A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon "news"

[Herned]

How is that logical when the only alternative route between the A14 and A10 and the A428 would be by going through the centre of Cambridge? It will likely need around five miles of new road for non-motorway traffic before that section can be reclassified.

Why would that be an issue though? Non-motorway traffic wanting to go e.g. Foxton-Milton doesn't get a non-motorway road, it has to go through the middle of Cambridge. Slightly different as this involves a change of status of an existing road, of course. The number of journeys every day wishing to travel A428-A10 and not being allowed on a motorway must be minute though, if such demand exists at all.

[roadtester]

How is that logical when the only alternative route between the A14 and A10 and the A428 would be by going through the centre of Cambridge? It will likely need around five miles of new road for non-motorway traffic before that section can be reclassified.

But what is the non-motorway traffic? I've lived in the area for twenty years and I don't really recall seeing anything that wouldn't qualify to use a motorway on it.

If a couple of cyclists who might otherwise be foolhardy enough to use it have to go through Cambridge instead, so what?

And even if an expensive LAR had to be built, that would not in itself render the idea illogical. Expensive, yes, impractical, perhaps, but not illogical.

[Berk]

It could also remove a not inconsiderable number of local users, whose main need to use the A14 is as a quick hop to J33 to catch the A10 (and vice-versa).

I’ll repeat, I used to be flabbergasted by how many stories I heard of Cambridgeshire people moaning about how bad the A14 was, even though they still used it. I assumed they could use other, local routes - until I realised there weren’t any.

Removing cross-Cambridgeshire traffic will make life a lot easier for trunk traffic. So I would say that is a scheme with potential. If you managed to provide access to the Science Park via an LAR and closed the A14 junction (so Science Park users had to use the LAR instead), again the A14 would drastically improve.

That’s what’s being done for Huntingdon, so I’m a little surprised the scope of this project hasn’t included the Science Park as well.

[KeithW]

How is that logical when the only alternative route between the A14 and A10 and the A428 would be by going through the centre of Cambridge? It will likely need around five miles of new road for non-motorway traffic before that section can be reclassified.

That's how it works with a large number of cities. If you are not able to use the A1(M) Doncaster bypass you go though the centre of Doncaster. The same applies at Winchester with the M3. For cyclists, mopeds, users of mobility scooters etc the Cambridge ring road is a far less lethal option than the current A14 which cyclists are technically able to use but certifiable if they do and of course the Cambridge Western Bypass is already motorway.

The A428 is an interesting case, from the A14 to Cambourne it is pretty much built to motorway standard and even has a LAR (the old St Neots Road). When it is extended to the A421 that could be reclassified as a limited access road.

[KeithW]

How is that logical when the only alternative route between the A14 and A10 and the A428 would be by going through the centre of Cambridge? It will likely need around five miles of new road for non-motorway traffic before that section can be reclassified.

Why would that be an issue though? Non-motorway traffic wanting to go e.g. Foxton-Milton doesn't get a non-motorway road, it has to go through the middle of Cambridge. Slightly different as this involves a change of status of an existing road, of course. The number of journeys every day wishing to travel A428-A10 and not being allowed on a motorway must be minute though, if such demand exists at all.

In the case of the A10 at Milton there is a bridge over the A14 that was built especially for the use of cyclists and pedestrians which will take them down the Milton Road, round the Ring Road to the Madingley road and west onto the old St Neots Road. Rather a more attractive option than the A14/A428. In fact having used the A14/A428 almost every day between 1996 and 2016 I don't believe I ever saw a single cyclist and just one terrified moped rider who got off just as soon as he could at Madingley.

[someone]

But what is the non-motorway traffic? I've lived in the area for twenty years and I don't really recall seeing anything that wouldn't qualify to use a motorway on it.

And even if an expensive LAR had to be built, that would not in itself render the idea illogical. Expensive, yes, impractical, perhaps, but not illogical.

I was responding to you saying it would be logical to reclassify it at the same time as the upgraded section north of Girton (with a new local access road), not that is would be illogical for it to ever become a motorway.

But if there is no problem with slow traffic, then what is the logical reason for reclassifying it? What problem will it solve or benefit will it realize?

That's how it works with a large number of cities. If you are not able to use the A1(M) Doncaster bypass you go though the centre of Doncaster. The same applies at Winchester with the M3.

There is a difference between building a new special road that provides some road users with a shortcut and with breaking an existing link for other road users.

And you can avoid the centre of Winchester. Where the A31 ends at M3 J10, you can take Bull Drove off the western dumbbell. That takes you to the B3335, which meets the A3090 at M3 J11. It skirts the southern bit of the city, but an alternative route does not have to be a parallel local access road if there is nothing to access. It is not an unreasonable detour and avoids adding to a congested city centre.

We had this discussion a few pages back about the other part of the new proposal being to reclassify the A1 north of Brampton, despite no local access road built between Brampton interchange where non-motorway traffic will have to leave, and Brampton Hut. There is some disagreement over whether the planning inspector will regard the B1514 and reclassified A141 as an acceptable route from the A1 to the new access road being built between the new A14/A141 junction and Alconbury.

[c2R]

How is that logical when the only alternative route between the A14 and A10 and the A428 would be by going through the centre of Cambridge? It will likely need around five miles of new road for non-motorway traffic before that section can be reclassified.

It wouldn't affect a massive number of users and the road is not an upgrade of an existing historic right of way, it was entirely new build which for some reason someone decided would be best as all purpose. There are no property or field accesses. Consequently on this section I've only ever seen learner drivers and the odd cyclist on a suicide mission - and actually I don't see anything illogical about them having to use a shorter route through Cambridge centre itself, or an alternative route either using class III and unclassified lanes to the north of Cambridge or using residential and commercial frontaged routes through the north of Cambridge.

[someone]

It wouldn't affect a massive number of users and the road is not an upgrade of an existing historic right of way, it was entirely new build which for some reason someone decided would be best as all purpose. There are no property or field accesses. Consequently on this section I've only ever seen learner drivers and the odd cyclist on a suicide mission - and actually I don't see anything illogical about them having to use a shorter route through Cambridge centre itself, or an alternative route either using class III and unclassified lanes to the north of Cambridge or using residential and commercial frontaged routes through the north of Cambridge.

Who said it was an historic right of way? And what route do you know of through the city centre that is shorter? You have to practically reach the ring road to get between the B1049 and A1307 that there is no shortcut by using residential streets to do so. And going via other roads to the north is almost twice as long.

Not that anyone has said that either is illogical either. I have only questioned the idea that if the A14 north of Girton is upgraded to a motorway that it is logical that that section should also be upgrade to a motorway. It does not logically follow at all. If the rest of the A14 were a motorway then it would be logical to include that section. But it does not follow that it should be just because a small section with an accompanying local access road is to become one.

But I am still bewildered by everyone wanting to point out that there is no problem to solve by upgrading that section of A14 to a motorway as an argument in favour of it! No matter how few would be disadvantaged, there is no reason for them to be so at all if it will not benefit other users on the road.

[KeithW]

There is a difference between building a new special road that provides some road users with a shortcut and with breaking an existing link for other road users.

And you can avoid the centre of Winchester. Where the A31 ends at M3 J10, you can take Bull Drove off the western dumbbell. That takes you to the B3335, which meets the A3090 at M3 J11. It skirts the southern bit of the city, but an alternative route does not have to be a parallel local access road if there is nothing to access. It is not an unreasonable detour and avoids adding to a congested city centre.

We had this discussion a few pages back about the other part of the new proposal being to reclassify the A1 north of Brampton, despite no local access road built between Brampton interchange where non-motorway traffic will have to leave, and Brampton Hut. There is some disagreement over whether the planning inspector will regard the B1514 and reclassified A141 as an acceptable route from the A1 to the new access road being built between the new A14/A141 junction and Alconbury.

You can indeed take Bull Drove from the A31 - now try it on the A34.

The A14 is NOT a realistic link for other road users. Are you seriously suggesting cyclists, equestrians and pedestrians should proceed up the A14 from the from the A10 to the Girton Intechange and take the A428 to Caxton Gibbet ? The reality is that the cycle bridge across the A14 was built to give them an alternative route. The area around Brampton is entirely different to that of Cambridge where there are MANY suitable routes which are not significantly longer. Don't want to go through Cambridge centre - fine take Gilbert Road , go round the back of the Coop and take Oxford Road and Storeys Way to the Madingley Road and up the old St Neots Road - simples !

We are not required to protect routes when reasonable alternates exist especially when there is no evidence of use of the A14/A428 by non motorway traffic. The main concern by cycling groups, equestrians and hikers was that the new A14 be provided with alternate routes for REAL traffic flows like Oakington to Dry Drayton and Boxworth.

[c2R]

But I am still bewildered by everyone wanting to point out that there is no problem to solve by upgrading that section of A14 to a motorway as an argument in favour of it! No matter how few would be disadvantaged, there is no reason for them to be so at all if it will not benefit other users on the road.

My argument is one of safety. Occasionally a cyclist or an invalid carriage, or a learner driver, or a tractor can at the moment use the existing A14. While I've not seen a tractor on this stretch (unlike further east or on the A1), I've heard of invalid carriages and seen cyclists and learners on it - the road really isn't suitable for cyclists and other NMUs, particularly with the high speed merges that occur at Girton.

[ManomayLR]

On the wiki there are different phases of Expressway.

Phase 3 is Smart road technology and a likely upgrade to a smart motorway. Phase 4 is upgrading of the entire dual carriageway to motorway.

So a Phase 3 expy should have an AxM number and Phase 4 expys should have an Mx number.

[Ruperts Trooper]

But I am still bewildered by everyone wanting to point out that there is no problem to solve by upgrading that section of A14 to a motorway as an argument in favour of it! No matter how few would be disadvantaged, there is no reason for them to be so at all if it will not benefit other users on the road.

My argument is one of safety. Occasionally a cyclist or an invalid carriage, or a learner driver, or a tractor can at the moment use the existing A14. While I've not seen a tractor on this stretch (unlike further east or on the A1), I've heard of invalid carriages and seen cyclists and learners on it - the road really isn't suitable for cyclists and other NMUs, particularly with the high speed merges that occur at Girton.

Invalid carriages were banned from use on all UK roads in 2003 - I took my son on the A14 as a learner, specifically to show him motorway-like conditions.

[trickstat]

But I am still bewildered by everyone wanting to point out that there is no problem to solve by upgrading that section of A14 to a motorway as an argument in favour of it! No matter how few would be disadvantaged, there is no reason for them to be so at all if it will not benefit other users on the road.

My argument is one of safety. Occasionally a cyclist or an invalid carriage, or a learner driver, or a tractor can at the moment use the existing A14. While I've not seen a tractor on this stretch (unlike further east or on the A1), I've heard of invalid carriages and seen cyclists and learners on it - the road really isn't suitable for cyclists and other NMUs, particularly with the high speed merges that occur at Girton.

Invalid carriages were banned from use on all UK roads in 2003 - I took my son on the A14 as a learner, specifically to show him motorway-like conditions.

This is a sensible thing to do. I remember driving with my parents in their car as a learner from Stevenage to Cheshunt and back to use the dual-carriageway A10 for the same reason. Having previously only driven in Stevenage, the traffic lights in Cheshunt were probably as daunting as joining the A10 from a slip road!

[Alderpoint]

Making it motorway will no longer stop all learner drivers using it.

[c2R]

Yes but they will have to be being taught in a dual control car...

[roadtester]

This is the weekend the new Bar Hill bridge is being manoeuvred into position.

https://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/news/c ... e-15152720

There is a full closure for the whole weekend.

[robstel]

"This diversion will be approximately less than three miles more than the normal route."

[KeithW]

"This diversion will be approximately less than three miles more than the normal route."

It will also be down an S2 road which will be no fun for anyone, ironically that road (the A1198) was the A14 until the 1980's.
Looking at Google Maps with Traffic turned on it seems to be heavily congested from north of Papworth to Caxton Gibbet
The A428 westbound from Cambourne to Caxton Gibbet is also very slow. The eastbound S2 section from St Neots to Caxton Gibbet looks to have a 3 mile long queue at this point with some traffic diverting along local roads such as the B1046 and B1040

[DJ Mike]

Drove by over the old Bar Hill bridge last night - they already had both bridges up on their abutments, albeit looking like they were finishing everything off. I assume some point today they finish and commence removing all the temporary surface they've had to lay to move them in the first place.

[NICK 647063]

Was a right problem here yesterday afternoon, the A1198 diversion route for the A14 was closed by an accident, which then meant highways had to close the A14 east at both Alconbury and Brampton hut with traffic having to go further down the A1 and take the A428, clearly shows the issues with diverting that amount of traffic down an S2 road.