A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon "news"

[roadtester]

Another aspect in which it is very deficient: due to being D2AP, elephant racing is very common.

Yes - I can see a day when most of the is three-laned in each direction, but via a series of further piecemeal improvements rather than some big overall master plan.

[Big L]

Another aspect in which it is very deficient: due to being D2AP, elephant racing is very common.

Yes - I can see a day when most of the is three-laned in each direction, but via a series of further piecemeal improvements rather than some big overall master plan.

3-way elephant racing then! (I believe lorries are allowed in lane 3 of a 3 lane noon motorway dual carriageway.)

[A9NWIL]

Given that the eastbound Catthorpe signs state 'M6 (A14)', could there be a plot to extend the M6 along the A14 and therefore be the designation of the current scheme?

I doubt it, there is a 40 mile gap of all purpose road between Catthorpe and Brampton Hut where the A14(M) will begin and then another 70 miles of A14 from Girton to Felixstowe and HE have already stated the motorway section will not include the Cambridge Northern Bypass. The signs are as they are because the M6 ends east of junction 19 of the M1

It doesn't, though. The M6 goes over Catthorpe Viaduct and terminates by merging into the M1. The road from the M6 to the A14 is a slip road. (You can confirm this by looking at the letters on the Driver Location Signs, which clearly differentiate slip roads from mainlines.)

Presumably this is because the M6 always used to terminate on the M1, and it would have caused a lot of extra paperwork for no benefit to change that.

So you dont think they just counted those bits as M6 slip roads? It also says M6 on the chopsicks signs, after the diverge coming from the A14. M1 is the slip to the left and M6 is the slip to the right officially. The chopstick signs are after the diverge in each case.

[KeithW]

It doesn't, though. The M6 goes over Catthorpe Viaduct and terminates by merging into the M1. The road from the M6 to the A14 is a slip road. (You can confirm this by looking at the letters on the Driver Location Signs, which clearly differentiate slip roads from mainlines.)

Presumably this is because the M6 always used to terminate on the M1, and it would have caused a lot of extra paperwork for no benefit to change that.

I can well believe Driver Location Signs are unchanged and there was indeed no need to change that As you say the original junction was a simple merge onto the M1. I can easily believe that both the M1 slip and the mainline under the M1 carry the designation M6. That is not unique, the A11/M11 junction at Stump Cross is like that with the motorway stub being designated as M11. Indeed the temporary terminus of the M11 at Stump Cross was a roundabout where J9A is today. I can remember coming off there and taking what is now the A1301 to Cambridge with the roadworks for the M11/Cambridge Western Bypass clearly apparent and wishing they would finish the darned thing

[ais523]

So you dont think they just counted those bits as M6 slip roads? It also says M6 on the chopsicks signs, after the diverge coming from the A14. M1 is the slip to the left and M6 is the slip to the right officially. The chopstick signs are after the diverge in each case.

It's usual for chopsticks signs on slip roads to specify the number of the motorway they lead to (this is universal at pretty much every motorway junction). That doesn't mean that the slip roads are part of the motorway; the standard is, in each direction, to sign the slip road as part of the road it leads to.

Catthorpe Interchange is weird in this respect because the eastbound M6→A14 sliproad is signed as part of the M6, despite all the usual signing logic implying that it should be signed A14 even before the end-of-motorway sign (just like at typical two-bridge roundabout junctions, the slip road going to the roundabout will be signed with the name of the all-purpose road even though it's under motorway regulations, and given a slip road designation on the driver location signs).

The westbound signage, signing the westbound A14→M6 sliproad as leading to the M6, is correct.

[alans]

Just read this page by Charles Wilson Engineers on A14 Facebook

https://www.cwplant.co.uk/a14-upgrade-c ... vM5tMvXxeE

They mention a 17 mile bypass Barr Hill to Girton plus the 21 mile new stretch of A14

Also the use of 35,000 million cubic metres of concrete used on the project

Surely a few typos somewhere

[KeithW]

Yes - I can see a day when most of the is three-laned in each direction, but via a series of further piecemeal improvements rather than some big overall master plan.

In general I agree but there are some sections which will require more than ad hoc widening, the Nene viaduct being the most obvious example and they really need to give some urgency to closing the gaps and flat junctions between Brampton and Thrapston

[RickyB_uk]

Just read this page by Charles Wilson Engineers on A14 Facebook

https://www.cwplant.co.uk/a14-upgrade-c ... vM5tMvXxeE

They mention a 17 mile bypass Barr Hill to Girton plus the 21 mile new stretch of A14

Also the use of 35,000 million cubic metres of concrete used on the project

Surely a few typos somewhere

If the length of the scheme is 21 miles, then that's about 34 km, or 34,000 metres.
So that's just over a million cubic metres of concrete per metre length of roadway. How deep are those foundations?!
I didn't realise they needed to try and anchor the road to the Earth's mantle, rather than just bedrock.

[leenewton]

Just read this page by Charles Wilson Engineers on A14 Facebook

https://www.cwplant.co.uk/a14-upgrade-c ... vM5tMvXxeE

They mention a 17 mile bypass Barr Hill to Girton plus the 21 mile new stretch of A14

Also the use of 35,000 million cubic metres of concrete used on the project

Surely a few typos somewhere

If the length of the scheme is 21 miles, then that's about 34 km, or 34,000 metres.
So that's just over a million cubic metres of concrete per metre length of roadway. How deep are those foundations?!
I didn't realise they needed to try and anchor the road to the Earth's mantle, rather than just bedrock.

Indeed it would seem to be another typo. I suspect the figure they've used is the same as from here "35,000m³ of concrete has been poured to make bridge parts and road foundations". However I'm guessing someone has somehow taken the m to mean millions .

[camflyer]

New calls to make the Girton junction an all-ways interchange.

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/ ... n-9069596/

You would have thought that this should have been done as part of the A14 works.

[Al__S]

Yes, Girton probably should have been made all-ways (or at least four ways, with the A1307 not actually joining the A14(M) until Bar Hill) and fitting additional slip roads will become even harder

[Berk]

Yes, Girton probably should have been made all-ways (or at least four ways, with the A1307 not actually joining the A14(M) until Bar Hill) and fitting additional slip roads will become even harder

It does join at Dry Drayton - and then of course switches sides. When I raised it before, people wondered what I was talking about.

[KeithW]

New calls to make the Girton junction an all-ways interchange.

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/ ... n-9069596/

You would have thought that this should have been done as part of the A14 works.

The trick is doing it without bringing the whole of Cambridgeshire to a halt. I dont see any way of doing it without demolishing it and starting again.

I dont really see how the restrictions claimed in this article can be accurate

1) While the M11 is accessible from the A14 westbound via the interchange, there is no eastbound access to it from the A14 or the A428.
2) Drivers heading east along the A428 have to travel down the A1303 Madingley Road, which gets heavily congested in rush hours, to access the motorway."

The first claim seems to have only a minor basis in fact. With the current layout getting on to the M11 from the A14 eastbound involves staying on the mainline while the A14 TOTSO's onto the Cambridge Northern Bypass on a slip which is shared with the Huntingdon road. With the new layout there clearly is an eastbound link road that carries the A14 onto the Cambridge Northern Bypass and this is no longer shared with the Huntingdon Road which uses the A1307 access road. As before staying on the mainline leaves you on the M11 southbound.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.u ... final_.pdf

Now its quite true you cannot head northbound up the stub of the M11 between Girton and J10 but why would you want to ? There is nothing there to access that cannot be reached from the new Bar Hill junction via the A1307 local access road.

It is true that there is no eastbound link from the A428 to the M11 but that in my humble opinion should be provided via a separate link road running from the A428 Madingley Road junction to the M11 at a rebuilt J13 or J12 rather than adding further complication the already messy Girton interchange. I say rebuilt because neither of these junctions is fit for purpose. J13 is particularly bad as it lacks any north facing slips and the light controlled tee junction off the M11 northbound regularly causes congestion back to J12. These problems have little to do with the new A14 which HE were asked to deliver and at present the A428 is predominantly a commuter road carrying local traffic from St Neots, Papworth, Cambourne and Caldecote into Cambridge. In any event I suspect this is something that will need to be evaluated as part of the Oxford Cambridge Expressway scheme. In the short term widening the Madingley Road from Madingley Mulch to M11 J13 will need to be done anyway but that is the responsibility of Cambridge County Council as the dominant traffic movement from the A428 is into the centre of Cambridge and to the Park and Ride, the congestion will get much worse as people move onto the new University West development at Madingley where no infrastructure development has been made beyond light controlled junctions onto the overloaded Huntingdon and Madingley roads.

Last but not least calling for basic design changes when the bulldozers are already on the ground reeks of point scoring rather than constructive engagement.

[c2R]

New calls to make the Girton junction an all-ways interchange.

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/ ... n-9069596/

You would have thought that this should have been done as part of the A14 works.

Why? It would have been scope creep to provide local accesses that are hitherto unavailable - the missing movements aren't strategic in nature and therefore it shouldn't be done as part of the A14 works - these would have an unforeseen effect on local traffic movements and would be best considered once the new strategic flows are embedded.

There are plans to provid ethese local movements and more park and ride accesses, but this needs to be funded by Cambridgeshire and not out of the strategic budget.

[Mattptb]

Once the current works around the Girton interchange have been finished and the new a14 westbound movement is complete. Couldn’t the land where the existing A14(w) west loop currently sits be used for a slip road to go from the M11 northbound to the westbound A428. Land take would be minimal and would probably be quite cheap to build and is the missing movement that is probably most needed as it would relieve the current Madingley road junction on the M11.
Building a slip road off the A428 eastbound to either join the upgraded A14 or to simply serve the new park and ride wouldn’t be too difficult either. I just wouldn’t be surprised if a scheme like this got quickly pushed through (even as part of the broader A428 to Black cat scheme).

[KeithW]

Once the current works around the Girton interchange have been finished and the new a14 westbound movement is complete. Couldn’t the land where the existing A14(w) west loop currently sits be used for a slip road to go from the M11 northbound to the westbound A428. Land take would be minimal and would probably be quite cheap to build and is the missing movement that is probably most needed as it would relieve the current Madingley road junction on the M11.
Building a slip road off the A428 eastbound to either join the upgraded A14 or to simply serve the new park and ride wouldn’t be too difficult either. I just wouldn’t be surprised if a scheme like this got quickly pushed through (even as part of the broader A428 to Black cat scheme).

The west loop is earmarked for emergency and maintenance use and in any case only gets you onto the M11 Northbound so to go south you would have to turn at the Bar Hill junction. It would also retain the rather nasty short weaving section between the loops.

I already posted a suggestion for an A428 link to J12 and in all honesty they should have added the extra movements at J13 when the motorway was built as it was always a pain in the butt.

Coming down to the A14/ M11 from Huntingdon if you want to get on to the Madingley Road you have to go past J13 to J12 turn back onto the M11 northbound and only then can you get onto the Madingley Road for the park and ride. The trouble is all the area to the north and west of the Park and Ride is going to be taken up by what is effectively a new town. Google maps only shows a ghostly outline but Sabre Maps shows the new reality and I dont think there is a cat in hells chance of running a link through there to the Park and Ride /J13 . They have already started building on the land as the GSV shows. Oddly GSV is more up to date than either Google maps or Google Satellite view.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.21380 ... 8192?hl=en

Essentially the triangle between the Huntingdon Road, M11 and Madingley Road is going to be developed as a new town (Eddington) complete with homes, offices, schools supermarket etc. All approved by the same people complaining about the lack of a link road.
https://eddington-cambridge.co.uk/about ... nd-history

[A9NWIL]

Once the current works around the Girton interchange have been finished and the new a14 westbound movement is complete. Couldn’t the land where the existing A14(w) west loop currently sits be used for a slip road to go from the M11 northbound to the westbound A428. Land take would be minimal and would probably be quite cheap to build and is the missing movement that is probably most needed as it would relieve the current Madingley road junction on the M11.
Building a slip road off the A428 eastbound to either join the upgraded A14 or to simply serve the new park and ride wouldn’t be too difficult either. I just wouldn’t be surprised if a scheme like this got quickly pushed through (even as part of the broader A428 to Black cat scheme).

The west loop is earmarked for emergency and maintenance use and in any case only gets you onto the M11 Northbound so to go south you would have to turn at the Bar Hill junction. It would also retain the rather nasty short weaving section between the loops.

I already posted a suggestion for an A428 link to J12 and in all honesty they should have added the extra movements at J13 when the motorway was built as it was always a pain in the butt.

Coming down to the A14/ M11 from Huntingdon if you want to get on to the Madingley Road you have to go past J13 to J12 turn back onto the M11 northbound and only then can you get onto the Madingley Road for the park and ride. The trouble is all the area to the north and west of the Park and Ride is going to be taken up by what is effectively a new town. Google maps only shows a ghostly outline but Sabre Maps shows the new reality and I dont think there is a cat in hells chance of running a link through there to the Park and Ride /J13 . They have already started building on the land as the GSV shows. Oddly GSV is more up to date than either Google maps or Google Satellite view.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.21380 ... 8192?hl=en

Essentially the triangle between the Huntingdon Road, M11 and Madingley Road is going to be developed as a new town (Eddington) complete with homes, offices, schools supermarket etc. All approved by the same people complaining about the lack of a link road.
https://eddington-cambridge.co.uk/about ... nd-history

I can see what Mattptb means but KeithW your right the loop cant be used as its a loop and not a left turn slip road. Perhaps the left turn slip could hug the edge of the loop as it makes its way from the M11 NB to A428 WB, so as to minimise land take?

[KeithW]

I can see what Mattptb means but KeithW your right the loop cant be used as its a loop and not a left turn slip road. Perhaps the left turn slip could hug the edge of the loop as it makes its way from the M11 NB to A428 WB, so as to minimise land take?

It could but in fact if you leave the M11 at J13 and take the A1303 to the A428 you already have that movement and unless there has been an accident that road flows freely even at peak. I know as it was my usual route home

The pain was on the morning rush when the queue from the lights controlling the M11 J13 off slip could tail all the way back up to the A428 at Madingley Mulch. I could spend more time covering a mile there than it took me to travel the 19 miles I had already travelled. This is why I keep banging on about the inadequacy of J13.

In 1980 when It was opened you couldnt even turn right into Cambridge from the M11 northbound as the only movement was westbound towards Madingley, the slip had to be altered and traffic lights installed to allow that. As built it was already hemmed in to the south by the British Antarctic survey and the Design Centre (now AVEVA) and they didnt even bother building slips to the north of the junction. Now the area has been massively developed its pathetic.

But wait a while as its going to get worse , now the precedent has been set the next development target will east of the M11 and north of the A603 Barton Road which would remove any chance of a link road to J12. Boy am I glad I retired and moved back to North Yorkshire in 2016

[David349]

If it were me, there's plenty of chance for creative solutions without destruction of property - the main issue would be to separate local and strategic traffic as discussed earlier.

I would start by converting junction 12 into a reasonably standard roundabout interchange with the A603 - there would not be any interaction with Granchester/Coton road, which continue to be connected by a bridge or underpass - this would reduce cut through traffic in both Coton and Granchester. The northbound on/off slips would run parallel to the M11 as a collector distributor - there could also be direct access to these collectors from the M11, bypassing junction 12.

Junction 13 would be also converted into a roundabout - the collector/distributor slip roads connecting to the roundabout with the M11 passing underneath. This would still enable Science Park traffic easy access to/from the M11. A new road would continue north, connecting to the roundabout on the new Fen Drayton-Hungtindon link road.

Finally the Girton interchange would be upgraded in whatever manner is deemed most appropriate to make it full access between the A14, A428 and M11 (I haven't got quite that far but additional loops and/or stack ramps seem appropriate!).

It's difficult to draw this in map form but it all makes sense in my head. Basically I'm envisaging something similar to the work that has already been done on the A14 upgrade with a local access road built next to the main route. Cambridge's roads typically have only one route only for both local and strategic traffic, by separating these flows resilience for the Motorway network is improved while enabling local traffic to keep flowing even when there's heavy traffic on the Motorway. It's very frustrating that movements for non-local traffic involves using routes like Madingley Road, and I'm hopeful one day proper links will be built, even if it isn't priority right now!

[KeithW]

If it were me, there's plenty of chance for creative solutions without destruction of property - the main issue would be to separate local and strategic traffic as discussed earlier.

I would start by converting junction 12 into a reasonably standard roundabout interchange with the A603 - there would not be any interaction with Granchester/Coton road, which continue to be connected by a bridge or underpass - this would reduce cut through traffic in both Coton and Granchester. The northbound on/off slips would run parallel to the M11 as a collector distributor - there could also be direct access to these collectors from the M11, bypassing junction 12.

Junction 13 would be also converted into a roundabout - the collector/distributor slip roads connecting to the roundabout with the M11 passing underneath. This would still enable Science Park traffic easy access to/from the M11. A new road would continue north, connecting to the roundabout on the new Fen Drayton-Hungtindon link road.

Finally the Girton interchange would be upgraded in whatever manner is deemed most appropriate to make it full access between the A14, A428 and M11 (I haven't got quite that far but additional loops and/or stack ramps seem appropriate!).

It's difficult to draw this in map form but it all makes sense in my head. Basically I'm envisaging something similar to the work that has already been done on the A14 upgrade with a local access road built next to the main route. Cambridge's roads typically have only one route only for both local and strategic traffic, by separating these flows resilience for the Motorway network is improved while enabling local traffic to keep flowing even when there's heavy traffic on the Motorway. It's very frustrating that movements for non-local traffic involves using routes like Madingley Road, and I'm hopeful one day proper links will be built, even if it isn't priority right now!

As I said at the start the trick is doing this without bringing traffic to a halt and there is a LOT of it around Cambridge. Projections show traffic flows along the A14 exceeding 100k very soon.

To take the Madingley Road first. The reality is that most of the the traffic coming along it from the A428 is local traffic heading for West Cambridge and the park and ride while the traffic on the A428/A14 is heading for Orchard Park/Histon, The Science Park and Milton Park and Ride, a major reason for the dualling as far as Caxton Gibbet was to make it able to handle the increasing levels of commuter traffic. The desirability of separating this from strategic traffic is precisely why I would not add those movements at Girton.

Ideally we would separate that traffic from the Cambridge Northern Bypass and send it down Kings Hedges Road from the A428. One of the major improvements of the new A14 alignment is that it does that separate strategic traffic with local traffic using the A1307. If you drive down the Northern Bypass at peak the fall off in traffic levels east of the A10 is immediately obvious.

I dont think you can do anything at this point with the Girton interchange as there are just too many things happening to have a clear idea of what will happen. In addition to the Oxford Cambridge Expressway coming down the upgraded A428 I suspect that the Cambridge Northern Bypass will need to be widened to D3 all the way to the A14/A11 merge just to handle growth and if the A10 is dualled all bets are off. My feeling is that HE wont look at any major changes at Girton for at least a decade, if nothing else it will allow a better analysis of future needs as there definitely will be changes to local traffic patterns.


J12 is really an angled dumbbell and I am not sure the traffic flows would fit well with a standard roundabout interchange but as you can tell I am no expert. What happens with traffic from the A603 at peak is you have 4 major flows one of which is not immediately obvious

1) From the A603 onto the M11 northbound for the Madingley Road/Park and Ride
2) From the A603 straight down the Barton road into Cambridge
3) Coming off the M11 southbound negotiating both roundabouts and the heading back up the M11 to come off at J13 as there is no southbound exit for A14/M11 traffic.
4) From the A603 eastbound onto the M11 southbound.

The Coton/Granchester road is a bit of a red herring as traffic along it is very light.

Given my suspicion that what happened with infill development at J13 is likely to happen at J12 east of the M11 I think that a design that could give direct access from the M11 into such a development would be worth looking at as an option but in the short term I would not do much. If I were going to do anything it would be to address the safety aspects on the north eastern roundabout. As with all large roundabouts traffic speed can be very high and that leaves non motorised traffic, especially cyclists very vulnerable. There have been some nasty incidents involving cyclists, motorcyclists and moped riders over the years.

As for J13 I am not convinced that once the Eddington development is finished there will be enough space make it a roundabout interchange and I guarantee that after 5 years of continuous roadworks there nobody wants to see any more for a while