whose lives have been blighted by ever-worsening traffic for decades.

 

[Gareth Marston]

Extremely well used - that's the new by-pass I'm talking about. It's made a massive difference to the area, removing heavy lorries, vans, and thousands of cars from residential and rural areas. The number of road accidents on the residential and rural roads/villages has fallen as traffic levels are now down to the levels they were planned for. It's a win-win for the drivers and a win-win for the poor sods living in the congested areas whose lives have been blighted by ever-worsening traffic for decades.

So with all this "success" is there a report/ post construction evaluation you can point us toward that outlines the exact nature of how this has been "successful" and any impacts its had on the local economy or regional traffic levels?

Surely if its such as a success then the powers that be would want to formally lay out the results to demonstrate the wisdom of its construction?

 

[Ianno87]

Most of the traffic is to the Port at Heysham for the ferries to Ireland and Isle of Man. Pretty difficult and expensive to move an entire port to the other end of town I'd have thought!

Similarly, Morecambe is the other end of Town too, again, difficult to move a seaside resort, and tens of thousands of people living in the area, to the other side of town.

Sometimes, and Lancaster is one of them, a by-pass is the answer, other than re-routing the motorway!

Hasn't the "signed" route for many years to Morecambe/Lancaster (before the northern bypass) been off the M6 via Junction 35 /A601(M) thence through Carnforth and Hest Bank?

Not that many people actually went that way from the south due to it being such a long way round!

 

[underbank]

Hasn't the "signed" route for many years to Morecambe/Lancaster (before the northern bypass) been off the M6 via Junction 35 /A601(M) thence through Carnforth and Hest Bank?

Not that many people actually went that way from the south due to it being such a long way round!

Signed from the North, yes, but not from the South. Anyway, all it did was cause Carnforth to be badly congested as it's only a small town, and also congested Morecambe promenade with lorries going to Heysham.

 

[47802]

So with all this "success" is there a report/ post construction evaluation you can point us toward that outlines the exact nature of how this has been "successful" and any impacts its had on the local economy or regional traffic levels?

Surely if its such as a success then the powers that be would want to formally lay out the results to demonstrate the wisdom of its construction?

I don't live in the area but know the area fairly well, and can well imagine that the new link road will be a magnificent improvement to the area and long overdue.

The fact is whether you like or not, roads are the primary means of transport for many people in this country and in many cases the only means and even spending crazy amounts of money on new lines wouldn't change that. Anybody who travels by road a lot knows the roads in this country need significant investment, that's not to we cannot look at new lines and stations although personally I would rather see the majority investment concentrated on the existing network. You look at the Cumbrian coast line with its clapped out Victorian infrastructure, the Blackpool-Preston Electrification Scheme, and never mind the electrification work look at the amount of work that is going into the stations, the track, the signalling etc. in order to make fit for the 21st century.

Of course most of us in the North tomorrow will again be reliant on the roads given the unions have decided to go on strike yet again.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Of course most of us in the North tomorrow will again be reliant on the roads given the unions have decided to go on strike yet again.

One reason for keeping roads as an alternative to allow us to escape from what you say above. The Manchester Metrolink system and bus services will enable workers to reach places of employment in many parts of the Land of the TfGM Empire on such days of "Industrial Inaction"

 

[muddythefish]

I hope the poor sods of Tavistock and wisbech get help soon.

Their long promised railways lines ? Me too

 

[muddythefish]

I don't live in the area but know the area fairly well, and can well imagine that the new link road will be a magnificent improvement to the area and long overdue.

The fact is whether you like or not, roads are the primary means of transport for many people in this country and in many cases the only means and even spending crazy amounts of money on new lines wouldn't change that. Anybody who travels by road a lot knows the roads in this country need significant investment, that's not to we cannot look at new lines and stations although personally I would rather see the majority investment concentrated on the existing network. You look at the Cumbrian coast line with its clapped out Victorian infrastructure, the Blackpool-Preston Electrification Scheme, and never mind the electrification work look at the amount of work that is going into the stations, the track, the signalling etc. in order to make fit for the 21st century.

Of course most of us in the North tomorrow will again be reliant on the roads given the unions have decided to go on strike yet again.

Solves absolutely nothing in most cases. This country's road system is largely complete. Our nearby town had 2 stations until the 1960s - thanks to population growth it needs them more now than it did then. We need our rail lines back more than we need new roads.

 

[yorksrob]

Their long promised railways lines ? Me too

Indeed.

 

[Gareth Marston]

I don't live in the area but know the area fairly well, and can well imagine that the new link road will be a magnificent improvement to the area and long overdue.

The fact is whether you like or not, roads are the primary means of transport for many people in this country and in many cases the only means and even spending crazy amounts of money on new lines wouldn't change that. Anybody who travels by road a lot knows the roads in this country need significant investment, that's not to we cannot look at new lines and stations although personally I would rather see the majority investment concentrated on the existing network. You look at the Cumbrian coast line with its clapped out Victorian infrastructure, the Blackpool-Preston Electrification Scheme, and never mind the electrification work look at the amount of work that is going into the stations, the track, the signalling etc. in order to make fit for the 21st century.

Of course most of us in the North tomorrow will again be reliant on the roads given the unions have decided to go on strike yet again.

But what are you trying to achieve by "significant investment"? No country in the world has solved the conundrum of road congestion by building more road space , the empirical evidence that road schemes boost the economy are notable by their complete absence and all the published evidence points to new roads generating new traffic and causing new congestion problems.

If you mean catching up on the maintenance backlog and filling in those potholes that's fine but road capacity expansion is a dead end. The argument that we all have cars and therefore must invest in this mode is a fallacy as the motorists worst enemy is another motorist.

 

[47802]

But what are you trying to achieve by "significant investment"? No country in the world has solved the conundrum of road congestion by building more road space , the empirical evidence that road schemes boost the economy are notable by their complete absence and all the published evidence points to new roads generating new traffic and causing new congestion problems.

If you mean catching up on the maintenance backlog and filling in those potholes that's fine but road capacity expansion is a dead end. The argument that we all have cars and therefore must invest in this mode is a fallacy as the motorists worst enemy is another motorist.

So you are saying there is no evidence that road schemes boost the economy, I'm sure there must be plenty of evidence around to suggest that workers and freight lorry's stuck in traffic queues is a substancial cost to the economy. Yes I would agree we cannot continue to build roads endlessly but that doesn't mean to say that we cannot improve existing roads or build new roads such as the new link road around Lancaster to target specific problem areas, I think it's also very clear that many Businesses choose to locate their businesses in area's where there are good roads.

If I take the village where I live for example there were 2 railway line within reasonable distance of the village although neither of the stations on the line were particularly well located both being on the edge of the village. The most useful to put back would be the one to Leeds however that route is so well built on that it would be impossible to put back and you would likely need a knew alignment for much of the route and frankly the cost of it I expect would be huge. On the other hand Low Moor station has reopened about 3 miles from where I live. Now its not much use to me from the point of view of travelling to Leeds or Bradford but I did use to travel to Preston the other week, and in the grand scheme of things the cost of reopening such as Low Moor is small compared to the cost of reopening new lines so perhaps that is what should be concentrated on.

Now near to Low Moor station is the Spen Valley route there have been discussions on here before about reinstating this line, it does have the advantage in the route is essentially intact and no doubt it would bring some benefit to Cleckheaton and Heckmondwike but even with an intact route the costs are going to pretty high. The route is also heavily used as Walking and Cycling route and any attempt to bring it back may not be universally welcomed, and if was brought back a Light rail Tram/Train solution might be the better option. But even if you spend the money on that line its still not much good to me as live nearly 3 mile from Cleckheaton so I will still need road transport to get to Cleckheaton, and will still likely use road transport to get to Leeds or Bradford from where I live.

You seem to be of the view that we can solve most of the transport problems of this country by building new railway lines all over the country, well apart from the cost of it being huge, not practical for some parts of the country, it simply isn't going to happen, and apart from anything else as a country we are road orientated, and if you held a referendum as to whether or not HS2 should be built it would loose by a massive majority, if you held a referendum on whether we should build HS2 or a new North South Motorway I reckon the Motorway would win by a massive majority.

 

[B&I]

Most of the traffic is to the Port at Heysham for the ferries to Ireland and Isle of Man. Pretty difficult and expensive to move an entire port to the other end of town I'd have thought!

Similarly, Morecambe is the other end of Town too, again, difficult to move a seaside resort, and tens of thousands of people living in the area, to the other side of town.

Sometimes, and Lancaster is one of them, a by-pass is the answer, other than re-routing the motorway!

You were talking about businesses expanding in the area north of Lancaster. Morecambe is only just north of Lancaster and Heysham is some way south.

 

[Gareth Marston]

apart from anything else as a country we are road orientated, and if you held a referendum as to whether or not HS2 should be built it would loose by a massive majority, if you held a referendum on whether we should build HS2 or a new North South Motorway I reckon the Motorway would win by a massive majority.

Popularity doesn't = being right after all as my old Politics Lecturer use to say National Socialism was popular in Germany in the 1930's. And does this new North to South Motorway go through the Chilterns?

So you are saying there is no evidence that road schemes boost the economy, I'm sure there must be plenty of evidence around to suggest that workers and freight lorry's stuck in traffic queues is a substancial cost to the economy.

Try Google - You'll get plenty about the estimated cost of road congestion however try and find anything about the benefits of building new roads to relieve it. If the benefits are so obvious and well known why isn't anything there?

You seem to be of the view that we can solve most of the transport problems of this country by building new railway lines all over the country

Unlikely to be a solution on their own however there not a dead end solution.

 

[B&I]

So you are saying @×@@ is no evidence that road schemes boost the economy, I'm sure there must be plenty of evidence around to suggest that workers and freight lorry's stuck in traffic queues is a substancial cost to the economy. Yes I would agree we cannot continue to build roads endlessly but that doesn't mean to say that we cannot improve existing roads or build new roads such as the new link road around Lancaster to target specific problem areas, I think it's also very clear that many Businesses choose to locate their businesses in area's where there are good roads.

If I take the village where I live for example there were 2 railway line within reasonable distance of the village although neither of the stations on the line were particularly well located both being on the edge of the village. The most useful to put back would be the one to Leeds however that route is so well built on that it would be impossible to put back and you would likely need a knew alignment for much of the route and frankly the cost of it I expect would be huge. On the other hand Low Moor station has reopened about 3 miles from where I live. Now its not much use to me from the point of view of travelling to Leeds or Bradford but I did use to travel to Preston the other week, and in the grand scheme of things the cost of reopening such as Low Moor is small compared to the cost of reopening new lines so perhaps that is what should be concentrated on.

Now near to Low Moor station is the Spen Valley route there have been discussions on here before about reinstating this line, it does have the advantage in the route is essentially intact and no doubt it would bring some benefit to Cleckheaton and Heckmondwike but even with an intact route the costs are going to pretty high. The route is also heavily used as Walking and Cycling route and any attempt to bring it back may not be universally welcomed, and if was brought back a Light rail Tram/Train solution might be the better option. But even if you spend the money on that line its still not much good to me as live nearly 3 mile from Cleckheaton so I will still need road transport to get to Cleckheaton, and will still likely use road transport to get to Leeds or Bradford from where I live.

You seem to be of the view that we can solve most of the transport problems of this country by building new railway lines all over the country, well apart from the cost of it being huge, not practical for some parts of the country, it simply isn't going to happen, and apart from anything else as a country we are road orientated, and if you held a referendum as to whether or not HS2 should be built it would loose by a massive majority, if you held a referendum on whether we should build HS2 or a new North South Motorway I reckon the Motorway would win by a massive majority.

What about all these roads you propose ? How much are they going to cost ?

 

[yorksrob]

So you are saying there is no evidence that road schemes boost the economy, I'm sure there must be plenty of evidence around to suggest that workers and freight lorry's stuck in traffic queues is a substancial cost to the economy. Yes I would agree we cannot continue to build roads endlessly but that doesn't mean to say that we cannot improve existing roads or build new roads such as the new link road around Lancaster to target specific problem areas, I think it's also very clear that many Businesses choose to locate their businesses in area's where there are good roads.

If I take the village where I live for example there were 2 railway line within reasonable distance of the village although neither of the stations on the line were particularly well located both being on the edge of the village. The most useful to put back would be the one to Leeds however that route is so well built on that it would be impossible to put back and you would likely need a knew alignment for much of the route and frankly the cost of it I expect would be huge. On the other hand Low Moor station has reopened about 3 miles from where I live. Now its not much use to me from the point of view of travelling to Leeds or Bradford but I did use to travel to Preston the other week, and in the grand scheme of things the cost of reopening such as Low Moor is small compared to the cost of reopening new lines so perhaps that is what should be concentrated on.

Now near to Low Moor station is the Spen Valley route there have been discussions on here before about reinstating this line, it does have the advantage in the route is essentially intact and no doubt it would bring some benefit to Cleckheaton and Heckmondwike but even with an intact route the costs are going to pretty high. The route is also heavily used as Walking and Cycling route and any attempt to bring it back may not be universally welcomed, and if was brought back a Light rail Tram/Train solution might be the better option. But even if you spend the money on that line its still not much good to me as live nearly 3 mile from Cleckheaton so I will still need road transport to get to Cleckheaton, and will still likely use road transport to get to Leeds or Bradford from where I live.

You seem to be of the view that we can solve most of the transport problems of this country by building new railway lines all over the country, well apart from the cost of it being huge, not practical for some parts of the country, it simply isn't going to happen, and apart from anything else as a country we are road orientated, and if you held a referendum as to whether or not HS2 should be built it would loose by a massive majority, if you held a referendum on whether we should build HS2 or a new North South Motorway I reckon the Motorway would win by a massive majority.

Your supposed comparison between the popularity of a new motorway and HS2 isn't really relevant to this thread as such a fund would not be aimed at reopening a north/south trunk route.

I suspect that if, on the other hand, you were to ask the population whether they thought their nearest town should be linked to the National rail network, you would get a resounding positive response.

Just because your local track bed has been built over is no reason to prevent other towns from being connected to the network.

 

[158756]

You were talking about businesses expanding in the area north of Lancaster. Morecambe is only just north of Lancaster and Heysham is some way south.

Functionally Morecambe and Heysham are North of Lancaster, as to reach them from the South you have to pass through, or now around, Lancaster. I didn't think the traffic was exceptionally bad in Lancaster but as the main route to a town the size of Morecambe it must have been one of, if not the worst in the country.

And I'm sure proponents of any rail scheme would claim easier access to a place and removing lorries and other traffic from a city centre as key benefits, but somehow they don't count if Dr Beeching never commented on the alignment.

 

[underbank]

You were talking about businesses expanding in the area north of Lancaster. Morecambe is only just north of Lancaster and Heysham is some way south.

Heysham may be geographically south of lancaster but you have to travel north of lancaster to get to it because of the river lune as it's on a peninsula. Yes, Morecambe is only just North, but that's the point - you used to have to go through Lancaster's horribly congested city centre to get to it.

 

[underbank]

What about all these roads you propose ? How much are they going to cost ?

Probably an awful lot less than building brand new railway lines through developed areas meaning demolishing buildings, building loads of new bridges, etc.

 

[underbank]

Just one of the business expansions facilitated by the new Lancaster by pass:-

https://www.peelports.com/news/2016/expansion-plans-for-heysham-with-10m-facility-investment

"It is estimated that for £1 invested, the link road will earn £4.40 for the local economy."

 

[yorksrob]

Functionally Morecambe and Heysham are North of Lancaster, as to reach them from the South you have to pass through, or now around, Lancaster. I didn't think the traffic was exceptionally bad in Lancaster but as the main route to a town the size of Morecambe it must have been one of, if not the worst in the country.

And I'm sure proponents of any rail scheme would claim easier access to a place and removing lorries and other traffic from a city centre as key benefits, but somehow they don't count if Dr Beeching never commented on the alignment.

It's not just about relieving congestion though. It's about providing better public transport opportunities for those for whom better road links are of limited use.

 

[underbank]

It's not just about relieving congestion though. It's about providing better public transport opportunities for those for whom better road links are of limited use.

Of course not, but buses were caught up in the congestion too, meaning very slow journey times, cancelled services, etc as a daily occurrence. Bus users reported a noticeable improvement once the new road was open and many roads were a lot clearer meaning buses could run to timetable. In fact, a side effect was Lancaster bus station being congested with buses as they were arriving early and had no bay to park in! Car and pedestrian journeys also better as far less traffic to negotiate in residential areas, etc. There'll be VERY few people in Lancaster and north of it, drivers and non drivers, who'll say it's not benefited them.

The new road doesn't stop the councils providing better public transport options too, but given that the local councils have done nothing for decades, no reason to think they'll start now!

 

[B&I]

Probably an awful lot less than building brand new railway lines through developed areas meaning demolishing buildings, building loads of new bridges, etc.

Sorry, I didn't realise it cost more to demolish a building when building a railway, as opposed to when building a road

 

[underbank]

Sorry, I didn't realise it cost more to demolish a building when building a railway, as opposed to when building a road

No buildings were demolished for the route of the new by pass. Dozens of buildings would need to be demolished to put in a new tram or railway line with stations etc. to encourage more city centre travellers out of their cars. Quite simply because the by-pass route is fields around the city, whereas a tram/railway track would only be beneficial if it went through the city centre and built up residential areas. Not much point in a railway track to the M6 (which is where the by-pass goes) is there? Of course, unless you were going to build a new rail/freight terminal at Heysham and a new railway line to join it to the WCML but that would also mean loads of buildings being demolished too!