What now for the A494 Expressway "mess"???

[Chris5156]

Bit muddled in places... maybe they want hard shoulders to be added so they can then be converted to a third running lane

What do you call a non-motorway smart motorway?

An expressway...?

[jackal]

Appendix A contains a strip map for the entire route including traffic counts.

[wrinkly]

Press release from WG:

https://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/20 ... 6/?lang=en

Exhibitions in July.

Not sure how this relates to the larger scheme. Maybe I missed some of the previous documentation.

[orudge]

The bridge needs to be replaced regardless of whether the A494 or A548 route is upgraded, I believe. How many lanes the replacement bridge will have I’ll be interested to see.

[wrinkly]

More than two lanes each way would require reconstructing the adjacent bridge under Chester-Holyhead railway, and would seem to negate the decision that the main route is to go the other way.

[orudge]

Ah yes, that was reconstructed (or refurbished?) a few years ago wasn't it?

[wrinkly]

It seems to have had extra crash protection measures at minimum. You can see something of the work using the date slider on Streetview. Rebuilding it for a wider road would be a far bigger job.

[jackal]

Some info about the bridge replacement scheme:

Due to the age of the bridge, there is evidence of deterioration to key structural features which would be difficult to repair. The bridge’s concrete deck is in a poor condition which results in an uneven surface and may in the future affect the crossing’s weight carrying capacity. The abutments which support the bridge are also in a poor state of repair. If we do nothing, these structural issues will continue to deteriorate and we may need to introduce weight restrictions and/or lane closures to maintain the crossing of the River Dee. Replacing the deteriorated parts would require the closure of the A494 for significantly long periods, resulting in severe disruption and delays to journeys both for bridge users and for those travelling on the local road network. Replacement of parts would also be a temporary solution as it would not fully address the structural issues in the long term. In addition to the structural issues, the bridge is not up to modern day standards:
• The current levels of traffic are beyond the capacity of a two lane, dual carriageway.
• The bridge has no hard shoulder facility. A vehicle breakdown can result in long delays causing queues on the approach to the bridge.
• When congestion occurs, emergency services struggle to cross the bridge.
• The footpath on the bridge is very narrow.
• The central reserve and parapets are substandard.
We believe that the best solution is to consider proposals to replace the bridge to improve safety, provide greater resilience and enhance journey time reliability.

Options are being developed with public exhibitions last month.

https://beta.gov.wales/a494-river-dee-bridge

[Berk]

More than two lanes each way would require reconstructing the adjacent bridge under Chester-Holyhead railway, and would seem to negate the decision that the main route is to go the other way.

Is that still based on the decision made 11 years ago??

[wrinkly]

More than two lanes each way would require reconstructing the adjacent bridge under Chester-Holyhead railway, and would seem to negate the decision that the main route is to go the other way.

Is that still based on the decision made 11 years ago??

No, I'm talking about the decision made in September 2017 to choose the red route.

[jackal]

The recent documentation mentions that volumes on the bridge are 62,000aadt, which is more than is advisable for D2, though not dramatically so. Presumably D2 would be plenty once the new route is complete and save the unnecessary rebuild of the railway bridge.

If you see the quote I gave above there seems to be an implication that the new bridge would be significantly wider. The wider bridge could just be to allow a wider NMU path and perhaps hard shoulders, which are both mentioned as areas for improvement.

[nowster]

• The bridge has no hard shoulder facility. A vehicle breakdown can result in long delays causing queues on the approach to the bridge.

I thought this didn't matter these days.

[wrinkly]

Consultation on Dee bridge replacement:

https://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/20 ... n/?lang=en

https://beta.gov.wales/a494-river-dee-b ... ent-scheme

[Bryn666]

Consultation on Dee bridge replacement:

https://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/20 ... n/?lang=en

https://beta.gov.wales/a494-river-dee-b ... ent-scheme

MOTORWAY BY STEALTH! Just wait for the feather spitting from the locals...

[Euan]

The old bridge would still carry the eastbound traffic i.e. half of the traffic it currently takes. If the bridge did need to be closed long term for repairs then 50% of all the traffic across the Dee would still be diverted. Would the new bridge be able to accommodate traffic both ways with just three lanes though? During a period of closure for the old bridge the new bridge may have to be able to cope with this.

[c2R]

The old bridge would still carry the eastbound traffic i.e. half of the traffic it currently takes. If the bridge did need to be closed long term for repairs then 50% of all the traffic across the Dee would still be diverted. Would the new bridge be able to accommodate traffic both ways with just three lanes though? During a period of closure for the old bridge the new bridge may have to be able to cope with this.

Fake news!

The existing bridge will be replaced as part of the proposed scheme: https://beta.gov.wales/sites/default/fi ... cument.pdf

The construction will involve a new bridge with three lanes and a hard shoulder. Presumably this will be built first, and all traffic diverted over it in a 2+2 configuration while the existing bridge is then demolished and another three lanes and hard shoulder built. Traffic will then open in both directions as D3+HS

[Euan]

The old bridge would still carry the eastbound traffic i.e. half of the traffic it currently takes. If the bridge did need to be closed long term for repairs then 50% of all the traffic across the Dee would still be diverted. Would the new bridge be able to accommodate traffic both ways with just three lanes though? During a period of closure for the old bridge the new bridge may have to be able to cope with this.

Fake news!

The existing bridge will be replaced as part of the proposed scheme: https://beta.gov.wales/sites/default/fi ... cument.pdf

The construction will involve a new bridge with three lanes and a hard shoulder. Presumably this will be built first, and all traffic diverted over it in a 2+2 configuration while the existing bridge is then demolished and another three lanes and hard shoulder built. Traffic will then open in both directions as D3+HS

So overall there will be two brand new bridges built? It just sounded like the existing bridge was to be upgraded to the same standard as the new westbound bridge.

Presumably the hard shoulder on the westbound bridge will temporarily be used during demolition and reconstruction works at the other crossing site as the fourth lane in allowing two-lane traffic to flow in each direction, with the hard shoulder acting as the slow lane for westbound traffic.

It sounds like a far more radical solution than when structural faults were found in the Forth Road Bridge - it's still standing! But obviously the two are not quite comparable as the existing bridge over the Dee is only a couple hundred metres long and hence demolition is far more straightforward than it would be over open water.

[wrinkly]

It sounds like a far more radical solution than when structural faults were found in the Forth Road Bridge - it's still standing! But obviously the two are not quite comparable as the existing bridge over the Dee is only a couple hundred metres long and hence demolition is far more straightforward than it would be over open water.

The Dee bridge is of course also a lot lower than the FRB.

Little-known fact: it was designed for possible conversion to a lifting bridge!

The rising of the land in NW Britain, as it recovers from the weight of the ice sheet as recently discused in another thread, may be one of the reasons why that never happened. And of course the vast growth in traffic would have made it an unlikely prospect anyway.

[jackal]

So overall there will be two brand new bridges built?

No, three! There is a new railway bridge for westbound traffic, with the old railway bridge retained for eastbound traffic. This will also be three lanes in each direction with, it seems, the hard shoulder.

[avtur]

Consultation on Dee bridge replacement:

https://gov.wales/newsroom/transport/20 ... n/?lang=en

https://beta.gov.wales/a494-river-dee-b ... ent-scheme

MOTORWAY BY STEALTH! Just wait for the feather spitting from the locals...

The locals had the width extension up Aston Hill knocked back, didn't they? To the point where the compulsory purchase land (which had been cleared of dwellings) has since been resold and is now developed again meaning that there is no chance of widening the Aston Hill section. At some point the M56 has to reduce from 3 lanes to 2 and that causes a bottle neck, doesn't this scheme just move the bottle neck from one place to another?