Selly Oak Bypass

[JamesA44]

Excellent

I went to Homebase on Saturday and did notice there was less traffic, but just put it down to the torrential rain! I go over there quite often so will be interested to see the effect of this.

[Chris Bertram]

Just ask them to move the "4" to the front. The B438 is not used according to the Wiki

That's far too sensible for Birmingham City Council; that would be an appropriate number and in the correct zone. What do you want, the moon on a stick?!

Has anyone followed this (B384 vs B438) up any further?

[c2R]

Haha, having used the road southbound during the evening rush hour last week, I wondered why the number was B384, and have just read this thread.... you couldn't make it up...!

The only problem is, that the bypass is a bit crap... I queued all the way round the bypass to the roundabout with the A4040, as the flow of traffic southbound there blocked us from progressing. Must have been kicking out time at the university as well, as getting past that roundabout was also difficult. Might try using the B road through the town next time (o;

[Big L]

Heading Northbound it's touch-and-go whether the bypass is quicker or not. Southbound, I use the old road every time.

The sign coming up from Bournville on the A4040 has the 'new' B road number on the signs now, but no mention of which way the A38 goes towards the city.

[JamesA44]

The whole issue of signing the bypass and the old road has been a shambles.

[urbanfox]

Plans for the second phase... or rather Phase 1B of the Selly Oak New Road online here.

Looks fairly simple and straightforward but probably as good as can be expected without sticking some flyovers and tunnels in. Still looks as though it could provide a decent improvement over what is currently traffic hell.

Traffic lights at the junction of Gibbins Rd and Harborne Lane should be a good improvement too, trying to turn in and out of there in the mornings and afternoons is a nightmare.

Could do with widening the existing bypass slightly and/or remarking it as S4 in conjunction with this. It's just about wide enough for 2 lines of traffic on each side as it is, and when it's busy traffic tends to arrange itself as such (apart from the odd one who sits in the middle of the wide single lane). I assume it was built as wide as it is to enable future remarking as S4 as traffic levels dictate?

[Truvelo]

It could really do with facing the A38 head on if they want more traffic to use it. As it stands the old road is still an attractive alternative but as you say without spending a fortune there's not a lot that can be done.

[ais523]

I submitted Selly Oak Triangle to CBRD's Bad Junctions a while back. It is, at current, pretty terrible. (It also possibly has the highest concentration of incorrect signs in the country; I went and photographed pretty much every sign at the junction; there was only one flag sign that I could spot no problems with, and many of the non-flag signs were incorrect too.) There has been a small improvement since I contacted CBRD (the lane assignments on the approach to the junction on the A38 northbound have been fixed), but the junction is nonetheless pretty terrible at the moment.

Here's the response I gave to the consultation on the linked site:

The current layout of Selly Oak Triangle is a huge traffic bottleneck, and problematic in many other ways (e.g. it has pervasively incorrect signage, which is a particular problem because it encourages drivers to ignore the new bypass). As such, I'm pleased to see that a scheme has been improved to fix it.

The new plan, in general, seems like a sensible improvement. However, I have some specific concerns:

1. Currently, according to signs at Selly Oak Triangle, Harborne Lane is classified as the A4040, and signs direct traffic for Birmingham city centre along the B384 (some examples from signs currently at the junction, approaching the junction along the A38 northbound: "For City centre Attractions follow City centre (B384)", "City centre, Edgbaston (B384)"). This has the effect of discouraging traffic from using the new bypass, and in practice means that the vast majority of drivers use the old route of the A38. In order to avoid this problem with the new junction layout, could you please ensure that the signage at the new junction:
a) classifies the stretch of Harborne Lane between Selly Oak Triangle and Aston Webb Boulevard as the A38 (and signs exits in this direction as "A38 (A4040)" so that drivers looking for the A4040 clockwise know that this route is also correct for them), and does not classify the stretch of Bristol Road between Oak Tree Lane and Chapel Lane as a primary road or A road;
b) consistently uses primary (green) backgrounds, patches or panels as appropriate when referring to the A38, and non-primary (white) backgrounds, patches or panels as appropriate for the other roads in the region;
c) signs the old route of the A38 only for local destinations within Selly Oak (such as Selly Oak itself, the new retail park on the Battery Park site, and Selly Oak station and its associated Park and Ride).

2. The current pedestrian crossing timings at Selly Oak triangle are highly dangerous; many of the crossings show "red man" / "do not cross" signs for considerable lengths of time while the road in question is in fact closed to traffic from all directions. The problem with this is that as there can be a wait of several minutes before the crossing turns green, pedestrians have an incentive to ignore the pedestrian lights and cross the junction anyway. This means that when a pedestrian incorrectly remembers the (fairly complex) sequence of traffic flows at the junction, they run a serious risk of being run over; I've personally witnessed a near miss at the crossing of Harborne Lane nearest to Bristol Road. In order to enhance safety for pedestrians, I'd like you to ensure that the pedestrian crossing lights correctly reflect whether the road is in fact safe to cross at that time. Another change along these lines which would help would be to stagger pedestrian crossings so that each carriageway of a road can be crossed individually; this would allow longer "green man" periods because the lights would not need to wait for traffic in both directions to be stopped before turning green.

3. One of the most critical parts of this plan will be the traffic light timings at the A38/A4040 corner of the junction. The main flows at the junction are turning left from Bristol Road into Harborne Lane, and turning right from Harborne Lane into Bristol Road. With the roads as shown in the diagram, these flows are possible simultaneously and would likely make a sensible long-duration traffic light phase (which would also include a "straight on" from Harborne Lane onto Oak Tree Lane as it does not conflict with either of these movements). I would recommend that you program the traffic lights to give green lights to this set of movements most of the time, especially during the morning and evening peak periods. (With the movements at the junction as are drawn on the diagram, two other phases would be needed: one which allows traffic to go straight on or turn left or right from Oak Tree Lane, and one which allows traffic to go straight on on, or turn left from, Bristol Road in either direction. Most likely a phase will also need to be added for pedestrians, who would otherwise have trouble crossing the carriageways of roads that lead away from the junction.)

4. The junction as drawn gives no obvious way to get from the Bristol Road (northbound) to Oak Tree Lane; the direct right turn is disallowed, which makes sense given the topology of the junction, but there is no obvious alternative, and the current method of doing this (doing a complete clockwise loop of the triangle) is no longer possible. I assume the new way to perform this movement is to do a complete anticlockwise loop of the triangle? If so, clear signage will be needed to help people understand this, as most motorists will be unlikely to guess (it took me a while to spot the possibility while looking at the plans, and motorists will typically not have a diagram of the junction available unless shown on signs).

5. I have some concerns over the provision for busses. Out of the most popular bus routes, the junction seems to handle the current bus routes 98, 11C and 76 well, and 11A adequately (although information will need to be given to bus customers attempting to catch the 11A on Bristol Road that they will have to use the stop on Oak Tree Lane instead). However, the 61 and 63, possibly the most popular bus routes, seem to be in some amount of trouble northbound. There's no obvious position for a bus lane on Bristol Road northbound (because the 61 and 63 want to continue on Bristol Road to be able to serve Selly Oak and Selly Oak station, effectively "turning right" off the A38, and thus have no use for the typical position of a bus lane which is on the left); I'm assuming that the bus lanes near the junction will just be removed on the assumption that the new junction layout will allow traffic to flow freely enough that they are no longer necessary. In addition, the bus stop on Bristol Road northbound near Harborne Lane is necessarily going to have to be removed as part of the scheme; this bus stop is needed by 61 and 63 customers to be able to interchange with the 11 (walking from the other side of Elliott Road is not really acceptable, especially as it requires crossing two or three roads, one of which is extremely busy). It may be worth giving some thought to a replacement bus stop for the 61 and 63, and in particular working out where it could be sited (the best location with the proposed layout appears to be on the inside of the triangle itself, but this is far from ideal).

6. Although I am glad to see that the grossly incorrect number B38 for the old course of the A38 was changed, B384 is also an incorrect number, as (because like most roads in Birmingham, the road falls geographically entirely between the A4 and the A5) its first digit should be 4. The most obvious correct number for the stretch of road would be B438 (which is currently unused). Because most signs that will need to show the number will be at Selly Oak Triangle itself, the junction upgrade seems like the best opportunity to change the number to a valid one; the need to produce new signs anyway will minimize the costs involved in doing so.

I'd encourage other SABRE members who are interested in the issues I raised to write their own responses to the consultation. (Selly Oak Triangle is something I feel pretty strongly about, given that I used to work very close to it – the entrance to the workplace is on Selly Oak Bypass itself – and still frequently go through the junction, and given what a mess it is at the moment.) I'd encourage submitting your own opinion rather than copying mine (copied opinions tend not to have the impact that they maybe should).

I'll also try to attend one or more of the consultations in person. If anyone wants me to ask a question of the question-answerers there, let me know in this thread and I'll try to bring it to them.

[BF2142]

Does it really matter?

[ais523]

It matters if you have to use the junction!

And a pretty large number of people have to use the junction. When I was younger it was on the way to school, and often jammed up so badly that we had to get up much earlier than we'd like in order to avoid being late. Depending on how long the queue at the junction was, we had multiple rat-runs to avoid it (the longer ones were for when the shorter ones jammed too). So in addition to everyone using the junction, it also affects anyone using any of the roads nearby.

Seeing the potential for the junction to be sorted out is some of the best roads-related news I've seen for a while (for south Birmingham residents, it's up there with the improvements to Catthorpe as something that needed fixing). As such, and given the track record the council has of completely screwing things up at that junction in particular, I want to make sure that it's done correctly this time.

[S Parkinson]

Here's the response I gave to the consultation on the linked site:
<<>>

Comprehensive and well made points.
I'm 99% certain that after 'phase 1B' is complete A38 northbound signage will direct City Centre traffic via the bypass, with increased signal priority given to the Bristol Road (south) to Harborne Lane turning movement, as the B384 is to be 'downgraded' at that time including applying a 20mph speed limit as outlined here.

Regarding the stated summer 2018 start for this scheme, my understanding is that this is dependant on the existing supermarket within the triangle being closed first, which in turn will not happen until the new superstore on the Battery site is built and opened.
The good news is that after a protracted ground remediation phase, the new store should rise pretty quickly once the build finally starts.

[S Parkinson]

According to this update the bypass phase 1B works are 'now programmed to commence on site early 2019'.
Still no sign of work on the new store starting even though the development web site is still saying the build should have commenced before the end of 2016.

[ais523]

The delay's due to ground preparation; they basically need to dig up a landfill to get down to the land beneath. I haven't seen work in the main part of the site for quite a while, though (although there's often yellow vehicles moving around in the area closest to Battery Park). Either they've just stopped work on it for a while, or else they're digging up rubbish faster than they can process it (and have taken a break to go through the backlog).

Incidentally, you don't need to wait for the hoarding to blow down to look at what's going on; you can get a pretty good view from the train (the Cross City Line between Selly Oak and University).

[ais523]

The new store is now well underway, so it seems like there's now progress on this once more.

Something that (if I remember correctly) hasn't been linked here yet: the consultation response and resulting adjusted plans, here. The main change is the inclusion of segregated cycle paths (in the same style as is being built on the A38 further north; the idea seems to be to futureproof the area for if the A38 cycle path is extended southbound, and to act as a "cycle route interchange" in the meantime). There are some minor changes that seem like good improvements too, e.g. a more pedestrian-friendly signal sequence that nonetheless doesn't seem to hurt cars that stick to the major roads, and a bus interchange that's now actually fairly logical.

Of Sabristic interest: the consultation response has a sentence responding to my complaints about B384 being out of zone. Unfortunately, it was "B384 was allocated by DfT years ago and there is no intention to change this." So I guess keeping the zone system intact is not really a high priority around there.

Interestingly, from this and other consultation responses, it appears that Birmingham has a rule that for every tree cut down as a result of construction work, two more have to be planted nearby. Given that there also seems to be a rule that a tree that has to be cut down for safety reasons or because it's died/too old must be replaced by a tree nearby, I suddenly understand why Birmingham has quite so many treese.

[S Parkinson]

Harborne Lane new southbound carriageway taking shape, 1. looking south, 2. looking north

1. https://freeimage.host/i/sonr-1b-may-2020-1.JNwKts
2. https://freeimage.host/i/sonr-1b-may-2020-2.JNwuR9
(photos linked as couldn't attach)

Selly Oak New Road phase 1B plan: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=39848&p=1030427

[ais523]

(photos linked as couldn't attach)

If you want to upload an image to SABRE but can't attach it to a forum post, you can use the wiki's "Upload file" feature. That's normally a better way to preserve the images for the future than third-party hosts, which have a tendency to go out of business or retroactively add restrictions.

[S Parkinson]

Harborne Lane southbound carriageway is now open which effectively marks the completion of the Selly Oak Bypass (although in reality a fair bit of finishing off still remains).
I've uploaded 5 nr photos to the wiki (tagged A38) here (then jump to End)
[some have un-orientated, help Mods].
First pic seems to indicate the notorious B384 may be being renumbered to B3800!
Forth pic shows city bound traffic now directed left at the Triangle rather than straight on (former sign on GSV).
Third and fifth pics confirm there are two lanes for that A38 TOTSO movement in both directions (the lane closure on the new carriageway was associated with some out of peak working btw).
Disappointingly I counted a 30 second green phase (85' red) for Harborne La to Bristol Rd (south) versus 40 secs (75' red) for Bristol Rd (from Selly Oak) to Bristol Rd (south). Bristol Rd (south) to Harborne La gets 70 secs green (30' left phase + 40' with straight) with only 45' red.

[JamesA44]

Forth pic shows city bound traffic now directed left at the Triangle rather than straight on

When they did the Northfield bypass, for city-bound traffic they successfully made it seem that although you were effectively turning left, this left bend was the natural way to go - thereby stopping people ignoring the bypass and still going through Northfield.

I haven't driven eastbound on the A38 through Selly Oak since these works have been done, so I wonder if it's the same here? i.e. that the left turn feels "natural", or whether it feels so forced that a lot of people would carry straight on anyway if they were heading into the City Centre? I always thought that the relatively new buildings on the left would prevent a gradual curve.

First pic seems to indicate the notorious B384 may be being renumbered to B3800!

It looks like the "B3800" is the section past the retail park, which was A4040 before. But yes, I wonder if they will also use this number for the old road through Selly Oak (currently B384).
It's still wildly out of zone though

[Chris Bertram]

Forth pic shows city bound traffic now directed left at the Triangle rather than straight on

When they did the Northfield bypass, for city-bound traffic they successfully made it seem that although you were effectively turning left, this left bend was the natural way to go - thereby stopping people ignoring the bypass and still going through Northfield.

I haven't driven eastbound on the A38 through Selly Oak since these works have been done, so I wonder if it's the same here? i.e. that the left turn feels "natural", or whether it feels so forced that a lot of people would carry straight on anyway if they were heading into the City Centre? I always thought that the relatively new buildings on the left would prevent a gradual curve.

First pic seems to indicate the notorious B384 may be being renumbered to B3800!

It looks like the "B3800" is the section past the retail park, which was A4040 before. But yes, I wonder if they will also use this number for the old road through Selly Oak (currently B384).
It's still wildly out of zone though

B438, which is an unused number, was always the obvious choice for the old route. B4380 is already taken (it includes the old Shrewsbury by-pass in its route), and B4038 is in use in the Rugby/Daventry area.

Chapel Lane is unworthy of a number. However, if it does indeed have a number, it will be one of those classified roads where one end is clearly visible from the other.

[S Parkinson]

I haven't driven eastbound on the A38 through Selly Oak since these works have been done, so I wonder if it's the same here? i.e. that the left turn feels "natural", or whether it feels so forced that a lot of people would carry straight on anyway if they were heading into the City Centre?

Difference from Northfield is the 'old' straight on city-bound is still clearly straight on, as per my last photo. You can also see that the carriageway is marked with left arrows to continue on the A38. The scheme plan also clearly shows the layout.

It looks like the "B3800" is the section past the retail park

That did cross my mind but I ultimately dismissed the thought based on a logic that the Triangle is effectively one junction (ie the left fork at that point is just a precursor to the left turn proper into Selly Oak a short distance ahead). I might be wrong. Not all of the new signage is yet in place.