The province of North Brabant has received 136 responses on its most recent interim step towards an improved N279 between Veghel and Asten. The reactions vary widely and further demonstrate the complexity of the task that the province and its partners face. The responses lead to the refinement and deepening of the approach for an Environmental Impact Report (MER), but do not result in the addition of extra alternatives or substantial changes.

This spring, the province presented the concept of the Note on Scope and Detail Level, (refers to another website) or NRD. It describes five alternatives for improving the N279 and how the province intends to investigate these further. All alternatives must contribute as much as possible to traffic safety, accessibility, and livability on and around this important provincial road. The final choice for the N279 could fall on one of those alternatives, but it could also be a combination that includes elements from multiple alternatives.


136 responses have been received on the NRD from various stakeholders. These include responses from residents along the route between Veghel and Asten, as well as businesses, municipal authorities, and interest groups. Many stakeholders emphasize in their responses the importance of a careful and transparent process in which a future-proof and sustainable solution for the N279 is developed. Many submitters also reflect on the impact of specific alternatives on livability, nature, health, and traffic safety. Additionally, attention is drawn to the impact of detours on local communities. The financial feasibility of the plans and the effect of future spatial and economic developments in the region are also frequently highlighted.

Three Adjustments

Some of the raised points of attention will be incorporated into the further development of the plans and will be carefully weighed. “At this moment, the raised points of attention do not lead to substantial adjustments to the studies,” said deputy Hagar Roijackers (Environment). “Based on all input, three technical recommendations and points of attention will be implemented in the scope and detail level of the MER to be drawn up.”

These include:

  1. Clarifying the delineation of the project area
  2. Clarifying the study area for the MER
  3. Investigating subjective traffic safety, alongside the study of objective traffic safety. This refers to the feeling of safety that cannot be directly captured in numbers.


The recommendations from the MER Commission and BrabantAdvies will also be incorporated into the development of the plans and the decisions to be made. This primarily concerns making all objectives of this project transparent and how this influences the alternatives to be studied and the consequences for the environment.

Diversity of Interests

“We are pleased to have received so many responses,” says deputy Stijn Smeulders (mobility). “This shows that many people are involved in the future of this important road. It also reflects the diversity of interests. Some advocate for a solution that involves doubling the number of lanes or a detour, while others argue for the opposite. What is certain is that significant, impactful decisions must be made. We must make the best choice in the public interest. Ultimately, we all want to drive as smoothly and safely as possible on the N279, with as little inconvenience and impact on the environment as possible.”


The MER to be drawn up in 2026 should ultimately lead to the most feasible solution for the N279: the preferred alternative. The current plan is that by 2027 it should be clear what that preferred alternative looks like. In the meantime, the province is increasing traffic safety on the N279 with smaller interventions that can be carried out separately from the larger measures.