- National Highways halted plans to convert part of the M3 into a smart motorway
- Work for the project in Hampshire had already been started by Balfour Beatty
- The move comes after mounting pressure from MPs and safety campaigners
Road chiefs have halted plans to convert part of the M3 into a smart motorway after pressure from MPs and campaigners.
Balfour Beatty was ready to begin phase one of the £140million project to turn the hard shoulder into a permanent fourth lane between Eastleigh and Winchester.
But National Highways stood down the company, which had already built work compounds for the project in Hampshire. It claims the ten-mile upgrade is being temporarily postponed.
Fantastic news today about the progress the campaign is making. Please could you supply my email address to Claire. I would like to talk with her.
Hi Peter, I emailed you Friday? did you receive it? if not info@smartmotorwayskill.co.uk comes though to me
Years before “Smart Motorways” were conceived I was Project Director for consultants working for the, then, Highways Agency on the Widening and Improvements between Junctions 30 and 32 of the M6 near Preston.
That stretch of M6 had a very poor accident record. (13 people were killed in fog when traffic was queueing around Junction 30.) There were then discontinuities in the hard shoulder at bridges, which had been created when the stretch was widened from its original two lanes to three. (That stretch had been the UK’s first motorway, having been opened in December 1958.)
As part of the “Project Appraisal Report” I wrote a section explaining why hard shoulders should always be provided, and why the their provision should be continuous.
I believed that very strongly at the time, and even more so now.
Even if vehicles in difficulty COULD, by sheer good fortune reach the refuge of a discontinuous hard shoulder, they are then faced with having later to emerge, from a standing start, into traffic travelling at speeds of at least 70 mph.
This case was accepted wholeheartedly, because, at that time -around 1988 -it was what the Highways Agency wanted to hear.
I have always believed that motorways MUST have hard shoulders, and that they MUST always be continuous. Short refuges are no solution at all. They are dangerous in themselves.
I have worked on live motorways, where traffic flows were in excess of 185,000 vehicles per day (AADT). They are very dangerous places to be, with all those fast-moving missiles. They are noisy, windy (as a result of traffic) and frightening places to be.
I support Clare Mercer, and wish her every success in ending the use of the inappropriately-named “Smart Motorways”
I sent this to the then transport minister on the 17/02/2015.
Only reply i got was from the highways agency with a document saying how great the new layout will be.
Dear Mr Mcloughlin,
I am writing to you as a concerned motorist.
As a regular user of the M1 at all times of day and night, I am shocked by the number of accidents on the Bedfordshire stretch.
This seem to be the most dangerous road in the UK. Without having the facts and figures to hand, I would suggest that since the widening and introduction of the congestion lane there has been a significant increase in injury/death related incidents.
From personal observations, the variable speed limits don’t work. Just a cash generator for government. The congestion lane is dangerous and doesn’t get used. I have personally seen it being used several times when out of use!
Lane hogging is on the increase. Although recent police powers have been introduced, they don’t appear to be used enough or at all. Maybe this is because Bedfordshire Police don’t have a unit patroling and have reduced the amount of officers in the traffic department.
I would also suggest this is since the introduction of highways traffic officers. This was the most pointless role ever created at a great expense. Bedfordshire police are struggling to fund their traffic department, but the highways are driving around in expensive 4×4 vehicles that are not fuel efficient.
How many more deaths or serious injuries do there have to be before something is done? The public demand to see more police and they are not getting this.
Having worked for Bedfordshire Police I have seen the decline in officer numbers.
The financial implications to the UK must be very high each time the M1 is closed or lanes are reduced. This cost must out weigh the cost of providing more police officers.
Please could you personally look into this with the intention to make the M1 safer
I support this campaign. So-called “smart” motorways are a stupid and dangerous idea. Yes, they save money and provide more road space, and we, the travelling public, will pay for it with our lives. I feel ashamed that our lawmakers believe the money saved is more valuable than people’s lives. A real backwards step.
I would hope that all stupid “smart” motorways will have hard shoulders reinstated. And yes, it will cost money.
I couldn’t agree more. There’s nothing smart about ‘smart’ motorways; they are one the most stupid things our transport planners have ever devised. The sooner they’re consigned to the dustbin of ill-conceived experiments the better.
5