A555 Stockport news

[lefthandedspanner]

The brain drain in local authorities coming back to bite people then. Still it's only the public who suffer from these cock-ups so who cares eh?

First rule of contracts is set out your terms very clearly. It's school level stuff that.

The ‘brain drain’, down skilling and cost reduction isn’t restricted to local authorities, it’s the way of the world unfortunately. It’s coming back to bite us all in our daily lives ...

It'll soon get to the point where we have to import workers from abroad to do anything which requires any skill whatsoever (or outsource absolutely everything abroad); and yet we have more graduates per head than ever before, funny that.

[SteveA30]

These days, everyone has to have bits of paper saying they know stuff, even when they don't, because they haven't actually done the work out in the field. Work experience and learning the job from others is the only way that works. Academic qualifications are no good on their own.

[Norfolktolancashire]

These days, everyone has to have bits of paper saying they know stuff, even when they don't, because they haven't actually done the work out in the field. Work experience and learning the job from others is the only way that works. Academic qualifications are no good on their own.

Agreed, that's where apprenticeships come in, however due to the low pay of most of these schemes new starters in the workplace are tempted for short term higher paid work elsewhere.

Regarding the four way traffic lights being removed, I was stuck for forty minutes the other week coming from the Knutsford direction!

[avtur]

Regarding the four way traffic lights being removed, I was stuck for forty minutes the other week coming from the Knutsford direction!

I've spent far too much time waiting at those lights in recent months, I'm very pleased to hear they have gone. I presume that is because the bridge works at Styal Road/A555 are now finished, or at least much close to being finished.

[wrinkly]

The structural bridge works were finished some time ago. The junction will be a flat signalised crossroads sitting on top of the enlarged railway bridge. It's carriageway works on Styal Road that have been responsible the latest single line working. What will be the southbound lanes have now been finished (possibly except for the wearing course) and are presumably now carrying one lane each way while they work on the northbound side. The tarmac is very thick in places - the new carriageways are about 3 or 4 ft higher than the old.

[c2R]

Here are a couple of photos for anyone interested:

Buxton Road bus bridge over new A555 - this is at the eastern end of the scheme, the bridge allows busses to use the old A6 alignment to serve the houses on the old road



Railway bridge over A555



A555 Meeting the realigned A6





A555 looking west towards the railway bridge




Old A6 - new Buxton road ridge, busses and cycles only. I can't honestly say I'm keen on the road markings, with the left lane just disappearing like that...!




A6 realignment and AS for junction with A55 at Simpsons Corner

[avtur]

Here are a couple of photos for anyone interested:

Great pictures, thanks for posting

[Berk]

Why was it decided that only buses and cycles can use the old A6??

[avtur]

Why was it decided that only buses and cycles can use the old A6??

I would hazard a guess that it is to stop people making a 'rat run' of the bus route. Where the new road meets that A6 there are undoubtedly going to be queues at peak times which I'm sure will lead to drivers taking 'the old road' to avoid the new junction. I'm sure that would be particularly appealing to northbound drivers as they would simply slip off to the to the old road left and join back in from the left, i.e. without any need to cross oncoming traffic; which would be the case for south bound traffic. That would explain why it is the north bound lane of the 'old road' that is dropped on the bus bridge. Well, that's a stab in the dark from a (former) local.

[M5Lenzar]

Why was it decided that only buses and cycles can use the old A6??

I would hazard a guess that it is to stop people making a 'rat run' of the bus route. Where the new road meets that A6 there are undoubtedly going to be queues at peak times which I'm sure will lead to drivers taking 'the old road' to avoid the new junction. I'm sure that would be particularly appealing to northbound drivers as they would simply slip off to the to the old road left and join back in from the left, i.e. without any need to cross oncoming traffic; which would be the case for south bound traffic. That would explain why it is the north bound lane of the 'old road' that is dropped on the bus bridge. Well, that's a stab in the dark from a (former) local.

So, in plain English, 'how dare you not want to sit in a queue for ages'?

[avtur]

Why was it decided that only buses and cycles can use the old A6??

I would hazard a guess that it is to stop people making a 'rat run' of the bus route. Where the new road meets that A6 there are undoubtedly going to be queues at peak times which I'm sure will lead to drivers taking 'the old road' to avoid the new junction. I'm sure that would be particularly appealing to northbound drivers as they would simply slip off to the to the old road left and join back in from the left, i.e. without any need to cross oncoming traffic; which would be the case for south bound traffic. That would explain why it is the north bound lane of the 'old road' that is dropped on the bus bridge. Well, that's a stab in the dark from a (former) local.

So, in plain English, 'how dare you not want to sit in a queue for ages'?

I don't quite understand how your comment fits, are you calling me impatient? My answer is nothing at all to do with my attitude.

I'm simply offering a possible explanation to answer a question someone has asked.

[M5Lenzar]

Not an attack on you at all!

It's an attack on the council blocking off a perfectly good short cut and forcing people to sit in a queue. I am very much opposed to this kind of restriction as it makes people's lives a little more difficult for no valid reason.

[wrinkly]

Reasons to close the old A6 to general traffic:

1) Saves the cost of a two-lane-wide bridge.

2) Frees householders on the bypassed route from the danger, noise and pollution of traffic.

3) It wouldn't be a short cut in terms of distance anyway as the diverted A6 is slightly shorter than the old.

4) If it were made available to rat-runners then any benefit they gained would be at the expense of those who did the responsible thing and used the new shorter A6.

5) It gives an advantage to bus users who are using a more environmentally responsible form of transport.

[Truvelo]

If done properly it could have functioned as a basic GSJ. Think of the roundabout immediately south of M20 J8 where a bridge allows A20 eastbound to avoid the junction. The A6 bus lane would have performed an identical role. Such an arrangement would remove a phase from the traffic lights resulting in less queuing. Both left turns at the lights could be permissive, further improving throughput.

[wrinkly]

But traffic on the A6 in each direction has to reduce to one urban lane when past the junction area, negating any benefits of grade separation.

[Bryn666]

Can't inconvenience the hard pressed motorist by making a redundant alignment residents and buses only now can we...

[Berk]

It’s been done with every new scheme for the last 30 years. And yes, it does inconvenience people - who usually have to drive further/to the next junction.

Which isn’t exactly good for the planet...

[Jeni]

It’s been done with every new scheme for the last 30 years. And yes, it does inconvenience people - who usually have to drive further/to the next junction.

Which isn’t exactly good for the planet...

I take it you're not familiar with this scheme then?

[Berk]

It’s been done with every new scheme for the last 30 years. And yes, it does inconvenience people - who usually have to drive further/to the next junction.

Which isn’t exactly good for the planet...

I take it you're not familiar with this scheme then?

No, I’m not -have I overlooked something??

I was referring to other projects where a local junction is closed, and the next one is at least half-a-mile away, sometimes more.

[c2R]

It’s been done with every new scheme for the last 30 years. And yes, it does inconvenience people - who usually have to drive further/to the next junction.

Which isn’t exactly good for the planet...

I take it you're not familiar with this scheme then?

No, I’m not -have I overlooked something??

I was referring to other projects where a local junction is closed, and the next one is at least half-a-mile away, sometimes more.

There's a few properties on each side of the bridge, strung out in a linear fashion. There's no real need for people on one side of the bridge to visit properties on the other (unless they've got friends there; and I suspect many could walk, or drive the very short distance around.

Assuming you didn't build a bridge at all, you'd be adding time and distance onto the bus route as it would have to now turn off the main road to turn down two cul-de-sacs to collect people - this would make the bus take longer, and require additional bus priority measures to allow safe egress. Alternatively, you could put bus stops on the bypassed section, but these would not exactly be accessible and would again make the public transport less convenient.

You could build a bridge allowing access for everyone, but this has all the problems described above, and would require a more expensive two lane bridge.

If it were me building the scheme, though, I'd have used no motor vehicles except buses provision - the current signed prohibitions would appear to me to prohibit invalid carriages and horses which should really be using this route rather than attempting to negotiate the new junction.

I'd also put an exemption for Royal Mail while carrying out deliveries (somehow).