A2 Scheme Between Falconwood and Dartford
The stretch of A2 between Falconwood and Dartford, in Kent, was one of the best stretches of 'A' road in England. Three lanes of straight road, plus hard shoulder, made it comparable to any three lane motorway; in fact, better than most, because it is street lit as well. Until along came TFL with their modification scheme. However, nobody around here seemed to have a good word to say about it. In fact, the consensus of local opinion was just another unnecessary waste of money wrecking a perfectly good road in the process and bringing its own array of negative effects and problems. This is what TFL had to say.
A letter about the implementation of this scheme, pointing out some of the obvious problems and negative effects.
Mr B. Blunden
South & East Area Team
Transport for London -
Street Management
Freepost LON17390
SW1H 0YZ
RE: A2 ALTERATION BETWEEN BLACK PRINCE INTERCHANGE AND FALCONWOOD
08/04/02
Dear Mr Blunden,
We have had a lot of complaints and negative feedback about the modifications carried out on the stretch of the A2 between the Black Prince interchange and the dual carriageway at Falconwood. This revised scheme is causing problems with the traffic flow and proving to be a liability. Vehicles are now more congested and many are cutting in and out of the so called 'local lane' and undertaking to try and gain some advantage thereby causing increased risk of accidents. What once used to work very well, enabling vehicles to spread out and get on their way unimpeded, now does not. That particular stretch of road (three lanes of high quality street-lit carriageway), used to be one of the finest stretches of A-road in the country. Most people seem to be of the opinion that the implementation of this new scheme was not only unnecessary and a waste of public resource, but in fact, has completely ruined it.
Surely if you are working on behalf of the general public and spending money provided by the general public, you have a duty to spend it wisely and sensibly on things that are in accordance with people's wishes? Society is already short of capital when it comes to financing essential facilities and has suffered badly due to cut backs in many areas. It is not fair that local authorities and government departments are able to 'waste' money on retrogressive schemes that nobody wants or favours and which make the quality of people's lives worse, whilst, at the same time, effectively charging them for the privilege. If you are spending someone else's money you should know that what you are doing with it is what they would like to see you do with it and that the end result is worthwhile. This scheme is yet another instance where that cannot be said to be the case. So, on behalf of all of those people who are unhappy about this scheme, we would like to request that you put it back the way it was, because we preferred it like that. If, however, you can offer any real advantages defending the validity of the scheme we would be grateful if you could point them out to us in writing so that we can forward the views to the concerned parties and weigh them up against the obvious disadvantages. Thank you.
Yours faithfully,
D.J. Tarrant
A reply from TFL saying that the scheme was introduced to try and reduce the number of accidents and to assist in slip road problems, and that they were continuing to monitor the situation.
Dear Mr Tarrant
A2 ALTERATION BETWEEN BLACK PRINCE INTERCHANGE AND FALCONWOOD
Thank you for your letter of 8 April 2002, which we received 17 April 2002.
I can advise you that the accident assessment of the A2 in Bexley that led to the introduction of the scheme showed that for the 36-month period ending 30 September 1999 there were 104 accidents. A total of 55 accidents occurred on the Kent bound carriageway. Of these 44 resulted in slight injury and 11 resulted in serious injury.
Accordingly, the scheme was therefore introduced to reduce the potential for accidents on both carriageways. Accidents were occurring owing to excessive speeds on a route with difficult on and off slips, poor forward visibility to the junctions and with queuing problems to the off slips. Apart from the misery caused to those directly involved in the accidents many thousands of drivers are caught up in the delay as emergency services attend and deal with the accidents.
Our present monitoring of traffic shows that the A2 works very well, with free flowing traffic for most of the day with the exception of short periods during the morning and evening peak periods. However, we are aware of the rising problem of drivers using the local lane to undertake slow moving traffic to merge with the through traffic lanes at the last moment. We have discussed this with the police and asked them to target drivers who change lane without care and attention. They recently carried out some enforcement ad another operation is planned in the near future.
We continue to collect accident data and to examine the results we are getting from our electronic monitoring and from our observations from the four CCTV cameras along the route of the A2 in Bexley. This gives us, amongst other things, the volume of and the speed of traffic, at specific locations, over 24 hours every day of the week. We, therefore, have a good picture of what is happening on the road and are exploring what may be done to improve flow rates without reducing the safety and environmental improvements we have achieved to date.
We are currently having meetings with the Police, Bexley Council and our Highways Consultant, to discuss the additional measures that could be introduced to improve the flow of traffic. I can assure you that remedial measures will be introduced and/or changes made where necessary to address any serious problems.
Thank you for taking the time to contact Transport for London (TfL) on this matter.
Yours sincerely,
Bob Blunden
South & East Area Team
A letter suggesting to TFL that this objective could have been achieved far more cheaply,
and without all of the negative effects, perhaps by simply introducing a variable speed limit at peak times.
Mr B. Blunden
South & East Area Team
Transport for London -
Street Management
Freepost LON17390
SW1H 0YZ
RE: A2 ALTERATION BETWEEN BLACK PRINCE INTERCHANGE AND FALCONWOOD
08/08/02
Dear Mr Blunden,
Thank you for your reply dated 25th April 2002, to our letter regarding the above.
We take your point that there were a number of accidents on this stretch of road and we understand the obvious need to reduce the frequency and likelihood of such accidents wherever possible. We do however wonder if the current scheme is the best solution on offer and note that it has its own inherent dangers and questionable safety issues. Also it is not very popular. Has there, therefore, been any notable decrease in the frequency, or seriousness, of such accidents since the new scheme was implemented that could not have been achieved by simply reducing the speed limit during peak traffic times and would this not have been enough on its own to improve the problem? We would be more in favour of a variable speed limit, without a local lane, such as exercised on the M25. We are not in favour of the local lane and are strongly opposed to designating road resource disproportionately, thereby forcing traffic into more cramped conditions. We are much in favour of flexibility and driver initiative and feel that the objective you are trying to achieve could be realised, preserving these elements, by simply reducing the speed limit from seventy to fifty miles an hour during peak traffic times.
We would prefer this to the current scheme and would like to see the local lane removed and this revised protocol put in its place. We feel that this revised scheme would meet your objectives and be acceptable to us also. This revised scheme will also solve the congestion problems brought about by inhibiting the use of what constitutes a third of the road resource. It will also remove the dangers of the undertaking and the cutting in and out. It will also remove the frustration that motorists are currently feeling and the temptation to cut in and out. It will therefore remove the chance of people being penalised unnecessarily through such activity, saving time and money, and will relieve the police of having to be involved in checking this activity when their resources are already highly stretched. It will largely restore this stretch of road to how it was before, which was greatly preferred, but at the same time reduce the number of peak time accidents, hopefully getting your vote of approval as well as ours. We look forward to your consideration of this proposal and hope that you can agree. Thank you.
Yours faithfully,
D.J. Tarrant
The reply from TFL says that their consultants are looking at all aspects of the scheme
with a view to making any improvements that do not compromise safety.
9 September 2002
Dear Mr Tarrant
A2 SAFETY SCHEME
Thank you for your letter dated 8 August, addressed to the Route Manager Bob Blunden, about the A2 Safety Scheme. Please accept my apology for the delay in responding.
I can confirm that our consultants are looking at all aspects of the scheme and we will be seeking to introduce any measure/s that will improve the flow of traffic without compromising safety. I am expecting a report in the next few weeks and will advise you of our proposals when these have been finalised.
Yours sincerely,
BARRINGTON ANDERSON
SM SOUTH & EAST AREA TEAM
CC BOB BLUNDEN
TFL did eventually make some improvements to the original scheme,
but is it ultimately better for the amount of money it has cost?
Some improvements have since been made to the original scheme with the completely unnecessary local lanes serving the low density exits being removed. The fact is, they should not have been put in in the first place and this is just another example of how authoritative bodies, such as TFL and local government, can fritter away public money on things that the public don't want in the first place, make a mess of it and then have to use more public money to put things back the way they were. Where public money is being spent, the public should also have some say in what it is spent on, and people who think they know best perhaps should make sure they do, rather than fishing about in the dark and wasting money than we can all ill afford. Even with the current measures, there are still a number of negatives and many still consider that what we have is worse and has been a complete waste of money. This used to be one of the best stretches of 'A' road in the country and now it suffers from a 24/7 fixed 50mph speed limit! Possibly appropriate and acceptable at times of peak traffic, but not at night or when the roads are quiet! Nevertheless, that's how it now is and as there are several speed cameras in place, people can still be penalized at three in the morning, when there is no other traffic about and when there is no danger of accident and they are certainly not driving dangerously.