Press Release - 05 September
replies to Elaine Turner
Your ref. ET/HC/MSA/0521/PMF
05 September 2006
Mrs E Turner
Technical Services Partnership
Witham Park House
Lincoln LN5 7JN
Dear Mrs Turner
I thank you for your response to my email of the 25th August
and have noted your comments, which, although informative, raise
read Elaine Turner's response dated 01 Sep 2006, click here
Firstly, you quote me as being selective with my words, which
may appear so, but I do appreciate the difference between Lincoln
and Boston. Size should not be compared when we are looking
at road infrastructures but more importantly congestion and
pollution. Two major requirements of the Department for Transport.
My knowledge of both places tells me which fulfils the above
I appreciate that the Lincoln Traffic Model is coming to the
end of it’s life and obviously you wish to proceed with
a more up to date piece of software which takes into account
more transport options and alternatives.
This leaves two issues, which need explaining.
1. We queried the use of the SATURN model when the Boston Transport
Study commenced, as we understood a more suitable model was
available. If you knew at that time of this model, why was it
It could be that a pre-judgment had been made and that nothing
would be done for Boston in the short term.
2. The ability of SATURN to accurately model traffic flows
at individual junctions or other local impacts are less accurate.
Surely this is a major requirement for the abundance of traffic
lights in the area John Adams Way, Sleaford Road, area of Boston?
It would appear, therefore, that if a bypass for Boston is
proposed a new assessment will be needed which presumably will
envisage the use of the VISSIM to fulfil Government criteria.
You quote in your letter that, "Where new modelling applications
are appropriate to better justify future bids for transport
funding, we will always examine situations on merit, as we have
done in the case for Lincoln". This does, therefore, indicate
that Lincoln is being given a preferential case and treatment.
This does appear to be a waste of taxpayer’s money when
the most appropriate model should have been used for Boston
in the first instance.
Although we have asked on numerous occasions for a breakdown
of the funding and contract with Jacobs Babtie, it would be
useful to know an estimate of finance required for other modeling
tools if a bypass for Boston is proposed and we would be pleased
if you could advise us of an estimate of this.