Upgrading the A66 and A69

[IanRB]

There may be some spanners in the works re the A69 roundabout upgrades:

http://www.newtonandbywell.org/latest-news.php

[Euan]

There may be some spanners in the works re the A69 roundabout upgrades:

http://www.newtonandbywell.org/latest-news.php

It sounds like there is some local opposition from Newton to any junction layout changes on the A69 which would restrict access to the village from either carriageway or the road opposite. Hopefully the matter will be resolved though.

[NICK 647063]

As far as I’m concerned the A69 roundabout schemes should be cancelled, talk about a massive waste of money on a section that I have never seen congested, surely any feasibility study would rule this work out...... the real effort needs to be on the A66 a route that carries thousands of lorries daily and a vital national link and get the A64 scheme pushed on between York and Malton an actual section of road that suffers congestion.

[jackal]

There may be some spanners in the works re the A69 roundabout upgrades:

https://www.newtonandbywell.org/latest-news.php

It sounds like there is some local opposition from Newton to any junction layout changes on the A69 which would restrict access to the village from either carriageway or the road opposite. Hopefully the matter will be resolved though.

Presumably the complaint is that HE want to close the pair of reserve gaps immediately south of Newton, which will mean village traffic has to use the new GSJ to the west, adding a mile's journey for traffic to/from the east. You can see this would be a mile longer (Newton is the village in the north east corner of the plan):



I can somewhat see the point in terms of lost convenience for a hundred or so people in Newton, but that has to be balanced against the inherent risks of a priority junction on a high speed dual carriageway, not to mention the journey time savings the GSJ would provide for 25,000 users per day.

[jackal]

It seems HE were proposing to reduce the number of right turns at Newton rather than close the gap entirely:

 Access between the A69 and Newton village
Our current proposals include the closure of a number of movements of the A69 gap at
the Newton junction. This will remove the right turn out of Newton onto the A69 towards
Corbridge and Hexham to the west and the right turn into Newton from the east. The
remaining movement will be A69 eastbound turning right southbound toward
Stocksfield. These proposals to reduce the number of vehicles crossing the central
reservation gap are safety related.
Concerns have been voiced relating to these access arrangements and we are looking
very carefully at these issues. At the moment this remains work in progress.

[Stevie D]

As far as I’m concerned the A69 roundabout schemes should be cancelled, talk about a massive waste of money on a section that I have never seen congested, surely any feasibility study would rule this work out...... the real effort needs to be on the A66 a route that carries thousands of lorries daily and a vital national link and get the A64 scheme pushed on between York and Malton an actual section of road that suffers congestion.

I agree that the A64 and A66 are higher priorities, but the A69 should be pretty high up as well. The roundabouts have been future-proofed for grade separation, so they should be relatively low cost options, which is why they are being put forward. While they don't tend to suffer too much from congestion, they do have an impact on journey times – particularly Styford, which is at the bottom of a hill, and so all the trucks are grinding up from a slow start rather than flying over the floor of the valley at 56mph and then facing a gentler climb. But perhaps a more significant reason is that the two roundabouts have a really poor accident record, and so improving them should pay dividends just on a reduction in accidents alone.

[jackal]

The GSJs are priced at £15m each. This is a real steal for two-bridge roundabouts in the current environment. They may not be the most desperately needed in terms of congestion but they're an easy win in terms of safety and journey time, and a sensible incremental step towards eventual expressification of the A69.

[Altnabreac]

It seems HE were proposing to reduce the number of right turns at Newton rather than close the gap entirely:

 Access between the A69 and Newton village
Our current proposals include the closure of a number of movements of the A69 gap at
the Newton junction. This will remove the right turn out of Newton onto the A69 towards
Corbridge and Hexham to the west and the right turn into Newton from the east. The
remaining movement will be A69 eastbound turning right southbound toward
Stocksfield. These proposals to reduce the number of vehicles crossing the central
reservation gap are safety related.
Concerns have been voiced relating to these access arrangements and we are looking
very carefully at these issues. At the moment this remains work in progress.

Just do it properly and close off all central reservation gap turns. Stocksfield is perfectly accessible via the A68 without needing to leave a right turn movement on the A69.

Really what it needs is a GSJ at the B6309 junction as well and then traffic for Newton, Stocksfield and Ovington can access the villages from both sides safely and you'd have eliminated all the gaps between Newcastle and Hexham. Hopefully a GSJ for the B6309 will follow on from this scheme.

[Mark Hewitt]

It seems HE were proposing to reduce the number of right turns at Newton rather than close the gap entirely:

 Access between the A69 and Newton village
Our current proposals include the closure of a number of movements of the A69 gap at
the Newton junction. This will remove the right turn out of Newton onto the A69 towards
Corbridge and Hexham to the west and the right turn into Newton from the east. The
remaining movement will be A69 eastbound turning right southbound toward
Stocksfield. These proposals to reduce the number of vehicles crossing the central
reservation gap are safety related.
Concerns have been voiced relating to these access arrangements and we are looking
very carefully at these issues. At the moment this remains work in progress.

Can't see on street view but I know that junction and last time I was there there were big signs saying "Experimental no right turn" - don't know if they still persist.

[85CF380]

Looks like the Hexham roundabout removal is about to begin - this article dated 14Feb 2019, but the Corbridge roundabout has been put back a year.
https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/no ... 9-15826329

As noted above, I can't see why the locals don't like the limited access junction improvements that were planned for Corbridge. The HE could implement the limited access plans & leave the roundabout as it is.

[Glenn A]

It seems HE were proposing to reduce the number of right turns at Newton rather than close the gap entirely:

 Access between the A69 and Newton village
Our current proposals include the closure of a number of movements of the A69 gap at
the Newton junction. This will remove the right turn out of Newton onto the A69 towards
Corbridge and Hexham to the west and the right turn into Newton from the east. The
remaining movement will be A69 eastbound turning right southbound toward
Stocksfield. These proposals to reduce the number of vehicles crossing the central
reservation gap are safety related.
Concerns have been voiced relating to these access arrangements and we are looking
very carefully at these issues. At the moment this remains work in progress.

Just do it properly and close off all central reservation gap turns. Stocksfield is perfectly accessible via the A68 without needing to leave a right turn movement on the A69.

Really what it needs is a GSJ at the B6309 junction as well and then traffic for Newton, Stocksfield and Ovington can access the villages from both sides safely and you'd have eliminated all the gaps between Newcastle and Hexham. Hopefully a GSJ for the B6309 will follow on from this scheme.

I had a near miss with a Land Rover on this junction and always feel a bit apprehensive when approaching the at grade junctions on the A69. It would be a lot easier for both parties if they were replaced.

[tibsy]

It does seem a bit unnecessary, making the Corbridge and Hexham roundabouts GSJ's, these junctions never seem to be a problem. The problem is at the West end of the A69 where it passes through Warwick Bridge. This desperately needs a bypass, very dangerous passing right through a village inches from houses.

[KeithW]

It does seem a bit unnecessary, making the Corbridge and Hexham roundabouts GSJ's, these junctions never seem to be a problem. The problem is at the West end of the A69 where it passes through Warwick Bridge. This desperately needs a bypass, very dangerous passing right through a village inches from houses.

Playing devils advocate this round of improvements is justified on the basis of improving access to the Hexham and beyond and is the first part of a wider vision to make the A69 a strategic East West road. Traffic levels at Corbridge are around 25k and if you reduce the bottlenecks at the western end then the expectation is that traffic levels will rise. As we know from the experience of the A1 replacing roundabouts with GSJ's and closing gaps is a lot less disruptive when the traffic levels are still relatively low.

[Robert Kilcoyne]

It does seem a bit unnecessary, making the Corbridge and Hexham roundabouts GSJ's, these junctions never seem to be a problem. The problem is at the West end of the A69 where it passes through Warwick Bridge. This desperately needs a bypass, very dangerous passing right through a village inches from houses.

The solution may be to build a Junction 43A instead near Linstock, probably just with southfacing slip roads, so that traffic travelling north on the M6 towards Brampton and Hexham would then use the A689 instead of the A69 through Warwick Bridge. You could then put a weight restriction on the A69 through Warwick Bridge to prevent HGV's using that road as a through route. A new Junction 43A would also improve access to Carlisle Lake District Airport from the south. The A69 between Junction 43 and Brampton could then be downgraded to Axxxx.

[Chris5156]

It does seem a bit unnecessary, making the Corbridge and Hexham roundabouts GSJ's, these junctions never seem to be a problem. The problem is at the West end of the A69 where it passes through Warwick Bridge. This desperately needs a bypass, very dangerous passing right through a village inches from houses.

Playing devils advocate this round of improvements is justified on the basis of improving access to the Hexham and beyond and is the first part of a wider vision to make the A69 a strategic East West road. Traffic levels at Corbridge are around 25k and if you reduce the bottlenecks at the western end then the expectation is that traffic levels will rise. As we know from the experience of the A1 replacing roundabouts with GSJ's and closing gaps is a lot less disruptive when the traffic levels are still relatively low.

It's also a bit of pragmatism, or perhaps opportunism. Warwick Bridge does need a bypass, but planning a road on a new line and then getting it built takes a long time, a lot of effort and quite a lot of money, even for a modest improvement. Putting in two flyovers where space has been left for them within highway boundaries can be done (relatively speaking) quickly and cheaply. I think this is, at least in part, about a quick win because the money is ready to be spent.

[Altnabreac]

It does seem a bit unnecessary, making the Corbridge and Hexham roundabouts GSJ's, these junctions never seem to be a problem. The problem is at the West end of the A69 where it passes through Warwick Bridge. This desperately needs a bypass, very dangerous passing right through a village inches from houses.

The solution may be to build a Junction 43A instead near Linstock, probably just with southfacing slip roads, so that traffic travelling north on the M6 towards Brampton and Hexham would then use the A689 instead of the A69 through Warwick Bridge. You could then put a weight restriction on the A69 through Warwick Bridge to prevent HGV's using that road as a through route. A new Junction 43A would also improve access to Carlisle Lake District Airport from the south. The A69 between Junction 43 and Brampton could then be downgraded to Axxxx.

+1 for this. Seems a much cheaper and easier intervention that has identical benefits.

[Glenn A]

It could be easy to build junction 43A, where the B6264 crosses the M6 and is only a few hundred yards from the A689, as the A689 is likely to get busier when commercial flights start from Carlisle Airport in three months time.

[jackal]

Consultation now open:

https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... s-pennine/

[Mark Hewitt]

Consultation now open:

https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... s-pennine/

Dualling of this route was supposed to be complete in 2009, iirc!

[Achmelvic]

Dualling of this route was supposed to be complete in 2009, iirc!

Yep! I've seen dualling come and go so many times I've forgotten how many! Fingers crossed it they get it done this time.

I'm just reading through the consultation document, there's quite a few junctions marked as All Movement but apart from the Kemplay Bank roundabout at the A6 where either an underpass or flyover are proposed it's not clear what they're thinking with the last sections saying

We are not providing options for, or consulting on, the junctions along the A66 or the junctions with the M6 and A1(M) at this stage. This is because junction layouts and positions are dependent on the final chosen route.
Once the route is selected, we will complete more detailed traffic analysis that will provide the data for the design. We will then come back for a further consultation to ask you about our proposals.

Fingers crossed we don't end up with more staggered flat junctions like those near Gilling and Smallways they built when the last two sections were upgraded about a decade ago.

Going west to east the things which jump out to me include:

The MOD would loose their sports field and tank turning loop at Warcop, albeit I'm not sure how often the latter is used these days.

They're proposing a GSJ at Bowes for the A67 which makes sense. I assume the existing bridges will need widening or replacing. This would also finally see the end of the old Bowes Station which has been gradually falling down for the last few decades.

The biggest flaw I can find, one which I suspect County Durham council will flag up, is they're proposing to either block off completely or make east bound only the junction by Roker Park near the western end of the current D2 section past Greta Bridge and direct all traffic to the B6277. This might not seem much except for the following issues:
This is the HGV access to Barnard Castle from the east due to the bridge over the Tees near the castle not being strong enough and there being not junction between the A67 and A1(M) near Darlington. The road to Roker Park was widened and Abbey bridge reinforced for this very purpose a few years back. It the route of the local 79 bus service.

And there's a added on proposals to work on the M6 & A1(M) junctions, so we might get a decade or so use out of the recently expanded roundabout at Scotch Corner before they do it again.

Gone is any proposal to build a northern bypass of Penrith.