Catthorpe re-modelling

[ais523]

On the subject of the whole "should A14 J0-J1 be a motorway" debate, I just learned an interesting fact that may imply that there were originally some plans in that direction.

First, some background: one of the features of smart motorways is the CCTV coverage. Unlike what may be implied by some of the advertising, I don't think every inch of a smart motorway is actually covered by CCTV. However, it's nonetheless the case that on motorways in general, and smart motorways in particular, there's a fairly high concentration of CCTV cameras.

I was messing around on Traffic England's website recently. It shows a range of information, one of which is semi-live (around ~30 seconds old) pictures from trunk roads, and it gains that information from the CCTV cameras. That means that, as a side effect, you can use it to work out where the CCTV cameras are (fortunately, the locations are shown on the map, so you don't need to play WAI with the images to figure it out).

Anyway, the interesting fact: A14 J0-1 has fairly densely packed CCTV cameras (maybe not quite as dense as the typical smart motorway, but denser than, say, M6 J0-1). Meanwhile, A14 J1-6 has no (Highways England-operated) CCTV cameras at all. (They start appearing again at the Kettering bypass, J6-10, and then there are no more until the A141 and the new Huntingdon Bypass.)

I doubt there would have been any reason to have that sort of disparity in CCTV coverage when the A14 was first built, so the CCTV cameras must have been installed at some point since, and the obvious time is the Catthorpe upgrade. I'm wondering if there were originally plans to try to designate the section in question as motorway, and the CCTV cameras were viewed as an important part of that. (If the theory is correct, then the plans would have changed at some time after the cameras had already been ordered and installed.) J1 seems to be too neat a place to have a sudden drop in CCTV coverage unless it were somehow tied to the "this bit of road inescapably leads to a motorway" issue.

[Bryn666]

On the subject of the whole "should A14 J0-J1 be a motorway" debate, I just learned an interesting fact that may imply that there were originally some plans in that direction.

First, some background: one of the features of smart motorways is the CCTV coverage. Unlike what may be implied by some of the advertising, I don't think every inch of a smart motorway is actually covered by CCTV. However, it's nonetheless the case that on motorways in general, and smart motorways in particular, there's a fairly high concentration of CCTV cameras.

I was messing around on Traffic England's website recently. It shows a range of information, one of which is semi-live (around ~30 seconds old) pictures from trunk roads, and it gains that information from the CCTV cameras. That means that, as a side effect, you can use it to work out where the CCTV cameras are (fortunately, the locations are shown on the map, so you don't need to play WAI with the images to figure it out).

Anyway, the interesting fact: A14 J0-1 has fairly densely packed CCTV cameras (maybe not quite as dense as the typical smart motorway, but denser than, say, M6 J0-1). Meanwhile, A14 J1-6 has no (Highways England-operated) CCTV cameras at all. (They start appearing again at the Kettering bypass, J6-10, and then there are no more until the A141 and the new Huntingdon Bypass.)

I doubt there would have been any reason to have that sort of disparity in CCTV coverage when the A14 was first built, so the CCTV cameras must have been installed at some point since, and the obvious time is the Catthorpe upgrade. I'm wondering if there were originally plans to try to designate the section in question as motorway, and the CCTV cameras were viewed as an important part of that. (If the theory is correct, then the plans would have changed at some time after the cameras had already been ordered and installed.) J1 seems to be too neat a place to have a sudden drop in CCTV coverage unless it were somehow tied to the "this bit of road inescapably leads to a motorway" issue.

I fear you're reading too much into it. Those sections were purpose built highways so will have had all the comms equipment built as standard. The linking bits were largely existing roads cobbled together in a mad panic so I expect they didn't factor in the need as highly.

[ais523]

I fear you're reading too much into it. Those sections were purpose built highways so will have had all the comms equipment built as standard. The linking bits were largely existing roads cobbled together in a mad panic so I expect they didn't factor in the need as highly.

I thought that the new linking bit went further than the A5199, though (although I'm having trouble finding reliable information on just how much of the western A14 was newly built as the A14).

[c2R]

I fear you're reading too much into it. Those sections were purpose built highways so will have had all the comms equipment built as standard. The linking bits were largely existing roads cobbled together in a mad panic so I expect they didn't factor in the need as highly.

I thought that the new linking bit went further than the A5199, though (although I'm having trouble finding reliable information on just how much of the western A14 was newly built as the A14).

Everything west of Kettering is on a completely new corridor if that's what you mean?

[KeithW]

Everything west of Kettering is on a completely new corridor if that's what you mean?

New in the 1990's - West of Kettering only Catthorpe has changed since.

[ais523]

Everything west of Kettering is on a completely new corridor if that's what you mean?

Yes, that's what I was getting at. If A14 J0-6 was all originally built at the same time, the imbalance in CCTV cameras between J0-1 and J1-6 is something that seems unlikely to be a coincidence, and leaves me wondering what the explanation is.

[c2R]

ah, I see - I thought they were put there to monitor how far back the queue to the Catthorpe Junction was stretching back on the A14 westbound

[darkcape]

Everything west of Kettering is on a completely new corridor if that's what you mean?

Yes, that's what I was getting at. If A14 J0-6 was all originally built at the same time, the imbalance in CCTV cameras between J0-1 and J1-6 is something that seems unlikely to be a coincidence, and leaves me wondering what the explanation is.

I didn't think any of the 1990s A14 had CCTV and most of what is there J3-Thrapston etc was installed in the 2000s as part of technology upgrades and the MS4s went in.

The increase in cameras towards a strategic junction is normal practice when accident risk and queuing traffic risk is increased

[ManomayLR]

Everything west of Kettering is on a completely new corridor if that's what you mean?

Yes, that's what I was getting at. If A14 J0-6 was all originally built at the same time, the imbalance in CCTV cameras between J0-1 and J1-6 is something that seems unlikely to be a coincidence, and leaves me wondering what the explanation is.

I didn't think any of the 1990s A14 had CCTV and most of what is there J3-Thrapston etc was installed in the 2000s as part of technology upgrades and the MS4s went in.

The increase in cameras towards a strategic junction is normal practice when accident risk and queuing traffic risk is increased

Still, the MS4s are nowhere near as frequent as on motorways, and even advisory reduced speed limits etc. are not shown (with the exception of the new smart section).

I find it appalling that motorways are graced with frequently-spaced variable message signs, advisory or mandatory speed limits, and lane control signals, while many A-roads that are equally important get no such technology. Why does the A1 not have frequent VMS signs throughout, instead of just on the improved sections? What about the A3? All of them should be equipped with the same standard of VMS and lane control / advisory speed limits as motorways. Ideally frequent MS4s but even central reserve MS1 would be adequate.

[KeithW]

Everything west of Kettering is on a completely new corridor if that's what you mean?

Yes, that's what I was getting at. If A14 J0-6 was all originally built at the same time, the imbalance in CCTV cameras between J0-1 and J1-6 is something that seems unlikely to be a coincidence, and leaves me wondering what the explanation is.

I didn't think any of the 1990s A14 had CCTV and most of what is there J3-Thrapston etc was installed in the 2000s as part of technology upgrades and the MS4s went in.

The increase in cameras towards a strategic junction is normal practice when accident risk and queuing traffic risk is increased

Well yes but given that at Catthorpe a free flow junction replaced roundabouts I would expect accident rates decreased and I know that long queues were the norm on the old layout ! I spent long enough in those queues.

[KeithW]

Still, the MS4s are nowhere near as frequent as on motorways, and even advisory reduced speed limits etc. are not shown (with the exception of the new smart section).

I find it appalling that motorways are graced with frequently-spaced variable message signs, advisory or mandatory speed limits, and lane control signals, while many A-roads that are equally important get no such technology. Why does the A1 not have frequent VMS signs throughout, instead of just on the improved sections? What about the A3? All of them should be equipped with the same standard of VMS and lane control / advisory speed limits as motorways. Ideally frequent MS4s but even central reserve MS1 would be adequate.

Many motorways north of Doncaster are little changed from the 1960's, both the Durham and Darlington bypasses come to mind. There are dammed few VMS signs of any type.

[6637]

fwiw my take on what should be done about A14 J0-1 is "extend the A14 to the A5"

Sure, it likely wouldn't get much use, but it would make things a lot easier for the small amount of nonmotorway traffic in that area, and the cost of it is literally just two sliproads and some signage. They could have done this in the original scheme without much extra cost- might be less cost-effective to do it now though.

[Truvelo]

I'm sure links to the local road network were removed to avoid ratrunning. Villages such as Swinford had plenty of traffic zooming through them prior to the junction being rebuilt. What I do agree with is a simple exit slip from the westbound A14 to allow prohibited traffic an escape route should it have continued past J1. Without an equivalent eastbound entry slip it would go some way to mitigating the effects of ratrunning.

[Bryn666]

I'm sure links to the local road network were removed to avoid ratrunning. Villages such as Swinford had plenty of traffic zooming through them prior to the junction being rebuilt. What I do agree with is a simple exit slip from the westbound A14 to allow prohibited traffic an escape route should it have continued past J1. Without an equivalent eastbound entry slip it would go some way to mitigating the effects of ratrunning.

There is an authorised vehicles only slip road for these eventualities. It's also where Mr Plod can give you a fine for ignoring the Section 36 traffic sign saying start of motorway 200 yards prior.

There's enough warning on the westbound A14 even if it's unlawful and stupid signage.

[ForestChav]

As much a cluster-thing this is, they couldn't easily make A5199-M1 motorway, because it isn't, and to do so would involve revoking right of way (which presumably can happen in theory but in practice doesn't). They also can't sign it as motorway, because it isn't.

The signage of non-mway traffic off at A5199 is the only thing they can do - whilst the straight ahead direction is not a motorway, it leads inescapably to one, and so non-mway traffic would get stuck normally, if it carried on.

Saying that, I can't see a lot of motorway prohibited traffic using a narrow A42-like "we'll build it so it's hard to make a motorway out of it" D2 A14 anyway, so the risk is surely a bit theoretical; I'd suggest even those cyclists, learners, horse riders who are daft enough to use the A14 would know to come off where it says "non-motorway traffic leave".

[B1040]

So, do we know if there have been significant problems with non motorway traffic heading from J1 to J0 and getting stuck?
It sometimes feels as if we're fretting about a problem that probably doesn't exist.

[ForestChav]

So, do we know if there have been significant problems with non motorway traffic heading from J1 to J0 and getting stuck?
It sometimes feels as if we're fretting about a problem that probably doesn't exist.

Well that's what I was implying. It seems a theoretical risk more than anything.

[JammyDodge]

So, do we know if there have been significant problems with non motorway traffic heading from J1 to J0 and getting stuck?
It sometimes feels as if we're fretting about a problem that probably doesn't exist.

It probably is not common. A niche problem I could forsee is that someone gets stopped for being on the M1 or M6, like a learner driver with a parent. The are not allowed on a motorway without an instructor, but they are allowed on the A14 between J1 and Catthorpe as it is officially classed as all-purpose and not a special road. Parents (and learners) may not be paying attention to signage until it is too late.

When I was learning, there has been several times my mum freaked out because I didn't go where she was expecting. I was in the correct lanes for the roundabout, but merging into a dual carriageway and then immediately changing lanes wasn't in her plan. Mostly because she 'forgot' I was a leaner until I mentioned it to her again. I was basically her driver for 4 months on the weekends

[Chris5156]

So, do we know if there have been significant problems with non motorway traffic heading from J1 to J0 and getting stuck?
It sometimes feels as if we're fretting about a problem that probably doesn't exist.

I don't think there has been a significant problem with it, no - for me it's not so much about it causing terrible problems daily, and more about it being poorly designed when it could so easily have been done properly.

There are too many things, even on the trunk road network, where there is clearly a proper way, or a best practice way, of doing something, but instead a different and less effective solution gets built, simply because the industry has been de-skilled, value engineering is the order of the day, and some of the people who make the decisions care more about it being easy than it being right. Not all of them, I hasten to add, and there are brilliant people working on the roads (and posting to this forum) - but there are enough who don't care if they make poor decisions to allow poor decisions to be found all over the road network.

[c2R]

fwiw my take on what should be done about A14 J0-1 is "extend the A14 to the A5"

Sure, it likely wouldn't get much use, but it would make things a lot easier for the small amount of nonmotorway traffic in that area, and the cost of it is literally just two sliproads and some signage. They could have done this in the original scheme without much extra cost- might be less cost-effective to do it now though.

a14.png

And then along would come the metal sheds or some new car-dependent housing... Or perhaps a service area like South Mimms.....