Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

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
Fenlander
Member
Posts: 7801
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2010 21:54
Location: south Lincolnshire

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by Fenlander »

doebag wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:04
crb11 wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2019 21:40 Maybe I'm missing something, but what benefits would this have over the existing A142/A141 route from Ely, which looks slightly shorter to me? Also, with all these plans, do we need to do something about bypassing Wisbech to give access to the northern A1101 without having to go through the town? I've gone this way to the A17 from Cambridge (both via A10/A142/A141/A47 and via A10/A1101) and that's been the bottleneck.
There was talk around here a couple of years ago about a Northern Wisbech by-pass, from the B198 Lynn Road to the A1101 Sutton Road, with a new bridge over the Ouse. Not sure how serious it was, or if it was just some politician saying 'we need this' without any further explanation. But it was in the local press.
The expensive problem there is the port of Wisbech, as long as the river needs to be navigable to sea going freighters (mostly timber these days) any bridge would need to be either high or opening like Cross Keys bridge on the A17 at Sutton Bridge.
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by c2R »

marconaf wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2019 20:44

Beyond Littleport to K.Lynn there is no need for dual, its fast and with lots of overtaking opportunities for tractor etc.
Are you driving a different road to me? It's an interminable slog ; loads of freight and sugar beet tractors - the section along the banks of the Great Ouse north of Littleport is (much like the Guyhirn to Wisbech section of the A47) of an appalling standard, with poor forward visibility and camber, and the section through west Winch (from the A134 to Hardwick) drags to the point where you'd be almost pleased to get to King's Lynn, until you realise the Hardwick roundabout is in front of you.

While I'd agree that from Ely to Downham Market a dual carriageway isn't warranted on current AADT grounds, a new alignment is, and if going to the hassle of building a new alignment through fenland terrain, you may as well dual it and improve the access to and economy of places like Downham Market and King's Lynn, as the land is fairly cheap.
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
crb11
Member
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 21:35
Location: Cambridge

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by crb11 »

Fenlander wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:28
doebag wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:04 There was talk around here a couple of years ago about a Northern Wisbech by-pass, from the B198 Lynn Road to the A1101 Sutton Road, with a new bridge over the Ouse. Not sure how serious it was, or if it was just some politician saying 'we need this' without any further explanation. But it was in the local press.
The expensive problem there is the port of Wisbech, as long as the river needs to be navigable to sea going freighters (mostly timber these days) any bridge would need to be either high or opening like Cross Keys bridge on the A17 at Sutton Bridge.
I was assuming more a western bypass, running from around the B198 roundabout across the river, joining the A1101 a bit north of the built up area. You'd need to get rid of a few houses along the B1169 but otherwise it looks relatively clear. (There's almost space to get a road in to near the A1101/B1169 junction but you might have to take too much out to be viable.)
[real name Colin]
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31475
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by roadtester »

c2R wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:51
marconaf wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2019 20:44

Beyond Littleport to K.Lynn there is no need for dual, its fast and with lots of overtaking opportunities for tractor etc.
Are you driving a different road to me? It's an interminable slog ; loads of freight and sugar beet tractors - the section along the banks of the Great Ouse north of Littleport is (much like the Guyhirn to Wisbech section of the A47) of an appalling standard, with poor forward visibility and camber, and the section through west Winch (from the A134 to Hardwick) drags to the point where you'd be almost pleased to get to King's Lynn, until you realise the Hardwick roundabout is in front of you.

While I'd agree that from Ely to Downham Market a dual carriageway isn't warranted on current AADT grounds, a new alignment is, and if going to the hassle of building a new alignment through fenland terrain, you may as well dual it and improve the access to and economy of places like Downham Market and King's Lynn, as the land is fairly cheap.
I agree that the Brandon Creek section to the north of Littleport alongside the river is abysmal in terms of alignment, surface and sight-lines, and definitely overdue an upgrade but I don’t find the rest of it too bad.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by Berk »

Fenlander wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:28
doebag wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 11:04
crb11 wrote: Mon Apr 01, 2019 21:40 Maybe I'm missing something, but what benefits would this have over the existing A142/A141 route from Ely, which looks slightly shorter to me? Also, with all these plans, do we need to do something about bypassing Wisbech to give access to the northern A1101 without having to go through the town? I've gone this way to the A17 from Cambridge (both via A10/A142/A141/A47 and via A10/A1101) and that's been the bottleneck.
There was talk around here a couple of years ago about a Northern Wisbech by-pass, from the B198 Lynn Road to the A1101 Sutton Road, with a new bridge over the Ouse. Not sure how serious it was, or if it was just some politician saying 'we need this' without any further explanation. But it was in the local press.
The expensive problem there is the port of Wisbech, as long as the river needs to be navigable to sea going freighters (mostly timber these days) any bridge would need to be either high or opening like Cross Keys bridge on the A17 at Sutton Bridge.
The reason I suggested a route across the Fens was to make a straight-line journey quicker. At present, you may have the A141/A142, but even though they’ve been improved, they are quite winding routes. The bypasses also hug the towns they avoid quite closely - tight curves usually mean roundabouts, pinch points, and congestion.

I was thinking about improving both the B1093, and the bottom bit of the A1101 and building a bridge and connecting road between them. The A1101 north of there can be declassified, or downgraded to Class II. The part from the A1122 junction can join that route instead.

Also worth considering is the fact the A1101 is frequently closed during the winter and spring due to flooding across the washes near Welney. Locals do not have an effective diversion route, and in any case the A1101 is of a very poor standard around there.

That could definitely do with some investment.
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by c2R »

Anything across at Welney would prevumably need to be elevated or heavily culverted to allow the area to continue to flood

Something like this sort of thing but on a massive scale: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.8303784 ... 312!8i6656
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
crb11
Member
Posts: 1630
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 21:35
Location: Cambridge

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by crb11 »

Berk wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 16:46 The reason I suggested a route across the Fens was to make a straight-line journey quicker. At present, you may have the A141/A142, but even though they’ve been improved, they are quite winding routes. The bypasses also hug the towns they avoid quite closely - tight curves usually mean roundabouts, pinch points, and congestion.

I was thinking about improving both the B1093, and the bottom bit of the A1101 and building a bridge and connecting road between them. The A1101 north of there can be declassified, or downgraded to Class II. The part from the A1122 junction can join that route instead.

Also worth considering is the fact the A1101 is frequently closed during the winter and spring due to flooding across the washes near Welney. Locals do not have an effective diversion route, and in any case the A1101 is of a very poor standard around there.

That could definitely do with some investment.
Measuring on Google maps, the distance from Ely (the A10/A142 junction) to March (B1101/A141 at the south end of the bypass) is 16.4 miles. Using your alternative route, Ely to where the A1101 reaches the Washes is 9.0 miles, and Manea station to March is 5.6 miles, and the gap is about 2.5 miles, for a total of 17.1 miles. So in terms of distance it seems the only benefit is to journeys between Littleport and March (and on to Peterborough).

There's clearly benefit in improving the A1101 washes crossing (although it would be technically difficult, as others have said) but it seems much more sensible to do the further improvements on the existing A1101/A1122 route north, which would improve existing journeys on the A17-Cambridge axis we've been discussing, and benefit the various villages on the route - the only thing betwen Littleport and March is Manea, and that's tiny.
[real name Colin]
marconaf
Member
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 14:42

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by marconaf »

c2R wrote: Tue Apr 02, 2019 14:51
Are you driving a different road to me? It's an interminable slog ; loads of freight and sugar beet tractors - the section along the banks of the Great Ouse north of Littleport is (much like the Guyhirn to Wisbech section of the A47) of an appalling standard, with poor forward visibility and camber, and the section through west Winch (from the A134 to Hardwick) drags to the point where you'd be almost pleased to get to King's Lynn, until you realise the Hardwick roundabout is in front of you.
Yeah but that windy bit is actually good for overtaking as the tractors/lorries cant get speed up and the sightlines are not as bad as you might initially think (helped by the abandoned camera on the straight at the end) - never noticed any camber issues? Ironically given the laybys it has already had some straightening! Indeed most of the route is a bypass already of all the villages and thus NSL upto West Winch.

After you cross the Brandon Creek bridge, which gives you excellent sight lines and a downhill push - from there to Winch is pretty straight and very fast. The long straight up towards the garden centre is a joy, and its wide and gentle curves after that.

Admitedly I came off at Downham and yes the Winch bit to Hardwock is dire but that is already planned for a bypass.

I could buy into bypassing to that bridge from Littleport, but the entire thing only needs S2 really.

I msut admit that I started using the A134 and then diving onto the B1152 to Lakenheath (to miss Brandon) to take the A11 south and in reverse; but that was more about missing the A10 south of Ely (and Milton / A14 to M11), or during the Ely works which screwed up the A142 to A11.

I used to use the Queen Adelaide route (hell of a lot of fun!) - which presumably post southern Ely bypass looks even more attractive than the actual A10 north?

Alterntively, there are some almost empty but straight and fast roads from the north Littleport roundabout that drop you onto the A142 near Soham (via A1101/B1382/B1104 from map). Very bumpy in places but my kids loved that and the feeling of being in the countryside was nice too!
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by c2R »

marconaf wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 02:39
Yeah but that windy bit is actually good for overtaking as the tractors/lorries cant get speed up and the sightlines are not as bad as you might initially think (helped by the abandoned camera on the straight at the end) - never noticed any camber issues? Ironically given the laybys it has already had some straightening! Indeed most of the route is a bypass already of all the villages and thus NSL upto West Winch.

The camber is wrong on most of the stretch - see here: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4792372 ... 312!8i6656

This fairly typical - the road curves to the left, but the slope of the road is down from the river bank, rather than banked for the curve - this can cause vehicle instability, particularly in HGVs or larger vehicles. I agree that the worst parts have been straightened, particularly the bit north of Brandon Creek - but that which remains is still bad - and as I said, given the low cost of land but high cost of building a stable road across it, if bypassing the stretch the marginal cost of making it D2 over S2 can't be that high - compared at least with doing it at a later date (see: Acle Straight).
Is there a road improvement project going on near you? Help us to document it on the SABRE Wiki - help is available in the Digest forum.
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31475
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by roadtester »

c2R wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 08:46
marconaf wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 02:39
Yeah but that windy bit is actually good for overtaking as the tractors/lorries cant get speed up and the sightlines are not as bad as you might initially think (helped by the abandoned camera on the straight at the end) - never noticed any camber issues? Ironically given the laybys it has already had some straightening! Indeed most of the route is a bypass already of all the villages and thus NSL upto West Winch.

The camber is wrong on most of the stretch - see here: https://www.google.com/maps/@52.4792372 ... 312!8i6656

This fairly typical - the road curves to the left, but the slope of the road is down from the river bank, rather than banked for the curve - this can cause vehicle instability, particularly in HGVs or larger vehicles. I agree that the worst parts have been straightened, particularly the bit north of Brandon Creek - but that which remains is still bad - and as I said, given the low cost of land but high cost of building a stable road across it, if bypassing the stretch the marginal cost of making it D2 over S2 can't be that high - compared at least with doing it at a later date (see: Acle Straight).
Those GSV pictures give no idea how horrible it is to actually drive along - it just feels all wrong!

I always dislike driving along the Brandon Creek bit because it’s also where my first Renault Fleunce got written off on the section near the speed camera and the big lay-by - although that was thanks to an enormous piece of debris in the road rather than the quality of the road itself.

I’ve often idly wondered why the A10 crosses the river twice near Littleport rather than just staying on the western side, although I’ve never explored the terrain on that side for its suitability.

PS - ignore that last bit - I’ve just realised after looking at the map that one of the bridges is over the Little Ouse, not the Great Ouse!
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
marconaf
Member
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 14:42

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by marconaf »

Route wise its all dominated by ground. I think a lot of crayoning misses just how wet and unstable the ground is. Whilst North/West of Littleport/A10 looks like open countryside just like anywhere else, it is basically a pumping system fail from being swamp and sea with nothing but sediment beneath you anyway.

The lack of settlements and that main routes skirt the area (A10 is based upon not having to repeatedly cross the Ouse as it gets wider, and that East of it the ground starts to rise into what becomes the conventional rolling countryside of North Norfolk) shows to me that anything new cutting through the fenlands would be a major engineering undertaking even for a decent S2, let alone D2 or M type roads.

Having now lived in the area and Lincolnshire, the effect upon roads of ground movement is incredible. Although I do seek out some minor bumpy ones as taking the kids down them is much cheaper than Alton Towers :-)

As for the camber, still dont really recall that being an issue in that section. An online upgrade at relatively little cost would fix that and straighten - D2 would be very costly given bridges and dealing with properties fronting etc. The option of short DC lengths to let people pass (as Im used to seeing a lot of in southern england) seems to be a past tendancy now? (Or is it just accidental leftovers of more comprehensive previous plans!)

Given this already bypasses the villages and is pretty freeflowing - I cant see how this is important compared to many similar routes that still go through the centre of places.

A few years ago I was chatting to a regional politician and asked about A10, it wasnt on any list (bar Winch) - even the A47 wasnt seen as a priority yet dualling that completely (followed by A17) would be my priorities - plus the A10 south of Ely is in desperate need.

I also think the A134 takes more HGV traffic than the A10 north of littleport and improving that would be preferable. I wonder if post A14 work, stuff from Suffolk will use that to go North as I suspect a lot of Suffolk/Norfolk HGV traffic is heading (“draining”) to A17 at K.Lynn.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by KeithW »

marconaf wrote: Wed Apr 03, 2019 11:00 Route wise its all dominated by ground. I think a lot of crayoning misses just how wet and unstable the ground is. Whilst North/West of Littleport/A10 looks like open countryside just like anywhere else, it is basically a pumping system fail from being swamp and sea with nothing but sediment beneath you anyway.

The lack of settlements and that main routes skirt the area (A10 is based upon not having to repeatedly cross the Ouse as it gets wider, and that East of it the ground starts to rise into what becomes the conventional rolling countryside of North Norfolk) shows to me that anything new cutting through the fenlands would be a major engineering undertaking even for a decent S2, let alone D2 or M type roads.

Having now lived in the area and Lincolnshire, the effect upon roads of ground movement is incredible. Although I do seek out some minor bumpy ones as taking the kids down them is much cheaper than Alton Towers :-)
Its noticeable how many apparently straight and flat fen roads have undulations induced by drying and settlement that can be severe enough to make you lose control even when driving within the NSL. I have seen the same problem in the Somerset levels. There have been several fatals over the years as result when people decide the 40 or 50 mph limit is ridiculous. Many of the roads, especially the minor ones are essentially floating on the bog. That said one my favourite drives remains the B1040. When I lived in Gamlingay I would often get off the A1 at Peterborough and head south from Whittlesey through Ramsey, Warboys and St Ives
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by jackal »

The full study entitled 'Feasibility of extending the M11 to the A47: Strategic Outline Case' can be found in the middle of these minutes: http://cambridgeshirepeterborough-ca.go ... 042019.pdf

Three corridors were shortlisted:

M11-A47 route options - Copy.PNG

The standard is assumed to be grade-separated DC. Costs (including 44% optimism bias but excluding any associated improvements to the A14) are estimated at £1bn-£1.25bn, with the central route cheapest, the eastern route most expensive. Even with the optimism adjustment this seems wildly optimistic at little over £20m per km.

BCRs were over 2 for all options, but comfortably highest for the eastern route (3.72). As the study acknowledges, the southern half of the eastern route is essentially the separately proposed A10 scheme. It therefore also considers the case for the western and central routes if the A10 improvement is assumed as already built, and finds they still have over 2 BCR.

It doesn't, however, appraise creating the eastern route by adding the northern section to a previously built A10 DC route. Given the A10 is ahead in the queue, and the eastern route had the highest BCR anyway, that seems the most likely way that something like the scheme would eventually be achieved. Major improvements to the A14 Cambridge Northern Bypass and Milton junction would presumably be required.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19205
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by KeithW »

jackal wrote: Fri Apr 05, 2019 12:47 It doesn't, however, appraise creating the eastern route by adding the northern section to a previously built A10 DC route. Given the A10 is ahead in the queue, and the eastern route had the highest BCR anyway, that seems the most likely way that something like the scheme would eventually be achieved. Major improvements to the A14 Cambridge Northern Bypass and Milton junction would presumably be required.
Option 4 sort of does this as the document states it would follow the A10 corridor to Ely. They recognise they cannot really cost this on the basis that somebody else will dual the A10 from Milton to Ely, apart from anything else they will need to upgrade the junctions and you cannot base a proposal on a hypothetical future project.

The short list comes down to Options 1,2 and 4

Option 1 would be a brand new road based on simple straight line route between Northstowe and Wisbech . I doubt that anyone will be impressed by the notion of using the B1050 from Northstowe to Bar Hill.

Option 2 would be another new route basically from Bar Hill to Northstowe, Mepal and Chatteris - the sting in the tail is that this involves on a crossing of the Ouse washes which is not only environmentally sensitive but bad ground for a road.

Option 4 follows the A10 to Ely and then upgrades the West Fen road and B1141 to join the A1101 north of Elm. basically the Welney route - nuff said.

My suspicion is that 2 and 4 are deliberate nasty routes intended to get people to think 'well Option 1 is not too bad'

I am somewhat bemused that such a high weight is given the shorter routes taken by Options 1 & 2 given that both dump their traffic onto the A14 at Bar Hill and basically ignore the problem of traffic proceeds from there. At least option 4 involves a road that pretty much directly serves the Research Park, Science Park and Milton Park and Ride. I doubt HE would be happy about any new route that required major junction changes at Bar Hill to handle commuter traffic. A large part of the reason for the new A14 upgrade design is the desire to segregate such traffic from the strategic route. They do however acknowledge that the Bar Hill junction will be somewhat constrained - no kidding bat man !

Ii is also clear that this is no M11 extension its basically a D2 all purpose road and if they want to GSJ all the junctions I think they have underestimated what that will involve. I note they are basing all costing on an opening in 2026. I suspect the enquiry will take longer than that. They also make it clear that the estimates are essentially guesswork intended to give order of magnitude comparisons of the costs for the different options.

If you concluded that I was not impressed you would be correct.
marconaf
Member
Posts: 290
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2018 14:42

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by marconaf »

Hmmm....

Not convinced by any of those options. Sensibly on a budgetary basis this needs to tie into the A10 Milton-Ely upgrade. I struggle to imagine the engineering of a DC road heading across the washes and see no chance of it surviving a political and environmental storm.

Hence I suppose Options 1/2 which as you say, then don't look "so bad". Yet the lack of post A14 flow I agree undermines it.

All in all, pretty poor really yet the requirement, to head N/NW with a high quality road to Wisbeach etc. is a very real one.


To be fair, we should probably put this on the back burner and focus on Milton and A10 to Ely which is (a) desperately needed now (b) fairly obvious in terms of the online/offline solution.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by jackal »

KeithW wrote: Fri Apr 05, 2019 16:24
jackal wrote: Fri Apr 05, 2019 12:47 It doesn't, however, appraise creating the eastern route by adding the northern section to a previously built A10 DC route. Given the A10 is ahead in the queue, and the eastern route had the highest BCR anyway, that seems the most likely way that something like the scheme would eventually be achieved. Major improvements to the A14 Cambridge Northern Bypass and Milton junction would presumably be required.
Option 4 sort of does this as the document states it would follow the A10 corridor to Ely. They recognise they cannot really cost this on the basis that somebody else will dual the A10 from Milton to Ely, apart from anything else they will need to upgrade the junctions and you cannot base a proposal on a hypothetical future project.
They already 'base[d] a proposal on a hypothetical future project'. This is the extra scenario they ran for options 1 and 2 where the A10 improvement to Ely was assumed as already built.

So what I'd have wanted to see was the same scenario for option 4. This would effectively ask how cost effective option 4 would be minus the cost and benefit of the A10 improvement.
User avatar
Berk
Member
Posts: 9779
Joined: Fri Sep 10, 2010 02:36
Location: somewhere in zone 1

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by Berk »

This article may shed some light on a potential solution - to the Milton Junction problem, at least.

As has well been observed, this junction is both disruptive, and disrupting - when improvement works are planned. There have been plenty of schemes in the last 10 years, none of which really seem to have finished.

So I think the answer is not to modify this junction, but to build a new one altogether - slightly to the east. This would have new, improved access to and from the A10. Whether or not the existing junction would stay open remains to be seen.

The reason for this is a proposal to relocate the Milton sewage works so that a new neighbourhood can be built. That would surely justify (sigh) a new junction, and access to/from the A10, as without that it would be pretty pointless.

It seems so ingenious, it’s a wonder no-one had thought of it before.
Al__S
Member
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Mar 04, 2017 10:56

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by Al__S »

I'm at a loss as to where you would put your new junction Berk. Where it is connects the realigned A1309 Milton Road to the A10 Milton bypass.

Opposite the sewage works site is Milton Country Park.

Are you suggesting building a new junction and thus new Milton bypass that would pretty much completely destroy the Country Park? Because i think suggesting that in public would be bordering on suicidal.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by jackal »

Here's my rebuild for Milton Interchange:

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ima ... -_Copy.png

All movements are retained except A10 to/from Milton, which is virtually a U-turn and low demand. All movements between A10, A14 and A1039 are freeflow.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31475
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Northern M11 extension into the Fens is to be quietly allowed to die

Post by roadtester »

jackal wrote: Mon Apr 15, 2019 10:39 Here's my rebuild for Milton Interchange:

https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/ima ... -_Copy.png

All movements are retained except A10 to/from Milton, which is virtually a U-turn and low demand. All movements between A10, A14 and A1039 are freeflow.
I use A10 to/from Milton all the time to access Tesco, and in particular its filling station (which is just off the small roundabout on the right of the pic).

My guess would be that that is actually quite a popular flow - or at least one that people would moan about if it were removed.

I suspect quite a lot of people use it to access the industrial estate just to the right of the same roundabout as well.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
Post Reply