Andrew, in addition to being the MP for Harrogate and Knaresborough, is a Parliamentary Under Secretary of State in the Department for Transport with the dubious honour of having the brief to deliver the road investment strategy. He can't help being a Yorkshireman and from the "wrong" side of the Pennines.
The meeting didn't begin to auspiciously. Before the Minister arrived, I was accosted by a member of Amesbury Council, who pompously announced that this meeting was very much focusing on Amesbury and the Amesbury end of any road improvements. As I say, he was a member - of the council.
Thankfully, this wasn't the case, with the Minister making quite clear that he was discussing the entirety of the Countess Roundabout to Berwick Down section of the A303 scheme.
The meeting demonstrated that most parties understand the vital need to improve the A303, that it is part of the larger corridor plan and to fail to deliver the Stonehenge section would mean the whole strategic plan would fail. Failure, this time, seems not to be an option - but we've heard similar assurances in the past.
A consensus is building that something has to be done, which in a way is a major step forward. Stakeholders, STAG included, are holding bilateral meetings with each other to ensure that there are no surprises and issues are dealt with early.
What were the key points emerging from the meeting? Well, although there has been much talk of tunnels, nothing is yet set in stone. Highways England are looking at all the options previously considered, eliminating those that have little chance of success and focusing in on the best option. They will submit this and all the other information as part of the Development Consent Order process, which replaces a Public Inquiry. The re will be an examination of the facts and figures in public, but their is no adversarial element to the DCO process. This process has already begun and should take 5 years to complete. It clearly involves a heck of a lot of work and Highways England expressed a wish to engage with stakeholders throughout this process.
A lot of key issues were raised. Perhaps the most important for all locally was what happens between now and when any project comes to fruition. A lot of the discussion focused on the need to improve both the Countess and Longbarrow roundabouts - neither of which are allowing traffic flow during peak periods and the tailbacks encourage rat running. The minister seemed to take that on board, though time will tell if they achieve anything.
As far as the Longbarrow to Berwick Down section went, they are focusing on the northern route (ie north of the current A303). Those representing Winterbourne Stoke pointed out that we expected a lot more consideration being given to sound-proofing the section that ran across the Till valley to protect the village from road noise. It was noted that the previous scheme involved raising the road on a causeway - bizarre given the history of the River Till - which was no longer acceptable. It had been done to try and get rid of a lot of the spoil from the previously planned tunnel. We raised the issue of the phosphatic chalk discovered along the possible tunnel route and the suggestion that disturbing it might release radon. It was clear that both Andrew Jones and Highways England were well aware of this and they commented that appropriate ways of disposing of such material would need to be found.
The only question that Highways England didn't answer, in fact they were told NOT to answer it by Andrew Jones, was one we asked for information. We asked how deep the tunnel might be, below ground level, at two points: Stonehenge Bottom and at its closest predicted point to Stonehenge itself. We indicated that at this early stage, we weren't after specifics; just a general indication of depth - were we talking a metre, 10 metres or 100 metres. Given that Highways England have been talking about a tunnel 2.9km long - not 2 to 3 km but 2.9km, we do find it a little bit odd that they aren't prepared to give a similarly important estimate on depth at this stage. At the end of the day, the depth of the excavation for the tunnel roof is going to be the measurement that is going to have to be defended the most in terms of the probability, or not, of damaging as yet undiscovered buried features. Like the tunnel length, this sort of discussion is best started early, so at least the most specious arguments are rapidly surfaced and dismissed.
The only note of dissent came from Amesbury Abbey, in relation to how Highways England might change the Countess Roundabout as part of the overall scheme. The suggestion was that the A303 would cross above the A345 at a raised level. The objection here was that this would increase sound levels experienced by elderly residents of Amesbury Abbey. A rational concern, but one which could surely be alleviated by careful screening and road surface selection? Like many of the possible concerns, lets get them out in the open now, identify solutions and move on. Throwing Teddy's in corners will get us nowhere fast.
We all know it isn't going to be easy; there are a lot of vested interests. There are some for whom no compromise is acceptable and yet compromise we must have - the transport needs of the living and for generations yet to come have to be balanced with the need for preservation of things built by generations long dead, and quality of life has to be balanced with improved access to part of mankind's rich heritage. It's a huge, huge ask, but we are prepared to play our part in building the consensus that is needed to make this work.
It rather begs the question, dear reader. Are YOU?
No comments:
Post a Comment