A47 Corridor improvement programme

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
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by jackal »

I mean efficient from a budgetary/economic perspective. If you're paying consultants in 2019 to rush planning submissions for 30 2021/22 schemes, you're taking money out of the 2015-20 budget that could instead have gone on actually starting construction on something.
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Berk »

It now appears the delays to the Wansford-Sutton scheme have been due to responses generated by the consultation process. Basically, villagers have proposed a new route, slightly to the north.

However, I seem to remember HE rejected this - both on environmental and archaeological grounds. Now it seems they’re happy to accept it, apart from the fact a field has been designated as a scheduled monument for many years, even though there’s no evidence of historical buildings at all.

Removing that status would require a (judicial?) application to the other HE (Historic England, ex English Heritage). Let’s hope they can fix this, and the project can proceed. However, the article seems to have a very optimistic timeframe (start this time next year). That is definitely not going to happen.

Starting in 2 years time might be more realistic. There’s also been a change of delivery partner, as Galliford Try are now involved. They are already busy constructing the Lincoln Eastern Bypass, so it might prove a lucrative contract for them to move on to.
M56phil
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 18:41

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by M56phil »

I've never driven on the A47 up until today (Great Yarmouth - Leicester) - except for a few token sections such as the Kings Lynn Bypass.

Here's what I think - In General the D2 sections are pretty good, but they are still abit too few and far between. I am aware some sections are going to be dualled in the future.

Ideally, really...the entire road from the A1 to Great Yarmouth should be dualled. Particularly the Kings lynn to Norwich section. However, I don't think there is the political will or cash to do it.

The Acle straight is interesting - I am presuming that as it's in a national park, dualling basically won't happen- or it's unlikely.

For me, anyone who comes from the midlands, north/mid Wales or north west England - a trip to East Anglia will almost certainly involve the A14 (and if it's Norwich or The Broads it's then the A11).

My question is, could or should the A47 become a viable alternative as a long distance route? If there was enough D2 - I think it could. The only problem is that getting to the A47 is difficult from the motorway network - M1/M69 and through Leicester is problematic.

Has this ever been thought about. I would say as the A14 gets busier and busier (which is pretty much now) surely a long distance upgrade of the A47 expressway should be planned.

Any thoughts on this? I know there are campaigns to dual the A47 but long term could the A47 get the same treatment as what will happen to the A96 in Scotland.

Many thanks - any thoughts?
User avatar
Nicholas
Member
Posts: 4695
Joined: Sun Jun 25, 2006 18:37
Location: Bournemouth
Contact:

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Nicholas »

M56phil wrote: Sun Nov 03, 2019 17:08 For me, anyone who comes from the midlands, north/mid Wales or north west England - a trip to East Anglia will almost certainly involve the A14 (and if it's Norwich or The Broads it's then the A11).
I've made a couple of trips from the north west to Norfolk and have never used the A14, only for heading south or east of Cambridge.

My route has always been to get to the A1, then take the A17 from Newark. If anything, it is the A17 that I would like to see upgraded.
Voie Rapide / Mótarbhealaí
Updated 1 November 2019!
M56phil
Member
Posts: 606
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2004 18:41

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by M56phil »

I think if you come from say Doncaster or Leeds or Lincoln - naturally, the A17-A47 is the best route; not the A14.

However, if you come from say Birmingham, Telford, Shrewsbury or Chester. You wouldn't touch the A17.

From the west and north west of England the A14 is basically the only option. My point being if I wanted to get to Norwich, I'd use the A14/A11 - however, the A47 could be a viable alternative - certainly from Peterborough. I know people from my area have used the A47 to say get to Norwich but I'd say 4/5 would use the A14/A11 route.
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Berk »

It’s A47 all the way. To get to the A14, it’s at least 25/30 miles. I can get to the A47 in less than 10.

Leicester is only one hour away via the A47 (plus travelling time to my house). And it’s the same time to King’s Lynn. It would take almost as long (45 mins) to get to the A14, and considerably longer to battle up the A10 from Cambridge.

The A47 also provides quick connections to the A1.
User avatar
Norfolktolancashire
Member
Posts: 1185
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 22:34
Location: Cornwall

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Norfolktolancashire »

M56phil wrote: Sun Nov 03, 2019 17:55 I think if you come from say Doncaster or Leeds or Lincoln - naturally, the A17-A47 is the best route; not the A14.

However, if you come from say Birmingham, Telford, Shrewsbury or Chester. You wouldn't touch the A17.

From the west and north west of England the A14 is basically the only option. My point being if I wanted to get to Norwich, I'd use the A14/A11 - however, the A47 could be a viable alternative - certainly from Peterborough. I know people from my area have used the A47 to say get to Norwich but I'd say 4/5 would use the A14/A11 route.
I use the M62,A1, A17, A47 route usually. The M6,A14, A11 route is D2/3 all the way however it regularly jams up around the West Mids so not worth the extra miles. To reach the Broads area using the A1, A14, A11 is the quickest for me, but for the rest of Norfolk the route via the A17 is still the quickest.

The dualling of the A11 through Norfolk along with the Norwich bypasses have helped a lot.
User avatar
skiddaw05
Member
Posts: 2036
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 21:33
Location: Norwich

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by skiddaw05 »

I'd have thought an upgrade of the A47 east of the A1 would also have the benefit of taking the pressure off the A17. It wouldn't work the other way round - ie upgrading the A17 instead - because it still wouldn't be a logical way of getting to/from the Midlands. On the other hand an upgraded A47 would provide a good route to/from both the Midlands and the North.
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Berk »

I also don’t think you’d use the A14 if you needed to get to somewhere in North Norfolk, or on the coast. It just wouldn’t make any sense.

Only if you’re headed somewhere in the east - Norwich/Yarmouth, really.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by KeithW »

The few times I have driven from the North East to North Norfolk I have mostly used the A1/A17 route as it is faster and shorter than the A1/A14/A11. I did once take the A1/M62/A15/A17 route but that was because I had to call in and see someone in Hull along the way.
ais523
Member
Posts: 1139
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 19:52
Location: Birmingham

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by ais523 »

I've done Birmingham to North Norfolk many times. It typically involves using the M6/A14 and switching to the A47 at some point: there doesn't seem to be a huge amount of difference (in terms of time/distance) between M6-A14-A605-A1139-A47, M6-A14-A43-A47, and M6-M69-A5460-A563-A6-A6030-B667-A47 (there are probably better routes through Leicester but memorising one was hard enough). Any suggestions for improved routes would be appreciated!

Some mapping programs have considered the idea of M6-A14-A11-???-A140 for points further east in North Norfolk, mostly avoiding the A47, but my experience is that this doesn't actually work (it's much longer and Norwich tends to eat up all your speed gains). Perhaps if Norwich gets a western bypass (and the new Huntingdon-Cambridge bit of the A14 is completed) it'll become competitive.

(Of course, the most Sabristic route, if not the shortest or fastest, would be A47-B4114-A47-A594-A47, and even the A594 is a concession to the pedestrianisation of central Leicester.)
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by jackal »

Plans for making the roundabout at Guyhirn bigger rumble on, with a start date next year. One of the more exotic rejected options was apparently an S2 flyover for A47 to A141.

A47 A141 - Copy.PNG

http://assets.highwaysengland.co.uk/roa ... rn+SAR.pdf
Last edited by jackal on Thu Jan 30, 2020 11:24, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31475
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by roadtester »

jackal wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:28 Plans for making the roundabout at Guyhurn bigger rumble on, with a start date next year 2021. One of the more exotic rejected options was apparently an S2 flyover for A47 to A141.


A47 A141 - Copy.PNG


http://assets.highwaysengland.co.uk/roa ... rn+SAR.pdf
Admittedly speaking as a lay person familiar with the junction rather than any sort of expert, that is literally the last upgrade option that would occur to me for that roundabout.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by jackal »

Indeed, A47-A47 is pretty dominant.

A47 A141 - Copy.PNG

I think they could only afford a new river bridge or a new GSJ, not both as an A47-A47 GSJ would require. Probably best to leave it for a proper upgrade when the A47 itself is eventually improved.
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17467
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Truvelo »

The elliptical roundabout is the only design which will be futureproofed for a GSJ if the A47 is to eventually become an expressway. However I can't see an upgraded A47 running through here as there's no room for a D2 immediately to the west of the junction.
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
doebag
Member
Posts: 2311
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 11:47
Location: Wisbech, Cambs

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by doebag »

Option 7 :yikes:
Would extra roundabouts really improve things ?

Free flow routes for traffic turning A47 to A141 and A47 to A47 seems the big need in my layman's view.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31475
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by roadtester »

Yes - you'd have thought that all things being equal, A47 to A47 should be prioritised in upgrades given the back-drop of the priority attached to improving the corridor as a whole.

On the other hand if any eventual upgrade/dualling of the A47 was going to avoid the roundabout completely, it would be far less important.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
Debaser
Member
Posts: 2219
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 16:57

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Debaser »

Frankly, given the short flares on each approach and funnels on the exits - due to the bridge and other constraints - I've got a tenner here says adding a third lane to the circulatory and approaches isn't going to be much of a solution either.
ais523
Member
Posts: 1139
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2015 19:52
Location: Birmingham

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by ais523 »

jackal wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:28 Plans for making the roundabout at Guyhurn bigger rumble on, with a start date next year. One of the more exotic rejected options was apparently an S2 flyover for A47 to A141.
From a road traffic point of view, there's no benefit for making the flyover two-way. A47 westbound to A141 is a left turn, you don't need a flyover for a left turn. The only benefit would thus come from allowing NMUs to avoid having to cross a freeflow lane at-grade (although they'd still have to cross the traffic slowing for the roundabout at-grade), and an NMU bridge is probably cheaper than adding a second lane to a vehicular flyover.

For what it's worth, I think adding freeflow lefts would be a much more sensible option than adding an extra circulating lane with no guidance on which lane is for what (i.e. the current plan). Luckily, the current plan can be changed into a plan with filter lanes simply by re-marking the road. However, I have a suspicion that on a roundabout where all the exits are two lanes wide, a third circulating lane isn't going to give much benefit unless some sort of spiral markings are in use.
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: A47 Corridor improvement programme

Post by Berk »

ais523 wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 23:19
jackal wrote: Wed Jan 29, 2020 11:28Plans for making the roundabout at Guyhurn bigger rumble on, with a start date next year. One of the more exotic rejected options was apparently an S2 flyover for A47 to A141.
From a road traffic point of view, there's no benefit for making the flyover two-way. A47 westbound to A141 is a left turn, you don't need a flyover for a left turn. The only benefit would thus come from allowing NMUs to avoid having to cross a freeflow lane at-grade (although they'd still have to cross the traffic slowing for the roundabout at-grade), and an NMU bridge is probably cheaper than adding a second lane to a vehicular flyover.

For what it's worth, I think adding freeflow lefts would be a much more sensible option than adding an extra circulating lane with no guidance on which lane is for what (i.e. the current plan). Luckily, the current plan can be changed into a plan with filter lanes simply by re-marking the road. However, I have a suspicion that on a roundabout where all the exits are two lanes wide, a third circulating lane isn't going to give much benefit unless some sort of spiral markings are in use.
I’m thinking perhaps the GSJ was designed to stop delays on the A47W mainline when you get vehicles wishing to turn off towards March having to give way to vehicles from Peterborough doing the same.

The A141/A47 is the main route from March to Peterborough for many people. The A605 still has a level crossing west of Whittlesey with considerable delays, and the North Bank route from Whittlesey to Peterborough also gets flooded during excess rainfall periods.

The GSJ would certainly help in the evening peak, and at bank holidays with traffic to Sandringham and the north Norfolk coast.
Post Reply