A1(M) Leeming - Barton

[Roadmeister17]

WRINKLY - are you playing Devil's advocate ? Surely you agree that the lane - drop sign and road markings need removing
while the A1L2B Contractors are onsite and at their expense ? The signage and markings were put in place as part of the Dishforth -Leeming scheme opened in 2012 to warn drivers that the carriageway was imminently narrowing from 3 lane motorway down to two lane carriageway. It was obvious that when the stretch north of J51 was widened that signage and markings should be removed as part of the A1L2B contract.
I despise efforts to weasel out of removing signage and markings.
It is a pathetic attempt to save money instead of lives .
Three lanes slamming down to two - just for the crossing of the A684 - then branching out again to three is a recipe for disaster. To compound the lunacy, the road space is already there !

ROADMEISTER17

[Mark Hewitt]

WRINKLY - are you playing Devil's advocate ? Surely you agree that the lane - drop sign and road markings need removing
while the A1L2B Contractors are onsite and at their expense ? The signage and markings were put in place as part of the Dishforth -Leeming scheme opened in 2012 to warn drivers that the carriageway was imminently narrowing from 3 lane motorway down to two lane carriageway. It was obvious that when the stretch north of J51 was widened that signage and markings should be removed as part of the A1L2B contract.
I despise efforts to weasel out of removing signage and markings.
It is a pathetic attempt to save money instead of lives .
Three lanes slamming down to two - just for the crossing of the A684 - then branching out again to three is a recipe for disaster. To compound the lunacy, the road space is already there !

ROADMEISTER17

I don't see how it's the contractors responsibility especially as it was done as two contracts Dishforth to Leeming to connect into the old A1 then L2B to connect into that. The responsibility for it lies squarely with Highways England, it should of course be sorted out while traffic management is already on site but blaming the contractors and expecting them to pay for something which wasn't in the spec isn't going to happen.

[Roadmeister17]

We do not know for a fact that it wasn't in the spec.
Highways England was surely instrumental in appointing the Contractors for A1LB.
It should have been glaringly obvious that said signage and markings would need removal upon completion of the new three lane northern section.
We can bandy words about all day but surely this aspect of the work - getting three lanes open over the A684 - and its expense were understood from the start ?

ROADMEISTER17.

[Jeni]

We do not know for a fact that it wasn't in the spec.

I think we can be sure that it wasn't, otherwise they'd be doing it.

[Mark Hewitt]

We do not know for a fact that it wasn't in the spec.
Highways England was surely instrumental in appointing the Contractors for A1LB.
It should have been glaringly obvious that said signage and markings would need removal upon completion of the new three lane northern section.
We can bandy words about all day but surely this aspect of the work - getting three lanes open over the A684 - and its expense were understood from the start ?

ROADMEISTER17.

That's not how it works. The government allocates funding to highways england to 'upgrade to three lane motorway' then HE appoints a contractor and they make the road according to spec that HE set out. I'm sure they would have pointed out the D2M section but it's up to the HE spec.

If I got a builder in to improve my kitchen and then another one to improve my dining room would I then end up blaming one of them because I'd forgotten to ask for a door between the two? The fault would be mine alone.

[Roadmeister17]

We don't need to know about your hypothetical home improvements...the analogy is irrelevant.

My point stands.

ROADMEISTER 17.

[Jeni]

We don't need to know about your hypothetical home improvements...the analogy is irrelevant.

My point stands.

ROADMEISTER 17.

Your point is rediculous and shows no knowledge of the situation.

[Repmobile]

In response to a query to Highways England about the lane drop at Leeming Bar, this was their response in April 2017:

'We can confirm that in the permanent scheme, the A1(M) will continue to reduce to two lanes between the exit and entry slip roads at Junction 51 (Leeming). There will only be a three lane arrangement following the point at which the northbound entry slip road has joined the A1(M). A decision was taken when assessing the affordability and value for money of the scheme to remove the lane drop when that area of carriageway needed resurfacing in future years rather than disturbing long lengths of carriageway that still have a residual life.''

So, the decision was taken by Highways England (the Client), not the Contractor.

Edit to add, going back to 2015 on Page 33 of this thread a valued poster who had seen the HE safety audits was quite alarmed to see they had the lane drop at Leeming in then!.

[AndyB]

I've just deleted part of the thread where it turned to direct insults - which aren't acceptable in any shape or form on this website - and the responses to those insults.

[AndyB]

There is a phrase completely appropriate to this thread: "He who pays the piper calls the tune."

If the payer (Highways England) calls the tune (no third lane through J51), the piper (the contractor) plays according to their wishes.

If the contractor ignores HE's direction to leave the mainline through J51 as it is, they do so at their own expense, and risk having to undo it in order to match the specification they were paid to implement. Thus it ever was in Contract Law.

[wrinkly]

WRINKLY - are you playing Devil's advocate ?

No, I m telling you the truth as I understand it.

Surely you agree that the lane - drop sign and road markings need removing while the A1L2B Contractors are onsite and at their expense ?

Of course I don't. The job of the contractors is to build what they're told to build, not something different. If they think of improvements they should get them approved by the client's representative.

The signage and markings were put in place as part of the Dishforth -Leeming scheme opened in 2012 to warn drivers that the carriageway was imminently narrowing from 3 lane motorway down to two lane carriageway.

Agreed.

It was obvious that when the stretch north of J51 was widened that signage and markings should be removed as part of the A1L2B contract.

I would prefer if the design had included the removal of the signage and markings but the evidence is that DfT and/or HA/HE and/or their design consultants chose to leave the lane drop in place.

I despise efforts to weasel out of removing signage and markings.
It is a pathetic attempt to save money instead of lives .
Three lanes slamming down to two - just for the crossing of the A684 - then branching out again to three is a recipe for disaster. To compound the lunacy, the road space is already there !

Money spent on removing the lane drop would then be unable to be spent elsewhere, and it's far from obvious that it would save more, or any, lives by being spent at Leeming.

[Repmobile]

As much as almost everyone on here, we locals and no doubt everyone who uses the A1(M) in that area would like to see no lane drop northbound at J51, as it stands, until such time as the carriageway needs to be resurfaced, we ain't going to see it happen.

Not ideal, I know and it really should have been set into the plans, but it wasn't. A missed opportunity? Most likely.

Local people can write to their MP about it, lobby their councillors about it etc etc and I hope they do (as I will) but unless a really good case is presented, or even if a really good case is presented, if the money pot is empty, it won't happen.

Perhaps if Mr Meister can 'bring to the party' some really good points upon which to help build a business case on the issue then I will be happy to include them in a letter to the area (and my) MP, Mr Rishi Sunak.

Perhaps everyone who gets stuck in the probable tailbacks at Leeming northbound, should also write to their respective MP's about it.

People power etc may in the grand scheme of things bring about an earlier resolution to the issue. However I feel it will have to be a very good case to basically rip up fairly new (4 or 5 year old?) good tarmac over a considerable length and replace it with new tarmac and new lines and signage.

Not that I am a defeatist, just a realist in this day and age of the UK being, for the want of a better word, skint.

[wrinkly]

It is from one point of view an optimistic sign that Dishforth to Baldersby has just been resurfaced after only 6 years! Full width of both carriageways, I think.

[Bryn666]

It's purely a designer led cock-up to be. Someone presumably couldn't be bothered or forgot to include this in the design, then it evolved into some 'value for money' nonsense to save face.

It'll haunt Highways England, but you can't force a contractor to do something outside of the agreed drawings, otherwise you've just made them liable for all sorts of problems.

[moggsy]

Perhaps everyone who gets stuck in the probable tailbacks at Leeming northbound, should also write to their respective MP's about it.

People power etc may in the grand scheme of things bring about an earlier resolution to the issue. However I feel it will have to be a very good case to basically rip up fairly new (4 or 5 year old?) good tarmac over a considerable length and replace it with new tarmac and new lines and signage.

The issue here in reality is, it hasn't caused tailbacks of any kind in the first 4/5 weeks of being open (I use it almost every day, at all times of day). Sure it's untidy, and not ideal, and not as safe as a continued 3 lane over the junction, heck it's not even required to manage traffic flows, but at the time it was built the northern upgrade had been shelved, and as such a lane drop, which to be fair seemed like a good way to return the A1 to dual carriageway.

I also agree it should have been factored in to be changed upon the resurrection of the northern upgrade, but it wasn't, whoever fault that was is kind of immaterial, its not been factored in.

On that basis, waiting for the tarmac to be renewed now does in fairness seem to be the most sensible option.

[Conekicker]

So a bit of hydro-blasting is utterly impossible to organise and there are absolutely no other patches of black anywhere else on the network that don't have removed markings?

Extremely weak and unconvincing excuse from whoever sorted this one out TBH.

[NICK 647063]

To be fair the lane drop at J51 as stated doesn't cause any delays at the moment but I'm sure it soon will, do remember many people have avoided this whole section for a number of years but once opened as a full motorway I would guess things will change.

As we know most people these days seem to follow google maps or a real time sat nav once these update with the new motorway I would guess for many destinations it would become the quicker or preferred route over say the A19, you only need to look at wetherby to walshford that coming south had the lane drop at walshford and caused some peak delays but nothing major before the upgrade but now if 1 of the 3 lanes gets closed at anytime of day you get a large build up.

For me I just find it annoying especially when the HGV's suddenly realise they need to move over, the layout is ideal for a major junction like the A66 but not this pretty local junction.

[Andy J]

Much ado about nothing this I think really, though as someone exiting at Leeming Bar admittedly it is a little bit messy not knowing whether a slower vehicle in the D3 inside lane is going to stay in the lane for a bit so I can overtake, or move across ages before the actual turn off so I could potentially undertake.

[SteveA30]

Just regular incompetence, endemic in Britain or at least, England these days. GWR electrification, another fine mess. How hard can it be to just authorise the work, no matter whose fault it was? Such a short stretch as well.

[Mark Hewitt]

Considering they have the funds to resurface the A66 every week this should be a doddle.