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.
Berk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2019 15:38
I was thinking about this yesterday. If you only focus on Ely-Cambridge (which is fine as a Stage 1, but if you don’t move forward with plans for Stage 2), what about the section between Trumpington and Royston?? A road doesn’t usually exist in isolation - it has to connect somewhere.
My time in Cambridge tells me that the A10/A505 corridor is a well-sought and quick (or used to be) route to the A1. And gets a fair amount of use from commuters coming from the south.
You could even argue a case for Stage 3 (extending dialling along the A505 to the M11).
I’ve often thought this too. Quite often, just for the sake of variety, I’ll strike out from the M25 home to Cambs along the A10 rather than the A1(M). It’s quite a varied and interesting drive if the traffic isn’t too heavy.
Much of the existing dualling at the southern end is to a high standard - I think there was a plan for the dualling to be extended northwards at one time that got dropped.
Definitely the A505 should be dualled between the A10 and the A11. This is probably a cheaper and easier ask than dualling of the A10 and bypassing of Harston and providing a new bridge over the railway at Foxton. This probably would add some more traffic to the M11 between Duxford and the A10, but the capacity issues with the M11 are currently between the A10 and Girton anyway.
Royston itself could do with a bypass for the A10, but I suspect it's always been shelved as being on the challenging side - the landscape is particularly undulating with chalk healthland habitats, particularly on the west side of the town, so an eastern bypass is probably the best option, but that itself is likely to be challenging in construction as well as public opinion acceptance.
Berk wrote: ↑Sun Jul 21, 2019 15:38
I was thinking about this yesterday. If you only focus on Ely-Cambridge (which is fine as a Stage 1, but if you don’t move forward with plans for Stage 2), what about the section between Trumpington and Royston?? A road doesn’t usually exist in isolation - it has to connect somewhere.
My time in Cambridge tells me that the A10/A505 corridor is a well-sought and quick (or used to be) route to the A1. And gets a fair amount of use from commuters coming from the south.
You could even argue a case for Stage 3 (extending dialling along the A505 to the M11).
I’ve often thought this too. Quite often, just for the sake of variety, I’ll strike out from the M25 home to Cambs along the A10 rather than the A1(M). It’s quite a varied and interesting drive if the traffic isn’t too heavy.
Much of the existing dualling at the southern end is to a high standard - I think there was a plan for the dualling to be extended northwards at one time that got dropped.
Definitely the A505 should be dualled between the A10 and the A11. This is probably a cheaper and easier ask than dualling of the A10 and bypassing of Harston and providing a new bridge over the railway at Foxton. This probably would add some more traffic to the M11 between Duxford and the A10, but the capacity issues with the M11 are currently between the A10 and Girton anyway.
Royston itself could do with a bypass for the A10, but I suspect it's always been shelved as being on the challenging side - the landscape is particularly undulating with chalk healthland habitats, particularly on the west side of the town, so an eastern bypass is probably the best option, but that itself is likely to be challenging in construction as well as public opinion acceptance.
Yes agreed - although I don't think there's ever been a grand plan to dual the whole lot. I could be mistaken but I vaguely recall there being a dropped plan to extend the existing dualling a few miles north, presumably to or incorporating the Buntingford bypass but I can't find any reference to this now.
c2R wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 09:57
Definitely the A505 should be dualled between the A10 and the A11. This is probably a cheaper and easier ask than dualling of the A10 and bypassing of Harston and providing a new bridge over the railway at Foxton. This probably would add some more traffic to the M11 between Duxford and the A10, but the capacity issues with the M11 are currently between the A10 and Girton anyway.
Royston itself could do with a bypass for the A10, but I suspect it's always been shelved as being on the challenging side - the landscape is particularly undulating with chalk healthland habitats, particularly on the west side of the town, so an eastern bypass is probably the best option, but that itself is likely to be challenging in construction as well as public opinion acceptance.
Dualling the A505 would certainly be nice but the question is who will pay ? Its not a strategic road so the cost would fall on Cambridgeshire County Council and I suspect they see the A10 as a higher priority. The best justification may be safety, the A505 between Royston and the M11 has had a lot of accidents as I recall. There are a considerable number of flat junctions and frustration leads to risky overtaking.
roadtester wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:11
Yes agreed - although I don't think there's ever been a grand plan to dual the whole lot. I could be mistaken but I vaguely recall there being a dropped plan to extend the existing dualling a few miles north, presumably to or incorporating the Buntingford bypass but I can't find any reference to this now.
It's most frustrating that the developers or all the many new houses in Buntingford haven't been obliged as part of the master plan to all contribute a bit towards improving the access to the town, even if the existing junctions between the end of the existing dual carraigeway and the southern end of the bypass could be improved as a single carriageway with turn lanes and better sightlines.
KeithW wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 10:52
Dualling the A505 would certainly be nice but the question is who will pay ? Its not a strategic road so the cost would fall on Cambridgeshire County Council and I suspect they see the A10 as a higher priority. The best justification may be safety, the A505 between Royston and the M11 has had a lot of accidents as I recall. There are a considerable number of flat junctions and frustration leads to risky overtaking.
I suppose with regard to the who would pay question, it depends I suppose if it seen as an either/or choice... the existing A10 could be downgraded to non-primary with weight limits, Foxton level crossing not replaced, and no bypass of Harston and traffic to Cambridge could all be signed via the A505, and junctions improved at either end - it's only 2.5 miles longer from the centre of Royston to Trumpington via the A505/M11; and certainly a much better route for Royston-Ely traffic (using the A11-Newmarket-A142 route) than using the A10/M11/A14/A10 so it has other wider benefits at routing medium distance Cambridgeshire traffic away from Cambridge
c2R wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 09:57
Definitely the A505 should be dualled between the A10 and the A11. This is probably a cheaper and easier ask than dualling of the A10 and bypassing of Harston and providing a new bridge over the railway at Foxton. This probably would add some more traffic to the M11 between Duxford and the A10, but the capacity issues with the M11 are currently between the A10 and Girton anyway.
Royston itself could do with a bypass for the A10, but I suspect it's always been shelved as being on the challenging side - the landscape is particularly undulating with chalk healthland habitats, particularly on the west side of the town, so an eastern bypass is probably the best option, but that itself is likely to be challenging in construction as well as public opinion acceptance.
Dualling the A505 would certainly be nice but the question is who will pay ? Its not a strategic road so the cost would fall on Cambridgeshire County Council and I suspect they see the A10 as a higher priority. The best justification may be safety, the A505 between Royston and the M11 has had a lot of accidents as I recall. There are a considerable number of flat junctions and frustration leads to risky overtaking.
The section between Royston and Duxford/M11 is certainly the worst stretch - long straight but with a lot of rural side roads and a single accident can block the road for hours. The problem would be dualling/bypassing it right to the M11 as the Duxfield airfield gets in the way.
The Duxford to Granta Park/A11 section isn't too bad (apart from at peak time or when there is a big event at the airfield) and there have been several safety measures implemented over recent years. There was a plan to upgrade the A505/A1301 roundabout as part of the proposed AgriTech park on the land between the A1301 and A11 but that seems to have gone quiet after the initial design was knocked back by planners.
However, if the choice was between the A505 or A10 upgrade then the A10 would have to be the priority - especially fixing the horrendous level crossing at Foxton which can add 10-15 mins to a journey if you time things badly.
c2R wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:09
I suppose with regard to the who would pay question, it depends I suppose if it seen as an either/or choice... the existing A10 could be downgraded to non-primary with weight limits, Foxton level crossing not replaced, and no bypass of Harston and traffic to Cambridge could all be signed via the A505, and junctions improved at either end - it's only 2.5 miles longer from the centre of Royston to Trumpington via the A505/M11; and certainly a much better route for Royston-Ely traffic (using the A11-Newmarket-A142 route) than using the A10/M11/A14/A10 so it has other wider benefits at routing medium distance Cambridgeshire traffic away from Cambridge
There has been what looks to be quite serious work gone into looking at options to get rid of the Foxton level crossing : https://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/document ... %20hub.pdf
I haven't read it in detail but the report talks of an increase to six trains each way per hour at Foxton in 2018 and AADT on the A10 of 16,000, states that Network Rail has identified Foxton as a suitable site for evaluation and proposes scheme completion for December 2023.
I've just put Baldock to Ely into Google Maps and it gives me :
i) A505/A1198/A603/M11/A14/A10 54 minutes
ii) A505/A10/M11/A14/A10 54 minutes
iii) A505/M11/A14/A10 55 minutes
iv) A505/A11/A14/A142 57 minutes.
I guess at peak times with long queues at Foxton that route becomes relatively less attractive, but certainly the above times accord with my experience off peak. I normally stick to option ii).
c2R wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:09
I suppose with regard to the who would pay question, it depends I suppose if it seen as an either/or choice... the existing A10 could be downgraded to non-primary with weight limits, Foxton level crossing not replaced, and no bypass of Harston and traffic to Cambridge could all be signed via the A505, and junctions improved at either end - it's only 2.5 miles longer from the centre of Royston to Trumpington via the A505/M11; and certainly a much better route for Royston-Ely traffic (using the A11-Newmarket-A142 route) than using the A10/M11/A14/A10 so it has other wider benefits at routing medium distance Cambridgeshire traffic away from Cambridge
There has been what looks to be quite serious work gone into looking at options to get rid of the Foxton level crossing : https://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/document ... %20hub.pdf
I haven't read it in detail but the report talks of an increase to six trains each way per hour at Foxton in 2018 and AADT on the A10 of 16,000, states that Network Rail has identified Foxton as a suitable site for evaluation and proposes scheme completion for December 2023.
I've just put Baldock to Ely into Google Maps and it gives me :
i) A505/A1198/A603/M11/A14/A10 54 minutes
ii) A505/A10/M11/A14/A10 54 minutes
iii) A505/M11/A14/A10 55 minutes
iv) A505/A11/A14/A142 57 minutes.
I guess at peak times with long queues at Foxton that route becomes relatively less attractive, but certainly the above times accord with my experience off peak. I normally stick to option ii).
Hmmm - interesting. I don't think I've ever done Baldock to Ely but but as someone who lives in the area and know the roads well, my gut instinct to avoid the likelihood of delays would be iv) via A11/A14/A142 as I have a natural aversion to the A10 (both the parts north and south of Cambridge)
c2R wrote: ↑Tue Jul 23, 2019 11:09
I suppose with regard to the who would pay question, it depends I suppose if it seen as an either/or choice... the existing A10 could be downgraded to non-primary with weight limits, Foxton level crossing not replaced, and no bypass of Harston and traffic to Cambridge could all be signed via the A505, and junctions improved at either end - it's only 2.5 miles longer from the centre of Royston to Trumpington via the A505/M11; and certainly a much better route for Royston-Ely traffic (using the A11-Newmarket-A142 route) than using the A10/M11/A14/A10 so it has other wider benefits at routing medium distance Cambridgeshire traffic away from Cambridge
There has been what looks to be quite serious work gone into looking at options to get rid of the Foxton level crossing : https://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/document ... %20hub.pdf
I haven't read it in detail but the report talks of an increase to six trains each way per hour at Foxton in 2018 and AADT on the A10 of 16,000, states that Network Rail has identified Foxton as a suitable site for evaluation and proposes scheme completion for December 2023.
I've just put Baldock to Ely into Google Maps and it gives me :
i) A505/A1198/A603/M11/A14/A10 54 minutes
ii) A505/A10/M11/A14/A10 54 minutes
iii) A505/M11/A14/A10 55 minutes
iv) A505/A11/A14/A142 57 minutes.
I guess at peak times with long queues at Foxton that route becomes relatively less attractive, but certainly the above times accord with my experience off peak. I normally stick to option ii).
Hmmm - interesting. I don't think I've ever done Baldock to Ely but but as someone who lives in the area and know the roads well, my gut instinct to avoid the likelihood of delays would be iv) via A11/A14/A142 as I have a natural aversion to the A10 (both the parts north and south of Cambridge)
I semi-regularly do a similar journey to visit a elderly relative, and always go A505/A11 east of Cambridge, and then A142 and up past Queen Adelaide, re-joining the A10 to Downham north of Littleport.
I did try the A10 from Royston to Cambridge again last night, and got caught by two separate trains at the level crossing!
And this article from about a month ago has the mayor's somewhat vague plans to accelerate local road and rail projects - including A10 and A47 improvements. A bit short on the detail of the "how" it has to be said!
How likely is this at any point in the future? I've seen the idea thrown around and it seems to be getting more acceptance over time, and although Lincolnshire would appreciate a motorway direct from London, will this realistically ever happen?
RIS1 is over , RIS2 is underway and RIS3 pipeline preliminary pipeline sketched out. With some RIS2 projects being pushed into RIS3 and a mountain of debt from the Covid crisis I dont see any likelihood of new major developments. I suspect the best that can be expected is some minor tweaking and improvements on the A1. There are a number of very nasty flat junctions on the A1 in Lincolnshire and they may be able to get replaced on safety grounds as has happened elsewhere.
There are few strategic roads in Lincolnshire and the county council has barely enough of a transport budget for maintenance so I say little chance of them doing anything. When it comes to longer term transport options government focus is switching more towards rail with HS2, Northern Powerhouse Rail and the Beeching Reversal fund. This is seen as more sustainable in the long term. Frankly reopening a railway for freight and building intermodal hubs is a lot cheaper than building a road that can handle HGV's. https://www.railengineer.co.uk/500-mill ... -reversal/
There's also potential of longer term improvements to the A10 to facilitate further growth at Ely, and better connectivity for Wisbech has also been mooted in the past, although I agree that it's likely that the best that this will see is A47 improvements.
I can't see it happening anywhere in the planning horizon either, for several reasons.
Firstly I think there's a strong case for waiting two or three years after the pandemic to find out to what extent travel demand has permanently changed before assessing major new projects.
Secondly, there just isn't the money to fund big new infrastructure projects without a decent economic case, which means that such a road is only ever likely to be justifiable as an enabler for huge amounts of house building and development along the route.
Thirdly, other big road projects are being cancelled, watered down, delayed, or pushed into the long grass eg. Oxbridge expressway and Sheffield - Manchester, so why should a lower priority project such as an M11 extension queue jump in the priority list?
Fourthly, a lot of strategic long distance traffic benefits of an M11 extension could be provided at much lower cost with a package of A1 improvements, as Keith W has suggested.
c2R wrote: ↑Sat Feb 27, 2021 13:30
There's also potential of longer term improvements to the A10 to facilitate further growth at Ely, and better connectivity for Wisbech has also been mooted in the past, although I agree that it's likely that the best that this will see is A47 improvements.
The A10 is not a HE road nor are the roads to Wisbech etc. I dont see much likelihood of the County Council or Cambridge and/or Peterborough Combined Authority raising the money in the short term despite Mayor Palmer's posturing. He is the man who proposed building an underground metro in Cambridge as well as upgrades to the A10 and A47 and an extension of the M11 to link Chatteris, March and Peterborough. In reality his annual budget for transportation improvements is £20 million.
HE are upgrading the A47 and tts possible that reopening the Wisbech railway line could happen with money from the Beeching Reversal Fund it would be a relatively cheap scheme if Network Rail are happy with reinstating the old level crossings. https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... d-stations
