Does Luton need a northern bypass?

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
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

The latest information I could find
Thanks CJ, I hadn't spotted that. I'm not at all surprised, though.
Owen
A303Paul
Member
Posts: 5222
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 06:49

Post by A303Paul »

The thing I dont understand abotu the A505 is why when the Baldock bypass opened they didnt multiplex it with the D3M stretch of the A1(M) from J9 to J8 and rename the A602 as A505.

Then Letchworth could also have been bypassed along with much of Hitchin with the existing road becoming part of the B656.

Presumably at some point a short D2 will be built to bypass St Ipollits and the west of Hitchin and that would complete the D2 from Royston to Luton. Perhaps they are waiting until this is done before they renumber.
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

The whole thing is a mass of issues which have interdependencies. You won't get a Dunstable northern bypass until M1 J10-13 is sorted. You won't get a Luton northern bypass without a Dunstable northern bypass. The route of the Luton northern bypass (an inner route, joining the A505 south of Stopsley, or an outer route, joining the A505 between Stopsley and Lilley) can't sensibly be decided until you know the extent of new housing east of Luton and where the Luton eastern bypass will meet the existing A505. But the route of the Luton eastern bypass will depend on plans for Luton Airport as well as the housing plans. If you propose both an outer Luton eastern bypass (beyond the airport) and a southern Hitchin bypass (the latter has been mentioned as a transport prerequisite of Luton airport expansion), then you're going to be building an awful lot of new D2 with big dog legs to join up to the existing Lilley / Great Offley section of the A505. But if you've done all of that then you've built the Stevenage to Dunstable section of POLO, and we'd never hear the end of it.

I do agree that it's ridiculous that the A505 is still numbered via Letchworth.
Owen
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Post by jackal »

A few suggestions for breaking down these interconnections.

I don't really see why the M1 J10-13 widening is relevant. The bypasses would have complex effects on M1 flows, and I'm not at all sure that the net effect would be significantly positive. If the local authority improvements could be disentangled from the HA improvements that would be a small step forwards.

Also, an outer eastern bypass seems like a non-starter. It would be such a long way round that traffic would probably prefer to keep using Vauxhall way. So I don't see why it can't be agreed that an inner eastern bypass is the way forward regardless of what's going on further north.

Even if they built the inner eastern bypass and an outer route for the northern bypass I don't see that as a big problem. The main point of the northern bypass is to let A505E traffic get past Luton, rather than to carry traffic from the airport to the north - that traffic is better off going to M1 J10.
A303Paul
Member
Posts: 5222
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 06:49

Post by A303Paul »

Personally I think the only sensible option is to widen Vauxhall way. They already have the land take and it dosent go through an AONM

As to the A6, once the M1 J13 to Bedford widening is done on the A421 then that will surely become the main Luton - Bedford route and the A6 will no longer be primary - and could even become A1081 as far as Bedford.

I personally have my doubts about hard shoulder running from J10 to 13. There were to be five lanes one way from 10 to 11 due to the hill and they will still have to do something about the closeness of the services to J12. Allowing hard shoulder running there will be fraught with issues.
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

I don't really see why the M1 J10-13 widening is relevant.
Because of one important point which I forgot to mention. There's a plan for massive amounts of new housing north of Dunstable and Houghton Regis. I think the main reason for the Dunstable bypass is to provide an M1 link for this development, not to relieve existing settlements. The vpd maps at the consultation showed very little reduction in traffic on the A5 and other routes through Dunstable and the local area, but increases in traffic on the M1 from J10 to J11A. J11 to J11A would also be affected by traffic to/from Luton to/from north and west of Dunstable bypassing Dunstable. This is a common commuter movement - there's a lot of employment in central and south Luton. Building a load of housing plus a Dunstable northern bypass without improving at least M1 J10 to 11A I think would be a disaster.
an outer eastern bypass seems like a non-starter. It would be such a long way round that traffic would probably prefer to keep using Vauxhall way. So I don't see why it can't be agreed that an inner eastern bypass is the way forward
It's a very long way round, true. But an inner eastern bypass would give very poor access to the 9,000 new houses proposed for east Luton. So then you have a whole new development on the east side of Luton with completely inadequate road links. Also it would be very difficult to grade separate an inner eastern route.
If the local authority improvements could be disentangled from the HA improvements that would be a small step forwards.
I really don't think it's that simple. They may only be local authority schemes but they are so large that they would be bound to have significant effects on HA routes. In reality the whole thing is wrapped up in Prescott's Luton / Milton Keynes growth strategy.
The main point of the northern bypass is to let A505E traffic get past Luton
But is it? Nobody seems to be very sure on this. If you're right, you're talking about a major through route, which sounds like something strategic to be taken on by the HA (as the Dunstable northern bypass has been) and would imply a Hitchin southern bypass as a minimum. But a lot of thinking seems to be that it's simply for better access to the various local growth areas. If you look at Luton on a map, you'll see that it's already spread greatly to the north west, north and east, but without any proper road provision for local movements. Consequently there's an awful lot of traffic and rat running on inadequate local roads, and that's before the massive expansions that are proposed. Something's got to give.

I don't really know what to think is best on this.
Owen
A303Paul
Member
Posts: 5222
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 06:49

Post by A303Paul »

I suspect that some other traffic flows will increase once the dunstable northern bypass materialises.

1) lots of traffic from MK will go down the A5 to the M1 instead of trekking along the A421 to J13

2) As well as the Dunstable Northern Bypass it will be the Toddington southern bypass. Toddington is a slow drag. I predict traffic joining the M1 at J12 and leaving it at J11A, though probably not as much as the (1) scenario.

As to the 8000 houses in the current climate :pig:
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

1) lots of traffic from MK will go down the A5 to the M1 instead of trekking along the A421 to J13
Definitely, despite the A421 being dualled from MK to J13. And the public consultation vpd map showed this also. In fact the A5 north of Dunstable to MK will be seriously overloaded, another argument for M1 widening to J13.
I predict traffic joining the M1 at J12 and leaving it at J11A, though probably not as much as the (1) scenario
Quite possibly, especially as the preferred route of the Dunstable northern bypass includes a roundabout with the A5120.
Owen
A303Paul
Member
Posts: 5222
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 06:49

Post by A303Paul »

owen b wrote:
1) lots of traffic from MK will go down the A5 to the M1 instead of trekking along the A421 to J13
Definitely, despite the A421 being dualled from MK to J13. And the public consultation vpd map showed this also. In fact the A5 north of Dunstable to MK will be seriously overloaded, another argument for M1 widening to J13.
Sir, would you prefer 10 million roundabouts or a few miles of high standard S2 :lol:

If the A5 gets to busy you can always go via the A4146 D2 and A505 WS2.
I predict traffic joining the M1 at J12 and leaving it at J11A, though probably not as much as the (1) scenario
Quite possibly, especially as the preferred route of the Dunstable northern bypass includes a roundabout with the A5120.
Theres also the fact that the A421 will be the new A14/A43 once the Bedford to J13 section is dualled, which will have all sorts of interesting effects. It will probably be as quick to go down the A428/A421 to J13 then up the M1 at certain times of the day, especially if you are going to somewhere like Northampton or the M40 (at least until its widened to D3 north of Cambridge)

And the A505-A602-A505 is not a bad cross country route from the A14/A11 now that Baldrick has a tunnel, especially if you know that short cut round the back of Hitchin.

I really think they will have to widen J10-13 properly
User avatar
JohnnyMo
Member
Posts: 6982
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 13:56
Location: Letchworth, Herts, England

Post by JohnnyMo »

So much to think about,
Why was the A505 Hitchin to Luton build with GSJ back in the 70's
(was and still is none primary) [How many never primary GSJ are there]
Why is there a kink near Lilley
Why was the A1(M) J8 to J9 D3M rather than D2M
Why was the Leighton Buzzard Bypass numbered A505 when it is
1) Out of Zone
2) Does join the A505 ( except via a multiplex )
Why was the Old A505 in Baldock given the number B656

The last two bypasses imply a joined up plan to make the A505 a through route, just need to add Hitchin & Luton/Dunstable bypasses. But how long ago was this plan hatched.

Also one of the other driving forces for roads was to be Airports, with road improvements in and around Luton liked to the airport plans for SE England.
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

the A505-A602-A505 is not a bad cross country route from the A14/A11 now that Baldrick has a tunnel, especially if you know that short cut round the back of Hitchin
It's great off peak for Luton or M1 J10 traffic, and yes I do cut the corner at Hitchin. At busy periods it's not fun eastbound as you either have to queue to turn right at the A505/A602 roundabout or queue to turn right where the "cut the corner" meets the A602.
Why was the A505 Hitchin to Luton build with GSJ back in the 70's
I think this dates back to and is one of the finest examples of the pre-1974 oil crisis era of grandiose road building, but just maybe there was a grand plan in mind? The Great Offley bypass even has a crawler lane westbound which is scarcely ever used.
Why is there a kink near Lilley
That predates the modern era of roadbuilding. It features on my late 1920s Newnes Motoring Guide.
Why was the A1(M) J8 to J9 D3M rather than D2M
Why was the Leighton Buzzard Bypass numbered A505
Circumstantial evidence for a grander plan for the A505 involving Dunstable, Luton, Hitchin and Baldock bypasses, I'd say. I've never seen any formal evidence of plans, though.
Owen
User avatar
JohnnyMo
Member
Posts: 6982
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2003 13:56
Location: Letchworth, Herts, England

Post by JohnnyMo »

owen b wrote:
Why is there a kink near Lilley
That predates the modern era of roadbuilding. It features on my late 1920s Newnes Motoring Guide.
But far bigger kinks than that have been removed when roads are improved. It would not have been difficult when the road was dualled to have removed it. I can think of examples were kinks were left in one carriageway where parallel dualling took place, but not where the a dual carriagways was built with a kink.
Circumstantial evidence for a grander plan for the A505 involving Dunstable, Luton, Hitchin and Baldock bypasses, I'd say. I've never seen any formal evidence of plans, though.
Neither have I which is why I listed all the anomilies.
“The simple step of a courageous individual is not to take part in the lie" - Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn
Johnny Mo
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17467
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Post by Truvelo »

What about the A602 at Little Wymondley. Why was it built as D2 only to end up as a 30mph suburban street in Hitchin? Perhaps it was meant to join up with the A505 and form a southern bypass of Hitchin which would provide continuous D2 between Luton and Stevenage. If this is a little too ambitious then perhaps a short stretch of new road between Offley Road and Park Way would be more cost effective.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Post by jackal »

owen b wrote:
I don't really see why the M1 J10-13 widening is relevant.
... The vpd maps at the consultation showed very little reduction in traffic on the A5 and other routes through Dunstable and the local area, but increases in traffic on the M1 from J10 to J11A. J11 to J11A would also be affected by traffic to/from Luton to/from north and west of Dunstable bypassing Dunstable. This is a common commuter movement - there's a lot of employment in central and south Luton. Building a load of housing plus a Dunstable northern bypass without improving at least M1 J10 to 11A I think would be a disaster.
J10-J13 will of course be improved, so the question is whether the improvements will be enough. I'm still not convinced that the net increase will be so great that ATM (the minimum that is likely to happen) would be insufficient, assuming the HA's modelling has previously shown it will be okay.

One issue is that a lot of southbound M1 traffic will be getting off at J11a. The A6 and A5120 (and maybe the B5179 - I'm not sure if that will have connections), via the northern bypasses, will become major routes into Luton and Dunstable from the north. So there will be some traffic moving off J11-J11a, as well as that moving onto it.

It should also be remembered that the northern bypasses are not going to be built to especially high standards, so I think it's debatable whether they'll be contributing that much extra traffic. I don't think the idea that they might overload the M1 really squares with the design for J11a, which will be a pretty basic dumbell derivative IIRC. They'll be pretty ordinary non-trunk A roads, the likes of which are routinely connected to motorways without worrying about motorway congestion.

So my point is that, while congestion is obviously an issue on the M1 that needs to be addressed, I doubt the new developments will have much impact on the wider picture. Even ten or twenty thousand new houses is a drop in the ocean when we're talking about a 100,000VPD+ motorway.
an outer eastern bypass seems like a non-starter. It would be such a long way round that traffic would probably prefer to keep using Vauxhall way. So I don't see why it can't be agreed that an inner eastern bypass is the way forward
It's a very long way round, true. But an inner eastern bypass would give very poor access to the 9,000 new houses proposed for east Luton. So then you have a whole new development on the east side of Luton with completely inadequate road links. Also it would be very difficult to grade separate an inner eastern route.
I guess my point is that a long grade separated outer bypass is massive overkill for serving 9,000 new houses, and of debatable value for through traffic on account of the circuitous route. So the best option is probably just to dual the inner route online and at grade, and provide S2 to connect to the new houses. I think this would be a lot cheaper, and do the job as well.
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Post by owen b »

What about the A602 at Little Wymondley. Why was it built as D2 only to end up as a 30mph suburban street in Hitchin? Perhaps it was meant to join up with the A505 and form a southern bypass of Hitchin which would provide continuous D2 between Luton and Stevenage.
The bypasses at Little Wymondley and south of Leighton Buzzard are both early 90s vintage. Roads to Prosperity (1989) famously talked of an "E/W route Aylesbury-A12". I don't have documentation to hand, but I'm sure that this route was planned to cross the A1(M) at J8 (I think there might be a protected route) and I'm sure that both the Leighton Buzzard southern bypass and the Little Wymondley bypass were designed with the Aylesbury to A12 route in mind.

It would be great if some dogged Sabristi would do a thorough investigation of all the various elements of the grand plan, to include the talked of bypasses for Aylesbury, Wing, Leighton Buzzard, Luton, Hitchin, Little Wymondley and the extension towards Stansted.
J10-J13 will of course be improved, so the question is whether the improvements will be enough. I'm still not convinced that the net increase will be so great that ATM (the minimum that is likely to happen) would be insufficient
You might be right : from the HA page on the Dunstable northern bypass :
"Until a decision is reached regarding how the M1 Junction 10 – 13 scheme will be implemented, we cannot give a date for delivery of the A5 – M1 Dunstable Northern Link Road, because any alterations to the M1 J10 -13 scheme could potentially affect the A5 – M1 Dunstable Northern Link Road proposals. It is anticipated that a decision will be made in autumn 2008 and further information will then be provided."
At the Dunstable northern bypass consultation, an HA consultant told me that no account had been taken of a possible Luton northern bypass, although the proposed dumbbell arrangement is clearly convenient for a Luton northern bypass.

Or you might not be right. I make no claims of expertise, but consider the likely effects on the M1 :
i) Dunstable northern bypass
a) Increases traffic where A5 is bypassed (J9-J11A)
b) Increases traffic where A505 is bypassed (mainly J11-J11A)
c) Increases traffic where A5120 is bypassed (J11A-J12)
d) Reduces traffic J11A-J13 where some traffic uses A5 from Bletchley rather than M1
ii) Luton northern bypass
a) Increases traffic where A6 is bypassed (J10-J11A) (traffic using M1 to access A6 north and northern parts of Luton from the south)
b) Reduces traffic to/from M1 north from J11A-J11 where J11A is used for access to northern Luton (N.B. there is no access to the B579 or other local roads in the J11A scheme for Dunstable northern, probably because the B579 is a hideous route into Luton with numerous lights, a narrow railway underpass, and a congested local centre = Bury Park)
iii) 9000 new houses east of Luton
Increases motorway traffic
iv) 17000 new houses elsewhere in Luton & South Beds by 2021 (mostly north of Houghton Regis and north of Luton, plus some north west of Dunstable, possibly west of J10, around Leighton Buzzard)
Increases motorway traffic

So there will be a lot more increases in M1 traffic as a result of these schemes and development in the area than decreases. And it's not like the M1 isn't already busy enough.

This is all before taking into account other developments not too far away, especially Milton Keynes expansion and the A421 improvements between MK and Bedford, plus major employment developments in the south of Luton (airport, Power Court, Butterfield Green, Napier Park).
while congestion is obviously an issue on the M1 that needs to be addressed, I doubt the new developments will have much impact on the wider picture
I disagree. When you add them all together, they will, I think.
a long grade separated outer bypass is massive overkill for serving 9,000 new houses
But it's also serving the airport, new and existing centres of employment, and the existing eastern suburbs which already extend for about 5 square km east of the existing A505 (and are poorly connected by road), plus some through traffic.

Sorry for the long post, but this is a complex issue.
Owen
User avatar
SouthWest Philip
Member
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2002 19:35
Location: Evesham, Worcestershire

Post by SouthWest Philip »

owen b wrote:The bypasses at Little Wymondley and south of Leighton Buzzard are both early 90s vintage. Roads to Prosperity (1989) famously talked of an "E/W route Aylesbury-A12". I don't have documentation to hand, but I'm sure that this route was planned to cross the A1(M) at J8 (I think there might be a protected route) and I'm sure that both the Leighton Buzzard southern bypass and the Little Wymondley bypass were designed with the Aylesbury to A12 route in mind.

It would be great if some dogged Sabristi would do a thorough investigation of all the various elements of the grand plan, to include the talked of bypasses for Aylesbury, Wing, Leighton Buzzard, Luton, Hitchin, Little Wymondley and the extension towards Stansted.
In SABRE Fantasy land I would have made this route part of a Gloucester (or even Hereford!) to Colchester motorway, the M44. It would negate, or at least reduce, the need for the widening planned on the M25, M4 and M11 south of jnc 8. (Why south of jnc 8, I don't know, it's north of there it needs widening.)

Even environmentally I think there would be benefits in that such a route would, in common with all major motorways, would draw tens of thousands of vehicles off less suitable surrounding roads over a large distance. In the case of the "M44" there would be no need for further improvement to the relevant sections of the A40, A41, A44, A418, A421 W of MK, A505, A414, A602, A120 and A12 from the M25-Colchester. Even roads as far away as the A14 might have seen some benefit. It would be reasonable to assume that A505 past Leighton Buzzard, A602 Little Wymondley bypass and A120 E of Stansted could have been incorporated into such a motorway.
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Re: Does Luton need a northern bypass?

Post by owen b »

Every household in Luton is to receive a rather fetching eight page colour brochure entitled "North Dunstable and North Luton Consultation - We Would Like Your Views on Transport Proposals in the North Dunstable and North Luton Area". Catchy title, eh? There's a series of public exhibitions this week. See here : http://www.luton.gov.uk/internet/refere ... n%20bypass
Owen
User avatar
CJ
Member
Posts: 1922
Joined: Tue Feb 18, 2003 20:37
Location: London

Re: Does Luton need a northern bypass?

Post by CJ »

Interesting. The leaflet with details on the scheme options is here:
link to leaflet PDF
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Does Luton need a northern bypass?

Post by jackal »

It seems a little strange to me that they present the Luton Northern Bypass options without explaining how they would link into any Eastern Bypass or upgrade of Vaxhall Way, or what their purpose would be. Without that information, it looks like the Red, Brown and Black routes have been selected almost at random, with the Red and Black routes serving completely different journeys.

(Note - I only skim read.)
User avatar
owen b
Member
Posts: 9859
Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2003 15:22
Location: Luton

Re: Does Luton need a northern bypass?

Post by owen b »

It seems a little strange to me that they present the Luton Northern Bypass options without explaining how they would link into any Eastern Bypass or upgrade of Vaxhall Way, or what their purpose would be. Without that information, it looks like the Red, Brown and Black routes have been selected almost at random, with the Red and Black routes serving completely different journeys.
100% agreed. It's very difficult to take a view without a lot more information about the other road improvements around Luton, and the development proposals for north, north east and east Luton and Luton airport, and whether or not there are any plans for a Hitchin southern bypass. Each of the options has very serious demerits, but doing nothing (in terms of new roads) is only a serious option if there is no further significant development to the north, north east or east of Luton in my view.
I'm hoping to get to the exhibition tomorrow (or possibly on Saturday), but I have an uneasy feeling that I'm not going to get much in the way of specifics on any of this and that I'm going to struggle to contribute a reasoned point of view. If anyone has any particular questions, let me know, and I'll do my best to find out.
Owen
Post Reply