A555 Stockport news

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: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:17 I could buy the layout if it was designed purely for the airport but proved handy to avoid having to go into Stockport and gain the M60/56 there. But as you say it was alway designed to serve the airport and take traffic off the A6. I guess the problem with a GSJ might be that the A555 crosses the runway approach and getting the height differential for such a jct might have been very costly or simply not practical. Otherwise it was really a no brainer.

Though going under the runway approach does afford the sight of Britain's shortest street lighting - these are on Ringway Road, next to the A555 as there's no GSV of it yet.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.36497 ... 6656?hl=en
The existing T2 GSJ if adapted is well away from any flight paths and would be have been a better use of space than having several signal controlled junctions around what is going to be a series of several floor office blocks etc (which may be ill-advised now post Covid...). Height wasn't the issue, design competence and willingness was.
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
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by jackal »

Even accepting that they 'had' to be at-grade, the first three junctions on the A555 (heading eastbound) should all be freeflow in one direction - eastbound, westbound, eastbound respectively. The first one (at T1) has a signalised merge when it should be a lane gain. The other two stop both directions of the A555 at the lights when one direction should bypass them and then rejoin as a lane gain. There's a similar emphasis on pointless signalisation across the rest of the route. The exception of course is the old bit in the middle with actual GSJs, a glistening remnant of a more civilised time.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:29 Even accepting that they 'had' to be at-grade, the first three junctions on the A555 (heading eastbound) should all be freeflow in one direction - eastbound, westbound, eastbound respectively. The first one (at T1) has a signalised merge when it should be a lane gain. The other two stop both directions of the A555 at the lights when one direction should bypass them and then rejoin as a lane gain. There's a similar emphasis on pointless signalisation across the rest of the route. The exception of course is the old bit in the middle with actual GSJs, a glistening remnant of a more civilised time.
It will only get worse when those at-grade junctions enable developers to tack extra ones on for houses - you don't for a minute think this corridor will remain 'rural' do you?

Should have been built as a motorway in the first place through to the M60, then at least the box shed and cookie cutter houses wouldn't directly screw it up in 15 years time.
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
Phil
Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Phil »

Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:03 I did an an east to west run along the then new A555 not long after it opened. But until yesterday I hadn't any need to come at it from the other end. Oh dear.... Coming off the M56 at junction 5 it is still only signposted Airport. At the first junction of the end of the spur you get a three lanes sign with no words except T2 above the LH lane. You eventually get a Wilmslow A555 (A34) and finally you get a A555 Buxton (A6) as you leave the airport area. Though in effect it is all straight on this is pretty poor given the road wasn't just sold as the new road to the airport.

Coming back the other way one junction is a cracker. it's two lanes and a sign indicated that ahead it will become three and the LH lane is for turning left into T1. Is there a clue as to how this will be achieved. Nope. Lane one becomes left turn only and lane two splits with the only signage painted on the tarmac. I wasn't the only one to get this wrong for the sake of either some rejigging of the white lines or just making it clear on the sign. And as it is all part of the new layout it could have been done better - you might be forgiven for thinking they didn't foresee or want through traffic....
Ever thought that was deliberate?

The toned down A555 with its at grade junctions has a finite amount of capacity - and the whole reason it eventually got finished was to act as a local distributor. Without a proper continuation back to the M56 at the eastern end, flooding it with strategic traffic off the M56 for Stockport etc can only make things worse for those on the likes of the A6
Phil
Member
Posts: 2270
Joined: Sun Dec 15, 2002 18:03
Location: Burgess Hill,W Sussex, UK

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Phil »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:54
jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:29 Even accepting that they 'had' to be at-grade, the first three junctions on the A555 (heading eastbound) should all be freeflow in one direction - eastbound, westbound, eastbound respectively. The first one (at T1) has a signalised merge when it should be a lane gain. The other two stop both directions of the A555 at the lights when one direction should bypass them and then rejoin as a lane gain. There's a similar emphasis on pointless signalisation across the rest of the route. The exception of course is the old bit in the middle with actual GSJs, a glistening remnant of a more civilised time.
It will only get worse when those at-grade junctions enable developers to tack extra ones on for houses - you don't for a minute think this corridor will remain 'rural' do you?

Should have been built as a motorway in the first place through to the M60, then at least the box shed and cookie cutter houses wouldn't directly screw it up in 15 years time.
The only saviour might be if the corridor is also designated as a green belt to separate the towns to the south and urban sprawl to the north.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

Phil wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:57
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:54
jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 11:29 Even accepting that they 'had' to be at-grade, the first three junctions on the A555 (heading eastbound) should all be freeflow in one direction - eastbound, westbound, eastbound respectively. The first one (at T1) has a signalised merge when it should be a lane gain. The other two stop both directions of the A555 at the lights when one direction should bypass them and then rejoin as a lane gain. There's a similar emphasis on pointless signalisation across the rest of the route. The exception of course is the old bit in the middle with actual GSJs, a glistening remnant of a more civilised time.
It will only get worse when those at-grade junctions enable developers to tack extra ones on for houses - you don't for a minute think this corridor will remain 'rural' do you?

Should have been built as a motorway in the first place through to the M60, then at least the box shed and cookie cutter houses wouldn't directly screw it up in 15 years time.
The only saviour might be if the corridor is also designated as a green belt to separate the towns to the south and urban sprawl to the north.
Given Stockport and Tameside have nearly destroyed the entire GM Spatial Framework arguing over a box shed park at Denton it makes you wonder if anyone has any gumption at all on that front.
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
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by the cheesecake man »

KeithW wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 13:41
One of the reasons more private sector houses are needed is that public housing building has almost ceased to exist
It was banned by Thatcher. It has increased this century eg these new council houses but to nothing like it was from 1945-1979.

The main reason for the increased demand is simply fewer people are living in multi occupancy households see
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/social-tr ... milies.pdf
Also smaller households due to fewer children, later marriage and more divorce.


The main cause seems to be kids are leaving home earlier and couples are not living with one of the parents -
That doesn't seem right. When I started work in 1997 the idea of anyone still living with parents at 30 was almost inconceivable. But in 2006 I still was and three colleagues still were and nobody thought that was strange. In all 4 cases it was only impending retirement of parents that made us finally leave.
basically people want their own gaff.
Agreed. It's understandable but in my humble opinion government priority should be people having a decent home not focussing excessively on ownership.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by jackal »

Given the state of the A555 and lack of A6-M60 link, they really do need to make the M60 between J24 and J2 D4 ALR (C/D lanes at J2-3). It's entirely feasible, at worst with slightly narrowed lanes in Stockport, yet there's nothing in RIS2 and the RIS3 pipeline scheme is merely "Manchester South East Junction improvements".
User avatar
trickstat
Member
Posts: 8738
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2014 14:06
Location: Letchworth Gdn City, Herts

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by trickstat »

the cheesecake man wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 13:30
KeithW wrote: Mon Feb 24, 2020 13:41
One of the reasons more private sector houses are needed is that public housing building has almost ceased to exist
It was banned by Thatcher. It has increased this century eg these new council houses but to nothing like it was from 1945-1979.
I'm not sure if it was actually banned by Thatcher as such, but the fact that the money from Right To Buy sales wasn't allowed to be re-invested in new council houses, by and large, had the same effect.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 14:00 Given the state of the A555 and lack of A6-M60 link, they really do need to make the M60 between J24 and J2 D4 ALR (C/D lanes at J2-3). It's entirely feasible, at worst with slightly narrowed lanes in Stockport, yet there's nothing in RIS2 and the RIS3 pipeline scheme is merely "Manchester South East Junction improvements".
J26-J1 was originally D2M and widened as much as the sandstone cutting and river Mersey to one side would allow. It already has narrow lanes and an intermittent hard shoulder, D4 here will be extremely narrow lanes and unsafe to use.

Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
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
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Barkstar »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:25
Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
My family moved here in 1968 and there was to be an A6 bypass then.
User avatar
Steven
SABRE Maps Coordinator
Posts: 19168
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 20:39
Location: Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Steven »

Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:40
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:25
Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
My family moved here in 1968 and there was to be an A6 bypass then.
Yeah, but that was the other A6(M) Stockport North-South Bypass...
Steven
Motorway Historian

Founder Member, SABRE ex-Presidents' Corner

Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!

User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:40
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:25
Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
My family moved here in 1968 and there was to be an A6 bypass then.
The outer ring road, as it was, goes back to 1945. The decision to shrink the Manchester Outer Ring Road to run through Stockport town centre was formalised in 1998 when all the motorways were renumbered - but seems to have been decided on much earlier. Wythenshawe being part of Manchester but outside the M60 is one of the reasons the roads in and out of the place are all hopeless, because the route they should have pointed at only arrived in the last 5 years. And it is a complete failure of planning that the A6 still limps through Hazel Grove.
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
Steven
SABRE Maps Coordinator
Posts: 19168
Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 20:39
Location: Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Steven »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:48 Wythenshawe being part of Manchester but outside the M60 is one of the reasons the roads in and out of the place are all hopeless, because the route they should have pointed at only arrived in the last 5 years.
They've built the Western Parkway (aka the missing bit of the Outer Ring Road)???? :wink:
Steven
Motorway Historian

Founder Member, SABRE ex-Presidents' Corner

Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!

User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

Steven wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:51
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:48 Wythenshawe being part of Manchester but outside the M60 is one of the reasons the roads in and out of the place are all hopeless, because the route they should have pointed at only arrived in the last 5 years.
They've built the Western Parkway (aka the missing bit of the Outer Ring Road)???? :wink:
They built about 1/2 mile of it in 1971 didn't they... what's your problem man! Although from that side of Wythenshawe at least all the roads do point at the M56 provided you want to go north, otherwise forget 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
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by jackal »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:25
jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 14:00 Given the state of the A555 and lack of A6-M60 link, they really do need to make the M60 between J24 and J2 D4 ALR (C/D lanes at J2-3). It's entirely feasible, at worst with slightly narrowed lanes in Stockport, yet there's nothing in RIS2 and the RIS3 pipeline scheme is merely "Manchester South East Junction improvements".
J26-J1 was originally D2M and widened as much as the sandstone cutting and river Mersey to one side would allow. It already has narrow lanes and an intermittent hard shoulder, D4 here will be extremely narrow lanes and unsafe to use.
The central reservation is 5m wide through this section, take that down to 2m with concrete barriers, pinch 2m from each of the quasi-hard shoulders and you have 7m for your extra lanes without any really serious engineering. Hard strip can be laid on the verge.
Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
Where are they going to find half a billion? Central govt has made it clear they have zero interest in it, nor should they with that worthless design.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 16:13
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:25
jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 14:00 Given the state of the A555 and lack of A6-M60 link, they really do need to make the M60 between J24 and J2 D4 ALR (C/D lanes at J2-3). It's entirely feasible, at worst with slightly narrowed lanes in Stockport, yet there's nothing in RIS2 and the RIS3 pipeline scheme is merely "Manchester South East Junction improvements".
J26-J1 was originally D2M and widened as much as the sandstone cutting and river Mersey to one side would allow. It already has narrow lanes and an intermittent hard shoulder, D4 here will be extremely narrow lanes and unsafe to use.
The central reservation is 5m wide through this section, take that down to 2m with concrete barriers, pinch 2m from each of the quasi-hard shoulders and you have 7m for your extra lanes without any really serious engineering. Hard strip can be laid on the verge.
Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
Where are they going to find half a billion? Central govt has made it clear they have zero interest in it, nor should they with that worthless design.
What are you going to do about FSSD when you've put a giant concrete wall down the middle? 40 mph speed limit?

There's a reason the central reserve is wide through this area, it's because the horizontal alignment is already stretching the maximums of a 70 mph cross-section and FSSD cannot be achieved without splaying the carriageways. There is also a significant vertical difference in the carriageways between J27-J1 which further impacts achieving suitable FSSD, particularly through the double bend here https://goo.gl/maps/MnRVJdhcmqB18Ebu6 .

I have argued the speed limit through Stockport should have been reduced to 60 or even 50 for a while now.
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
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by jackal »

Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 16:28
jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 16:13
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 15:25

J26-J1 was originally D2M and widened as much as the sandstone cutting and river Mersey to one side would allow. It already has narrow lanes and an intermittent hard shoulder, D4 here will be extremely narrow lanes and unsafe to use.
The central reservation is 5m wide through this section, take that down to 2m with concrete barriers, pinch 2m from each of the quasi-hard shoulders and you have 7m for your extra lanes without any really serious engineering. Hard strip can be laid on the verge.
Stockport has every intention to build the missing bit of the A555.
Where are they going to find half a billion? Central govt has made it clear they have zero interest in it, nor should they with that worthless design.
What are you going to do about FSSD when you've put a giant concrete wall down the middle? 40 mph speed limit?

There's a reason the central reserve is wide through this area, it's because the horizontal alignment is already stretching the maximums of a 70 mph cross-section and FSSD cannot be achieved without splaying the carriageways. There is also a significant vertical difference in the carriageways between J27-J1 which further impacts achieving suitable FSSD, particularly through the double bend here https://goo.gl/maps/MnRVJdhcmqB18Ebu6 .

I have argued the speed limit through Stockport should have been reduced to 60 or even 50 for a while now.
Not to mention I'm moving Lane 1 2m closer to retaining walls and other visual barriers, haha. Still I think 60 might be possible. Or they could do some actual engineering and replace structures, widen cuts, etc to restore full width lanes and FSSD. Sacrilege, I know.
Last edited by jackal on Tue Oct 06, 2020 16:43, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 16:41 Not to mention I'm moving Lane 1 2m closer to retaining walls and other visual barriers, haha. Still I think 60 might be possible. Or they could do some actual engineering and replace structures, widen cuts, etc and restore full width lanes and FSSD. Sacrilege, I know.
Suddenly that half a billion pricetag for the half-baked A555 seems more appealing than 10 years of construction and a billion+ price tag to replace an urban motorway with an even bigger one.
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
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2602
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Barkstar »

jackal wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 16:13
Where are they going to find half a billion? Central govt has made it clear they have zero interest in it, nor should they with that worthless design.
So what's the alternative? Just putting up with it?
Post Reply