Jump to content
aberdeen-music

Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route (bypass, min)


KimyReizeger
 Share

Recommended Posts

I get the feeling the bypass is something we should all be opposing. I'm not even aware of severe traffic congestion and debilitating gridlock in Aberdeen, so why build a new road that tears through more greenery and will only encourage more people to use their cars more often?

You should try commuting from Dyce to Altens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

something needs to be done that's for sure but i'm not entirely sold on the bypass or it's route. i think that it's odd that they just produced this route from nowhere rather than any of the routes they'd consulted on. i also think it's a shame it's going to run through one of the nice parts of the area.

in saying that though, what other options are there? trying to persuade people to ditch their cars and take public transport is great in theory but it just doesn't work. people like their cars and want to use them. it doesn't help that buses in aberdeen are ridiculously expensive and have just gone up in price yet again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You should try commuting from Dyce to Altens.

So what happens when all that traffic is chucked onto another road? Plus the fact that more roads simply = more traffic. We're in the day and age that needs to reduce traffic, not give people better reasons to take the car. Besides, your inconvenient commute to Altens doesn't really bother me, that is a fact of life in a centre of commerce; can hardly be said to stem trade and will no doubt be an obsolete argument when the oil dries up.

What about sucking floating travellers from the city centre? Literally encouraging people to 'pass us by'.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So what happens when all that traffic is chucked onto another road? Plus the fact that more roads simply = more traffic. We're in the day and age that needs to reduce traffic, not give people better reasons to take the car. Besides, your inconvenient commute to Altens doesn't really bother me, that is a fact of life in a centre of commerce; can hardly be said to stem trade and will no doubt be an obsolete argument when the oil dries up.

What about sucking floating travellers from the city centre? Literally encouraging people to 'pass us by'.

If even 10% of the traffic is transferred from city centre roads with traffic lights and roundabouts every 100 yards, onto a dual-carriage trunk road, it's surely obvious that it would markedly improve city centre congestion.

As for more roads = more traffic......how?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something definitely needs to be done, and has been needed for a long time, as mentioned before trying to get in and out of Altens at rush hour is an absolute nightmare, the whole North Deeside road is terrible, the Bridge of Don pretty much stops moving at 8am and don't even get me started on the road out to Dyce. The city centre isn't that bad it's the people trying to get to work in all the various industrial estates that have the problem.

In saying that though it's never going to happen because like every other attempt to bring Aberdeen into the 21st Century, everybody will oppose it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get the feeling the bypass is something we should all be opposing. I'm not even aware of severe traffic congestion and debilitating gridlock in Aberdeen, so why build a new road that tears through more greenery and will only encourage more people to use their cars more often?

Ultimately, the bypass is desperately needed. There's not much in the way of alternatives - if the bypass isn't built, what's going to replace it?

Public transport? Any improvements now are going to cause traffic to snarl up even more badly than it already is, unless you want to throw a ridiculous amount of money (and disruption) at providing bus-only routes into the centre. I'm not even sure where these routes could go - unless you want to build tunnels. The Deeside Line might be one interesting option - but you can guarantee that there would be massive opposition to any attempt to restore a train service from Aberdeen station to Culter or thereabouts, despite it making excellent sense.

The main, and overriding issue here is that there's no logical, quick way from north to south - Anderson Drive cuts right through residential areas and the inner ring road can't really be improved much more. Altens to Dyce is a nightmare of a journey regardless of which route you take - the bypass will end the pain in that respect very effectively. Likewise, Bridge of Don to Dyce is also a complete pain - ever driven the back road from Asda BoD to the Airport? Absolutely dangerous ratrun, and yet another reason for the building of the route.

As for the final route - I actually think it's a great route. The fastlink from Stonehaven will allow traffic to bypass the city without coming close to the city. The Murtle route would've made more sense as it is a bit far out - but it's a small compromise to get it built.

The only issue is that I suspect the junctions are going to be built on the cheap - there's word that the A90 junction at Altens will become a roundabout, which is an absolutely dreadful idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I've been saying for years it that one of the major reasons there's so much congestion in the city is because there isn't a rail service going up to Peterhead, Fraserburgh, Mintlaw, Ellon, Balmedie, Strichen etc. There's thousands upon thousands of people drive in from those towns every single day, because their only other option is the bus, which is slow, uncomfortable and only runs once an hour. It's the main reason Bridge of Don is so overwhelmed. If there was a wee circular rail service every half hour or so, a lot of people would use it and leave their cars at home. The Ellon Park and Ride is a good idea but the buses are just too slow, it used to take me longer getting from Ellon to Aberdeen on the P&R bus than it did to drive from Fraserburgh to Ellon to get the P&R bus.... There was a railway there before, I say put it back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I've been saying for years it that one of the major reasons there's so much congestion in the city is because there isn't a rail service going up to Peterhead, Fraserburgh, Mintlaw, Ellon, Balmedie, Strichen etc. There's thousands upon thousands of people drive in from those towns every single day, because their only other option is the bus, which is slow, uncomfortable and only runs once an hour. It's the main reason Bridge of Don is so overwhelmed. If there was a wee circular rail service every half hour or so, a lot of people would use it and leave their cars at home. The Ellon Park and Ride is a good idea but the buses are just too slow, it used to take me longer getting from Ellon to Aberdeen on the P&R bus than it did to drive from Fraserburgh to Ellon to get the P&R bus.... There was a railway there before, I say put it back.

Think you're spot on, but don't hold your breath waiting..!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is a difficult one - Even though I'm in general agreement with the more roads - more traffic line of thought, I also recognise that Aberdeen has missed-out on two generations of roadbuilding, largely because of the indecision over this & as a result, we really do need something.

However, as the plans stand the proposals for the southern part of the scheme are a fudge & a cop-out that will not help in any meaningful way. They go completely against the normal traffic flow in the area & I really cannot see that many drivers prepared to double back by several miles once they have reached the very edge of the city. The previous Myrtle route made much more sense that way.

I am also speaking as one whose property would have been slightly affected by one of the road allignments associated with the original plan but not the current one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bring back the trams I say.

Fucking right.

There's a tram service here, and you won't believe how incredibly useful they are - the network is pretty dense and goes everywhere of importance, they run frequently (a tram from my flat to the city runs every 3 minutes) and they're generally great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fucking right.

There's a tram service here, and you won't believe how incredibly useful they are - the network is pretty dense and goes everywhere of importance, they run frequently (a tram from my flat to the city runs every 3 minutes) and they're generally great.

Yeah, it's definitely a viable idea. It will be interesting to see what difference the trams will make in Edinburgh when they come back (they have already started laying the lines in Leith etc).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently the tram lines down Union St. are still in place - they just laid tarmac over them. Dunno if it's true, but multiple people have told me this..

It certainly was true & the lines probably still remain in many parts of the city - esp where they also simply tarmaced over the old granite setts (cobbles). However Union St, Market St etc have all undergone major reconstruction & strengthening work in the last couple of decades & where that has happened, the lines would have been removed.

I can remember seeing them exposed by roadworks in several places over the years & I think that included Union St & Queens Rd. The rails also remain in place at the former Waterloo Station by the harbour & were fully exposed for checking a year or two ago, before being covered over again for the current railhead/lorrypark development. IIRC, the idea was that now the harbour has lost its link to the Joint Station across Market St/Union Sq, it will be easy to expand the remaining single-line railhead if demand ever increases again.

I'm in two minds about trams - As far as PT goes, they are fine but as I also ride a motorbike, I have to say that I've had some hairy moments with skidding around on or getting a wheel caught in lines in various european cities. Not fun! :( From that POV, electric trolleybuses are much safer IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't realise, but it is basically happening, with the only question being that of the exact route. I had thought the whole thing was still up for debate:

This inquiry is supposed to test the suitability of the chosen route, yet opponents are trying, even at this late stage, to turn it into an inquiry into whether or not a road should be built at all.

Many neutral observers will scratch their heads and wonder why the need for a road is being challenged now when democratically-elected government ministers have decided that it should go ahead and where the route should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The bypass idea isn't new. Kimy. This has been going on for years.

It has been kicking around in one form or another since the Colquhist Plan of 1952. Which stopped being official policy around 1992 (although elements of it have been retained) The reference library should have a copy you can inspect & the last time I saw one was in the RGU library at Garthdee. It is worth a look, if only to have your jaw hit the floor at the vision of what a future Aberdeen might look like. o_O :D

Shows you how good our council can be at avoiding a decision when they want to & the main sticking point has always been the area north of the Dee crossing. Not because of Myrtle/Camphill - the Steiner architects had factored that route into their planning as long ago as the 1970s & kept a corridor through the estate, but because of the opposition from the residents north of the Deeside road. Who include some of the people whose activties have gone a long way to create the current mess & who have benifited significantly from the growth of this city. Plus no small number of current & former councillors as well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shows you how good our council can be at avoiding a decision when they want to & the main sticking point has always been the area north of the Dee crossing. Not because of Myrtle/Camphill - the Steiner architects had factored that route into their planning as long ago as the 1970s & kept a corridor through the estate, but because of the opposition from the residents north of the Deeside road. Who include some of the people whose activties have gone a long way to create the current mess & who have benifited significantly from the growth of this city. Plus no small number of current & former councillors as well.

Of course, it's all a big conspiracy and Camphill were in fact all for it. I must have dreamt that whole massive "Save Camphill" campaign. :rolleyes:

Save Camphill Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route campaign

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope, they were certainly not happy about it but had lived & planned round the eventuality for many years. As had many others who lived in the area, my own family included - the reserved road corridor also stretched from Blairs Ferry to Portlethen & almost everyone submitting all but the most minor planning applications along it faced problems of one sort or another. Especially if it involved a change of use.

However the campaign did not initially involve the management of the estate. In fact, they maintained the "we are working fully with the authorities & engineers" line throughout & went to some lengths to dissociate themselves from it but could do nothing (& probably didn't want to) to stop residents or members of staff from organising & getting involved in a personal capacity. This may well have changed when the current route was annonced? They certainly moved that banner on to their land (it was previously sited on corridor land owned by them but leased to a 3rd party) fast enough.

From the outset, I would say the campaign really reflected the interests of other folk, who had been preparing for this for years but knew they would be less likely to get an easy ride in the publicity. After all, special needs kids vs local fat-cats/gentry - Who gets your sympathy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However the campaign did not initially involve the management of the estate. In fact, they maintained the "we are working fully with the authorities & engineers" line throughout & went to some lengths to dissociate themselves from the campaign but could do nothing (& probably didn't want to) to stop residents or members of staff from organising & getting involved in a personal capacity.

Not quite, but it's a bit of a confusing set up, Camphill has lots of different branches, the Camphill Estate (west of the Murtle route, behind the Waterwheel) took the "working fully" line, but the Camphill Newton Dee people launched the Save Camphill Campaign. After a while the Camphill Estate people startied supporting it too.

It's a fun theory to suggest that the road was moved because of the rich folk in the big hooses, but it's not borne out in fact I'm afraid, one reason and one reason only why it was changed - the Save Camphill campaign. There's plenty of rich and important folk on the new route but their campaign is doomed to failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Save Camphill Campaign may well have focused attention & precipitated the current fudge but you would be quite wrong to suggest that the rest have not had considerable influence. Not least because the planners feared the whole proposal could be mired in the courts by them. Which has been a major & consistant factor in the non-progression of this scheme since my grandparents were involved in fighting it in the 60s & 70s - Long before Save Camphill came along.

The reaction of the Myrtle management said it all to me I'm afraid. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...