Wednesday, 1 October 2014

Stonehenge: A Few Scary Moments On The A303 At Stonehenge Bottom

Earlier today, I went for a bike ride to clear my head and for the last part, I rode north-eastwards along Byway 12, to the A303.  Crossing the A303 is never easy and you need to have your wits about you.  Putting it bluntly, when you cross the A303 here, you have to remember that the great travelling public aren't really thinking that they might encounter people by the roadside.  Why on earth would there be people close to one of the wonders of the World; I ask you?

As a consequence of this, anyone attempting to cross the A303 at Byway 12, Byway 11 or Stonehenge Bottom has to regard themselves as a slice of ham about to be sandwiched between two pieces of steel-reinforced "bread" with a closing speed in excess of 120 mph.  Get it wrong and it is going to hurt - briefly, bloodily and almost certainly, finally.

At Byway 12, you have to wait until you can't see vehicles in either direction to have enough time to stroll, not run, across the A303.  Running isn't advised, as if you were to fall, you simply wouldn't have time to pick yourself up before the Grim Sandwich Maker appeared.  On quiet days, you might have to wait a couple of minutes for a safe gap - there aren't many quiet days any more!  On a bad day, you might have to wait 10-15 minutes or even longer to cross in reasonable safety, or simply give it up as a bad job and back track. Too many lose patience and take silly risks...

Today wasn't too bad and I was safely across in under a minute.  I rode up to the A344 then onto the temporary permissive path between Byway 12 and Stonehenge Bottom.  As I crested the ridge down to Stonehenge Bottom I was confronted by a veritable gaggle of cyclists heading down towards the A303.



They were a nice friendly bunch and I explained that I was part of STAG and what we were about and please could I take photos of them if they were trying to cross.  They were happy for me to do so, so here is a short vignette of what happened next.

The thought of them all trying to cross made my blood run a bit cold as the traffic here is gravity-assisted in both directions and the westbound traffic is still trying to settle scores with other drivers from the 2 lanes into 1 section of the A303, a few hundred meters to the east.

A few cyclists at the front of the group spotted a small gap and either ran or rode across.

Most of them didn't get the opportunity and there was  steady stream of fast-moving traffic in both directions on what is, at this point a Clearway, not that anyone gives a tuppeny-damn about the Highway Code these days!

They waited, and waited, and waited.
When a westbound gap appeared they moved forward, then back again as it disappeared.

One of them made it to the central strip and an eastbound driver in a grey car slowed and stopped.  Remember, it is a Clearway - no stopping.

The cyclists, not quite sure what to do now, all started to move off the verge towards the centre of the A303,  but did so very hesitantly.  The westbound traffic was still thundering past them with mere inches to spare.  It couldn't have been a very pleasant experience.

White van man from Black Hole Storage Removals clearly didn't give a damn and went roaring through and this carried on for a while until another grey car stopped on the westbound carriageway.
and finally, the whole group got across safely.

It could so easily have been very different.  But why are things so dangerous?

Well, the people who control the World Heritage Site have a policy of making Stonehenge a more bike (and horse and pedestrian) friendly place.  This seemed to be borne-out in the plans for the new visitor's centre submitted by English Heritage.  However, despite their intentions and despite planning conditions that mandated a whole raft of measures that would have improved things for cyclists, English Heritage have singularly failed to deliver.

One of the few things that was largely outside the control of English Heritage was an improved crossing at Stonehenge Bottom.  On the one hand,  increased usage of the crossing point was anticipated by all parties after the closure of the A344, hence the planning requiremnt.  However, a spoke was put in the works by the Highways Agency who produced a report - in the way Government Agencies do when they don't want to take action.  The conclusion of this report reads as follows:


"It is the designer’s view that the current usage of this crossing by pedestrians or by cyclists, on either the A303 or the A344 routes, does not justify the increased risk to motorised users on the A303 of providing refuge islands for this crossing. However it is felt that the opportunity to relocate the crossing to the best location position for NMU visibility and to reduce the crossing width is justified and should be taken.

In taking this view, the designer is taking note of RSA team preference, based on pedestrian rather than cycle use of the crossing, of the do minimum crossing type. The designer is also influenced by the fact that this is far from being the only single carriageway rural at grade crossing of the A303 with no specific NMU facilities, including equestrian crossings. 

The proximity of this crossing to the Stonehenge World Heritage site does not currently attract to it significant NMU usage. It is therefore felt that neither the existing usage of the crossing or the last five year’s accident records warrant a different approach here to that taken at other similar crossing locations where the balance of risks between NMU and Motorised Users, and hence the actual overall risk, dictates the level of provision made. 

It is therefore recommended that the measures in Option 4 proposals, with the refuge islands removed but all the other measures retained is adopted. 

A future scheme for reviewing the crossing arrangements needs to be submitted and approved. The scheme shall have regard to Design Manual for Roads and Bridges HD 19/03 Stage 4 Safety Audit 12 and 36 month post scheme recommendations for any remedial action. 

It is felt that the extensive investigation already under taken into the examination of the safety of and the changes to the crossing here proposed satisfies the requirements of the planning condition."

Just for the record, NMUs are non-motorised units - pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders.  Cutting out all the crap, what they are actually saying is that the body-count at Stonehenge Bottom is too low to warrant making anything more than superficial changes. However, they go on to suggest that a safety audit at 12 and 36 months might change things if the body count increases.

I don't suppose the contribution by Wiltshire Council helped much either:


"...that in relation to cycle usage their preferred route between the A344 to the north and Amesbury for cyclists was via the countess roundabout underpass crossing of the A303 and than via Lark Hill."  (all the typos and grammatical errors are courtesy of the Highways Agency!)

As usual with Wiltshire Council when it comes to anything in the south of the county - thumbs up bums and brains in neutral all the way.  No-one in their right minds, who knew about the local area, would ever choose to get from the centre of Amesbury to Stonehenge by heading north, through the scrofulous Countess Roundabout underpass (on foot - as cycling is forbidden on this bit of the cycle route), up Countess Road, being harassed by rat-running motorists, then head west to Larkhill along the rat-run of choice for coaches and HGVs, before eventually getting to the northern end of Byway 12.

Most sensible folk will simply head out to West Amesbury, up to the A303 and then to Stonehenge Bottom and the A344 - no need to ride with high speed traffic at all - just dice with death crossing the A303.  That's what they've always done, that's what they were doing today and that's what they will do until the A303 issue is resolved once and for all. 

Of course,  there was a fall-back plan to monitor the situation.  Here it is.  Read it carefully and spot the flaw:


STONEHENGE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT Planning Application Reference S/2009/1527 

Scheme required under planning condition 27 for reviewing pedestrian and cycle route access arrangements along the whole of the A344, and crossing arrangements at the A303 (Stonehenge Bottom)

Following approval of the details of the pedestrian and cycle route access arrangements along the whole of the A344 and crossing arrangements at the A303 (Stonehenge Bottom), English Heritage will co-operate with the Local Highways Authority, Highways Agency and the Local Planning Authority in reviewing the arrangements. In particular, should a formal Stage 4 Safety Audit be carried out, and any recommendations for remedial action be made in the 12 and 36 month Stage 4 Reports submitted to English Heritage and the other organisations, then any required remedial works, and arrangements for their implementation and funding, will be considered and agreed between English Heritage, the Local Highways Authority, the Local Planning Authority and the Highways Agency, as appropriate. 

In addition, English Heritage will carry out the following:

  • -  Incorporate questions about the pedestrian and cycle access into the annual visitor survey conducted by the travel and tourism department of market research company TNS. This will comprise face to face interviews with 180 individuals during the months of July, August and September. Likely questions include: whether people have accessed the site on foot or on bicycle, and, if so, where they have travelled from, how satisfactory they have found the route and where they are travelling onto. 

  • -  As part of the ongoing operational management of the site English Heritage staff will, as a matter of course, record, report to the relevant authorities and, if appropriate, take any necessary action in respect of any incidents or accidents along the route of the A344 between Airman's Corner and Stonehenge Bottom. 

    English Heritage 26th April 2012
 
Did you spot it?  Yes, that's right.  Most pedestrians, cyclists and horse riders arriving at Stonehenge don't pitch up at the visitor's centre, as there is (still) no provision for them.  They may arrive from east or west, north or south, but we suspect that few, if any, will be invited to take part in the annual visitor survey, conducted for English Heritage by TNS.  
During my many visits to the WHS this July August and September I've never seen anyone with a clipboard interviewing pedestrians, cyclists and the two riders I have seen, nor have I ever been approached.  Now that's interesting, if true because this safety audit is meant to be looking at the safety of crossing the A303 by any and all users, not just English Heritage's paying customers.
As I say, we don't know for certain that this is the case, but I feel an FOIA request ,or two, coming on! 











3 comments:

Unknown said...

The telling phrase here is "It is the designer’s view that the current usage of this crossing by pedestrians or by cyclists, on either the A303 or the A344 routes, does not justify the increased risk to motorised users on the A303 of providing refuge islands for this crossing." This begs a number of questions/observations:

1) If the layout means that only the requirements of NMUs (I've never been called a unit before) OR motorised users can be satisfied (i.e. not both) then it's an utterly crap design.
2) The priority is clearly motorised users.
3) How in the name of God does a refuge island pose a risk to motorised users, unless of course they are driving way too fast for their own safety.
4) Of course current usage of the crossing by pedestrians or cyclists is low. Who in their right mind would try to cross there? You stand more chance of surviving a fall into the Thames from London Bridge.

This is utterly typical of the complete incompetence and ignorance of transport planners in this country. If you brought a German, Dutch or Danish planner here and showed them this they would die laughing (assuming they hadn't already been killed crossing the A303 on foot or by bike.) It's bloody criminal.

Janice Hassett said...

I hope you took the opportunity to hand out some of those flyers General Disquiet??!

General Disquiet said...

Unfortunately, my decision to pop up to Stonehenge was very much a spur of the moment thing, so I didn't have any with me.

I didn't even have time to find out who the group was and where they had come from and were heading towards. Perhaps if they see the blog they might get in touch!