Opinion divided over bypass (From Salisbury Journal)

Opinion divided over bypass

9:58am Thursday 25th February 2010

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Comments(0)

I read that there are plans for 12,400 new homes in the city. That, according to figures from the Office of National Statistics, is an increase of over 25 per cent on the present number of homes.

That’s really substantial in its demands for space, which gives us two choices. Either to expand parts of the city piecemeal, using up bits of green space as is currently planned, or to consider afresh what will be needed by this new ‘town’.

I would argue that such an expansion cannot be managed with existing access infrastructure. We need better roads and rail and Ian Newman is right, a fresh look at the bypass which will be an integral part of the scheme.

The most practical direction for a new town in my view is to expand north from Bishopdown to the Beehive. It’s the only way to keep new homes near to the new workplaces – and so minimise commuting, which he predicts to increase by 50 per cent. Industry will require a new road linking it to the A303 and the Southampton Road – which effectively means a northern bypass.

Then we can have a proper industrial estate, with heavy traffic kept well away from the city.

Then, at last, provided access charges (parking, etc) don’t go up too much, we can enjoy the centre again, and it might be worth a makeover.

Alastair Lack, Coombe Bissett

The two old ladies arguing over the garden fence will never agree, simply because their arguments are based on different premises.

And so it is with those who wish to resurrect the Salisbury bypass debate. In fact, there were two bypasses under consideration – that for the A36 and the county council-funded eastern bypass.

For those who prefer facts rather than fantasy, it is instructive to return to the (expensive) paperwork presented to the public inquiry. Nowhere in their written statement of reasons or oral pre-sentation did the sponsors (Department of Transport and the WCC) claim that the scheme would – or even could – markedly reduce congestion in the city. Earlier schemes – the inner relief road in the 1970s and the introduction of the one-way system in 1950 – both promised traffic relief. Changes in government policy on housing, education, planning, parking and much more can have far greater effect on motorists’ behaviour.

But re-raising the subject is perhaps timely. Predictions by the department for how traffic would evolve, and published in their ‘proof of evidence’ on traffic and economics, show what we could expect 15 years after the bypasses opened. That date is now just months away.

By 2011, much of the Wilton and Southampton Roads would be ‘severely overloaded’ – even with both bypasses in place. Those who imagine that bypasses somehow eliminate congestion in town centres need only look at what has happened in Shaftesbury, Blandford or Warminster. And the eastern bypass wouldn’t have eased traffic in the Bourne Valley either, which continues to be a source of conflict.

A Phillips, Salisbury

With the advance of technology, we are near to resurrecting the dinosaur, however, please not the Salisbury bypass!

We have the opportunity to move forward and provide an integrated transport system in Salisbury, encouraging people to leave their cars (if they still have them) behind and enjoy the city of Salisbury.

The money could be far better spent on furthering the ‘vision’, doing our best to combat climate change locally and enhancing our business and tourism by creating a ‘people-friendly’ city free of pollution.

A bypass would generate more traffic in the area and studies have shown that the majority of traffic is local. So please, let’s leave the dinosaurs behind and move forward, encouraging people to visit a vibrant car-free city.

And yes, I own a car and a bike and use public transport whenever possible.

Pete Matthews, Amesbury

Following my urbanisation letter last week I have had several supportive responses, the most important being the city bypass comment that development at Hampton Park would end any hope of that pressing need. Contrary to the City Centre Management view, there is no other route than round to the east of the city. The death of any southern alignment was the crushing defeat of the county’s attempt at a Harnham relief road by the Environment Agency. Any such road across the floodplain of the Avon would have to be on high embankments affecting groundwater flow and having serious flooding implications not to mention its impact on the classic views of the cathedral. The long-time cabinet member for county roads, Fleur de Rhe Philipe, said a bypass won’t happen because she had “spent years trying to get one for Westbury”. She should have been trying for historic Salisbury. Another example of us being cut off by the Plain and evidence that we should strive to become a special heritage unitary authority on our own, separate but within the county like Swindon.

Other routes would be much longer, more expensive and, hence, impossible. The only hope is that it can be combined with other road improvements, the A303’s removal from the World Heritage Site (WHS) and now the dreadful distribution centre development in Solstice Park. Both demand positive government action now, but there are no votes in it for the present regime. Our roads are projects where government expenditure would reap cost-effective benefits in business and employment.

John Ellis, Farley

• Print
• Email
• Share
• Comments(0)