Photo of the Month

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 14:17 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 13:30
Posts: 4999
Location: Birmingham, England
geo449 wrote:
I can imagine the "meeting" at BCC:

Councilor A: So, what number shall we give the old road?
Councilor B: B38?
Councilor A: Great! Pub time!

Still, this is good news. Hopefully it'll mean it gets a proper number. It also proves that at least TfL know their stuff.

So, when will the B4100 get a proper non-stupid number? ;)

Which one, the Bicester to Adderbury one, the Banbury to Bishops Tachbrook one or the one through Birmingham city centre?

_________________
Moseley Rugby - http://www.moseleyrugby.co.uk
...... EDF Trophy winners 2009; "Onwards and Upwards" ......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 14:27 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 20:31
Posts: 971
Location: Wolverhampton, [insert county here]
All of them?

In fact, why does the one through Birmingham City Centre even need to have a number? Surely if they want to discourage traffic in the city centre they would remove the road numbers within the area! ;)

_________________
The M5: Because The Middle Lane Is The Best Lane!*

Mandatory 55mph limit on the middle lane in use 24 hours a day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 14:28 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Posts: 10779
Location: South London
geo449 wrote:
It also proves that at least TfL know their stuff.

DfT, shurely?

_________________
Chris
Bellhop and sweeper-upper, CBRD.co.uk
chris5156.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 14:32 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 20:31
Posts: 971
Location: Wolverhampton, [insert county here]
Chris5156 wrote:
geo449 wrote:
It also proves that at least TfL know their stuff.

DfT, shurely?


My lisdexia is layinp up again, tehn!

_________________
The M5: Because The Middle Lane Is The Best Lane!*

Mandatory 55mph limit on the middle lane in use 24 hours a day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2011 15:50 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 15:44
Posts: 2345
Location: Havant, Hampshire
And don't call him Shirley


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 17:47 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 16:20
Posts: 1184
Location: Around the A500
I've decided that I've read this thread too much - or else I've sold my soul to SABRE....

The other night I dreamt I was motoring through Tamworth (at least it registered as Tamworth, although I didn't recognise anywhere as there).

I spotted a road sign pointing to the B5 (obviously the old A5) :o

You can call the men in white coats to take me away now.

_________________
'Long before history began we men have got together apart from the women and done things. We had to.' - CS Lewis 1960


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We might as well all go home
PostPosted: Thu Dec 22, 2011 18:01 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 20:36
Posts: 7803
Location: Polbeth, West Lothian
Chris5156 wrote:
We are aware of the issue, and are in discussions with the local council to correct this.



Translation: No we ****** well did not authorise it. Now where is that councillor spanking stick?

_________________
Minds are like parachutes - they only function when open
Thomas Robert Dewar(1864-1930)
Take the pledge


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 20:04 
Offline
New Member

Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2009 21:17
Posts: 1
I've been driving past the offending signs for the past couple of weeks and today, for the first time, the one nearest the university has been patched to (I think) B384!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 20:12 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Posts: 10779
Location: South London
ian4091 wrote:
I've been driving past the offending signs for the past couple of weeks and today, for the first time, the one nearest the university has been patched to (I think) B384!

Out of the frying pan and into the fire. I make it 70 miles north of the A4, so slightly out of zone, but I will accept out-of-zone-number in preference to completely-ridiculous-number.

_________________
Chris
Bellhop and sweeper-upper, CBRD.co.uk
chris5156.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Sun Apr 01, 2012 20:27 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 17:34
Posts: 261
ian4091 wrote:
I've been driving past the offending signs for the past couple of weeks and today, for the first time, the one nearest the university has been patched to (I think) B384!
Just ask them to move the "4" to the front. The B438 is not used according to the Wiki :wink:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Wed Apr 11, 2012 14:48 
Offline
Member

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34
Posts: 189
I don't see why it is necessary to even number the old road at all, it just becomes another suburban street in Birmingham, surely ?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Sun Apr 15, 2012 14:31 
Offline
Member

Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2009 12:41
Posts: 27
The new number is on a black and white patch stuck onto a green sign. It really does look awful !


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 00:33 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 16:06
Posts: 7548
Location: Manchester
Not only is it out of zone still, it's in the wrong city. Three digit B roads in England are presumably reserved for London.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 01:10 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat May 31, 2003 13:25
Posts: 9551
Location: Amersham
nowster wrote:
Not only is it out of zone still, it's in the wrong city. Three digit B roads in England are presumably reserved for London.
Not true.

Bx00-x49 in zones 1-5 were reserved for (County of) London use. B600-B649 weren't going to be allocated, it seems.

However Bx50-x89 were simply the next 40 B roads out - note how the narrow 5- and 6-zones mean that those numbers come quite a way north (B589 in Loughborough, B689 in Newark - with lots of B68x in Nottingham from 1922). OK, B189 was in Grays, B290 in Epsom, B389 in Thorpe, B489 along the Chiltern ridge, but the 5- and 6-zones allowed the 3-digits to get a long way north.

You have since had the B52x that made the downgraded A50, B530 and B531 in Beds. B600 in Notts, B601 and B630 way up north.

_________________
"The more a society seeks to enforce an idea, the more important it is to question it." Professor Dalibor Krupa


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 08:46 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 13:30
Posts: 4999
Location: Birmingham, England
si404 wrote:
nowster wrote:
Not only is it out of zone still, it's in the wrong city. Three digit B roads in England are presumably reserved for London.
Not true.

Bx00-x49 in zones 1-5 were reserved for (County of) London use. B600-B649 weren't going to be allocated, it seems.

However Bx50-x89 were simply the next 40 B roads out - note how the narrow 5- and 6-zones mean that those numbers come quite a way north (B589 in Loughborough, B689 in Newark - with lots of B68x in Nottingham from 1922). OK, B189 was in Grays, B290 in Epsom, B389 in Thorpe, B489 along the Chiltern ridge, but the 5- and 6-zones allowed the 3-digits to get a long way north.

You have since had the B52x that made the downgraded A50, B530 and B531 in Beds. B600 in Notts, B601 and B630 way up north.

The B425 is in Solihull anyway. It's the former A41 from Seven Star Road to the Lode Lane roundabout, then Lode Lane all the way up to the Wheatsheaf junction in Sheldon.

_________________
Moseley Rugby - http://www.moseleyrugby.co.uk
...... EDF Trophy winners 2009; "Onwards and Upwards" ......


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 13:49 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2004 17:42
Posts: 2237
Location: SE London
And in respect of earlier queries on traffic flows; on Saturday when si404 and I drove it, the old route seemed rather busier than the new one.

_________________
Ian.

"Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither." - Benjamin Franklin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 14:38 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 20, 2006 17:35
Posts: 2085
Location: Halesowen, West Mids
FurryBoots wrote:
Just ask them to move the "4" to the front. The B438 is not used according to the Wiki :wink:



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?!

_________________
Respice, Aspice, Prospice

Blog : Road photos : Musician -- Facebook : Twitter


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 17:17 
Offline
Member

Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 20:31
Posts: 971
Location: Wolverhampton, [insert county here]
multiraider2 wrote:
And in respect of earlier queries on traffic flows; on Saturday when si404 and I drove it, the old route seemed rather busier than the new one.


It would be busier northbound as they haven't changed the signage at the A4040 junction to reflect the new A38.

I agree with sgil77, that would be far too sensible for BCC. Next you'll say that getting rid of the southeastern part of the IRR was a bad idea!

_________________
The M5: Because The Middle Lane Is The Best Lane!*

Mandatory 55mph limit on the middle lane in use 24 hours a day


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Mon Apr 16, 2012 17:36 
Offline
Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 17:54
Posts: 7383
Location: Southampton & Portsmouth, usually half way between
When I was last in the area, I used the old road because I didn't see any suggestions at all that there was another option, and although I'd read this thread I hadn't put two and two together and realised that this meant Selly Oak had a bypass.

_________________
I have websites about: Motorway Services | Fareham


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Selly Oak Bypass
PostPosted: Sun Apr 29, 2012 17:09 
Offline
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2006 13:24
Posts: 29
Location: Birmingham
JamesA44 wrote:
Oh dear, anything that involves more traffic going past Battery Park isn't good. At the moment it sounds like the only benefit to using the bypass [southbound] is to avoid the bottleneck through Bournbrook, but if you do that you get involved in the bottleneck by Battery Park :roll:

I'm pleased to see the lane markings on Chapel Lane (next to Battery Park) have been altered for the better. This was something I suggested to the City Council last year:

Dear Sir

With phase 2 of the Selly Oak New Road due for completion this summer [2011] but no start date announced for commencing the Section 278 phase 1B, I am concerned that the principle perceived benefit of the new road (ie. that it is less congested than the existing Bristol Road through Selly Oak) will not be realised due to acute congestion at the Chapel Lane / Bristol Road junction.

Even if phase 2 is not initially signed as the A38, any shift in traffic that does occur can only worsen the already chronic peak time congestion in Chapel Lane resulting in such delays that it is not beneficial to divert to the new road when travelling between the City and Northfield.

Whilst such a situation can perhaps be managed through public communication emphasising that the SONR is not actually complete pending phase 1B, a more likely perception of motorists upon the opening of phase 2 would be that the new road 'isn't working' or worse has been a 'waste of money'. Such short term perceptions would be damaging given the obvious benefit of the road upon full completion.

I write to offer a suggestion that I believe could help significantly with congestion in Chapel Lane between the opening of phase 2 and commencement of phase 1B whilst being extremely easy to implement. Quite simply change the lane demarcation on the approach to the junction such that the left hand lane is the lane that splits into the central and left hand lane at the junction itself (rather than the current situation where it is the right hand lane that splits to become the central and right hand lane). This would spread traffic more evenly between the two lanes as it queues back toward Harborne Lane instead of concentrating traffic in the right hand lane as currently. I appreciate this has a detrimental effect on the effectiveness of the left hand filter signal between Chapel Lane and Bristol Road, however use of this turning movement will have been reduced significantly by the opening of the new road.

I hope my suggestion will be given due consideration and would welcome your feedback on it.

Regards

S Parkinson


(Ref: Selly Oak New Road phases)

Reply (17 Aug 11):

Dear Mr Parkinson

I have considered your suggestion for the lining change at the junction of Bristol Road/Chapel Lane.

I feel the suggestion does have some merit and will therefore suggest the changes are made, along with any further measures that the City Council consider to be necessary for the efficient operation of this junction.

Regards

Brian Palmer
Projects Leader
Transportation Projects
Birmingham City Council


Nothing changed for at least a few months a after the bypass opened on the 21 Aug so I figured the suggestion was not going to be adopted. Now that it has (and I hadn't been that way for a good while before today so I don't know how long ago the lane markings were actually changed) I'd be interested to hear from anyone who uses this route regularly as to what difference it has made.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 105 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: BingPreview [bot], Brandwatch [bot], Google [Bot], Keiji, Pendlemac and 17 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group