A500 Etruria widening

[jackal]

The fly-throughs show that the scheme essentially provides an S1 link road in each direction between junctions, with no direct connection to the A500 mainline. It's similar to a recent A1 upgrade (link) but with the link roads only separated by hatching.

[roadtester]

The fly-throughs show that the scheme essentially provides an S1 link road in each direction between junctions, with no direct connection to the A500 mainline. It's similar to a recent A1 upgrade (link) but with the link roads only separated by hatching.

There's also this on the A47 Soke Parkway in Peterborough, with physical separation:

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@52.59705 ... z?hl=en-gb

[jackal]

True but the A1 and A500 examples are a little different in that there's access between the mainline and junctions at each end. They are quite unusual in this respect, as it means that there's still weaving on the mainline. More usually there's no such access (like the A47 example) or access in only one direction (like this), removing mainline weaving.

[roadtester]

The Peterborough one does too unless I 'm missing something really obvious!

[JF2309]

Physical segregation would probably take up more land than the tiger tails. So with a retail park a top of Wolstanton and the railway to the east it's probably the best you can do without re-engineering the whole lot. Assuming SOTCC have lobbied for this and are finacially liable for at least some of it you'd be foolishly naive to think they'd want to spend money to make a proper job of it. They don't do that many proper road jobs anymore.

[jackal]

The Peterborough one does too unless I 'm missing something really obvious!

I probably should have said 'the A1 and A500 examples are a little different in that there's access between the mainline and junctions at each end of the link road'.

So in the Peterborough example, to get between the A47 westbound and J18 you have to use J17 - you cannot stay on the mainline, go over J17, and exit at J18, as you would be able to with an A1/A500 style of design.

[vlad]

At least you can still leave or join the A500 at both these junctions, even though I was under the impression the roadworks were supposed to reduce the amount of weaving.

At the moment I can't help feeling it's a solution looking for a problem but we shall see.

[vlad]

On a slightly related matter, apparently Stoke CC want to turn the A500 and A50 into smart trunk roads (here). I'm not sure how that's going to work given that there's no hard shoulder to be turned into a running lane. The sceptic in me says all that's going to happen is that speed limits will be decreased again but you never know.

[Truvelo]

There is a short stretch with a wide central reservation so the extra lane could come from the offside.

[fras]

On a slightly related matter, apparently Stoke CC want to turn the A500 and A50 into smart trunk roads (here). I'm not sure how that's going to work given that there's no hard shoulder to be turned into a running lane. The sceptic in me says all that's going to happen is that speed limits will be decreased again but you never know.

It just shows you how completely stupid politicians can be, (or maybe mendacious if you are a secret "Blob" member and want to bully and harass the motorist). As my daughter will tell you, and as I have myself experienced, the A500 is completely choc-a-bloc at rush hours. How variable speed limits can make a difference when all lanes are full and everybody is either stopped or crawling along at 10 mph I fail to see.

When, oh when, will we get somebody in charge of transport who is not just the usual "amiable idiot"

[Duple]

On a slightly related matter, apparently Stoke CC want to turn the A500 and A50 into smart trunk roads (here). I'm not sure how that's going to work given that there's no hard shoulder to be turned into a running lane. The sceptic in me says all that's going to happen is that speed limits will be decreased again but you never know.

It just shows you how completely stupid politicians can be, (or maybe mendacious if you are a secret "Blob" member and want to bully and harass the motorist). As my daughter will tell you, and as I have myself experienced, the A500 is completely choc-a-bloc at rush hours. How variable speed limits can make a difference when all lanes are full and everybody is either stopped or crawling along at 10 mph I fail to see.

When, oh when, will we get somebody in charge of transport who is not just the usual "amiable idiot"

I have suggested up thread slowing the traffic during the peak may help the flow. A lot of the issues are to do with local traffic hoping on and back off at Wolstanton and it will be interesting to see if their suggested improvements actually work.

The Pathfinder project worked wonders but has very quickly got to capacity and the whole layout in the area local to the A500 is very confusing!

The A50 interchange at Sideway is also very haphazard and soon unfit for purpose. It's crying out for grade separation but there is very little land unfortunately in the area to utilize.

[jackal]

On a slightly related matter, apparently Stoke CC want to turn the A500 and A50 into smart trunk roads (here). I'm not sure how that's going to work given that there's no hard shoulder to be turned into a running lane.

Very simple, there would be no increase in the number of running lanes, as indeed is the case with many smart motorways (referred to as controlled motorways).

[Duple]

Work is progressing quite well with this, both extra C/D lanes open now at Wolstanton, it appears over the weekend the semi-permanent barrier protecting the central reservation has been pushed out further to encompass lane 2..

I can’t seem to find any detailed plans of the different construction phases, is this part of the original plan or are they making the most of reduced traffic volumes?

As I understand the next phase of the project is a new C/D lane for the Basford (MFI) roundabout ?

[brummie_rob]

The final phase involves the concrete barrier which was being done overnight only under a two lane closure. Due to reduced traffic levels they are making this a 24/7 closure instead to finish works in the day.

Once that is done, the project is finished. There are no plans to widen the section to Basford which is annoying but expected with the amount of groundwork to potentially do.

[jackal]

Scheme now complete:

https://www.fleetpoint.org/road-buildin ... -schedule/

[mikehindsonevans]

On a slightly related matter, apparently Stoke CC want to turn the A500 and A50 into smart trunk roads (here). I'm not sure how that's going to work given that there's no hard shoulder to be turned into a running lane. The sceptic in me says all that's going to happen is that speed limits will be decreased again but you never know.

You were right! Press release in article above:

"Reduction of the speed limit from 70mph to 50mph which is consistent with the majority of the A500."

[Truvelo]

On a slightly related matter, apparently Stoke CC want to turn the A500 and A50 into smart trunk roads (here). I'm not sure how that's going to work given that there's no hard shoulder to be turned into a running lane. The sceptic in me says all that's going to happen is that speed limits will be decreased again but you never know.

You were right! Press release in article above:

"Reduction of the speed limit from 70mph to 50mph which is consistent with the majority of the A500."

So it's only a matter of time until the northern section is also 50

[fras]

I'd love it if somebody could explain to me what is wrong with 60 mph ? It's now always 50 mph on whatever new dual-carriageway road that gets built nowadays, unless it's 40 mph or less ! Runcorn seem to manage with most of their DC network at 60 mph.

[Micro The Maniac]

Scheme now complete:

https://www.fleetpoint.org/road-buildin ... -schedule/

I note that this reports:

Other benefits of the widening scheme include:

• Reduction of the speed limit from 70mph to 50mph which is consistent with the majority of the A500.

I fail to see how reducing the speed limit, of a D3 to 50 is a "benefit" - there are two actual speeds for that stretch... 70(ahem) and 0

[Bryn666]

Slower vehicle speeds increase the ability of the weaving section to process more traffic than it would at 70...

I fail to understand why people oppose the proven fact that slower speeds where weaving occurs actually helps improve throughput because you aren't waiting for gaps that don't form and not joining a stream of traffic at a lower speed causing a brake shockwave.