Lowest signed bridge?

[Was92now625]

Would be interesting to know just what proportion of people could quote confidently just what the height of their car actually is. For most bridges, it seems to be a case of nonchalantly telling yourself "I'll fit comfortably under there" but with some of the figures seen in this thread, it would be tempting to do an actual measurement.

[Alderpoint]

I've measured the wife's ix35 with roofbox on as a "bit over" 2m - quite hard to measure it precisely. Fits (just) under a signed 2.05m garage entrance I know, but doesn't fit under a 2m height-restrictor elsewhere. So it's not just knowing how tall your vehicle is, but whether you can trust the signed height as well.

[rhyds]

Would be interesting to know just what proportion of people could quote confidently just what the height of their car actually is. For most bridges, it seems to be a case of nonchalantly telling yourself "I'll fit comfortably under there" but with some of the figures seen in this thread, it would be tempting to do an actual measurement.

I actually had to look it up in the handbook. According to the sainted text of our Lord Henry Ford, a MK1 Focus is between 1440mm and 1481mm tall when loaded with its kerb weight. This translates as 4.72 feet, or about 4 foot 8.63 inches for the lower value, and 4.85 feet, or about 4 foot 10.3 inches at the higher value.

Neither of these include the radio aerial.

[c2R]

I'm not sure which actually wins here - the 4'9" example is the clearance at the lowest point, so the arch in the middle would probably allow most people to walk upright through it (just), whereas the Essex Road level Crossing underpass is 5'0" all the way through. For thread regarding the replacement of the underpass with a bridge see here: http://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/forum/vie ... php?t=8519

[Johnathan404]

Would be interesting to know just what proportion of people could quote confidently just what the height of their car actually is.

We had a Renault Grand Espace fitted with roof bars which, if I recall correctly, would nervously shimmy under the local tip's 2.0m height restriction. We used that as our universal gauge everywhere we went, having to check every car park and drive thru we entered, bearing in mind those metal height restrictions never looked like they had been measured accurately.

[Lockwood]

I've banged my head on a 6'6 car park entrance as a pedestrian.
I am not 6'6.

When I did my short stint in Wales, I did pass a road warning of a 5'9 bridge up it.

I could never bring myself to divert and have a look at it.

[FosseWay]

Can't compete with the sub-6ft ones posted so far but the lowest I can remember driving under is the one referred to on this sign in GSV, in Brimscombe in Gloucestershire. The GSV car hasn't been up it, presumably because it's higher than 6' 6" (the road is also very steep and there is no turning point either side of the bridge).

[Stellar Forces]

This one in Atherstone is the lowest one I can remember driving under.

I always think of this one for very low bridges.

There is something about it which puzzles me- the Atherstone bypass opened in 1963, allowing the A5 to skirt round the side of Atherstone rather than go directly through the town. Before this, however, I can only assume that traffic used the old road (i.e. under this railway bridge)- have I got this wrong? Struggling to see how a major route coped with this bridge in any decade!

[Big L]

Historic maps from the 20s (on this website, but the 'link' function appears not to be working) show a 'bypass' that I guess follows the straight-on road here rather than the old road under the low bridge.

[DavidBrown]

My guess would have been that there would have been a level crossing that has long since gone, but yes looking at the maps that low bridge has always been there, with the current on-slip and westbound carriageway of the A5 forming a bypass of that right from the 20s.

[Klepsydra]

I've banged my head on a 6'6 car park entrance as a pedestrian.
I am not 6'6.

Well, that could be read as meaning you're 6'7", in which case...

[Lockwood]

Touché.

I'm around 6'3.

[Viator]

Re: Atherstone

My guess would have been that there would have been a level crossing that has long since gone, but yes looking at the maps that low bridge has always been there, with the current on-slip and westbound carriageway of the A5 forming a bypass of that right from the 20s.

Yes, Atherstone station opened in 1847, with a level crossing carrying Watling Street over the (then 2-track) line. A shallow underpass -- known as a "cattle creep" -- was also provided on the northern side of the road. This is what survives as today's very low bridge. As the original terminology implies, the underpass was only ever intended to facilitate the movement of herds of animals across the line; vehicular traffic used the level crossing.

The line, which was in the process of being quadrupled, was finally provided with an overbridge in 1903-4 (the public opening took place in February 1904). The "back story" to this is that the level crossing had long been a source of irritation and agitation in the locality, since it was closed not just for the passage of through trains but for every shunting movement that took place at the station. The London & North-Western Railway had dragged its heels about replacing the crossing for so long that, a few years earlier, Warwickshire County Council had applied for and succeeded in obtaining a court injunction obliging the LNWR to limit the speed of its trains through the crossing to a maximum of just 4 mph!

A case of "cutting off your face to spite your face" perhaps, but the tactic appears to have worked, because the railway, faced with having to reduce the speed of all its trains (even non-stop expresses) to walking-pace at this point, eventually agreed to pay for and build a diversionary road and two new overbridges (the second one was needed to cross the Coventry Canal). The opening of the overbridge saw the simultaneous closure and removal of the level crossing, but the "cattle creep" remained (with an improved road connection from the eastern side), principally, it would seem, to serve as a pedestrian sub-way -- though, as noted previously, it has never been closed to vehicles (at least, to those that can squeeze under it!).

[orudge]

Just happened to come across this tunnel under the A96, which looks like it may be on a private road, but Google has driven through it anyway. Perhaps it's just the nature of the "tube" but it looks pretty tight!

[a_c_skinner]

For a new example there is a tunnel under the A590 at Witherslack which is signed at 7'10" and opened within the last 18/12 or so.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.23908 ... 312!8i6656

Lights control a single track tunnel originally meant for bikes and beasts but now open to suitable motor vehicles too.

Andrew

[wrinkly]

No doubt some of those driving through it will be beasts.

[cmjones01]

I'm not sure how low this one is. It was once a bypass for a railway level crossing in Cambridge, but now it only serves foot and cycle traffic, and the railway is now a guided busway. I'm told it used to carry two lanes of traffic though it's hard to believe. It's certainly very low and feels like you're going to bang your head when cycling through it. It's hard to get a good view from Google because the approach ramps are long and shallow.

https://www.google.pl/maps/@52.2303336, ... 312!8i6656

Chris

[crb11]

I'm not sure how low this one is. It was once a bypass for a railway level crossing in Cambridge, but now it only serves foot and cycle traffic, and the railway is now a guided busway. I'm told it used to carry two lanes of traffic though it's hard to believe. It's certainly very low and feels like you're going to bang your head when cycling through it. It's hard to get a good view from Google because the approach ramps are long and shallow.

I can go and measure it if you like (I live about a mile away). It was, I think, 6'3-6'6 before the guided bus extension work was done; I haven't been through since.

[Johnathan404]

A 7' 6" here.

[Burns]

Just happened to come across this tunnel under the A96, which looks like it may be on a private road, but Google has driven through it anyway. Perhaps it's just the nature of the "tube" but it looks pretty tight!

I drove through a tunnel like that in Norway back in September.