Upgrading the A66 and A69

[jabbaboy]

Another factor is that a major archaeological survey is going on, there are a number of extant sites going back to before the Roman occupation as what we know call the A66 was already in use before the Romans arrived and built their own forts along the route.

Scotch Corner was where the alternate routes to Scotland diverged, the high road via the current A66 to the A6 and the Low road, the Great North Road, now A1 with a later diversion to York which had a Legionary Fort where the Minster now stands. One of the major battles of the conquest was fought near Scotch Corner and in the aftermath the Romans built a large base at Cataractonium which survives to this day as Catterick Camp.

Not sure where this high road and low road came from as far as I'm aware the low road is A6/A66, the high road is B6277/A689 and is a more modern thing. Dere Street in Roman Times definitely wasn't a low road as it went over Carter Bar which was one of the two junctions meeting there with the one heading West via the A66 route (unnamed). Not disputing the rest, mind there was no Great North Road at the time, that's a medieval thing.

[KeithW]

Another factor is that a major archaeological survey is going on, there are a number of extant sites going back to before the Roman occupation as what we know call the A66 was already in use before the Romans arrived and built their own forts along the route.

Scotch Corner was where the alternate routes to Scotland diverged, the high road via the current A66 to the A6 and the Low road, the Great North Road, now A1 with a later diversion to York which had a Legionary Fort where the Minster now stands. One of the major battles of the conquest was fought near Scotch Corner and in the aftermath the Romans built a large base at Cataractonium which survives to this day as Catterick Camp.

Not sure where this high road and low road came from as far as I'm aware the low road is A6/A66, the high road is B6277/A689 and is a more modern thing. Dere Street in Roman Times definitely wasn't a low road as it went over Carter Bar which was one of the two junctions meeting there with the one heading West via the A66 route (unnamed). Not disputing the rest, mind there was no Great North Road at the time, that's a medieval thing.

I was talking about roads that precede the Romans who to a large extent reused and improved the old routes. These were largely military roads used by the legions. Supplies would usually be sent by sea. There were roads east and west of the pennines. The great legionary bases in the north were Eboracum (York) in the east and Deva (Chester in the west)

The Romans referred to what is now the A66 as the Winter Road and the Summer Road was parallel to the A1 to Corbridge. For obvious reasons marching a large force over Bowes Moor in winter was not considered a good idea. Take a look at the OS Map of Roman roads here.
https://maps.nls.uk/view/230556567

You will find what is now the A66 from Scotch Corner to Brocavvm (Brougham) and Voreda (Penrith). Relatively few texts describing and/or naming them have survived and in the 400 years usage has changed. The climatic battle of the early years was the defeat of Boudicca and we still are not sure where that happened largely because the only records are the annals of the Roman historians Tacitus and Cassius Dio written after the event. At the time Tacitus was living in Anatolia (Turkey) while Cassious Dio was also based in the eastern empire. What information does survive in Britain comes largely from gravestones and other monuments to the dead. More recently the tablets found at Vindolanda are a godsend for historians.

I used the descriptive term Great North Road simply because the modern A1 follows a quite different route and one that varied over time. The classic route was Ermine Street to York and Dere Street to Corbridge. The crossing points or major rivers are better known, Piercebridge over the Tees is one example.
https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/vis ... an-bridge/

Once Hadrians wall was built that became the defacto northern boundary of Roman Britain and off course the road south of it is largely the B6318

[jcb336]

https://national-infrastructure-consent ... s/TR010062

This page appears to indicate that the Secretary of State decision has been made today and we are now in the post decision stage. Yet I can find no other reference anywhere. Has anyone else seen anything?

[jackal]

https://national-infrastructure-consent ... s/TR010062

This page appears to indicate that the Secretary of State decision has been made today and we are now in the post decision stage. Yet I can find no other reference anywhere. Has anyone else seen anything?

The decision letter is here: https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... ter%20.pdf

[wrinkly]

Other documents here:

https://national-infrastructure-consent ... /documents

The decision on Thurs 7 March was made on the last day, following a 4-month extension from the original deadline. (Though the minister could have given himself another extension.)

I wonder if there'll be a decision on the A1 Morpeth-Ellingham soon?

[jcb336]

Thank you to both for locating the relevant information. I can see now why the delay was necessary. The application by Andrew Boswell to the High Court can be expected. But the announcement is a relief and shows a real commitment to the scheme. I remember when the Brough and Greta Bridge bypasses opened in the 70s imagining that dualling the whole road could not be long delayed. Then of course we had the idiocy of the Bowes bypass, and the years of inaction which have followed. Ah well perhaps I might live to see it! As for the A1 in Northumberland the delays seem entirely bogus. We shall see.

[KeithW]

https://national-infrastructure-consent ... s/TR010062

This page appears to indicate that the Secretary of State decision has been made today and we are now in the post decision stage. Yet I can find no other reference anywhere. Has anyone else seen anything?

It was announced on TV.
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024 ... ly-dualled

and in the local press.
https://cumbriacrack.com/2024/03/07/a66 ... overnment/

[Mark Hewitt]

https://national-infrastructure-consent ... s/TR010062

This page appears to indicate that the Secretary of State decision has been made today and we are now in the post decision stage. Yet I can find no other reference anywhere. Has anyone else seen anything?

It was announced on TV.
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024 ... ly-dualled

and in the local press.
https://cumbriacrack.com/2024/03/07/a66 ... overnment/

It has been fully approved and cancelled before. Remains to be seen if the project survives a change in government.

[wrinkly]

It has been fully approved and cancelled before.

I don't think that's true. It has been in the programme before, and subject to a preliminary consultation on all the sections, and dropped from the programme, but it has never before progressed as far, or anywhere near as far, through the statutory processes, as it has now.

When it was last in the programme the procedure was different, but none of the sections ever got far as publication of draft orders, let alone a public inquiry.

If I remember correctly it was dropped without even publishing the results of the consultation.

Remains to be seen if the project survives a change in government.

I agree with that part of what you say.

[Glenn A]

At last, I'd hope Kirby Thore is the first place to be by passed as this is a real bottleneck and last year TTLs were causing delays of 20 minutes to journeys. Also the hazardous 50 mph restricted section at Warcop should come next. Hopefully, by 2029, we should see a much better A66.

[thomas417]

https://national-infrastructure-consent ... s/TR010062

This page appears to indicate that the Secretary of State decision has been made today and we are now in the post decision stage. Yet I can find no other reference anywhere. Has anyone else seen anything?

It was announced on TV.
https://www.itv.com/news/tyne-tees/2024 ... ly-dualled

and in the local press.
https://cumbriacrack.com/2024/03/07/a66 ... overnment/

It has been fully approved and cancelled before. Remains to be seen if the project survives a change in government.

You would have to be brain dead to not proceed with this crucial project, especially now it's fully planned and passed all the legal hurdles. I'm confident we will finally see it happen regardless of a change of government.

Is there any chance of part of it starting before the mooted October/November general election?

[wrinkly]

At last, I'd hope Kirby Thore is the first place to be by passed as this is a real bottleneck and last year TTLs were causing delays of 20 minutes to journeys. Also the hazardous 50 mph restricted section at Warcop should come next. Hopefully, by 2029, we should see a much better A66.

Is there any chance of part of it starting before the mooted October/November general election?

The then-proposed timescale is quoted in my post of 2 Sep 2022 on page 27 of the thread, showing four sections starting at the beginning of 2024, Temple Sowerby to Appleby (including Kirkby Thore) and one other at the beginning of 2025, all except Scotch Corner by the start of 2026, and all finished by the end of 2028.

But a lot has happened since then.

There's now an NH press release but it doesn't mention timescales:

https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-road ... -approved/

[Glenn A]

At last, I'd hope Kirby Thore is the first place to be by passed as this is a real bottleneck and last year TTLs were causing delays of 20 minutes to journeys. Also the hazardous 50 mph restricted section at Warcop should come next. Hopefully, by 2029, we should see a much better A66.

Is there any chance of part of it starting before the mooted October/November general election?

The then-proposed timescale is quoted in my post of 2 Sep 2022 on page 27 of the thread, showing four sections starting at the beginning of 2024, Temple Sowerby to Appleby (including Kirkby Thore) and one other at the beginning of 2025, all except Scotch Corner by the start of 2026, and all finished by the end of 2028.

But a lot has happened since then.

There's now an NH press release but it doesn't mention timescales:

https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-road ... -approved/

Kirby Thore is the only settlement on the A66 not to be by passed and glad this is a priority. One part, while it is nasty, will be a miss is driving past Warcop and seeing all the military vehicles and the cottage on the bend just before the last section of S2 heading eastbound.

[jackal]

At last, I'd hope Kirby Thore is the first place to be by passed as this is a real bottleneck and last year TTLs were causing delays of 20 minutes to journeys. Also the hazardous 50 mph restricted section at Warcop should come next. Hopefully, by 2029, we should see a much better A66.

Is there any chance of part of it starting before the mooted October/November general election?

The then-proposed timescale is quoted in my post of 2 Sep 2022 on page 27 of the thread, showing four sections starting at the beginning of 2024, Temple Sowerby to Appleby (including Kirkby Thore) and one other at the beginning of 2025, all except Scotch Corner by the start of 2026, and all finished by the end of 2028.

But a lot has happened since then.

There's now an NH press release but it doesn't mention timescales:

https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-road ... -approved/

Add a year to everything and that looks about right. It seems every crackpot gets their day in court.

Is there any chance of part of it starting before the mooted October/November general election?

Main construction: no. But significant enabling works are already underway, e.g.:

National Gas Transmission work
On the section between Penrith and Temple Sowerby, one of the biggest construction challenges is the diversion of two National Gas Transmission gas mains. We're working with them to ensure the diversion can be completed using their statutory powers and at the earliest opportunity. Our work will involve the supporting construction of four site access points.

The work has started with the installation of safety barriers and widening field access near Center Parcs. There will be some overnight traffic lights and thank you for your patience.

It could be cancelled notwithstanding such works, but like others I'm cautiously optimistic that this is a popular scheme that's hard to cancel.

[Glenn A]

Politicians of all persuasions, except the Greens, want the A66 to be dualled as it is such an important road. Also part of it passes through Rishi's constituency, so he will be quite keen for the dualling to go ahead. I would think it would be very stupid and partisan for a Labour government to cancel the project, but I doubt this will happen.
Sadly it does look like the A69 is forgotten in all this. As has been mentioned on here before, one solution would be to reroute the A69 along the A689 and B6264 as far as the bridge over the M6 and convert this into a a junction 44A, reducing the role of junction 43, and allowing faster access from the North East to the M6 for Scotland as the road runs 4 miles north of the current A69. This would probably remove the need for a by pass of Warwick Bridge and remove pressure on the current jct 44 at Greymoorhill. ( The A689 number would resume over the Carlisle NDR and SLR when this opens).

[Mark Hewitt]

Politicians of all persuasions, except the Greens, want the A66 to be dualled as it is such an important road. Also part of it passes through Rishi's constituency, so he will be quite keen for the dualling to go ahead. I would think it would be very stupid and partisan for a Labour government to cancel the project, but I doubt this will happen.
Sadly it does look like the A69 is forgotten in all this. As has been mentioned on here before, one solution would be to reroute the A69 along the A689 and B6264 as far as the bridge over the M6 and convert this into a a junction 44A, reducing the role of junction 43, and allowing faster access from the North East to the M6 for Scotland as the road runs 4 miles north of the current A69. This would probably remove the need for a by pass of Warwick Bridge and remove pressure on the current jct 44 at Greymoorhill. ( The A689 number would resume over the Carlisle NDR and SLR when this opens).

All of that is sensible given that the A689 runs almost parallel to the A69 there without the bottleneck of Warwick Bridge.

Some limited dualling would help the A69 even though this can cause safety issues on its own. It's a long haul along single carriageway to Hexham and you can get stuck in a long line of 35mph traffic.

[jabbaboy]

Politicians of all persuasions, except the Greens, want the A66 to be dualled as it is such an important road. Also part of it passes through Rishi's constituency, so he will be quite keen for the dualling to go ahead. I would think it would be very stupid and partisan for a Labour government to cancel the project, but I doubt this will happen.
Sadly it does look like the A69 is forgotten in all this. As has been mentioned on here before, one solution would be to reroute the A69 along the A689 and B6264 as far as the bridge over the M6 and convert this into a a junction 44A, reducing the role of junction 43, and allowing faster access from the North East to the M6 for Scotland as the road runs 4 miles north of the current A69. This would probably remove the need for a by pass of Warwick Bridge and remove pressure on the current jct 44 at Greymoorhill. ( The A689 number would resume over the Carlisle NDR and SLR when this opens).

All of that is sensible given that the A689 runs almost parallel to the A69 there without the bottleneck of Warwick Bridge.

Some limited dualling would help the A69 even though this can cause safety issues on its own. It's a long haul along single carriageway to Hexham and you can get stuck in a long line of 35mph traffic.

To be honest the whole section from Greenhead from Brampton really needs redone, it's extremely poor most of it with lack of space for turning in, Low Row and the dreadful section near Denton Mill.

The rest of it isn't really that bad, a crawler lane here and there between Bardon Mill and Hexham would be handy though.

[jackal]

Politicians of all persuasions, except the Greens, want the A66 to be dualled as it is such an important road. Also part of it passes through Rishi's constituency, so he will be quite keen for the dualling to go ahead. I would think it would be very stupid and partisan for a Labour government to cancel the project, but I doubt this will happen.
Sadly it does look like the A69 is forgotten in all this. As has been mentioned on here before, one solution would be to reroute the A69 along the A689 and B6264 as far as the bridge over the M6 and convert this into a a junction 44A, reducing the role of junction 43, and allowing faster access from the North East to the M6 for Scotland as the road runs 4 miles north of the current A69. This would probably remove the need for a by pass of Warwick Bridge and remove pressure on the current jct 44 at Greymoorhill. ( The A689 number would resume over the Carlisle NDR and SLR when this opens).

All of that is sensible given that the A689 runs almost parallel to the A69 there without the bottleneck of Warwick Bridge.

Some limited dualling would help the A69 even though this can cause safety issues on its own. It's a long haul along single carriageway to Hexham and you can get stuck in a long line of 35mph traffic.

To be honest the whole section from Greenhead from Brampton really needs redone, it's extremely poor most of it with lack of space for turning in, Low Row and the dreadful section near Denton Mill.

The rest of it isn't really that bad, a crawler lane here and there between Bardon Mill and Hexham would be handy though.

I'm generally a bit sceptical of crawler lanes/S2+1, unless there's a hill that really needs it. Safety is much the same as an S2 (maybe worse with the mayhem at the lane drops) and flows are obviously not grossly imbalanced eastbound versus westbound, as the standard implies. It's only a stopgap, yet a dead loss if the section is ever dualled.

Dualling between Greenhead and Brampton might work nicely as you have a short section of D2 and a roundabout at either end, so there would be no new lane drops. Not very likely though.

[chriscumbria]

Sadly it does look like the A69 is forgotten in all this. As has been mentioned on here before, one solution would be to reroute the A69 along the A689 and B6264 as far as the bridge over the M6 and convert this into a a junction 44A, reducing the role of junction 43, and allowing faster access from the North East to the M6 for Scotland as the road runs 4 miles north of the current A69. This would probably remove the need for a by pass of Warwick Bridge and remove pressure on the current jct 44 at Greymoorhill. ( The A689 number would resume over the Carlisle NDR and SLR when this opens).

The MP for Carlisle has been pushing for quite a long time for the A69 to be detrunked west of Brampton and the A689 to be trunked between Brampton and J44 of the M6 and renumbered as the A69. It makes sense and so would your idea of a J43A where it crosses the M6.

[Mark Hewitt]

Sadly it does look like the A69 is forgotten in all this. As has been mentioned on here before, one solution would be to reroute the A69 along the A689 and B6264 as far as the bridge over the M6 and convert this into a a junction 44A, reducing the role of junction 43, and allowing faster access from the North East to the M6 for Scotland as the road runs 4 miles north of the current A69. This would probably remove the need for a by pass of Warwick Bridge and remove pressure on the current jct 44 at Greymoorhill. ( The A689 number would resume over the Carlisle NDR and SLR when this opens).

The MP for Carlisle has been pushing for quite a long time for the A69 to be detrunked west of Brampton and the A689 to be trunked between Brampton and J44 of the M6 and renumbered as the A69. It makes sense and so would your idea of a J43A where it crosses the M6.

All of that makes sense. But I guess road number changing isn't something that is done on a whim.

Certainly without a J43A it is a bit of a problem that traffic for M6 South is directed so far North.