M42 Junction 6 improvement

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
tom1977
Member
Posts: 163
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2012 11:36

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by tom1977 »

The latest information on the Solihull website is that Highways England has no outstanding objections on road safety grounds and they are drawing up planning conditions. Sounds fairly close.
Attachments
PL_2015_51409_PPOL-HIGHWAY_ENGLAND_-_HOLDING_DIRECTION__2MONTHS_FROM_23_12_-605488.pdf
(67.49 KiB) Downloaded 47 times
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7544
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by jackal »

As that document says, HE are witholding consent until the J6 consultation can be taken into account:
Of further relevance to this application is Highways England’s developing scheme for
the improvement of Junction 6 of the M42 Motorway. Three scheme options have
been identified and have now been issued for public consultation. This consultation
is a live process with the objective of seeking public views on the options presented;
it continues until 27 January 2017 after which we will need to take into account of
public consultation responses received. As the MSA proposals may impact upon
these options it is considered that the current period of non-determination should be
extended beyond the end of the consultation period so as to not to risk prejudicing
the outcome of this public consultation.

On the basis of the above we are recommending that the planning application
not be determined for a period of 2 months beginning today 23 December
2016.
In addition, until the planning conditions that we are likely to recommend are
finalised and the consultation process is completed we are not currently in a position
to consent under section 175B of the Highways Act 1980 (as amended) to new
accesses to / from the M42 motorway as proposed in the planning application.
ais523
Member
Posts: 1139
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 19:52
Location: Birmingham

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by ais523 »

My guess is that if there's overwhelming public support for Option 3 (which makes it very hard to build a services safely), the developers will be asked to redesign their junction, whereas if Option 1 or 2 (which are very compatible with a services in that location) ends up being the favoured one, the go-ahead for the services will be given very quickly. So HE is simply placing the services on hold until they can be sure that they won't have to build a conflicting junction nearby.
User avatar
Alderpoint
Member
Posts: 1682
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 14:25
Location: Leamington Spa

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by Alderpoint »

Preferred route announced: option 1.

https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... _web.pdf-1
Let it snow.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7544
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by jackal »

Thanks for that. The preferred route on p. 13 shows a few changes from the consulted version of option 1:

1. Instead of being 'all movements', the new M42 junction is a half dumbbell (south-facing slips only).
2. The B4438 is severed, so to get to Catherine de Barnes you have to use the new link road via slips.
3. Unspecified improvements to the A45 either side of J6.
4. Freeflow lefts in NW and NE quadrants of J6, but not SE.
5. Widening and signalization to J6 itself, focused on SE quadrant.

I'm struggling to get my head around the new M42 junction. Any MSA traffic would have to go through the new junction, clock interchange, and J6! Maybe they're not going to have an MSA there, but in that case there's no reason not to have a freeflow junction instead.
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17467
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by Truvelo »

And why not move the dumbbell onto the B4102 and have it serve that road as well.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7544
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by jackal »

That would induce a lot of ratrunning and congestion.
User avatar
RichardA35
Committee Member
Posts: 5705
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 18:58
Location: Dorset

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by RichardA35 »

Truvelo wrote:And why not move the dumbbell onto the B4102 and have it serve that road as well.
A good way to mobilise the good burghers of Solihull to object to the scheme. At first glance, the scheme looks to maintain the local roads status quo and avoid creating new rat runs or access onto or off the motorway network so everyone should be reasonably happy.
ais523
Member
Posts: 1139
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 19:52
Location: Birmingham

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by ais523 »

The consultation responses were strongly in favour of an all-access junction in the "5A" location, so it's a little surprising to see a half-dumbbell (with some useless sections of roundabout!) there instead. I get the feeling from the various documents that HE want to provide a full access junction but don't have a working design for it yet.

It was definitely a goal of the scheme to make access between the B4102 and the new motorway junction as awkward as possible (which most attempts I've seen, including this one, do via the use of limited access junctions). It's not the sort of road that you want to dump a large amount of motorway traffic onto.
Robert Kilcoyne
Member
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 11:41
Location: Birmingham

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by Robert Kilcoyne »

ais523 wrote:
It was definitely a goal of the scheme to make access between the B4102 and the new motorway junction as awkward as possible (which most attempts I've seen, including this one, do via the use of limited access junctions). It's not the sort of road that you want to dump a large amount of motorway traffic onto.
The B4102 is unsuitable for a large volume of traffic, particularly through Hampton-in-Arden. Also, there is a very busy signalised junction where the B4102 meets the A41 Solihull Bypass west of Catherine de Barnes. It is effectively a six way junction and has to cater for many movements, not only traffic heading to and from Birmingham, but also traffic heading to Solihull town centre from Hampton-in-Arden and Catherine de Barnes and traffic heading to Jaguar Land Rover up the link road bypassing the Damsonwood housing estate. Hence they would not want to overload the B4102 with motorway traffic.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7544
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by jackal »

The Technical Appraisal Report and Scheme Assessment Report are now available. It seems they really are planning to build the preferred route without north-facing slips due to concerns about the 1100m weaving space to J6. They may be added if the MSA gets planning permission, but it is not explained how that would address the weaving issue.

As the SAR explains, there is also 'an increase in the number of conflict points associated with the introduction of additional roundabout junctions, which also gives rise to a predicted increase in accident numbers' (p. 46). The scheme is actually projected to result in 133 additional casualties during the assessment period!

The idea of 'upgrading' an interchange between two grade-separated roads by putting another interchange nearby, introducing additional roundabouts and (eventually) weaving spaces, is fundamentally misconceived. It's not even cheap - £200m at 2014 prices without risk, or £328.7m including inflation and risk.

TAR: https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... rt_web.pdf
SAR: https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... 0Final.pdf
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8986
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by wrinkly »

User avatar
6637
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 12:14
Contact:

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by 6637 »

Alderpoint wrote:Preferred route announced: option 1.

https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... _web.pdf-1
While I'm not very familiar with this area, wouldn't it be better if they did something freeflow to take long-distance M42-A45 traffic away from the J6 roundabout, like this?
birmingham.png
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by Bryn666 »

6637 wrote:
Alderpoint wrote:Preferred route announced: option 1.

https://highwaysengland.citizenspace.co ... _web.pdf-1
While I'm not very familiar with this area, wouldn't it be better if they did something freeflow to take long-distance M42-A45 traffic away from the J6 roundabout, like this?

birmingham.png
You would need to sort out the weaving between the existing J6 and your new junction on the M42 but as a concept that is not bad.

My only concern would be digging down as you are right against the runway of the Airport so no three level structures there. Likewise the NIMBY factor will come in massively.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
darkcape
Member
Posts: 2094
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 14:54

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by darkcape »

Plus the A45 u-bend is earmarked to be cut-and-cover tunnelled at some point in the future so any major junction there would have to take that into consideration.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8986
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by wrinkly »

darkcape wrote:Plus the A45 u-bend is earmarked to be cut-and-cover tunnelled at some point in the future so any major junction there would have to take that into consideration.
That's interesting. The earlier plan for an immediate tunnel, built as part of the runway extension, was replaced by the plan for the present layout. I didn't know there was a continuing aspiration for a tunnel.
ais523
Member
Posts: 1139
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 19:52
Location: Birmingham

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by ais523 »

Bryn666 wrote:Likewise the NIMBY factor will come in massively.
My experience of consultations for this particular improvement is that the attitude of the people around Bickenhill to new major projects is not so much "not in my backyard" but "Again? Seriously?".
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8986
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by wrinkly »

ais523 wrote: "Again? Seriously?".
That would certainly be my reaction if I lived there!
darkcape
Member
Posts: 2094
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2012 14:54

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by darkcape »

wrinkly wrote:
darkcape wrote:Plus the A45 u-bend is earmarked to be cut-and-cover tunnelled at some point in the future so any major junction there would have to take that into consideration.
That's interesting. The earlier plan for an immediate tunnel, built as part of the runway extension, was replaced by the plan for the present layout. I didn't know there was a continuing aspiration for a tunnel.
Apologies but I can't find the source but I definitely read it somewhere - the decision to not build a tunnel a few years ago was basically deferred. I worked on the widening at Bickenhill westbound for the rail bridge replacement just after the u-bend opened and we were told that was the plan also. It would be but similar to a long bridge, with a central pier in A45 centre res and one between A45 eastbound and the perimeter roads.
Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7544
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M42 Junction 6 improvement

Post by jackal »

Statutory consultation starts next week:

http://roads.highways.gov.uk/projects/m ... provement/
Post Reply