Baswich Lane Capacity Improvements

henryscat · Jun 21, 2014

There's going to be mayhem regardless of leaving the double roundabout alone when Severn Trent get stuck in....

http://www.staffordshirenewsletter....afford-phase/story-21101938-detail/story.html

Mikinton · Jun 21, 2014

Gramaisc said:
I've never been through that one - maybe it's because it's a bit nearer London and its associated driving attitudes?

My brother lived in Swindon in the '70s and so I traversed their one many times without incident - though, the first few attempts were exciting.

The one time I went across it, in the '70s, it was described to my father who was driving, as a "who dares wins".

gilesjuk · Jun 23, 2014

Noah said:
The Hemel Hempstead Magic Roundabout https://maps.google.co.uk/?ll=51.746246,-0.472822&spn=0.000983,0.002207&t=h&z=19 doesn't always work that well. maybe it's the trees

Have it on good authority from a Hemel resident (I worked there for a year) that it is better than what was there before. I suppose having 6 roads converging (two of them are A roads) isn't a good idea

Steve_b · Jun 23, 2014

@RoadPolicing: 38t lorry caught using a route with a weak bridge and plenty of signs as below. The maths is simple! @PoliceStafford http://t.co/JWRIjSopzU

Jonah · Jun 23, 2014

I've seen an artic go round the bottom of Baswich Lane and get stuck at the Mill corner.

Steve_b · Jun 24, 2014

Traffic Report, Baswich - Weeping Cross area.

The Baswich Lane/Porlock Avenue junction has also been assessed. Whilst the junction would operate within capacity under the 2016 scenarios, it would operate significantly over capacity in 2031 both with and without development.

The identification of potential capacity issues by 2031 highlight to both Stafford BC and SCC potential future issues on the network, and that retaining the protected routes [EDR] and there developments will be required within the time period of the Plan for Stafford.

So Stafford BC ignore this advice, delete sections of the EDR and score an own Goal. Rather than preventing uncontrolled planning applications, developers apply to build on the now Un-protected route.

proactive · Jun 24, 2014

The council early retirement fund has to be paid for somehow.

PPPPPP · Jun 24, 2014

Steve_b said:
Traffic Report, Baswich - Weeping Cross area.

The Baswich Lane/Porlock Avenue junction has also been assessed. Whilst the junction would operate within capacity under the 2016 scenarios, it would operate significantly over capacity in 2031 both with and without development.

The identification of potential capacity issues by 2031 highlight to both Stafford BC and SCC potential future issues on the network, and that retaining the protected routes [EDR] and there developments will be required within the time period of the Plan for Stafford.

So Stafford BC ignore this advice, delete sections of the EDR and score an own Goal. Rather than preventing uncontrolled planning applications, developers apply to build on the now Un-protected route.

And one of these 'developers' just happens to be a very prominent councillor.

markpa12003 · Jun 24, 2014

Sorry to be pedantic PPPP, Inglewood Investments are not 'developers' they are land agents and investors. Should Inglewood Investments, or any other land agent, obtain planning permission the site will then be sold to a 'developer'.

I have no idea if Inglewood Investments have any interest in land within this area. Given the Councillor's involvement with Inglewood Investments I would be extremely interested to know where they do have an 'interest' and whether these areas have been allocated for development in the adopted local plan or granted planning consent.

Steve_b · Jun 24, 2014

markpa12003 said:
Sorry to be pedantic PPPP, Inglewood Investments are not 'developers' they are land agents and investors. Should Inglewood Investments, or any other land agent, obtain planning permission the site will then be sold to a 'developer'.

I have no idea if Inglewood Investments have any interest in land within this area. Given the Councillor's involvement with Inglewood Investments I would be extremely interested to know where they do have an 'interest' and whether these areas have been allocated for development in the adopted local plan or granted planning consent.

Have a look at the Cornwall Dr development, http://www7.staffordbc.gov.uk/onlin...ils.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=N2ZIX2PS45000

markpa12003 · Jun 24, 2014

Thanks Steve B. It smells very fishy.

The councillor (and any other councillor) should not be allowed to have any involvement with land agents or developers. How can councillors make an impartial planning decision, and act on behalf of the electorate, if they are advising the agents and developers?!

proactive · Jun 24, 2014

markpa12003 said:
How can councillors... act on behalf of the electorate?

That made me laugh so hard the entire office turned round to see what I was up to.

PPPPPP · Jun 24, 2014

markpa12003 said:
Sorry to be pedantic PPPP, Inglewood Investments are not 'developers' they are land agents and investors. Should Inglewood Investments, or any other land agent, obtain planning permission the site will then be sold to a 'developer'.

I have no idea if Inglewood Investments have any interest in land within this area. Given the Councillor's involvement with Inglewood Investments I would be extremely interested to know where they do have an 'interest' and whether these areas have been allocated for development in the adopted local plan or granted planning consent.

Whether they get someone else to do the work or not, Inglewood and its offshoots are effectively developers which have vested interests in projects all over Staffs, directly benefiting the leader of the council . It's an outrage, so no wonder the police are investigating.

PPPPPP · Jun 24, 2014

markpa12003 said:
Thanks Steve B. It smells very fishy.

The councillor (and any other councillor) should not be allowed to have any involvement with land agents or developers. How can councillors make an impartial planning decision, and act on behalf of the electorate, if they are advising the agents and developers?!

Directors have a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of shareholders.

Steve_b · Jun 25, 2014

County Councillor John Francis; these sections (of the EDR) have now been formaly deleted from the LDF via the County Council because of funding constraints they would be very unlikely to be built.

Steve_b · Jun 25, 2014

Apt name for bridge? read at the bottom- http://t.co/V5Fydc308A

"Pegasus Bridge” A Great suggestion

Gramaisc · Jun 25, 2014

Steve_b said:
Apt name for bridge? read at the bottom- http://t.co/V5Fydc308A

"Pegasus Bridge” A Great suggestion

Are those steps still there? They have a convenient groove on the left, intended to aid you in getting your bike up them.

..although, I find it easier to wheel a bike on my right..

PPPPPP · Jun 25, 2014

Steve_b said:
Apt name for bridge? read at the bottom- http://t.co/V5Fydc308A

"Pegasus Bridge” A Great suggestion

Maybe it should be named after a flying pig rather than a flying horse. How about Porcasus?

daz100 · Jun 25, 2014

So as far as I can see the improvements are going to be nothing?? Or did I miss something?

Steve_b · Jun 25, 2014

daz100 said:
So as far as I can see the improvements are going to be nothing?? Or did I miss something?

It appears that it only stretches as far as a new cycle bridge, SBC say SCC cannot afford any after all?

Baswich Lane Capacity Improvements

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Spouting nonsense since the day I learned to talk

Well-Known Forumite

Enjoying a drop of red.

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Enjoying a drop of red.

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Forum O. G.

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite

Well-Known Forumite