daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Highways & Autobahns

Highways & Autobahns All about automobility



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old August 13th, 2010, 02:18 PM   #1361
Jonesy55
Mooderator
 
Jonesy55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Floreat Salopia
Posts: 14,205
Likes (Received): 20305

The Scottish central belt is heavily populated, why not use the term 'Scottish highlands' if you are referring to low population density?

Norfolk isn't heavily populated either but that doesn't affect the overall picture of southeast England because it is only one small part of that, similarly just because it is correct to say that the Scottish highlands are not heavily populated, that doesn't mean it is incorrect to say that great britain or the UK is heavily populated, as a whole it is (despite the fact that the cairngorms, snowdonia and Cumbria are not).
Jonesy55 no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old August 13th, 2010, 02:21 PM   #1362
JohnnyFive
Registered User
 
JohnnyFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 2,378
Likes (Received): 335

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy55 View Post
The Scottish central belt is heavily populated, why not use the term 'Scottish highlands' if you are referring to low population density?

Norfolk isn't heavily populated either but that doesn't affect the overall picture of southeast England because it is only one small part of that, similarly just because it is correct to say that the Scottish highlands are not heavily populated, that doesn't mean it is incorrect to say that great britain or the UK is heavily populated, as a whole it is (despite the fact that the cairngorms, snowdonia and Cumbria are not).
So where are the current motorway developments under construction in England?
JohnnyFive no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 02:22 PM   #1363
ChrisZwolle
Road user
 
ChrisZwolle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Zwolle
Posts: 43,613
Likes (Received): 19406

I think the public hostility against motorways is generally overestimated. Such stories always go well in the media and get a disproportional amount of attention.

For example, if they want to widen a motorway in the Netherlands, people can comment and eventually appeal if they feel to need to do so. However, the amount of comments is generally around 100 for a 10 mile upgrade in rural areas and around 500 in densely populated areas. However, this is only a small proportion of the people who live in the so-called "affected area" (650 yards on either side of the motorway). A 10 mile widening in an urban area would translate to a 7.4 square mile affected area. At 5,000 people per sq. mile, this would mean at least 37,000 people "affected" by the road widening. Maybe 1% comment and 0.02% of them appeal in higher courts.

It's more like; "nobody wants a speed bump, except in their own street".
ChrisZwolle no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 02:34 PM   #1364
Jonesy55
Mooderator
 
Jonesy55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Floreat Salopia
Posts: 14,205
Likes (Received): 20305

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyFive View Post
So where are the current motorway developments under construction in England?
Here you go.

http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/bas...aspx?JScript=1
Jonesy55 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 02:50 PM   #1365
JohnnyFive
Registered User
 
JohnnyFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 2,378
Likes (Received): 335

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy55 View Post
OK, so the answer is no motorways planned or under construction then in England.

Perhaps in the case of England it is because of the following?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy55 View Post
public is hostile to development precisely because we are so heavily populated.

Last edited by JohnnyFive; August 13th, 2010 at 02:56 PM.
JohnnyFive no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 03:08 PM   #1366
Harry
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 351
Likes (Received): 0

By and large, the general anti-development tendency of the English population (and yes - I'm generalising to make a point- there are exceptions) has worked quite well in preserving a rural way of life in large areas of the country. It is easy to make the point that England is, in general, a densely populated place - but planning policy has ensured that large areas of it retain a rural feel despite there being approx 50 million people living in an area less than half the area of France.

The contrast with the Netherlands is quite interesting. If anything (and I haven't looked at any figures) I would imagine the Netherlands is even more densely populated...but the Dutch population does not seem as averse to using precious land resource for infrastructure purposes. Different mindset. It strikes me as quite interesting, for example, that planners have been prepared to dedicate such a large tract of land in the centre of the Netherlands to Schiphol Airport. Schiphol is a fantastic airport, but I'm not sure that it's really needed (to the extent that its raison d'etre is primarily to act as a hub for foreign travellers, and less to serve the local population). A smaller airport would have sufficed if the objective was to serve the local population only - but planners, voters etc were obviously happy to allow a larger, 'de luxe' version...at the expense of a large area of costly land. That simply would not happen in the UK. Our loss, perhaps. I'm sure each approach has its merits.
Harry no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 03:09 PM   #1367
Jonesy55
Mooderator
 
Jonesy55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Floreat Salopia
Posts: 14,205
Likes (Received): 20305

There are numerous motorway developments there, widenings, upgradings, active traffic management schemes etc. They are the priority at the moment, it would be nice to see a south coast motorway too though.

There is opposition to motorways but like Chris says, its usually a vocal minority rather than overwhelming public hostility.
Jonesy55 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 04:43 PM   #1368
flierfy
Registered User
 
flierfy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,886
Likes (Received): 296

Quote:
Originally Posted by ed110220 View Post
It's a bit of a circular argument: a motorway is a motorway because it is legally defined as such with certain restrictions, but that tells us about how it is designated not anything about the road in itself or why for example the M32 is classed as a motorway but another road not. One could easily reclassify the M32 as an A-road, as was suggested above, without making any physical changes.
Reclassifying requires 'physical changes'. Apart from changing all directional signs on the road itself and all roads leading there as well as road markings on junctions along the M32 you have to implement special cycle path at slip road merges and diverges as cyclist would be allowed to use the road.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ed110220 View Post
Your argument emphasis the legal aspect, but to me that is subjective and circular: a motorway is a motorway because it is so legally defined. But surely we're interested in what the road is physically (ie objectively) rather than legally (ie subjectively)?
I don't know what you're interested in. But the classification of a road as motorway comes along with the requirement of high design standard.
__________________
Rippachtal.de
flierfy está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 07:17 PM   #1369
Stainless
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Pyeongnae
Posts: 420
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
Reclassifying requires 'physical changes'. Apart from changing all directional signs on the road itself and all roads leading there as well as road markings on junctions along the M32 you have to implement special cycle path at slip road merges and diverges as cyclist would be allowed to use the road.
You would probably have a parallel cycle path alongside it, that is what there is on the A4174 that crosses the M32 at J1. The only reason they wanted to declassify it was to turn a 2 lane motorway into a 1 lane road with a bus lane, which is a ridiculous idea. Other plans have included turning a very popular cycle path into a bus route, an idea that obviously wasn't thought through as it is narrower than a bus in several places and would only work in one direction.

I don't think there would have to be any changes to declassify it, a motorway is of a higher spec than an A road, the only difference being that you can go down an A road on a moped or a tractor.
Stainless no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 08:19 PM   #1370
sotonsi
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 5,563

Quote:
Originally Posted by flierfy View Post
I don't know what you're interested in. But the classification of a road as motorway comes along with the requirement of high design standard.
Technically it doesn't, however 98% of the motorway network is to a high standard, and it is highly unlikely that anything that doesn't meet the high standards for cross-section, horizontal and vertical alignment would be given motorway status these days, even if it's a new build, offline road that's an extension of the existing network - in fact, even being up to standards doesn't mean that it would - see the M56 'extension' - the motorway just ends where it used to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyFive View Post
OK, so the answer is no motorways planned or under construction then in England.
Err, they are building the A1(M) from Dishforth (j49) to Leeming, and the final link from Leeming to Barton (j56) is planned. That's it in terms of new centreline mileage.

Scotland has the M74 and M80 competitions under construction, with the M8 competition and M90 Forth Replacement Crossing planned (though the latter might not be motorway and isn't very far progressed in the whole funding it arena).
sotonsi no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 13th, 2010, 10:37 PM   #1371
Gareth
Keltlandia
 
Gareth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 8,879
Likes (Received): 66

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyFive View Post
Scotland is not heavily populated, neither is Wales or Norther Ireland, and as stated there is a major public campaign for roads to be built or upgraded in Scotland.
But then the UK as a whole is, which is the topic of the thread.

Can you please stop hijacking every UK-related thread outside the UK forum with your political dogma?
Gareth no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 14th, 2010, 03:59 PM   #1372
geogregor
Registered User
 
geogregor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London
Posts: 15,531
Likes (Received): 19211

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonesy55 View Post
you can use M1 M6 M74 M8 to go from London to Edinburgh.
I have done that. I still think Scotland needs another link with the rest of the country, particularly the east side.

Quote:
Maybe the british public is hostile to development precisely because we are so heavily populated. In siberia it doesn't matter if you build a road through some natural space, there is so much of it that it is barely noticeable. In a very densely populated area though natural open space is more precious and valued.
Some parts of Germany are also densely populated which doesn't stop them from having extensive motorway network which is constantly upgraded and extended. Even Hong Kong builds some new roads and bridges

Quote:
Of course this means practical problems of congestion etc but many british people would probably prefer to solve that through population reduction rather than building more infrastructure.
Yes, possibly by forcing people like me off the country.
I wonder how you gonna achieve such unrealistic goal as population reduction in country with quite fast population growth at the moment. Forced sterilization?
Good infrastructure is vital for any country growth. I mean economical growth not population growth. Yet some parts of British public dream about some past utopia as the way for the future. Green and pleasant land, where people ride horse buggies, eventually bicycles.
And then in the same sentence they complain that UK manufacturing is shrinking and the whole country relay on the banking industry . Of course there are many reason for that but outdated transport infrastructure doesn't help.

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyFive View Post
Anther person believing Britain = England = UK.
Come on, I lived in rural Scotland for a year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry View Post
By and large, the general anti-development tendency of the English population (and yes - I'm generalising to make a point- there are exceptions) has worked quite well in preserving a rural way of life in large areas of the country. It is easy to make the point that England is, in general, a densely populated place - but planning policy has ensured that large areas of it retain a rural feel despite there being approx 50 million people living in an area less than half the area of France.
I have to admit I like rural countryside but you can't stop changes. At some point there has to be new development.
The idea of preserving land as it was in XIX century at any cost is a bit silly. It is already artificial landscape anyway.
geogregor no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 14th, 2010, 06:05 PM   #1373
JohnnyFive
Registered User
 
JohnnyFive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 2,378
Likes (Received): 335

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth View Post
But then the UK as a whole is, which is the topic of the thread.

Can you please stop hijacking every UK-related thread outside the UK forum with your political dogma?
I was replying to the poster who who stated the following:

Quote:
Originally Posted by geogregor View Post
Unfortunately British public is very hostile to road investment. To be honest British public is hostile to any development. Even high speed rail (new green god of Europe) face opposition
I find it bizarre. People think they can live in some sort of rural, peaceful and traditional utopia. In one of the most densely populated countries in Europe. It is a joke.
This statement may be true for England.

It is certainly not true for Scotland, hence why I provided clarification of the differences between the two countries regarding the points raised.

Last edited by JohnnyFive; August 14th, 2010 at 06:23 PM.
JohnnyFive no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 14th, 2010, 10:57 PM   #1374
poshbakerloo
***Alexxx***
 
poshbakerloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London, Manchester, Cheshire, Sheffield, Moscow
Posts: 5,092
Likes (Received): 292

No more Motorways will get built, and no new high speed rail lines, there is no money!
__________________
"BEFORE WE MARRY...I HAVE A SECRET!"

I <3 London
poshbakerloo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 02:07 AM   #1375
Comfortably Numb
Goddess of Winter
 
Comfortably Numb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Rochester NY
Posts: 2,521
Likes (Received): 309

Britain's population is predicted to exceed 70 million by 2030. The reality is that new motorways are definitely going to be needed in the fairly near future, to cope with the rising population. Resistance to new motorway building is just going to cause a big, big problem later on, when the already overburdened roads become even more congested, causing more pollution and putting trade and commerce at risk.

The "no money" excuse is getting old. The money *could* be made available if the will to invest in the future was there in the first place and if people weren't so brainwashed into believing that bridging a few gaps and building no more than 5 major motorways would turn British cities into Los Angeles. Besides, major road (and rail) projects create sustainable jobs and would help in the long-term to keep Britain competitive.

Doing nothing would be far more disastrous for the long run than building 4-5 new major motorways, plugging a few gaps and widening some of the more congested roads, replacing roundabout type junctions with free-flow interchanges.

It's a truth that not many people like to hear. What any successful country needs is a good mass transit and road infrastructure.
Comfortably Numb no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 03:01 AM   #1376
niterider
niterider
 
niterider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 413
Likes (Received): 0

niterider no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 03:21 AM   #1377
Mateusz
Registered User
 
Mateusz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,536
Likes (Received): 235

Well to be completely honest I don't think that there is a party in this country which would propose motorway network expansion... that's the bit about roads from Tories' Manifesto

Quote:
Road users have had a raw deal under Labour, so we will:

* Crack down on road works, introducing lane rental for some of our busiest roads;
* Give more powers to local councils to get traffic moving;
* Crack down on rogue clampers;
* Introduce a lorry road user charge, so foreign lorries pay their fair share of tax;
* Consult on our Fair Fuel Stabiliser; and
* Facilitate the switch to green cars by creating a national car recharging network.
Yeah well I would turn a bild eye a bit on this, as everyone should in case of manifestos.
Mateusz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 03:24 AM   #1378
Pansori
planquadrat
 
Pansori's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: London - Vilnius
Posts: 9,973
Likes (Received): 6911

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mateusz View Post

Quote:
* Crack down on road works
LOL, now THAT is messed up.
Pansori no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 03:28 AM   #1379
Mateusz
Registered User
 
Mateusz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sheffield
Posts: 6,536
Likes (Received): 235

I was confused for a moment like WTF? so do they plan to cancel the requiered maintenance or they want to push forward more schemes
Mateusz no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old August 15th, 2010, 03:31 AM   #1380
poshbakerloo
***Alexxx***
 
poshbakerloo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: London, Manchester, Cheshire, Sheffield, Moscow
Posts: 5,092
Likes (Received): 292

Quote:
Originally Posted by Comfortably Numb View Post
Britain's population is predicted to exceed 70 million by 2030. The reality is that new motorways are definitely going to be needed in the fairly near future, to cope with the rising population. .
Its true they are needed, but I never see it happening...

I think in about 40 years time there will be a big problem as nothing will have progressed much, its fine right now but it won't be soon.
__________________
"BEFORE WE MARRY...I HAVE A SECRET!"

I <3 London
poshbakerloo no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
highways, motorway, united kingdom

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium