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: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

I'm staggered they got away with the A1 widening as they did. Of course, that road is now 50 and heavily enforced by SPECS so to many on here, that isn't really an improvement.

Also WTF was this supposed to be: https://goo.gl/maps/8CuZxYieVHLHK6R36

In any case, you don't gain anything widening just this bit to D4 because the bottleneck is J25 and J27, where you would have to replace structures to widen anyway.
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
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11155
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by c2R »

Bryn666 wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 11:41 I'm staggered they got away with the A1 widening as they did. Of course, that road is now 50 and heavily enforced by SPECS so to many on here, that isn't really an improvement.
Agreed, it's a bit on the cheap and nasty side.
Also WTF was this supposed to be: https://goo.gl/maps/8CuZxYieVHLHK6R36
It's an affront to useful signage. Compounded by being on a bridge yellow backing board. Even if the sign did make sense in its location,I can't see any particular reason why an end of restrictions sign like that would need highlighting.
In any case, you don't gain anything widening just this bit to D4 because the bottleneck is J25 and J27, where you would have to replace structures to widen anyway.
Well, yes. The A6 bridge is also a bit on the narrow side already...
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7539
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by jackal »

Bryn666 wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 11:41 In any case, you don't gain anything widening just this bit to D4 because the bottleneck is J25 and J27, where you would have to replace structures to widen anyway.
I've seen countless overbridges like J27 widened without being replaced. J25 is tougher and may well need replacement though it wouldn't be the worst place for a lane drop if the A6 bypass ever happened. The right hand entry (not TOTSO as I said before) of course needs fixing.

I think the reason for the viaduct being the focus is because that's the only potential showstopper. Worse comes to worst you just knock down a 70s bridge and start again. Can't really do that to Stockport Viaduct! Fortunately the arches are massive so there's no need.
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17456
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Truvelo »

We've come to the conclusion that the westbound arch is capable of taking four lanes if the barriers are pushed to the walls and the wooden fence is removed.

For eastbound traffic I suggest using the arch between the M60 and new A5145 and have two full width lanes passing through each arch plus hard shoulders if necessary. This would also require lengthening the A6 bridge. An alternative would be to keep D3 through the existing arch and have the unused arch for the eastbound J1 entry slip and then have D4 from the A6 bridge eastwards.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11155
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by c2R »

Truvelo wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:48 We've come to the conclusion that the westbound arch is capable of taking four lanes if the barriers are pushed to the walls and the wooden fence is removed.

For eastbound traffic I suggest using the arch between the M60 and new A5145 and have two full width lanes passing through each arch plus hard shoulders if necessary
I don't think that's necessary - as above, the retaining wall could be moved/pushed back to make both arches equal width.
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Barkstar »

c2R wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 13:03
Truvelo wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:48 We've come to the conclusion that the westbound arch is capable of taking four lanes if the barriers are pushed to the walls and the wooden fence is removed.

For eastbound traffic I suggest using the arch between the M60 and new A5145 and have two full width lanes passing through each arch plus hard shoulders if necessary
I don't think that's necessary - as above, the retaining wall could be moved/pushed back to make both arches equal width.
I'm thinking Network Rail may have some input on this - despite the viaduct being very substantial there maybe restrictions no amount of shifting barriers can get around. If there's enough room to squeeze in a 4th lane then why wasn't it built to the standard width in the first place?
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11155
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by c2R »

Barkstar wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 13:19
c2R wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 13:03
Truvelo wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 12:48 We've come to the conclusion that the westbound arch is capable of taking four lanes if the barriers are pushed to the walls and the wooden fence is removed.

For eastbound traffic I suggest using the arch between the M60 and new A5145 and have two full width lanes passing through each arch plus hard shoulders if necessary
I don't think that's necessary - as above, the retaining wall could be moved/pushed back to make both arches equal width.
I'm thinking Network Rail may have some input on this - despite the viaduct being very substantial there maybe restrictions no amount of shifting barriers can get around. If there's enough room to squeeze in a 4th lane then why wasn't it built to the standard width in the first place?
I agree they would; although it's not been an issue here: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.41107 ... 312!8i6656

I'd presume the wall is there to retain the hillside; I'm guessing but did the M63 here open as D2M and then was widened to D3M, at which point it was done without needing to perform additional excavation work?
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

c2R wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 13:32
Barkstar wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 13:19
c2R wrote: Thu Oct 08, 2020 13:03

I don't think that's necessary - as above, the retaining wall could be moved/pushed back to make both arches equal width.
I'm thinking Network Rail may have some input on this - despite the viaduct being very substantial there maybe restrictions no amount of shifting barriers can get around. If there's enough room to squeeze in a 4th lane then why wasn't it built to the standard width in the first place?
I agree they would; although it's not been an issue here: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.41107 ... 312!8i6656

I'd presume the wall is there to retain the hillside; I'm guessing but did the M63 here open as D2M and then was widened to D3M, at which point it was done without needing to perform additional excavation work?
Between J1 and J27 has always been D3M with a narrow hard shoulder, from J27 to J25 was D2M, but with the exception of the Portwood bridges, the formation was designed to add an extra lane each way - as can be seen in this image. The abandonment of the M63 eastwards will have presumably negated the need for D3M here in 1989 - but the intention presumably was to have a lane drop at J25 anyway for the A6(M). Which didn't happen of course, and in the Bredbury bend was pseudo-widened in 1999 along with the section underneath J1 which was also D2M.
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
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by PeterA5145 »

Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:03 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....
Yes, this is a very poor piece of design. Every time I use it I see someone having to move right out of the left-hand lane at the last minute. Surely it would work much better if the two running lanes continued ahead on to the motorway spur, with the additional lane appearing on the left.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
fras
Member
Posts: 3583
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by fras »

PeterA5145 wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 07:55
Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:03 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....
Yes, this is a very poor piece of design. Every time I use it I see someone having to move right out of the left-hand lane at the last minute. Surely it would work much better if the two running lanes continued ahead on to the motorway spur, with the additional lane appearing on the left.
There seems to be no mechanism to feed back user experience following completion of new schemes. Or is there ? If anybody knows, please tell us. I too, got caught out by this stupidity.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35714
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Bryn666 »

fras wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 09:23
PeterA5145 wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 07:55
Barkstar wrote: Tue Oct 06, 2020 10:03 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....
Yes, this is a very poor piece of design. Every time I use it I see someone having to move right out of the left-hand lane at the last minute. Surely it would work much better if the two running lanes continued ahead on to the motorway spur, with the additional lane appearing on the left.
There seems to be no mechanism to feed back user experience following completion of new schemes. Or is there ? If anybody knows, please tell us. I too, got caught out by this stupidity.
A competent Stage 3 safety audit would have picked it up... obviously done in house and all boxes ticked instead.
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
newt21964
Member
Posts: 31
Joined: Mon Nov 12, 2012 20:20

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by newt21964 »

PeterA5145 wrote: Tue Oct 13, 2020 07:55 Yes, this is a very poor piece of design. Every time I use it I see someone having to move right out of the left-hand lane at the last minute. Surely it would work much better if the two running lanes continued ahead on to the motorway spur, with the additional lane appearing on the left.
Absolutely agree with this. Fabulously poorly thought out. Particularly when its an HGV that realises at last minute :roll:
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by PeterA5145 »

There is another example of this kind of thing at the A555/A34 junction at Handforth Dean.

Approaching from the north on the A34, if you stay in the left-hand lane you will be led either to turn left along Stanley Road or, at the next roundabout, head east along the A555. To continue south along the A34, even to access the retail park, you must move a lane to your right.

This isn't as problematic, as it's better signed in advance, but it still seems wrong in principle. And surely the likely volume of traffic heading east on the A555 from the southbound A34 has been overestimated.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Barkstar »

PeterA5145 wrote: Wed Oct 14, 2020 14:53 There is another example of this kind of thing at the A555/A34 junction at Handforth Dean.

Approaching from the north on the A34, if you stay in the left-hand lane you will be led either to turn left along Stanley Road or, at the next roundabout, head east along the A555. To continue south along the A34, even to access the retail park, you must move a lane to your right.

This isn't as problematic, as it's better signed in advance, but it still seems wrong in principle. And surely the likely volume of traffic heading east on the A555 from the southbound A34 has been overestimated.
I think in that case the problem is the short distance between the two roundabouts, which doesn't give the unfamiliar a lot of space to get into the lane they want.
User avatar
Barkstar
Member
Posts: 2589
Joined: Sun Jul 14, 2013 16:32

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Barkstar »

Flooded again, in yet another 'once a century' event - fourth since it opened two years ago :roll:
And now there may be no solution, or at least an argument over who pays to fix it. I suppose even if they could identify who fouled up on this there'd be no restitution just endless finger pointing and companies going into administration. It's a sad mess indeed.

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk ... g-19681296
User avatar
Helvellyn
Member
Posts: 24618
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 22:31
Location: High Peak

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by Helvellyn »

No solution? How about a ferry? :D
User avatar
PeterA5145
Member
Posts: 25347
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 00:19
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Contact:

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by PeterA5145 »

Maybe they need to install some powerful pumps.
“The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.” – Robert A. Heinlein
fras
Member
Posts: 3583
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by fras »

PeterA5145 wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 17:25 Maybe they need to install some powerful pumps.
It's not so much this that is the problem, it is where to discharge the water from the exit side of the pumps. I have been studying the HS2 project for quite some number of years, and it is usual to create balancing lakes that are able to take sudden storm water and then to gradually feed it into a suitable river or water course so as not to overwhelm the discharge route. There was a similar lake constructed where I used to live in Hamstead, near Birmingham on the River Tame. Its now named Forge Mill Lake and is in the middle of a very pleasant country park. When the National Exhibition Centre was built in Birmingham in the early 70s a lake was included to take run-off from the hall roofs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forge_Mill_Lake

Without seeing the construction drawings its difficult to say whether this is inadequate or not. The report refers to full storage tanks, so there is obviously some provision for water balancing. Maybe the assumptions on their required volume and discharge rate were out-of-date when the road started construction.
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8984
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by wrinkly »

Sorry to reply to such an old post but I'm still catching up on stuff that was posted while I was away from the forum. Though this discussion of the M60 is off topic for an A555 thread.
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.
Not quite. J26 to 27 was originally D2M (I think that when planning it they looked at making J25 to 27 D4M but decided instead to make it D2M with a new parallel A560 and without east-facing slips at J27).

However the earlier stretch from J27 to J1 was always D3 (M-ish with narrow/interrupted hard shoulders) from its opening c. 1982, reducing to D2M inside junctions 27 and 1.#

Edit: I now see Bryn said this (8 Oct @12:44 on this page) partly contradicting what he said two days earlier in the post quoted above! Unless some quote markers have gone wrong and led to misattributions.

There are probably more hatch markings now than there used to be.

I hope to add some more comments over the next few days.
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8984
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: A555 Stockport news

Post by wrinkly »

Another reply to an old discussion - even older this time.
Bryn666 wrote: Tue Dec 11, 2018 15:52
martin2345uk wrote: Tue Dec 11, 2018 12:24 I had a look at the junction with shadowmoss road and the former ringway road yesterday - anyone know why they’ve made it a mini roundabout? It’s just a left hand turn with no other arms...
There's a trend for using conventional roundabouts instead of a bend where the alignment won't allow a proper radius and it's seen as a safe way of allowing the turns. Here it's just seemingly just laziness and refusal to widen the corner to 20m radius which would have been sufficient and probably possible within highway land.
I've never seen this mini-roundabout as I haven't visited the area since a few weeks after the A555 opened, when they had not yet tidied up the side roads. Is it still there or did it turn out to be only temporary?

A curve between Shadowmoss Road and Ringway Road was shown on the plans, and for weeks or months before the A555 opened they appeared to be preparing to build the curve. Its route was marked out by plastic markers in the grass, yellow on what seemed to be one side of the road and pink on the other.

I think they're visible on Streetview Aug 2018. Mostly pink ones in this view but some yellow visible if you move about a bit.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.36542 ... 312!8i6656
Post Reply