Great Western Coffee Shop

The report of the public enquiry into the proposed Westbury bypass was published in the last few days, together with the ministers' decisions. The report recommended that the proposal be rejected, and the ministers agreed.

The Westbury bypass would have cost many millions of pounds and was to be on the A350 - the road that parallels the TransWilts line.

Keys as to why the application was rejected:

* Conjestion is elsewhere
* Models are doubtful / limited use
* Doesn't fit long term plan
* Serious impact on environment (in parts only)
* Doesn't encourage modal shift
* Very expensive to improve conditions for few in town
* Possible that far west route may be better

Objections that were overruled:

* wildlife mitigation was adequate
* pollution fears were misplaced

and indeed it would have removed traffic from the town


I have written more / provided links to the full report / looked forward at

http://www.wellho.net/mouth/2268_Westbury-Bypass-Refused-looking-forward.html

An objection overrruled because "wildlife mitigation was adequate" sounds rather strange to say the least, but other than that I can't say I'm particularly unhappy about this decision - seems like the right one to me.

My wording, Phil ... I tried to summarise some 600 paragraphs that landed on my doormat.  More fully explained, the inspector said that the objectors were worried about the possible effect of the road on badgers, bats, dormice, great crested newts ... but that in each case he felt that the plans for the new road included sufficient measures that the effects on these species would be limited.

I was always curious about the logic behind the eastern route as it didn^t really give ready access to the business park where most employment in the area is, the only beneficiary as I could make out would have been the cement works.

I don^t suppose Lafarge has much influence in the Council, or their decision to all but close their Westbury works may have influenced any decision makers.  ;) :-X :-X

 Cement jobs axed (http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/wdp/news/Westbury-cement-jobs-axed-builders-struggle/article-341502-detail/article.html)

The arguments in Graham^s post could all be seen in a different light with a fully working cement works.

The Eastern route was the "preferred" route as it was the only one that was affordable - the Western route just priced itself out of being an option - except to the protesters.

The Eastern route did include a new link road from the Lafarge roundabout leading into the trading estate along the route of the old railway line which fed this site when it was a War Office depot many years ago.
See:  http://bypassnow.info/e1.jpg

I think the main reason the bypass was rejected this time was purely financial - ^31M saved - at a stroke ! Needed for duck houses and moat cleaning  ;D ;D

10 YEARS on and, yes, I'm sure that I want to reply.   The rejection of the bypass in 2009 did not, of course, solve the underlying issues for which the whole idea was brought up in the first place.  Heavy lorries still rumble through the town on the trunk A350, all vehicles twist and turn at a series of roundabouts, for the most part still producing concentrations of noxious gases and at some times of day it can be distinctly slow.

I was in Westbury last night with a brief to talk on current and future issues on PUBLIC transport - but that was just one half of an action packed evening, with the other half given over to issues relating to the neighbourhood plan, a key element of would need to be the environment in the town and what vehicles (lorries, buses, delivery vans, cars, cycles) go where.   And that could be so different were there a way for some of the most impact-full elements being routed away from the town, while protecting and encouraging traffic to businesses in the town.

This is (12:35, 7.11.19) a placeholder start to a topic ... diagrams to follow

I'm just shocked that duck houses and moat cleaning were 10 years ago.  Just as well parliament is so much better run these days....

Continues at http://www.passenger.chat/22426