Transport for the North's Strategic Transport Plan

[jackal]

I agree. Looking at the tunnel routes again, the 'M180 extension' to M1 J38 would only really work for the northerly route 4.

Such a route would seemingly pass north of Barnsley, whereas I'd have sent it south, meeting the M1 somewhere near Tankersley.

That could well be viable. The routes shown are only to illustrate high level concepts and are far from exhaustive.

[Robert Kilcoyne]

so there is still no mention of a A64 upgrade east of York...... i fully support the dulling of A1237 but we know hopgrove is planned to be a GSJ at some point but the A64 upgrade should be on top their list to sort York out because the dulling of the A1237 is useless until the A64 is fixed first

Hopgrove is a mess and it needs to become a full GSJ as soon as possible. The A1237 should be upgraded to dual carriageway with GSJ.

[ChrisH]

I like the study in general and particularly that it dares to imagine new corridors of strategic routes. Most of the time (cf M25 SW quadrant study) all we get is endless widening of existing routes and hence decreasing resilience to the network.

The proposed link from the M67 tunnel across to the M180 is very intriguing. It would mean a continuous motorway/expressway route from Holyhead to Grimsby via A55, M56, (SEMMMS), M67, M180 and A180.

Also the extension of M65 across to Harrogate and the A1 would be brilliant from a regional connectivity point of view. A link down towards Leeds and Bradford (presumably via A650/Keighley) would be grand.

[hat]

extending the M65 in the direction of the A59 to Harrogate means addressing the A56 route

[crowntown100]

extending the M65 in the direction of the A59 to Harrogate means addressing the A56 route

It might not be feasible as I don't know the area, but you could take a more southerly line. Something shadowing the A6068, A6034, A65 and A658 could proved better access to Leeds and Bradford (with some spurs in that direction), take traffic from the A59 and A56, bypass Harrogate to the south (again) but negate the need for a new bypass for the A59 and take some strain off of the M62.

[hat]

its one that's been hanging around for quite some time
viewtopic.php?f=1&t=29047&p=599190&hilit=a56#p599190

[Osthagen]

Also the extension of M65 across to Harrogate and the A1 would be brilliant from a regional connectivity point of view. A link down towards Leeds and Bradford (presumably via A650/Keighley) would be grand.

Assuming such an extension, a similar route, the M650 was proposed.

[jackal]

The draft Strategic Transport Plan has been published: http://transportforthenorth.com/wp-cont ... aft_lr.pdf

Also of interest is the updated Major Roads Report: http://transportforthenorth.com/wp-cont ... an2018.pdf

[NICK 647063]

Well I do like the fact the MRN shown here makes more sense than the others I have seen.

Also reading through the documents it’s good to see the Hopgrove Junction Scheme is now changed to Hopgrove to Barton Hill improvement as it was proved in the feasibility study that the A64 must be dualled before any Junction improvement.

[Steven]

Also of interest is the updated Major Roads Report: http://transportforthenorth.com/wp-cont ... an2018.pdf

Why on earth is there a random picture of M6 J10A in the middle of the report? Surely the NORTH has sufficient motorway junctions without using one 50 miles away...

[si404]

Why on earth is there a random picture of M6 J10A in the middle of the report? Surely the NORTH has sufficient motorway junctions without using one 50 miles away...

That was really odd - as that one (unlike the others) has signage on it and so one can know where it roughly is even if you aren't someone who plays 'what is the junction in the photo?' to a high standard.

They really love that green bridge of the A556 (it comes up more than once). And I'm fairly sure I've some recent HE glossy brochures with different shots of M60 J14 to the one in here: 3 brochures, 2 different bodies, 3 different pictures of the same junction.

[Big L]

Also of interest is the updated Major Roads Report: http://transportforthenorth.com/wp-cont ... an2018.pdf

Why on earth is there a random picture of M6 J10A in the middle of the report? Surely the NORTH has sufficient motorway junctions without using one 50 miles away...

It does say "NORTH WEST" on it!

[avtur]

I see that the former Deputy Labour Leader and Transport Minister, Lord Prescott, attended the TfN launch meeting yesterday.

He was so impressed he walked out part way through, shouting "it's a bloody fraud", obviously he's seen something in the plan he's not happy with.

Sounds as though he thinks it is a toothless 'advisory body' that will have no influence, I'm sure there are other opinions but the launch event appears to have received a lot of publicity for the wrong reasons.

[jackal]

He seems to be pretty isolated on this: https://transport-network.co.uk/Prescot ... kout/14741

I suspect his real beef is osborne and co. establishing the kind of legacy of investment in transport infrastructure that he could only dream of.

[Bryn666]

He seems to be pretty isolated on this: https://transport-network.co.uk/Prescot ... kout/14741

I suspect his real beef is osborne and co. establishing the kind of legacy of investment in transport infrastructure that he could only dream of.

Yes, it's sour grapes from Lord "failed to make regional government happen" Prescott.

Other complaints about this strategy are the almost total radio silence on the subject of active travel, which in city centres is a simple and achievable way to reduce congestion and increase the productivity of the area.

[Chris5156]

Other complaints about this strategy are the almost total radio silence on the subject of active travel, which in city centres is a simple and achievable way to reduce congestion and increase the productivity of the area.

It's really disappointing that there's no aspiration to give northern cities the sort of urban transport infrastructure that comparable European cities would have. Newcastle's Metro and Liverpool's underground railway starter kit could both benefit from some expansion, and all of Leeds, Bradford and Hull are more than big enough for multiple tram lines out to the suburbs. That's a fairly modest assessment of what ought to be provided.

[Bryn666]

Indeed, whilst enjoyable for road enthusiasts, it is an extremely road orientated report and not at all what anyone could really say is a strategic transport plan.

There's very little on urban rapid transit, walking, cycling, or how to reduce the amount of traffic clogging up the existing network. The Transpennine Tunnel is great, if you want to get between Manchester and Sheffield. There's guff all about what you do once you get to either end; other than an expectation of joining congested and rubbish city streets.

[si404]

I suspect his real beef is osborne and co. establishing the kind of legacy of investment in transport infrastructure that he could only dream of.

Nightmares, surely? He hated transport investment, hence why he made his job "Secretary of State for the Environment, Transport and the Regions", merging three departments, and then used the Environment part to justify the Transport part being little more than saying no and throwing all the plans for investment that weren't under construction in the shredder.

Yes, it's sour grapes from Lord "failed to make regional government happen" Prescott.

Maybe if he had focused on local and regional government, rather than making a super-department with Transport and the Environment (Environment got split off when he left the department, but New Labour continued to treat Transport and the Regions as things not important enough for a cabinet minister), he might have got it to happen rather than being distracted by playing with the shredder and saying no to transport plans?

Perhaps if he offered the North East a body with GLA powers, rather than centralising many local government powers to the regional assembly with a token bonus power to allow the pretence of devolution from Westminster, it wouldn't have been so vehemently despised by the populus?

[jackal]

Other complaints about this strategy are the almost total radio silence on the subject of active travel, which in city centres is a simple and achievable way to reduce congestion and increase the productivity of the area.

It's really disappointing that there's no aspiration to give northern cities the sort of urban transport infrastructure that comparable European cities would have. Newcastle's Metro and Liverpool's underground railway starter kit could both benefit from some expansion, and all of Leeds, Bradford and Hull are more than big enough for multiple tram lines out to the suburbs. That's a fairly modest assessment of what ought to be provided.

TfN's remit is 'pan-Northern strategic transport improvements'. Walking, cycling and trams are generally not viable modes of travel between city regions and are therefore the responsibility of the individual city regions.

[si404]

Indeed, whilst enjoyable for road enthusiasts, it is an extremely road orientated report and not at all what anyone could really say is a strategic transport plan.

There's the intercity rail too.

There's very little on urban rapid transit, walking, cycling, or how to reduce the amount of traffic clogging up the existing network.

There's a paragraph in the report that pushes local transport onto the combined authorities/PTEs.

It would have been nice if the PTEs were included in the writing of this document and you could have had references to TfGM's tram-train proposals, etc. Even if it was just one page with stuff you'd already know about if you wanted to even if you weren't the sort that reads meeting minutes (and thus know that a Wigan - Glossop metro line has been talked about, but isn't a concrete proposal).