Jump to content
aberdeen-music

Aberdeen Western Peripheral Route (bypass, min)


KimyReizeger

Recommended Posts

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.

Nah, if that was the case they would be in the same boat with the current route, just as much cash to pay lawyers' fees there, probably more so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With Camphill, the thing that I've said all along is simple - they are potentially sitting on a goldmine if the bypass runs far enough from their estates to be unheard, yet close enough to make access onto it a doddle. It's probably a certainity that any route in that area will be soundproofed to a large degree - again, driving up the value of any land located nearby but not next to.

I actually wonder how many miles of extra road will be built as a result of the Save Camphill campaign - looking at the route map now, it seems that there might have been no need for the Stonehaven 'fastlink' if the original Murtle route had been chosen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nah, if that was the case they would be in the same boat with the current route, just as much cash to pay lawyers' fees there, probably more so.

The only thing different there is that Hollyrood are now in charge of the project. Which maybe reduces the "big fish in a little tank syndrome" a bit. Which is probably why it has made any progress at all TBH. If the council were still the main authority, I think they would be finding any excuse to shelve it again for another few years.

Some of those folk are, or were senior lawyers or well enough off to make serious legal action a very real possibility. In addition, there used to be certain residents who the planners viewed with extreme trepidation - That retired builder for one, although he shuffled-off a few years back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

they are potentially sitting on a goldmine if the bypass runs far enough from their estates to be unheard, yet close enough to make access onto it a doddle.

The Myrtle route went through a land corridor between two active parts of the estate & passed very close to some of the buildings. For Camphill, the proposals are still a bit unclear (last time I looked anyway). They seem to suggest it will be close to the route existing road but possibly on the other side from the estate, however it may yet encroach on the wooded area shown below.

Google Maps

I really don't think Camphill are going to be the sort to view at this as a commercial opportunity as the schools/estates today are the result of several decades of very hard work by some very committed people. Its just that even though I've no liking for the plan at all, the Myrtle route seemed the lesser evil - least damaging & wasteful of all of them & it was the one the estate management had planned for over the years. Which IMO, made the opposition akin to those who buy a house near a church, then complain about the bells.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing different there is that Hollyrood are now in charge of the project. Which maybe reduces the "big fish in a little tank syndrome" a bit. Which is probably why it has made any progress at all TBH. If the council were still the main authority, I think they would be finding any excuse to shelve it again for another few years.

No, the reason it's made progress is because the Scottish Executive agreed to fund it in 2003. The council(s) were never the "main authority", they were just trying to convince the government to come up with the cash, but even as recently as the turn of the century the then Transport Minister Sarak Boyack was saying there was "no realistic prospect" of the government funding it:

Scottish Parliament - Official Report

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The council had been the main authority since the inception of the plan - Which was theirs in the first place. Although it is true they were always a little unclear about what was going to happen at the northern end of it.

Other than administration of national road policy (which the council had to comply with of course), the increased involvement of central government has only happened since the changes in regulation for trunk roads in what, the mid 90s. 2003 was when they finally got seriously involved.

However the issue of funding, with the council paying as little as they can possibly get away with has always been a sticking point - Particularly with the two plans to shove the whole thing back out to an upgraded Bridge of Dee/Anderson Drive in both the 1980s & 1990s - On both those occasions, they had secured a portion of central funding & were trying to minimise their own contribution. One offer lapsed because of council dithering & the other was withdrawn after a public enquiry deemed it utterly inadequate.

Boyack even refers to the Joint Structure Plan in that report - The successor to the Colquhist Plan, a few paragraphs above your link point.

How much help did the campaigners against those particularly cock-eyed plans get from Camphill's neck of the woods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, never, not for a proper solution.

Although they did get bloody close to it in the second proposal for the Bridge of Dee but only because they had agreement to fund the bridge rebuilding centrally, leaving only the Stony Roundabout/Andy Drive junction for them to pay for. Nobody really believed the rest of the road upgrades would ever happen. The 80's proposal also had funding for the bridge but failed because the council refused to take-on @3miles of link road.

They only removed the planning reservation for that route about 2-3 yrs ago & guess what, Stuart Milne got straight in there with a plan that includes building a substantial part of what they refused & just a few months ago, they co-opted it into the city plan as a new link to the A90! :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Aberdeen needs this new bypass and also more public transport. Not just more buses, but more options: trams, trains, those wee guys that have carriages on their bikes, bring it all back!!

Rickshaws!!! That's what they're called. Aberdeen needs more rickshaws :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rickshaws!!! That's what they're called. Aberdeen needs more rickshaws :-)

I think you will find that First Bus & the Taxi trade did for them a few years back - They oposed the licencing of a firm who wanted to establish a fleet & forced a council ban that only allows them to go up & down the Prom in summer.

Naturally, nobody has felt it worth trying to work within the new regs since. :(

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.

×
×
  • Create New...