Upgrading the A66 and A69

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
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

Rob590 wrote: Tue Mar 29, 2016 12:11 Interesting that the two are being considered in tandem. How do they compare usage-wise? My perception would be that the A66 takes a lot more long distance/HGV traffic than the A69, which is more about regional journeys to/from the North East/Cumbria? Is the implication here that improvements to the A66 might be in part justified by it taking traffic off the A69?

I think the issues - Warcop and Kirby Thore on the A66 and almost all of the A69 west of Haydon Bridge - are probably fairly obvious, so I guess it's a question of resources and priority.
They are being considered in tandem as part of a strategy to include the northern trans pennine routes but the A66 is happening first for a number of reasons not least of which is with the dualling already in place it can can be completed more quickly and at lower cost than the A69 and the consultation has been completed and preferred routes selected. It is also under more pressure when it comes to strategic traffic.

You can see the study document here.
https://www.transportforthenorth.com/wp ... report.pdf

I dont see the A66 improvement taking much traffic off the A69 but I suspect it could help to ease the traffic on the M62. If you are coming up the A1/A1(M) heading for Penrith or western Scotland your options realistically are A66 or M62 and knowing what the traffic on the M62 and around Manchester can be like I tend to avoid it.

To date HE seems to have been focusing on junction improvements on the A69
https://highwaysengland.co.uk/projects/ ... rovements/

However dualling for the A69 is included in RIS2
http://maps.dft.gov.uk/road-investment-strategy-2/
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

jackal wrote: Sun May 31, 2020 18:53 Those aren't the only developments - see Northern Echo. In any case, my complaint is that the 'northern link road' only makes sense as a development route and lacks strategic value. It's a very different situation to a strategic grade-separated bypass that happens to go near some developments.
Being a resident of the North East inside the TVCA area I read the Northern Echo and the Evening Gazette. Your opinions aside the current planche of major developments are happening south of a line from the Rotary Way to the A1(M) at J58. Further development is planned to take place within the triangular area between the ECML to the east and the A1(M) to the west.

The reason that the Northern Bypass is needed is to get through traffic off the A1150 and A167. Both roads have an AADF above 25k at the Darlington end and at J59 it is still 20k which suggests its predominantly through traffic headed for the A1(M) northbound and Newton Aycliffe . Its certainly going to benefit the Skeringham housing developments indirectly by reducing traffic on the A1150 although I suspect the bulk of that traffic will be using the A68 and Whessoe Road.

I really do suggest you read the Darlington Development Plan that highlights the need for a Northern Bypass to route traffic from the A66 from Stockton to the A1(M) at Newtown Aycliffe and the following requirements
https://www.darlington.gov.uk/environment-and-planning/planning/planning-and-environmental-policy/adopted-development-plan/core-strategy/ wrote: Specific priorities are as follows:
(i) carrying out improvements at problem points on the road network, such
as the North Road /Whessoe Road junction;
(ii) protecting and promoting the urban radial routes of North Road,
Haughton Road, Woodland Road and Yarm Road as key public transport
corridors, and Coniscliffe Road, Eastern Transport Corridor and Grange
Road as secondary public transport corridors;
(iii) in the medium to long term (2016-2026), upgrade the capacity of the
A66(T) to the east and south of the main urban area, by junction
improvements and part dualling
The map of the local area indicates that the TVCA Northern Bypass Route A option passes through a zone that is NOT designated for housing development, but the area around J58 is in fact in what is considered the existing Darlington urban area and is basically fair game for housing and employment development.

See Key Diagram after page 144
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3332
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by ManomayLR »

jackal wrote: Sun May 31, 2020 15:26 This is not a price worth paying to get some substandard, quite possibly single carriageway, 'link road' that doesn't go even vaguely in the right direction to relieve existing traffic issues around Darlington. Better to dump it and start planning an actual northern bypass.
I wonder whether this would be a smart motorway... or is it too short?
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

EpicChef wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 12:39
jackal wrote: Sun May 31, 2020 15:26 This is not a price worth paying to get some substandard, quite possibly single carriageway, 'link road' that doesn't go even vaguely in the right direction to relieve existing traffic issues around Darlington. Better to dump it and start planning an actual northern bypass.
I wonder whether this would be a smart motorway... or is it too short?
The final design is underway but I expect it will be a standard D2 bypass. Remember its running between the D2 A66 and the A1(M) at J59 which has barely changed since it was opened in 1965. While a lower cost S2 option has been put in as a lower cost alternative I suspect that given the AADF on that road is already over 20k its unlikely to be selected.
Al__S
Member
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:56

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Al__S »

KeithW wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:38
I dont see the A66 improvement taking much traffic off the A69 but I suspect it could help to ease the traffic on the M62. If you are coming up the A1/A1(M) heading for Penrith or western Scotland your options realistically are A66 or M62 and knowing what the traffic on the M62 and around Manchester can be like I tend to avoid it.
I've never considered the M62- for journeys that involve the A66 that I make the alternative for me is the A14. I guess starting north of Huntingdon the M62 might be a consideration, but for me the psychology of it involving a dogleg south rules it out.

So as such I do welcome the upgrade, but wish that it also involved sorting out all the remaining at-grade junctions/crossings.

And ensuring a no/low traffic high quality cycle route across the pass. But that's just a drum I'll not stop banging on any major roads project.
User avatar
ManomayLR
Social Media Admin
Posts: 3332
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 11:47
Location: London, UK

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by ManomayLR »

With such a huge scheme in the works, they might as well clean up all the non-GSJs, build a Local Access Road where needed, free-flowing links between the A1M and M6, and then just have a smart motorway (Expressway) trans-Pennine.
Though roads may not put a smile on everyone's face, there is one road that always will: the road to home.
User avatar
Helvellyn
Member
Posts: 24664
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 22:31
Location: High Peak

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Helvellyn »

Al__S wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 14:43 And ensuring a no/low traffic high quality cycle route across the pass. But that's just a drum I'll not stop banging on any major roads project.
Most of the railway hasn't been built on and as much as I'd like to see it back it'll never happen. It's missing a few rather large bridges though. Is there the demand for such a long-distance cycle route through a largely empty area?
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

EpicChef wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 14:54 With such a huge scheme in the works, they might as well clean up all the non-GSJs, build a Local Access Road where needed, free-flowing links between the A1M and M6, and then just have a smart motorway (Expressway) trans-Pennine.
Its not a huge scheme in budgetary terms, the study came up with a cost estimate of £825 million, as I recall the new section of A14 was around £1.4 billion. The sort of costs your suggestion requires would result in it being thrown out.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

Al__S wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 14:43
KeithW wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:38
I dont see the A66 improvement taking much traffic off the A69 but I suspect it could help to ease the traffic on the M62. If you are coming up the A1/A1(M) heading for Penrith or western Scotland your options realistically are A66 or M62 and knowing what the traffic on the M62 and around Manchester can be like I tend to avoid it.
I've never considered the M62- for journeys that involve the A66 that I make the alternative for me is the A14. I guess starting north of Huntingdon the M62 might be a consideration, but for me the psychology of it involving a dogleg south rules it out.

So as such I do welcome the upgrade, but wish that it also involved sorting out all the remaining at-grade junctions/crossings.

And ensuring a no/low traffic high quality cycle route across the pass. But that's just a drum I'll not stop banging on any major roads project.
The M62 dogleg may be longer in distance but compared with the non motorway routes in the area its faster. 30 years ago the M62 was quieter and the M6 less busy while the A66 was still mostly S2. Driving up the old road at Bowes Moor was no fun at all, especially if yuu were stuck behind a line of HGV's.

As for cycling I dont think I would be inclined to tackle Bowes Moor or Staimore, I got wet and cold enough on a motorbike and that was in summer !
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16909
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Chris5156 »

KeithW wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:38However dualling for the A69 is included in RIS2
http://maps.dft.gov.uk/road-investment-strategy-2/
I don’t think RIS2 contains anything for the A69. The page you linked to shows no A69 schemes in RIS2, and it also shows no A69 schemes in the RIS3 pipeline. Based on that I’d be surprised to see any A69 dualling work starting on site earlier than 2030.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

Chris5156 wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 17:59
KeithW wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 09:38However dualling for the A69 is included in RIS2
http://maps.dft.gov.uk/road-investment-strategy-2/
I don’t think RIS2 contains anything for the A69. The page you linked to shows no A69 schemes in RIS2, and it also shows no A69 schemes in the RIS3 pipeline. Based on that I’d be surprised to see any A69 dualling work starting on site earlier than 2030.
Mea culpa I misread it
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16909
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Chris5156 »

KeithW wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 18:10Mea culpa I misread it
Easily done!
jabbaboy
Member
Posts: 360
Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2006 09:25
Location: Newcastle

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by jabbaboy »

jackal wrote: Sun May 31, 2020 15:26 ^ Indeed, the northern link road being taken forward (route A) is just comically disconnected from the surrounding road network:

Image

An actual Darlington northern bypass would... bypass northern Darlington, i.e. A66 to J58 or thereabouts. At best this is a bypass for Burdon, Beaumont Hill and Coatham Mandeville, and it's not even any good at that as it fails to remove the main flows.

If the link road doesn't make any sense in traffic terms what's it really for? To open up a huge swathe of agricultural land for box housing development: https://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/ ... arlington/ This low quality car-dependent greenfield development is the last thing anyone (except politicians and developers) needs.

This is not a price worth paying to get some substandard, quite possibly single carriageway, 'link road' that doesn't go even vaguely in the right direction to relieve existing traffic issues around Darlington. Better to dump it and start planning an actual northern bypass.
From someone who lives North of Darlington and quite often ends up at Morton Park at rush hour, it would be a god sent. There's a lot of rat runs in the area, some which are busy and this bypass would fix most of them. It's very difficult to get from there to the A1 bar using the A167 and A1150 which is jammed so end up going the away a lot of people go and that's via Great Stainton and Morton and join the A1 at J60. There's usually traffic jams where Hillhouse Lane and Bishopton Lane join and Sedburgh is jammed. Wouldn't surprise me if a few thousand use it every day and the roads not designed for it with an absolutely horrendous junction at the far end joining the A689. You also have a few who branch off towards Sedgefield and Newton Aycliffe from it.

If you renumbed the B6444, you've effectively created a bypass for J68 aswell, they're not bad roads and are unused capacity wise which will help with the rat runs on Burtree Lane and the road between Morrisons North Road under the railway line then along Brinkburn Road and along Cleveland Street and Allan Street as so https://goo.gl/maps/GCdmTukBmMipsUpM7 and effectively create a bypass for the A68 at the same time away from Darlington itself.

I never understood personally why the A66(M), A1(M) junction is south only, it's a right pain in the arse going to places like Croft and Northallerton through the centre of Darlington from the North.
User avatar
solocle
Member
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 18:27

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by solocle »

Helvellyn wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 15:02
Al__S wrote: Mon Jun 01, 2020 14:43 And ensuring a no/low traffic high quality cycle route across the pass. But that's just a drum I'll not stop banging on any major roads project.
Most of the railway hasn't been built on and as much as I'd like to see it back it'll never happen. It's missing a few rather large bridges though. Is there the demand for such a long-distance cycle route through a largely empty area?
Well, having stayed at Center Parcs Penrith, getting out of the site involved cycling on the A66. Getting in after a spin through the lakes involved turning right from the A66 (which wasn't exactly fun). Plus this is on the C2C (Coast to Coast) corridor, so it would be well fairly used.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19207
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by KeithW »

solocle wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:00 Well, having stayed at Center Parcs Penrith, getting out of the site involved cycling on the A66. Getting in after a spin through the lakes involved turning right from the A66 (which wasn't exactly fun). Plus this is on the C2C (Coast to Coast) corridor, so it would be well fairly used.
In the case of Center Parcs the easiest solution would be for them to be able to open the gates to the tracks that ran south to Wetheriggs where you can head NW to pick up the A6. I understand they have concerns about unauthorised access but Center Parcs sites always seem to me to be more like a better class of open prison than a place to go on holiday.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.63286 ... 6656?hl=en
User avatar
Helvellyn
Member
Posts: 24664
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 22:31
Location: High Peak

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Helvellyn »

solocle wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:00 Well, having stayed at Center Parcs Penrith, getting out of the site involved cycling on the A66. Getting in after a spin through the lakes involved turning right from the A66 (which wasn't exactly fun). Plus this is on the C2C (Coast to Coast) corridor, so it would be well fairly used.
You'd be doing well to get from Centre Parcs over Stainmore and back in a day!

As a C2C route the current one via Alston and Nenthead is rather more interesting, although there may well be some appeal in an offroad option even if it's not quite as interesting.
User avatar
solocle
Member
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 18:27

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by solocle »

Helvellyn wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 13:56
solocle wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:00 Well, having stayed at Center Parcs Penrith, getting out of the site involved cycling on the A66. Getting in after a spin through the lakes involved turning right from the A66 (which wasn't exactly fun). Plus this is on the C2C (Coast to Coast) corridor, so it would be well fairly used.
You'd be doing well to get from Centre Parcs over Stainmore and back in a day!

As a C2C route the current one via Alston and Nenthead is rather more interesting, although there may well be some appeal in an offroad option even if it's not quite as interesting.
The one I did was getting dropped off at Eskdale Green, by my parents. Then I had the delights of Hardknott, Wrynose, and The Struggle (back road up Kirkstone)!

Coming down off Stainmore seems like one of the few places where I'd enjoy riding on the A66, since the descent would probably be 40+ mph.
User avatar
Helvellyn
Member
Posts: 24664
Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 22:31
Location: High Peak

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Helvellyn »

solocle wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 14:42
Helvellyn wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 13:56
solocle wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:00 Well, having stayed at Center Parcs Penrith, getting out of the site involved cycling on the A66. Getting in after a spin through the lakes involved turning right from the A66 (which wasn't exactly fun). Plus this is on the C2C (Coast to Coast) corridor, so it would be well fairly used.
You'd be doing well to get from Centre Parcs over Stainmore and back in a day!

As a C2C route the current one via Alston and Nenthead is rather more interesting, although there may well be some appeal in an offroad option even if it's not quite as interesting.
The one I did was getting dropped off at Eskdale Green, by my parents. Then I had the delights of Hardknott, Wrynose, and The Struggle (back road up Kirkstone)!

Coming down off Stainmore seems like one of the few places where I'd enjoy riding on the A66, since the descent would probably be 40+ mph.
Wouldn't fancy being on a D2 with HGVs on a bike even at 40 mph.

I semi-regularly went that way (driving) in the 90s, the frequent fog coupled with HGVs with very poor rear lighting was "fun" (that's one aspect of lighting that's definitely improved).
User avatar
solocle
Member
Posts: 806
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 18:27

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by solocle »

Helvellyn wrote: Wed Jun 03, 2020 13:24
solocle wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 14:42
Helvellyn wrote: Tue Jun 02, 2020 13:56
You'd be doing well to get from Centre Parcs over Stainmore and back in a day!

As a C2C route the current one via Alston and Nenthead is rather more interesting, although there may well be some appeal in an offroad option even if it's not quite as interesting.
The one I did was getting dropped off at Eskdale Green, by my parents. Then I had the delights of Hardknott, Wrynose, and The Struggle (back road up Kirkstone)!

Coming down off Stainmore seems like one of the few places where I'd enjoy riding on the A66, since the descent would probably be 40+ mph.
Wouldn't fancy being on a D2 with HGVs on a bike even at 40 mph.

I semi-regularly went that way (driving) in the 90s, the frequent fog coupled with HGVs with very poor rear lighting was "fun" (that's one aspect of lighting that's definitely improved).
Well, I dare say that I'd catch the draft of the first one passing... I did that on the A40 where it's part of the Oxford Ring Road. NSL DC, but I managed to hold the slipstream of an accelerating lorry to 48 mph! And, once keeping up with an HGV, you're part of the flow of traffic.

Certainly, there'd be a world of difference between riding on a DC at 40+ mph, and 20 mph.
Glenn A
Member
Posts: 9776
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2005 19:31
Location: Cumbria

Re: Upgrading the A66 and A69

Post by Glenn A »

With all this talk of the A66, looks like little is to be done with the A69, apart from the road going under the Bridge End roundabout and improvements to junctions to the west of Hexham. I often wonder if there is a plan to re route it along the A689 from Brampton to Greymoorhill and discourage traffic from using the old A69.
Post Reply