News RSS Feed


Possible Worcester ring road routes revealed

7:10am Wednesday 10th February 2010 in


TODAY your Worcester News can reveal in detail the two possible routes the controversial north-west link road around Worcester could take.

Until now, Worcestershire County Council has never revealed where it intends to build the final section of the city’s ring road.

One man has already vowed to fight the bulldozers after learning – from your Worcester News – that his historic home would have to be demolished to make way for the road. The road would:

• Link the Claines and Crown East roundabouts
• Include a new river bridge l Bypass Hallow, near Worcester, either to the west or east of the village
• Mean the demolition of a landmark listed farmhouse on the outskirts of Worcester
• Run through the site near Lower Broadheath where builder JS Bloor has submitted an application to develop up to 4,000 new homes
• Cut through listed buildings, conservation areas, waterways and landmarks.

The road forms part of a £300 million transport strategy that could change the way people move in and around Worcester over the course of the next 20 years.

The Worcester Transport Strategy, which is currently out for consultation, includes new park and ride sites, improved railway facilities, including a new Norton Parkway station, improved road junctions and foot and cycle links in and around the city.

According to a report by Halcrow – completed in April last year but only recently published online following a Freedom of Information request – the link road would be designed for speeds of up to 60mph and would include a cycle lane/footway along one side of the length of the route.

Halcrow indicates both would have a varying degree of negative impact on homes, the environment, landscape and sites of historical importance.

Councillor Derek Prodger, cabinet member for transport and safe environment, denied Worcestershire County Council had deliberately witheld information from the public.

In a statement he said: “We are committed to being open and transparent throughout this process and have started consulting the public at the earliest possible stage, and as part of this we have put a large number of the technical reports on our website which have been available over the last couple of weeks.

“This is an ongoing commitment which will see us make available further technical reports as they are published.”

We previously reported how the transport strategy would be delivered in two phases. Work on the north-west ring road would not start until at least 2016, and only if the council could attract the necessary funding.

Worcestershire County Council has suddenly shifted its attention from dualling the southern link road to completing the ring road around the city.

District councillors and officers have since pleaded with the council to explain its thinking, particularly as it could affect the South Worcestershire Joint Core Strategy – to build up to 25,500 new homes in and around Worcester by 2026, which was drawn up on the basis the southern link road would be dualled.

Interested residents had also demanded to see evidence and it was only because a Freedom of Information request was submitted to the council that the Halcrow report has been published – a month after public consultation began on the strategy.

Meanwhile, a notice of motion from the Liberal Democrats calling for the dualling of the southern link road to be included in the consultation, even at this late stage, was thrown out by the Conservative cabinet on Monday.

Transport chiefs said that scheme has not been completely abandoned but believe completing the north-west link road at this moment in time would deliver the most benefits for Worcester.

• Please read our story about the two proposed routes here then vote in our poll below to indicate your preference.

Related links


Comments(31)

keeneye says...
8:21am Wed 10 Feb 10

At last - thank you Worcester News for this headline and helping getting this into the open.
This development will be significant for Worcester, good or not so good all developements have a plus and munus element, I hope it generates the level of interest it deserves. And Worcester folks have their say, I do wonder if it will attract more comments than your recent headline, "Scoop that Poop". I hope so.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

skychip says...
8:45am Wed 10 Feb 10

My concern is whether there will be the money to do this project. It has been rumbling on for so many years - let's hope there will be a decision before too long

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Paul Griffiths says...
9:14am Wed 10 Feb 10

Conservative Cllr Derek Prodger says “We are committed to being open and transparent … we have put a large number of the technical reports on our website which have been available over the last couple of weeks."

Open and transparent? Last couple of weeks? The Halcrow report is dated April 2009.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Powyke says...
12:21pm Wed 10 Feb 10

The northern link is essential to the future of a Worcester economy (including the surrounding towns). Both suggested routes are equally viable so go with the lowest cost and envirnmental impact. This along with the Worcester Parkway Station are key to Worcester's future success as a commercial centre.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

MrStJohns says...
12:32pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Id agree with you there powyke, I think the time ahs come now to just get on put forward viable plans, better transport in the area will lead to better employment opportunities. Surely the new road tied up with the new university campus/ business park plan and 4000 homes is testament to getting this road complete and as powyke says ensuring the viability of Worcester as a commercial centre. You only have to look at Hereford, which is a lovely city, but struggles massively from being relatively cut of from good transport networks, in terms of employment opportunities.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

pudniw_gib says...
1:19pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Hopefully some rare newts and lack of cash will stop this hideous project.
Get the bus or ride a bike you lazy so and so's. It is only the amount of people driving private cars that causes the hold ups in town, if more people used the alternatives then there would be less need to blight the landscape and ruin other folks lives.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

keeneye says...
1:32pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Looks like coun Podger has been caught with his trousers down on this one. Lets see a picture of him in the Worcester News now, maybe stood at the Claines roundabout.
No wonder they wanted to keep this one quiet. And still he insists its only a concept for the future, come on!!you can do better than that counceller!! or do you play the usual game, keep quiet, keep out of the public debate and it will go away....again.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

waste says...
4:43pm Wed 10 Feb 10

it only makes me laugh that those who complain about the heavy traffic in the city, also complain about the proposed solution.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

cmot says...
5:45pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Well done to the Worcester News for exposing the truth about the north-west link, which appears to have been kept secret from the public since last April by those devious, secretive and untrustworthy council officers who are paid to be open, transparent and deliver services to the public.
How long were council officers going to keep this under wraps before springing the plans on us moments before committing to going ahead? Their attitude and approach towards this major scheme has been disgraceful, particularly as the owner of the house planned for demolishing only found out from the Worcester News. These officers should hold their heads in disgrace and be named and shamed for their behaviour.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Paul Griffiths says...
7:06pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Council officers, cmot? The buck stops with the Conservative councillors who make up the Cabinet. Or is that who you mean?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

rgdudley says...
7:14pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Paul Griffiths wrote:
Council officers, cmot? The buck stops with the Conservative councillors who make up the Cabinet. Or is that who you mean?
Have you ever watched "Yes Minister"?
.
It's definitely not the politicians who are in charge. They may think they are, but then they don't live in the real world.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

WorcsPhil says...
7:55pm Wed 10 Feb 10

It is obvious that our politicians and their staff in County Hall are totally divorced from reality.

Four words should be enough to scupper ANY road building on this scale:

"peak oil"
"climate change"

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

cmot says...
10:16pm Wed 10 Feb 10

Paul Griffiths wrote:
Council officers, cmot? The buck stops with the Conservative councillors who make up the Cabinet. Or is that who you mean?
Definitely mean council officers. Although councillors do all the spin and manage budgets, this scheme would have been investigated and delivered by officers with councillors merely giving their approval.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

flappy says...
7:57am Thu 11 Feb 10

The amateurs like Councillor Prodger have behaved despicably on this. As for the ring road and the proposed developments in the same area. Do they not realise this is Grade 2 farmland (best in Worcestershire) and that both proposed routes run through Sites of Sepcial Scientific interest which have national protection?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Paul Griffiths says...
8:36am Thu 11 Feb 10

When the councillors who are supposed to be running the council are instead "merely giving their approval" to their officers' proposals, I suggest it's time to elect a new set of councillors.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

psmite says...
10:03am Thu 11 Feb 10

This is an ill conceived plan which would be an environmental and ecological disaster. The Council should go back and look for sustainable and credible transport policies for Worcester not 'knee jerk' road building which will fill up to capacity instantly and encourage greater car use. They would be better spending the money on Schools and hospitals and repairing our existing poor roads.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

flappy says...
10:24am Thu 11 Feb 10

I agree with psmite. I have read the document which is available at http://www.worcester
shire.gov.uk/cms/tra
nsport-and-streets/t
ransport/plans-and-s
trategies/worcester-
transport-strategy/w
ts-technical-docs.as
px

The assessment states that there will be "large adverse " effects on landscape and wildlife from the proposed routes. It also points out the significant noise increases that can be expected for the rural properties.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Energetic says...
10:55am Thu 11 Feb 10

I would favour the shorter route as (a) probably cheaper to build and (b) more likely to be used by transit vehicles. People will be displaced, though handsomely compensated, and the existing ecology disturbed but this has to be balanced against the relief of gridlock in the City.

Disruption will be much less than that caused by the utterly useless terrestrial wind-farm projects, also on high-grade farmland, which will only benefit their builders and operators through taxpayer subsidies.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

keeneye says...
11:25am Thu 11 Feb 10

Flappy and PSmite, look at how claines has developed over he years, look at the style of buildings and their age and you will see Claines has developed over farm land over the years the, most recent being at the end of St Annes road, also Bevere has crept northwards, nothing new there. Claines or more accurately North of claines already carries the dual track, so what difference would it make, you either suffer the extra traffic on the Obmersley road into the Tything or have it routed away from the suburbs, so if you dont want development, lets demolish everything back to say the 1930's this might get us pack to Penbury Street - oh no !!dont want to spoil the view of the carrots and cabbages!!

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

rgdudley says...
1:09pm Thu 11 Feb 10

The development is coming whatever the state of the roads. Anyone who thinks otherwise is a fool. It may be in the Dines Green / Broadheath area, it may be in the Norton area, it may even be in both but it is coming, like it or not.
.
What we need to do is make sure that when it comes it doesn’t cause even more problems than it has to. One of the primary aims at the moment is to get traffic out of the City centre. The only way to do this is to build the northern bridge. It has to be built.
.
For those of you who think cars are go to die out when the oil runs out you are a fool to yourselves. We currently have electric cars as a reasonable alternative; the technology of these will only improve with time. Even without electric there is always steam, mock if you wish but in the 30’s and 40’s there were viable steam cars and lorries running around. The later Sentinel lorries were capable of over 70mph. Think what could be build with modern technology and modern materials. People won’t give up cars they are just too convenient. Even countries with decent public transport have cars so there is no chance of us getting rid of them.
.
If you think that the roads will fill up straight away then you just need to design them for greater capacity. The Southern link was a fiasco because the then planners made it a single carriageway. For the Northern Link to work it must be a dual carriage way, the roundabouts and junctions (including M5 J6) will need to be designed to take large volumes i.e. made big enough, not like the mini-roundabouts on the Southern Link.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

flappy says...
1:16pm Thu 11 Feb 10

Yes keeneye, look at the 10 billion people that will need feeding by 2050; the limited amount of high quality farmland we have; the adverse effects the proposals will have on wildlife and landscape. All are things that can never be recaptured. Where does your solution end? A whole country full of roads and concrete?

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

keeneye says...
1:36pm Thu 11 Feb 10

Flappy - "Sit down, calm down and listen - " The world is not going to end because we build a Northern link road" Okay? I know Gwillams is busy but he cannot fix10 billion we need more houses, what rgdudley has written is spot on. Cars are not going to go away in our life time. or our childrens life time, Worcester has had a problem for a while made worse by the half finished schemes not keeping up with development, we have a problem now, the answer is clear, "Northern link". What they build inside the ring road is another issue.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

flappy says...
1:49pm Thu 11 Feb 10

Keeneye- "Wake up, get real and smell the coffee!" Try getting just a bit higher up and take a longer term perspective on the world's resources. Your horizons are nearly as short as councillors and politicians who are only interested in the next vote.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

topspin says...
3:55pm Thu 11 Feb 10

Talking of "Peak Oil", the report released on 10th February by The Peak Oil Group (peakoiltaskforce.ne
t/) is highly relevant.
It concludes that oil shortages, insecurity of supply and price volatility will destabilise economic, political and social activity within five years.
It recommends, amongst other things, investment in public transport and a move away from the traditional car to more fuel/carbon-efficien
t transport.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

keeneye says...
4:00pm Thu 11 Feb 10

"Why thank you flappy thats the nicest thing said to me this week"
Okay- lets start with base line - traffic in Worcester is not goint to go away - we need housing - things are going to get more congested, whats the answer for Worcester? or do we just do nothing - By the way - I am involved with recovering the earths resources and my job takes me all over the world - less of the coffee and more substance flappy.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

BarryB says...
8:42pm Thu 11 Feb 10

A far distant ex resident from Worcester plugs his Fib Lem Councillors in Claines so readers, whatever we do in terms of voting and anything else that goes, just follow Paul Griffiths and his Liberal Councillor friends and they will do the exact opposite to what is needed to this road. Let's stop the politicking and concentrate on the issue that this paper is trying to get a sensible discourse on. The city needs to complete the road infrastructure to stop the centre becoming a massive, grid-lock. Loathe as I am to see good green land and pleasant areas tarmacked over, the only sensible solution is the Northern Link, straight through Claines and if the odd newt, bat, badger or vole get in the way, sorry, they don't need a car.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

rgdudley says...
9:00pm Thu 11 Feb 10

The Peak Oil report isn't really relevant here. As most of our motor fuel costs are tax, any price rise in oil could be offset instantaneously if the Government chose to do it. It is an artificially created problem not a real one, as Lord Oxburgh says in his opening words in the report “There isn’t any shortage of oil, but there is a real shortage of the cheap oil”.
.
What is relevant is providing a transport system for Worcester that is fit for the future and can carry the increased numbers of people to the places they want to go to. As said before a large amount of traffic through the centre of Worcester is transit traffic, it doesn’t want to go through Worcester; it is forced to because of the road layout.
.
The simplest most direct way to get the traffic off the City Bridge and out of the centre is to give it somewhere else to go. The Southern Link partly succeeded in that but is now choked due to its success and the lack of foresight by its planners.
.
I’m quite happy for there to be extra public transport as well but that is not an answer for everything. They just aren’t the buses, trains and infrastructure available to take people where they need to go. I travel 45 minutes by car to work each morning. To do that by public transport would be two bus rides and three train journeys, and would take 2 ½ hours (each way). It just isn’t going to happen.
.
I could work in Worcester, but that will mean that more jobs need to be created here, to do that requires development. To get development requires good transport. Good transport requires roads. Whatever way you look at this, unless we are all going to revert back to some feudal society scrimping for scraps in the fields then Worcester needs to grow and needs the roads to go with it.
.
If you get the traffic out of the City then you can have all your green space, you can have more pedestrian areas. If you expand the City and get more residents you will get the better stores coming here instead of other towns. That will generate more jobs locally and we can start to cycle to work rather than traipse up and down the M5 each day.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

keeneye says...
7:20am Fri 12 Feb 10

Well said BarryB, Well said rgdudley
The councellers we have are right out of there depth with this one.
This is a real issue for Worcester and surrounding areas and does not need the typical window dressing we get from them. This is not just the responsibility of Cllr D Prodger there are others who should be put in the spot light

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Ctrl Alt Del says...
4:57pm Fri 12 Feb 10

Just two small points. The article says the road will have a 60mph speed limit, therefore single carriageway therefore gridlock within weeks of opening. A parkway station has been proposed for Norton ever since I have lived in Worcester (more than 30 years) and it aint happened yet and is not likely to despite what our photo friendly councillor says.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

rgdudley says...
8:08pm Fri 12 Feb 10

I did notice the 60mph comment and wondered whether that meant a single carriageway. I thought they can't be THAT stupid, but then again it is the Council.
.
The delays in the Parkay station just prove that they have no interest in green or public transport and every word they say on the subject is hot air to be treated with the scorn it deserves.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

Common Sense says...
10:16pm Fri 12 Feb 10

As a "foreigner" from Pershore, I can only say rgdudley is right - IMHO!

We are now out of the "horse-drawn era" and the car is the preferred choice of most people, for its flexibility.

Do you suppose they had all this tug-of-war for and against a proposal, when building the railways? Or the canals?

They simply cut right through everything - regardless! Even through Candleford!

CS.

Report this post »    Register/Log In »

More News stories


IN THE WAY: his house beside the A449 at Claines will be bulldozed if either of the two proposed routes for Worcester’s northern ring road is approved IN THE WAY: This house beside the A449 at Claines will be bulldozed if either of the two proposed routes for Worcester’s northern ring road is approved

Most popular



Local Information

Enter your postcode, town or place name

House prices »   Schools »   Crime »   Hospitals »

Local Businesses