A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle 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

Post Reply
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Bryn666 »

Helvellyn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 10:35
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 10:24
A303Chris wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 09:57 Latest update from the HE on the Mottram bypass.

However with no bypass of Hollingworth or Tintwistle , it just seems, IMO, a big expensive sticking plaster.
It'll fuel the never build anything anywheres, "look at all this expensive road has done, moved the queue 4 miles... blah blah"...
AKA "the people who cause far less devastation than those who complain about them". Why do you think some of us have been so utterly turned against building?

In this case though my main objection is that it seems to be a series of roundabouts (surprise surprise). Maybe they'll flow better than the existing traffic.
It's the short termism of it, like building the half mile of M41 in London. If you're not going to do the job properly then don't bother. Moving a queue into Tintwistle isn't going to win many friends is it.
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
Helvellyn
Member
Posts: 24663
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 22:31
Location: High Peak

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Helvellyn »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 11:25
It's the short termism of it, like building the half mile of M41 in London. If you're not going to do the job properly then don't bother. Moving a queue into Tintwistle isn't going to win many friends is it.
I agree with everything you're saying there.
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Barkstar »

I did find this bit of the announcement hard to take:
Around 25,000 vehicles currently travel along the A57 through Mottram every day, including over 2,000 HGVs. The village is on the key 25-mile trans-Pennine route between Manchester and Sheffield, connecting the M67 in the North West to the M1 in Yorkshire.
It's a route that is soooo important it's taken over 40 years to do anything and then just a small bit of it. If HE think this is how you deal with key infrastructure gawd help anyone hoping for improvements on a road the isn't 'key'. :bang:
Fluid Dynamics
Member
Posts: 983
Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2002 19:54

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Fluid Dynamics »

The design of this scheme has always seemed as much to be about improving access to Glossop as improving Sheffield Manchester Links. Sits in the same category as the current A27 Lewes Pevensey works, short termism that doesn’t address the main issue. At least this has some interest by including a short length of tunnel.
User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by the cheesecake man »

Helvellyn wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 11:29
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 11:25
It's the short termism of it, like building the half mile of M41 in London. If you're not going to do the job properly then don't bother. Moving a queue into Tintwistle isn't going to win many friends is it.
I agree with everything you're saying there.
So do I. As I recently said in another context my philosophy is "If it's worth doing then do it well and get on with it. If it isn't worthwhile then don't bother". While common sense clearly says you might as well bypass all three villages while you're at it, Tintwistle is after the diverge for Glossop and Snake Pass traffic so moving the queue to Tintwistle might shorten it a bit. :pig: More cynically it moves the queue from Tameside to Derbyshire so might make Tameside MBC look good.
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Stevie D »

the cheesecake man wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 13:21While common sense clearly says you might as well bypass all three villages while you're at it, Tintwistle is after the diverge for Glossop and Snake Pass traffic so moving the queue to Tintwistle might shorten it a bit. :pig: More cynically it moves the queue from Tameside to Derbyshire so might make Tameside MBC look good.
Not only moves the queue so that it affects Derbyshire more than Tameside, but also relieves Tameside residents in Mottram of the choking traffic fumes, while doing nothing for their Derbyshire neighbours in Tintwistle and Glossop (and probably making it worse).
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Bryn666 »

the cheesecake man wrote: Tue Aug 25, 2020 13:21 ...so might make Tameside MBC look good.
I think that ship sailed a long time ago... :shock:
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
mikehindsonevans
Member
Posts: 1359
Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2016 11:44
Location: Cheshire, but working week time in Cambridge

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by mikehindsonevans »

I first headed east along the M67 to its end, noting the exit ramps diving left into the hillside for the routing "onwards and eastwards", during a northern posting in the summer of 1991.
Mike Hindson-Evans.
Never argue with a conspiracy theorist.
They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by A303Chris »

A new consultation is open here, which runs until December 17th.

Depressing the dual carriageway is only having a 50mph limit, while the single carriageway link to the non trunk A57 is only going to be 30mph :bang:

The press release is entitled Help make Mottram’s £228 million bypass happen , which sounds like a desperate plea.
The M25 - The road to nowhere
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7547
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by jackal »

They've removed the silly quasi GSJ planned partway along the dual carriageway. That helps a little but it still isn't well aligned with longer term ambitions. £228m is too much for a short term bodge. They should have spent a little more and designed it as the first section of the mooted trans-Pennine HQDC.
User avatar
A303Chris
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 3587
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2004 14:01
Location: Reading

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by A303Chris »

The red line plan of the proposals is here

Looking at it the existing roads are included within the red line, which indicates they are part of the scheme and will be included within the planning application. I wonder if they remove the traffic signals at the A57 Woolley Lane / A628 Market Street junction by The Gun Inn and close Woolley Road at the junction would that reduce queues through Hollingworth and Tintwistle. My experience it is these lights which cause the queue through the villages westbound.
The M25 - The road to nowhere
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 10:11 They've removed the silly quasi GSJ planned partway along the dual carriageway. That helps a little but it still isn't well aligned with longer term ambitions. £228m is too much for a short term bodge. They should have spent a little more and designed it as the first section of the mooted trans-Pennine HQDC.
That's what the French would have done, and it's not like moving a temporary terminal (in this case the M67) a few miles further east will make much difference to the Woodhead Pass when the bottleneck is the villages.

What they also should have been doing as part of this scheme is to return the 'drag-strip' section of the A57 down the hill where it's 4 lanes to a much more appropriate village style road (tree lined, cycle route, not a trunk road) and looked to replace the signal junctions with more village appropriate infrastructure. Better yet restrict through traffic access on some of the bypassed roads so the bypass is actually doing its job and not just allowing a load of single occupancy commuter journeys to fill up the relieved roads.
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
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by fras »

I have come this way quite often since moving to Crewe in 1995, many times with a classic car on a run or rally. One run actually ended at the Gun Inn right on the corner where the A57 and A628 part their ways. OK, the scheme is a bit of a spatchcock if the intention is to make the A628 into a proper reasonably fast road, but it does deal with the two bottlenecks at Mottram. Probably the worst is the cross roads in the middle of Mottram where all directions are permitted. We often dive into the Tesco near the end of the M67 to use the loos, and also refuel the car, (off the A560 actually). To get back to the A628, the easy way is to take the B6174 and then just wait at the traffic lights queue to turn right onto the A628.
The next queue is, of course, for the Gun Inn traffic lights, (its now closed BTW). So the proposal does deal with both bottlenecks, and will, I think do much to speed up A628 traffic. Once you have got past the Gun Inn, it's just a crawl through Hollingworth, slow but not usually blocked. Some judicious parking management could do a lot to alleviate any hold-ups. Of course what is really needed is to bypass the lot, but I suspect this will not be for a very long time.
ABB125
Member
Posts: 124
Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2020 19:58

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by ABB125 »

Rather a waste of money I'd say! Much better to spend a bit more money and do a proper job of it.
"We'll add an extra lane to the roundabout" - how adventurous! While you're at it, why not add an underpass?

The 50mph speed limit: is this due to the curve to the east of Mottram? If a new bypass of Hollingworth and Tintwistle were to be built from the eastern end of the tunnel "underpass", would the alignment be suitable for 70mph?
Will the underpass have space for 3 lanes if they're needed in the future? It would seem stupid to not include provision now for a tiny additional cost.

Luckily there's space to the west of the M67 roundabout to put a nice big tunnel portal: next stop Sheffield!
Micro The Maniac
Member
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 13:14
Location: Gone

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Micro The Maniac »

Agreed this shows a distinct lack of any strategic vision.

I know we don't live in an ideal world, but surely the long-term view would see the M67(*) extended through to Tintwhistle, with a junction serving the rerouted A57. Something like the attached.
M67-A57.png
* When I say "M67 extended" frankly, I'd reclassify the M67, as A57(M) as this is what it is, and be done with it... the new bit should be HQDC/Expressway though.
User avatar
poshbakerloo
Member
Posts: 426
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 00:04
Location: Cheshire / South Manchester

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by poshbakerloo »

Micro The Maniac wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 13:30 Agreed this shows a distinct lack of any strategic vision.

I know we don't live in an ideal world, but surely the long-term view would see the M67(*) extended through to Tintwhistle, with a junction serving the rerouted A57. Something like the attached.

M67-A57.png

* When I say "M67 extended" frankly, I'd reclassify the M67, as A57(M) as this is what it is, and be done with it... the new bit should be HQDC/Expressway though.
I think that route, whilst looks better in theory - I think there are some pretty steep hills in the way which is why it crosses over the A57 and turns south. Even the original M67 route did that.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Bryn666 »

poshbakerloo wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 13:54
Micro The Maniac wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 13:30 Agreed this shows a distinct lack of any strategic vision.

I know we don't live in an ideal world, but surely the long-term view would see the M67(*) extended through to Tintwhistle, with a junction serving the rerouted A57. Something like the attached.

M67-A57.png

* When I say "M67 extended" frankly, I'd reclassify the M67, as A57(M) as this is what it is, and be done with it... the new bit should be HQDC/Expressway though.
I think that route, whilst looks better in theory - I think there are some pretty steep hills in the way which is why it crosses over the A57 and turns south. Even the original M67 route did that.
The problem is tying back into the A628 which is on a ridge east of Tintwistle. Not impossible to resolve but the visual impact the cutting and retaining walls this would require would immediately render the idea extremely unpopular with locals. Following the contours naturally dumps you in Glossop. A big and super expensive engineering scheme would probably involve removing the industrial estate in the Etherow Valley and following the former railway alongside the reservoirs. Again not a particularly pleasing outcome but it avoids excavating half of the Pennines.
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
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17467
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Truvelo »

I'm more concerned about the 30mph limit. Why is it so low when even 40 would be below par. My only thinking is maybe there is going to be future frontage development. There can be no other justification for an urban speed limit being applied to a so called bypass.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Bryn666 »

Truvelo wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 18:26 I'm more concerned about the 30mph limit. Why is it so low when even 40 would be below par. My only thinking is maybe there is going to be future frontage development. There can be no other justification for an urban speed limit being applied to a so called bypass.
DMRB alignment must presumably be set at 50km/h.

In reality the 85%ile will be about 45 because even DMRB's 50km/h standards are like Monza's banked curves.
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
Was92now625
Member
Posts: 848
Joined: Fri Jan 08, 2010 00:29
Location: near A625

Re: A57/A628 Mottram Tintwistle bypass

Post by Was92now625 »

Truvelo wrote: Thu Nov 05, 2020 18:26 I'm more concerned about the 30mph limit. Why is it so low when even 40 would be below par. My only thinking is maybe there is going to be future frontage development. There can be no other justification for an urban speed limit being applied to a so called bypass.
While that figure is surprisingly low, it's still an improvement on stop-start driving with a maximum of about 15.
Post Reply