It was clear from the door-stepping activities and the meeting at St Peter’s Church that, whichever route you might prefer, there was a general feeling that Highways England were short-changing us when it came to the level of detail. Yesterday, JMD drew our attention to an earlier consultation on the Highways England website that was held last year to allow selection of the preferred route for the Lower Thames Crossing.
It’s quite instructive to see the differences between this and the bypass scheme for Winterbourne Stoke. There is an awful lot of information on the scheme that can be found here. Even a cursory examination of the main documents show detailed drawings of road surfaces, mitigation measures, bridge design, etc.
However the one that immediately grabbed our attention was the Pre-Consultation Scheme Assessment Report. In other words, this was produced before things went out to public consultation, so maybe at a stage even before the A303 Technical Appraisal Review that we have been shown.
Take a look at Volume 6, the Environmental Appraisal and compare and contrast it with section 18 of the TAR. There’s no comparison.
When it comes to noise, we get bland statements. The residents of Dartord got this for existing noise levels:
” alt=”Noise” />
With this information and some basic modelling, Halcrow, the designers, were able to show how each of the 4 road schemes would either improve, or worsen noise perception. They also did something very similar for nitrogen dioxide levels.
” alt=”NOX” />
- This reply was modified 4 years, 1 month ago by Council Administrator.