Abingdon
To chat about today's news and issues visit the Abingdon forum
| NEWS |  | | | | | OXFORD UNITED | | | | | | CRICKET | | | | | NEWS | |
|
|
|
Fresh call for new A34 junction
Fresh calls have been made for a new junction to ease congestion for drivers coming and going through Abingdon.
The Vale of White Horse District Council wants to see a full road junction installed with the A34 at Lodge Hill, to the north of the town.
The four-way junction would allow drivers travelling to and from the south of Abingdon along the trunk road - Dunmore Road - to get to the north side without having to drive through the town.
Councillors have agreed to write to the Highways Agency and Oxfordshire County Council, asking them to consider the scheme.
Residents and Abingdon Town Council have long campaigned for a Lodge Hill Interchange.
Drayton district councillor Richard Webber said: "The recent Abingdon Integrated Traffic Strategy (Abits) road changes have sought to address the congestion which Abingdon suffers from during some periods.
However, this really is tinkering with the fundamental problem. There is only one long-term solution to Abingdon's problems - we must reduce the numbers of vehicles coming into the town.
"The Lodge Hill proposal will not be cheap but it is much the cheapest of the many options available to ease Abingdon's transport problems, such as a new river crossing."
Ock Meadow councillor Samantha Bowring also supported the call for the new junction.
She said: "Abingdon needs action now to address the pollution which affects the town."
2:19pm Friday 1st August 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: doozer, Abingdon on 7:04pm Fri 1 Aug 08
So, in this article;
"Drayton district councillor Richard Webber said: "The recent Abingdon Integrated Traffic Strategy (Abits) road changes have sought to address the congestion which Abingdon suffers from during some periods"
I don't know if this is really the case. In a recent email communication I've had with 'the council' (about the validity of any TRL Review recently of ABiTS vs the Traffic Solutions Review) I was informed that
"Our objectives for this scheme are to improve conditions for pedestrians in the town centre by widening footways and holding vehicles at the edge of town where the roads are wider..."
I didn't see anything that mentions trying to improve the traffic flow. And anyway, 'improve traffic flow' is fairly immotive...if , say you wanted to make traffic flow really really badly so we all give up on our cars and jump on buses in order to save the planet then 'improve traffic flow' would = make it really really bad.
I for one have given up listening or indeed judging 'the council' by what they say, I now judge them by what they do.
If it wasn't for the independant action of the 'Action for Abingdon' people, we'd all still be sitting in traffic from last year.
We, the people, seem to KNOW what will help Abingdon, yet the people that WE, the people put in place to action our wishes appear totally disinterested.
We all know how to sort the traffic in Abingdon. If you're in charge, get tit sorted, or get out the way and let someone else get on with it. I'm fed up with this whole situation dragging on and apparently NO ONE in 'The council' doing anything!!
Jeysus..this whole story drags on longer than an episode of Lost!!
So, in this article;
"Drayton district councillor Richard Webber said: "The recent Abingdon Integrated Traffic Strategy (Abits) road changes have sought to address the congestion which Abingdon suffers from during some periods"
I don't know if this is really the case. In a recent email communication I've had with 'the council' (about the validity of any TRL Review recently of ABiTS vs the Traffic Solutions Review) I was informed that
"Our objectives for this scheme are to improve conditions for pedestrians in the town centre by widening footways and holding vehicles at the edge of town where the roads are wider..."
I didn't see anything that mentions trying to improve the traffic flow. And anyway, 'improve traffic flow' is fairly immotive...if , say you wanted to make traffic flow really really badly so we all give up on our cars and jump on buses in order to save the planet then 'improve traffic flow' would = make it really really bad.
I for one have given up listening or indeed judging 'the council' by what they say, I now judge them by what they do.
If it wasn't for the independant action of the 'Action for Abingdon' people, we'd all still be sitting in traffic from last year.
We, the people, seem to KNOW what will help Abingdon, yet the people that WE, the people put in place to action our wishes appear totally disinterested.
We all know how to sort the traffic in Abingdon. If you're in charge, get tit sorted, or get out the way and let someone else get on with it. I'm fed up with this whole situation dragging on and apparently NO ONE in 'The council' doing anything!!
Jeysus..this whole story drags on longer than an episode of Lost!!
Posted by: ady, shabingdon on 8:05pm Sun 3 Aug 08
if you put abingdon road system back to how it was then you wouldent need to **** up north abingdon aswell,like the council have done to the town centre, do whats right...
if you put abingdon road system back to how it was then you wouldent need to **** up north abingdon aswell,like the council have done to the town centre, do whats right...
Posted by: wit and wisdom, Abingdon on 10:32am Mon 4 Aug 08
Sure, put the road system back to how it was. Then we'll have all those extra parking spaces in Stert Street and High Street and all the lovely pollution will come back.
Brilliant!
Sure, put the road system back to how it was. Then we'll have all those extra parking spaces in Stert Street and High Street and all the lovely pollution will come back.
Brilliant!
Posted by: martin, Cumnor on 1:16pm Mon 4 Aug 08
The real problem here is facilating east bound traffic - i.e. traffic from say North Abingdon going through to Berinsfield or someone travelling from Marcham to Culham. I'm sorry but A34 north diamond junction will make sod all difference. You need another river crossing with an exit off Audlett Drive about where that crap leisure centre is and put the leisure centre back in the town where it belongs please.
The real problem here is facilating east bound traffic - i.e. traffic from say North Abingdon going through to Berinsfield or someone travelling from Marcham to Culham. I'm sorry but A34 north diamond junction will make sod all difference. You need another river crossing with an exit off Audlett Drive about where that crap leisure centre is and put the leisure centre back in the town where it belongs please.
Posted by: j, Abingdon on 1:51pm Mon 4 Aug 08
I'm not saying that the traffic situation in Abingdon is good as it clearly is not. I am just wondering how much of the problem is caused by the massive increase in housing in the town center with no additional roads. I doubt very much if the old system would work with the number of extra cars that the housing has brought in....any thoughts? I agree about the additional river crossing that would be useful but I do think that the North Abingdon junction should be upgraded.
Also Martin "crap leisure centre" It has a pool, gym, one of the best publicly available tennis facillities in the country, badminton, squash, exercise classes........in what way is that crap, what more do you want?
I'm not saying that the traffic situation in Abingdon is good as it clearly is not. I am just wondering how much of the problem is caused by the massive increase in housing in the town center with no additional roads. I doubt very much if the old system would work with the number of extra cars that the housing has brought in....any thoughts? I agree about the additional river crossing that would be useful but I do think that the North Abingdon junction should be upgraded.
Also Martin "crap leisure centre" It has a pool, gym, one of the best publicly available tennis facillities in the country, badminton, squash, exercise classes........in what way is that crap, what more do you want?
Posted by: cb, Abingdon on 3:19pm Mon 4 Aug 08
The only problem with the leasure centre is it is outside the Town Centre. Abingdon Town council try to look after the heritage of Abingdon. The merged VOWHDC/Oxfordshire County Council, seems to be determined to replace it all with flats/houses/apartme
nts.
They will never build the bridge, or Lodge Hill A34 link.
The only problem with the leasure centre is it is outside the Town Centre. Abingdon Town council try to look after the heritage of Abingdon. The merged VOWHDC/Oxfordshire County Council, seems to be determined to replace it all with flats/houses/apartme
nts.
They will never build the bridge, or Lodge Hill A34 link.
Posted by: j, Abingdon on 9:23am Tue 5 Aug 08
Seeing as this item is about traffic issues in the town center I would think that putting it back there would only make matters worse.....what about the parking?
Seeing as this item is about traffic issues in the town center I would think that putting it back there would only make matters worse.....what about the parking?
Posted by: expensive boy, ock street, abingdon on 1:41pm Tue 5 Aug 08
Having lived in Ock St for over 20years I am aware of changes to traffic flow and yes the new system has increased congestion. But so has something else! Over roughly the last 5years the amount of very heavy and large lorries using Ock St and the town is has increased HUGELY. That's noise and air pollution in one hit,structural damage could well be in the mix as well. It really needs to be stopped before something or someone gets damaged, you never know it might just make our new system tolerably workable.
Having lived in Ock St for over 20years I am aware of changes to traffic flow and yes the new system has increased congestion. But so has something else! Over roughly the last 5years the amount of very heavy and large lorries using Ock St and the town is has increased HUGELY. That's noise and air pollution in one hit,structural damage could well be in the mix as well. It really needs to be stopped before something or someone gets damaged, you never know it might just make our new system tolerably workable.
Posted by: Graham, Oxon on 6:35pm Tue 5 Aug 08
[quote][bold]wit and wisdom[/bold] wrote:
Sure, put the road system back to how it was. Then we'll have all those extra parking spaces in Stert Street and High Street and all the lovely pollution will come back.
Brilliant![/quote] Sadly, Wit and Wisdom, the 'lovely pollution' is not only still there but even worse everywhere except Stert Street. Things have got so bad that the 'experts' who 'run' the District have been told by DEFRA to extend the air quality zone in central Abingdon out much further, and the assessment they have at last produced shows that a reduction in traffic of at least 50% would be necessary to bring the levels down to legal limits. What is truly tragic is that they knew all this nearly a decade ago but did nothing. Local air quality campaigner Mr Hocken has often taken the District to task over this, and it's beginning to look like he was right after all.
Secondly, the Lodge Hill interchange would cost millions, whereas re-opening the Drayton slip would cost mere thousands as it already exists, and would immediately relieve the worst of the congestion on the Drayton Road. People from North Abingdon don't use the peripheral road now, so what difference would a diamond interchange actually have on traffic in the town centre anyway? Very little in my view.
wit and wisdom wrote:
Sure, put the road system back to how it was. Then we'll have all those extra parking spaces in Stert Street and High Street and all the lovely pollution will come back.
Brilliant!
Sadly, Wit and Wisdom, the 'lovely pollution' is not only still there but even worse everywhere except Stert Street. Things have got so bad that the 'experts' who 'run' the District have been told by DEFRA to extend the air quality zone in central Abingdon out much further, and the assessment they have at last produced shows that a reduction in traffic of at least 50% would be necessary to bring the levels down to legal limits. What is truly tragic is that they knew all this nearly a decade ago but did nothing. Local air quality campaigner Mr Hocken has often taken the District to task over this, and it's beginning to look like he was right after all.
Secondly, the Lodge Hill interchange would cost millions, whereas re-opening the Drayton slip would cost mere thousands as it already exists, and would immediately relieve the worst of the congestion on the Drayton Road. People from North Abingdon don't use the peripheral road now, so what difference would a diamond interchange actually have on traffic in the town centre anyway? Very little in my view.
Posted by: Adrian, Didcot on 9:40am Wed 6 Aug 08
I have to agree that the Drayton slip road closure caused me many journeys into Abingdon I didn't want when I lived in the village, rather moot given my current location however. Why was it ever closed? As mentioned one of the cheapest 'quick fix' options would be re-opening it, but then that would upset another group no doubt.
I have to agree that the Drayton slip road closure caused me many journeys into Abingdon I didn't want when I lived in the village, rather moot given my current location however. Why was it ever closed? As mentioned one of the cheapest 'quick fix' options would be re-opening it, but then that would upset another group no doubt.
Posted by: Martin, Sutton Courtenay on 1:08pm Thu 7 Aug 08
The Abingdon North junction definitey needs to be made two-way, as do all the junctions on the A34 (eg the Chilton one a few miles further south). There is nothing worse than being stuck in tailbacks on the A34 and having to drive past the junction in order to be able to make a U-turn at the next junction several miles away.
*All* motorway-style junctions should be two-way: making some of them one-way way naive.
The Drayton junction would be very useful, though it would probably bring extra traffic on the Drayton-Steventon road.
Then we need to tackle the tailbacks on Drayton Road approaching Ock Street. One way to fix this would be to replace the two mini-roundabouts with one big one so traffic only has to look out for *one* stream of traffic from its right instead of two in rapid succession. This would increase the throughout of this horrendous bottleneck.
The Abingdon North junction definitey needs to be made two-way, as do all the junctions on the A34 (eg the Chilton one a few miles further south). There is nothing worse than being stuck in tailbacks on the A34 and having to drive past the junction in order to be able to make a U-turn at the next junction several miles away.
*All* motorway-style junctions should be two-way: making some of them one-way way naive.
The Drayton junction would be very useful, though it would probably bring extra traffic on the Drayton-Steventon road.
Then we need to tackle the tailbacks on Drayton Road approaching Ock Street. One way to fix this would be to replace the two mini-roundabouts with one big one so traffic only has to look out for *one* stream of traffic from its right instead of two in rapid succession. This would increase the throughout of this horrendous bottleneck.
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
