Yesterday traffic was queuing from Kingsclere to the 'road works' at Knightsbridge, it was taking people over an hour to get through. The sign advises us that the 'roadwork’s' will take 50 weeks to complete. Have Hampshire County Council lost the plot, have any of the highway engineers ever driven down that road during rush hour? The hold ups are going to be frustrating beyond belief. There must be a dozen other ways to deal with this. A year to strengthen a two carraigeway bridge ? I drove through at the weekend, too, no 'roadworks' going on, I drove through during the evening, no 'roadworks' going on, but the hold ups and delays will frustrate us for nearly a year, this is astonishing. Any views or experience of this anyone ?

Use the HGV route.

When they replaced the smaller bridge about 150 yds S from the current one it took a similar amount of time to complete the works.

The bridge needs replacing, and there is no other way ( other than closing the road completely ) to do it.

Put in a temporary bridge (no HGV's) to the west side of the existing bridge, divert traffic across it, replace the old bridge. Once it's finished remove the temporary bridge and landscape the site.

I watch those engineering shows on Discovery.

Kingsclere or Headley people should use an HGV route ? ! Have you the first clue as to how much disruption that would be to people, the added distance, do you want people to rat run through Burghclere, Sydmonton, Echinswell to get to Newbury !! you must be a highway engineer, how about some weekend working and evening working using the available light to say 9 pm to shorten the contract period, how about using The Royal Engineers to put in a temporary bridge to the south, surely some short term 24 hour working would hugely decrease the disruption to all, if you wish HGVs to to use the HGV route then great, I would support that, put a weight limit on the A339 from today between Greenham and Headley, that will sort it.

Disruption? I bet it would be less than waiting in a queue for an hour.

Weekend / evening / night working? I'm sure the people of Headley would love that. Just som you can be inconvenienced less?

A temp bridge would require short sections of road to & from the temp bridge. I'm not sure 'Darling Buds' or the activity farm would like that. Even if a bridge built by the Royal Engineers would come up to DoT spec.

The Activity farm has been shut for over two years, Darling Buds of May would doubtless suffer any inconvenience for a consideration of a few thousand.
There are relatively few people living very close to the 'roadwaorks' I am sure that they would prefer the whole thing to be over very quickly.

So would those paying for it.

Activity farm might be shut to paying punters, but I doubt the'd want their land turning into a temporary road.

Leaving work early today in order to get through the 'roadworks' at Knightbridge, at 4 pm there was no work going on at all, no signs of any contractors whatsoever. School buses for the Clere School have been very heavily delayed, during exam times. It is pretty clear to me that this contract has been poorly let and its going to be very unimaginative in its execution. There is plenty of room to the south to build a temporary lane utilising a little of the Darling Buds field. The really annoying thing is that the restricted lane could have been unrestricted...certainly from 4 pm, who monitors these contracts, who monitors the contractors ?

Clear that this has been poorly let? Who knows what work has been done on the restricted lane......A year long programme of works is always going to affect someones exams......


Building a temporary lane would be prohibitively expensive, and all too relieve traffic for a short period of time. Once the owrks get established & people find alternative routes the delays will be shorter.

A couple of months testing to ensure the lights are working correctly ........ elfin safety you see!

I seem to remember a few years ago when they replaced the other bridge at Knightsbridge they built a temporary bridge and diverted traffic onto it round the roadworks?

Isn't this the same Highway Authority who have complained about the WBC proposal about routing HGV's going to Basingstoke via Tot Hill? The way they are repairing the bridge is 1950's - come on there really are alternatives, lets see some innovation for once.

Frankly, the state of the whole road, what should be a main highway between motorways, is an absolute disgrace and has been for years. Its no more than a tarmacked cart track.

We in Newbury should be quite pleased - Hampshire makes West Berks look competent!

Wait are you talking about all of the roads in the UK??

Not the main 'Euro routes' where there are heavy lorries moving around. Perhaps Hampshire is too rich to need any effective commercial routes.

I think they stuck a temporary lane over the demolished bridge.

The approved HGV route from M4 - M3 is via The A34 & A303. Sending HGVs along the A339 isn't part of the plan. It was, early 1990s saw a comprehensive feasability study carried out on the A339, dual carriage way from Newbury to Basingstoke.......plan dropped.

Trouble is how many more miles / diesel / driving time is it to take the approved route?

Depends what is more valuable to you - time or money. Being stuck in traffic jams can be wasted money.....

A prime example of a situation in which to switch off your engine whilst waiting!!

....as has the economy, wonder if there is any connection? Not exactly killing the Goose, but sending her nest to Scotland!