M275 @ Tipner

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

User avatar
sotonsteve
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01

M275 @ Tipner

Post by sotonsteve »

Portsmouth City Council scheme homepage

As many of you may know, plans for the junction at Tipner on the M275 were resurrected a few years back, having been shelved mid-build in the 1970s. The junction will serve a bus park and ride site, hence the bus lane on the southbound onslip on the plans.

According to Portsmouth City Council, there are three options:

Option 1
Option 3
Option 9A

Option 1 is a diamond interchange, with the road passing under the northern bridge (currently unused). This seems to be out of favour though, and so is the least likely to get built.

Option 3 is a roundabout interchange, much like the original plan, and utilises both bridges. This is the option preferred by the planners.

Option 9A is a peculiar junction with a couple of very tight looking slip roads and a strange layout, utilising the southern bridge. This option was suggested by local residents; probably NIMBYs in the houses next to the proposed southern onslip in options 1 and 3, hence the slip road being further north.

Personally, I prefer option 3, as it utilises the existing half-built layout and is a simple and easy layout to use. Option 9A, the NIMBY option as I regard it, would require additional earthworks, have a more peculiar layout, and have a couple of very tight slip roads, which obviously, in the eyes of safety, isn't as safe. The additional deceleration and acceleration on the inbound M275 would also create a greater safety risk and increase congestion in my mind.

The final plan hasn't been decided upon yet, but personally, I hope the planners stick with their favourite option rather than the NIMBY option. Work will start, at the earliest, in 2008, so there is time for a little trip down there in the summer to take lots of photos :P

Oh, and one final thing, do other Sabristi reckon the already built subways will be used, or filled in? Quite a few subways were filled in and replaced with at-grade crossings a few years back, and footbridges removed too, so I don't rate their survival as being too good. Photos, photos!
User avatar
Big Nick
Member
Posts: 4366
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2007 08:27
Location: Epping, Essex

Post by Big Nick »

Are they planning to replace the Firing Ranges to the west with better housing or industrial units or what?

Looking at aerial photos I realise I've been over that stretch about 10 years ago when there were about 6 submarines parked in the water there, waiting to be scrapped or sold to the likes of Canada.

Nick 8-)
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17501
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Post by Truvelo »

Option 9a for me :lol:

Could do with a bit more freeflow though
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
User avatar
sotonsteve
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01

Post by sotonsteve »

Big Nick wrote:Are they planning to replace the Firing Ranges to the west with better housing or industrial units or what?
I don't think the firing ranges will be developed; just a little bit of land west of the M275, and also the wasteland east of the M275.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35934
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

9A would work but for the stupid kink in the southbound exit slip. If that was built it would be the most dangerous two lane offslip I can think of - far wider curves have been one laned on motorway slips.

Option 3 wins it for me, personally. A diamond is just too low capacity.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Post by Johnathan404 »

Bryn666 wrote:9A would work but for the stupid kink in the southbound exit slip. If that was built it would be the most dangerous two lane offslip I can think of - far wider curves have been one laned on motorway slips.
Remember the road will have a 50mph limit, possibly becoming 40 on the sliproads.

Also, what happened to the plans to move Fratton Park to Tipner? I'd heard they were going to move it to The Hard instead, which I presumed was because they weren't going to build the junction. Imagine if all the football traffic had to navigate Tipner Road!
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35934
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

Wait, so the M275 is being dropped from 60 now?

I still don't like the sharp bend :?
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Post by Johnathan404 »

I've just noticed that the slips are only two lanes for the duration of the bend. What's the point in that?! Wouldn't it be easier to hatch out one of the lanes to conquer understeer?
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35934
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

Hence my dislike of the design! It's patently dangerous.

Did the same guy who made the rubbish signs one junction further up design option 9a too?
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
sotonsteve
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01

Post by sotonsteve »

MSAJohnny wrote:
Bryn666 wrote:9A would work but for the stupid kink in the southbound exit slip. If that was built it would be the most dangerous two lane offslip I can think of - far wider curves have been one laned on motorway slips.
Remember the road will have a 50mph limit, possibly becoming 40 on the sliproads.

Also, what happened to the plans to move Fratton Park to Tipner? I'd heard they were going to move it to The Hard instead, which I presumed was because they weren't going to build the junction. Imagine if all the football traffic had to navigate Tipner Road!
Yes, I've also heard about a 50mph limit too; what's the point in the current 60mph limit then, if it's not for the junction as I thought it was meant to be? I still think 60mph would be safe on the mainline though; 70mph+ is safe at present. Hadn't heard about the 40mph slip roads, but I have heard about slip roads being 50mph (or does that refer to the Rudmore roundabout slip roads and M275 north of the M27?). Either way, 40mph or 50mph would be too fast for the loops of option 9A.

A couple of weeks ago Portsmouth FC proposed a stadium on reclaimed land between Portsmouth Harbour station and the Historic Dockyard. I've never known of any proposals for a stadium at Tipner; just the playing fields north of Portsmouth or Fratton Village. The recent proposal will not have any parking provision, apart from for players, officials, disabled people, and residents of property that will be built as part of the proposal, and so park and ride would be vital. At least, unlike Southampton, they won't have to close a main route out of the city for over half an hour on match days, plus the stadium would be right next to a railway terminus, bus interchange, and the Gosport Ferry, if it's still running :evil:
User avatar
Johnathan404
Member
Posts: 11478
Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54

Post by Johnathan404 »

But it'll look completley out of place in the middle of Old Portsmouth!

As for Tipner Interchange, this is what someone on Wikipedia thinks the signs will look like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tipner_junction.PNG

To be honest, having seen the gantries, I wouldn't be surprised if that's how they really turn out.
I have websites about: motorway services | Fareham
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35934
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

Ugh, indeed!
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16976
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Post by Chris5156 »

MSAJohnny wrote:But it'll look completley out of place in the middle of Old Portsmouth!

As for Tipner Interchange, this is what someone on Wikipedia thinks the signs will look like:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Tipner_junction.PNG

To be honest, having seen the gantries, I wouldn't be surprised if that's how they really turn out.
I think whoever posted that has inside info. Perhaps it was put there by the person responsible for the existing M275 signs.
User avatar
Paul
Member
Posts: 9464
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2002 15:22
Location: Ingbirchworth/Leeds
Contact:

Post by Paul »

Proposal 9A: just wrong, and dangerous too.
Regards,
Paul
User avatar
mittfh
Member
Posts: 3228
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 12:34
Location: Kenilworth / Warwick

Post by mittfh »

One oddity I noticed in all three designs: the interchange design has just been slapped on top of the map. There is no indication of how/where the interchanges connect to the local road system, no indication of what happens to traffic on Tipner Lane, and no explanation for the 'orphaned' new road to the North of the junction on one design (Option 1?).

Also note that according to the design for Option 3, the roundabout will be narrower than the original plan, as it is well within the arc described by Tipner Lane.
User avatar
si404
Member
Posts: 10885
Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 13:25
Location: Amersham

Post by si404 »

mittfh wrote:Also note that according to the design for Option 3, the roundabout will be narrower than the original plan, as it is well within the arc described by Tipner Lane.
no it won't. Tipner lane only follows the roundabout for a bit, then narrows and comes off the line.

Option 2 is identical to the original plans.
"“Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations" Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
sotonsteve
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01

Post by sotonsteve »

The scheme could make for some interesting photography, with before, during and after construction shots, and photos of the new layout before opening :P :P :P

It seems that option 3 is the preferred option, having read notes from a meeting that happened back in March, not that the other options have been ruled out.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35934
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Post by Bryn666 »

Needs an expert sign designer though... :roll:
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
User avatar
sotonsteve
Member
Posts: 6079
Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 21:01

Post by sotonsteve »

I went on a Portsmouth road trip this morning, with the main intention of photographing the unbuilt junction on the M275 at Tipner, before work gets underway next year.

I won't post the photos on this thread specifically, as there are 40 of them! They are all named "M275 Tipner, June 2007", and can be found in the Mxxx Photo Gallery.

Any questions, just ask.
User avatar
Steven
SABRE Maps Coordinator
Posts: 19251
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 20:39
Location: Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
Contact:

Post by Steven »

sotonsteve wrote:I went on a Portsmouth road trip this morning, with the main intention of photographing the unbuilt junction on the M275 at Tipner, before work gets underway next year.

I won't post the photos on this thread specifically, as there are 40 of them! They are all named "M275 Tipner, June 2007", and can be found in the Mxxx Photo Gallery.

Any questions, just ask.
Have there been any changes since the PM Photo Gallery of Tipner?
Steven
Motorway Historian

Founder Member, SABRE ex-Presidents' Corner

Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!

Post Reply