CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!

£3 billion more road building

(27 posts)
  • Started 12 years ago by kaputnik
  • Latest reply from Wilmington's Cow

  1. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Minister for Motorways Keith Broon today announces £3bn plan to dual A96 between Inverness and Aberdeen.

    PLANS to dual the remaining 86 miles of the A96 between Aberdeen and Inverness at an expected cost of £3 billion were unveiled by transport minister Keith Brown today.

    The mammoth project is due to be completed by 2030 - just five years after a scheme to finish dualling of the A9 between Perth and Inverness, also costing £3bn.

    Together, they represent what could be the biggest building project in Scottish history and the equivalent of four Forth Replacement Crossings - which is itself putting a strain on the Scottish Government budget.

    Has there ever been such a road-crazed administration in Scotland as the current one since the 1960s?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  2. crowriver
    Member

    Pure pork barrel politics. Taking care of the core vote. It's so blatant.

    The new slogan appears to be: Bypasses For All.

    Meanwhile, railway investment is trimmed: no sign of electrification to Inverness nor Aberdeen anytime soon.

    Cycling? Not transport, just a hobby for a few eccentrics.

    Walking? That's what you do from the car to the shopping centre, workplace, or munro.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  3. kaputnik
    Moderator

    Keith must have some real dirt on John Swinney to get such a huge no-questions-asked guarantee card on his chequebook for roadbuilding.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  4. Min
    Member

    Seems like a very clear reason to vote NO to Independance to me. With the current situation, we clearly have more than enough money to burn on outdated transport systems before we even start thinking about sensible stuff.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  5. Baldcyclist
    Member

    "Taking care of the core vote. It's so blatant"

    Being a little frivolous here, but is that not the core purpose of *any* political party?

    SNP are currently doing what the last UK Labour administration did, and that is to bribe the populous with lots of nice things to make us (the majority at least, not *us* ;) ) feel all warm and fuzzy, and think we live in some sort of socialist nirvana with our free prescriptions, and new roads, and bridges, and schools etc etc.

    And then when the money runs out....

    Posted 12 years ago #

  6. shuggiet
    Member

    More evidence of how cyclists fund the 'road-tax' subsidy junkies....Keith should follow the bedroom tax example and set up an 'extra seat ' tax to fund this . 3m car drivers (my guess) for 3bn cost.. That's a £1000 for that unused unneeded car seat, that could be used by those large families crammed into those little cars...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  7. DaveC
    Member

    Does anyone know the number of vehicles on Scotlands roads? Also what is the average VED (Road Fund Liecence (misspelling by design))? We could work out what driver should be paying when they say only 'they' pay for the roads!!

    Posted 12 years ago #

  8. minus six
    Member

    there's nowt that keith likes better, than to unveil his massive project in front of his adoring motoring media chums

    its an obscenity. and they call this progress.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  9. cc
    Member

    I don't know what the truth of the matter is, but there's long been a perception that much of Scotland was unfairly left out of road building, and that large roads have for a long time been built either to serve Glasgow or to allow senior civil servants to motor in comfort between Edinburgh and their country houses in Perthshire. A sort of "teuchters don't matter" attitude. There have been calls for decades for the A9 and the A96 to be dualled. I think the current government sees itself as righting long-standing historic injustices.

    Personally I think it's become obvious to those who look at the evidence - what works elsewhere and what doesn't work - that we need a radically different approach, with safe and unthreatening cycle routes everywhere being easily the biggest bang for the buck.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  10. kaputnik
    Moderator

    but there's long been a perception that much of Scotland was unfairly left out of road building

    I'd agree with that perception. But you don't have to take that long and hard a look at the demographics of Scotland to see right through the "argument".

    I'd say the lack of a proper long-distance intercity rail service between the centres of population (Edinburgh to Glasgow excepted) and proper commuter and local rail services is something that areas outwith the central belt have been much more unfairly left out of.

    The roads already exist, but the Scottish Government is determined that they be bigger and wider, carry more traffic and people can drive to the places they can already drive, but slightly faster.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  11. cc
    Member

    Yes I'd agree about the rail. For example ISTR that one of the big bridges on the A9 north of Inverness - maybe the Dornoch bridge? - was designed to allow road and rail traffic, but that Thatcher insisted that rail lines not be built on the bridge as railways are Socialist. And I remember reading in a London news magazine just a few years ago that the railways in the Highlands should have their subsidy withdrawn and that all the people who can't manage without them should move to prosperous areas such as London, where the streets are paved with gold. And then there was the mad Tory plan to close a lot of the remaining Highland railways.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  12. Min
    Member

    One of the reasons I have mainly (in the past) supported the SNP is because of their willingness and commitment to putting funds into places north of the central belt in Scotland. Obviously if I had known that the sum total of that support would entail tarmacing it all over and turning it all into motorways, I wouldn't have.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  13. slowcoach
    Member

    Parts of the A96 (near Huntly) carry an average of less than 7000 vehicles per day (according to Transport Scotland) which is less than one third of the total that a single carriageway can cope with.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  14. Calum
    Member

    So, now that Glasgow has been comprehensively devastated by motorways, it's now the North's turn. Profligate waste.

    I have said it before and I will say it again: these degenerates would run a motorway up Princes Street if they thought they could get away with it.

    The SNP love to talk up their social justice credentials - saving the NHS from those nasty Tories etc - but it is their transport policies that keep Scots fat and idle, and send them to an early grave. Blood on their hands - every last one of them.

    I hate what these clowns are doing to my country, and if it keeps up I will not be staying here. I hear Copenhagen and Amsterdam are quite nice...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  15. chdot
    Admin

    "Inverness West Link: Vote favours Option Six route"

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-22468168

    Posted 12 years ago #

  16. crowriver
    Member

    Council leader Drew Hendry said he was pleased the vote favoured progressing the chosen route. He said: "The route was the subject of rigorous examination and I am convinced the route is the best possible option on technical, environmental and sustainability grounds. We have committed £1.3m to developing this route and we will now press ahead with a planning application by late summer."

    Depute leader David Alston said he strongly supported the choice of the chosen route. He said the proposal had been the subject of "rigorous scrutiny" by professionals and councillors. Mr Alston added that no viable alternative option had been presented by objectors.

    Last week, Highland Council referred itself to a public sector watchdog over its handling of the West Link. Audit Scotland has been invited to investigate allegations that the council's process for selecting the road's route has not been transparent.

    Well, that smacks of arrogance. Here's a textbook exanple of how Councils run roughshod over protests:

    - It's The Bee's Knees, professionals say so.
    - There Is No Alternative.
    - Protestors don't have a well funded proposal like ours.
    - We're betting the watchdog agrees with us.
    - It's going to happen Our Way and there's nothing you can do about it.

    I only hope we don't get this attitude over Leith Walk!

    Posted 12 years ago #

  17. chdot
    Admin

    "

    Carlton Reid (@carltonreid)
    09/05/2013 20:25
    DfT stats: motor traffic falls. Again. 2pc this qtr. http://www.bit.ly/ZK4fgU So why are we building new roads? #fixitfirst

    "

    Posted 12 years ago #

  18. crowriver
    Member

    From the report:

    "3. Recent trends in traffic estimates

    A number of factors may affect traffic volumes. For example, traffic levels would normally be expected to change in line with economic growth, as well as widespread weather events. When comparing changes between quarter one of 2012 and quarter one of 2013:

    An important factor affecting traffic appears to have been the heavy snowfall and icy conditions in many areas of Great Britain in the first quarter of 2013, dampening the traffic volumes. Initial analyses suggest that that this has not been to the extent of that seen in quarter four (October to December) of 2010.

    Preliminary estimates show GDP to have increased slightly overall between quarter one 2012 and quarter one 2013, by 0.6 per cent, with increases in the sectors we would expect to have the greatest influence on traffic volume. For example, the index for transport, storage and communication increased by 2.5 per cent between the first quarters of 2012 and 2013 and index for distribution, hotels and restaurants increased by 0.7 per cent during the same period."

    If you look at the graph there, it shows traffic growing from 1993, then plateauing from the end of 2007 onwards: presumably something to do with the global financial crisis and subsequent economic recession/stagnation?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  19. crowriver
    Member

    Seems like a very clear reason to vote NO to Independance to me.

    If that's how you're going to vote, that's up to you. I don't think transport policy has much to do with it though. Must have missed all those howls of outrage about the multi-billion motorway building programmes from Labour, Lib Dems and Tories. The only party protesting about more road building is the Green party, which is in favour of Scottish independence...

    Posted 12 years ago #

  20. Min
    Member

    If that's how you're going to vote, that's up to you. I don't think transport policy has much to do with it though. Must have missed all those howls of outrage about the multi-billion motorway building programmes from Labour, Lib Dems and Tories.

    It is nothing to do with transport policy. As I explained in my post,

    With the current situation, we clearly have more than enough money to burn on outdated transport systems

    So why change things?

    Posted 12 years ago #

  21. cb
    Member

    More dual carriageways needed north of Aberdeen too.

    'Call to extend A90 dualling':

    http://www.buchanobserver.co.uk/community/business-directory/call-to-extend-a90-dualling-1-2942355

    Councillor Gillian Owen said:
    "I am truly amazed that there is talk of opening up a railway which would cost huge amounts of money when the real answer is to get the dualling done right up to Peterhead."

    And Councillor Tom Malone said:

    "It is crucial that plans for a fit for purpose transport network are now urgently pursued."

    I assume that 'talk' of a railway would be with the intention of opening up the old (somewhat long way round) railway - currently the Formatine and Buchan Way.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  22. amir
    Member

    it could have been like this:

    Councillor Owen Gillan said:
    "I am truly amazed that there is talk of get the dualling done right up to Peterhead which would cost huge amounts of money when the real answer is to opening up a railway."

    And Councillor Tom Malone said:

    "It is crucial that plans for a fit for purpose transport network are now urgently pursued."

    Posted 12 years ago #

  23. kaputnik
    Moderator

    I assume that 'talk' of a railway would be with the intention of opening up the old (somewhat long way round) railway - currently the Formatine and Buchan Way.

    Yes there is talk mooted of re-opening the Formatine and Buchan line to Fraserburgh and/or Peterhead.

    As it was earlier summarised so eloquently, SNP transport policy appears to be "bypasses and dual carriageways for all (regardless of how thinly populated the area is)".

    Posted 12 years ago #

  24. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    I moved to Ellon in 1980 a year after the last freight services stopped using the line (I think passenger services were a couple of years before that). Our house had the line at the end of the garden, separating it from the golf course on the other side. I'd be surprised if there wasn't opposition to the line simply on the basis that since it went out of service there have been a lot of houses built right next to it.

    The other problem (though not insurmountable) is that the majority of little bridges crossing roads were knocked down. Not just in the towns (there were two in Ellon, one of which I remember as a kid cos the road got narrowed to one lane), but out in the sticks as well. In the towns it was allegedly to make life easier for buses and trucks. But there was a cynical (and I even remember this at the time) thought that it was to quell any talk of resurrecting the line.

    It would be FANTASTIC for places like Ellon andPeterhead and Fraserburgh. Faster into town than by car, certainly than by bus, and relieving a lot of traffic off the roads (driving into Aberdeen really is a bit of a nightmare at 'rush' hour).

    Amazing how 'build more roads' can become 'a fit for purpose transport network'.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  25. Calum
    Member

    Ah, look at those fine upstanding councillors Gardiner, Owen, and Malone - committed to car dependency, oil addiction, an inactive population, toxic air, noise, early death, climate catastrophe, waste of public money, and the general worsening of the quality of life of their constituents. How very noble.

    Peterhead:
    "Do trains go there?"
    "Well, not for the last hundred miles they don't!"

    The low quality of local politicians, particularly in one-horse towns like this one, is quite astonishing. I wonder if they've ever seen a train before.

    Posted 12 years ago #

  26. crowriver
    Member

    Councillor Gillian Owen said:
    "I am truly amazed that there is talk of opening up a railway which would cost huge amounts of money when the real answer is to get the dualling done right up to Peterhead."

    Translation: "I'll be driving regardless of whether they re-open the train line or not. I want a dual carriageway because it would be more convenient for ME."

    Posted 12 years ago #

  27. Wilmington's Cow
    Member

    "Do trains go there?"
    "Well, not for the last hundred miles they don't!"

    In fairness Peterhead is only 30-40 miles from Aberdeen, and the train loop is actually longer. But still definitely quicker than driving into town.

    Posted 12 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.


Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin