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.
roadtester wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 09:03
But I can show you the A10 between Ely and Cambridge, which twenty years ago was a pleasant, meandering, lightly-trafficked free-flowing twelve-mile rural tootle but which is now a slow-crawling traffic jam for most of its length for several hours a day in each peak. That's not surprising considering Ely has in that time doubled in population and is a prime dormitory for one of the world's hottest local economies - and yet dualling is still a distant prospect.
Indeed BUT in my mind we should be doing more along the lines of expecting the developers of the new housing estates to contribute to improving the roads that serve them. Take the examples of St Neots and Godmanchester, there are significant numbers of new houses being built which are going to funnel more traffic onto already congested roads but the developers largely get a free ride on this.
In North Yorkshire I live just off the A172 in Marton-in-Cleveland which is an extreme example of this. 30 years ago it was also a pleasant free flowing road, however unchecked development has meant that it has become the road to hell with the S2 A174 at the end of my road now having an AADT of over 25k. It can take 20 minutes to cover the 1 mile down to Ladgate Lane at peak period which has resulted in large scale rat running down residential streets and developers are still being allowed to build on greenfield sites along it. It makes the A10 look like a country lane. One of the up sides of the whole Covid thing is traffic levels are back to where they were 40 years ago. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.51983 ... 6656?hl=en
Developers are now being allowed to build houses on land that had been reserved for use as the corridor for a much needed eastern bypass of Middlesbrough as through some quirk of local governnment reorganisation this land falls under Redcar and Cleveland council who could care less about the traffic problems they cause by permitting development here.
This is certainly true of Ely > Cambridge on the A10. Ely itself is getting hundreds if not thousands of new houses, but there are huge new developments along the route as well, with, say, Waterbeach expected to have 6,500 new houses.
Luckily it's still a very spacious region, so even that pace of development, if concentrated, doesn't affect its essentially rural nature too much. But you can't tip that much extra traffic onto the existing roads and expect them to cope!
The thing with the Fens is that the nature of the geology, the number of waterways and paucity of bridges means that the connectivity of the road system is very low. a road closure can mean very long diversions. There is only the one sensible route from Ely to Cambridge.
I'm sure that plenty of other places have similar issues!
B1040 wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 16:29
The thing with the Fens is that the nature of the geology, the number of waterways and paucity of bridges means that the connectivity of the road system is very low. a road closure can mean very long diversions. There is only the one sensible route from Ely to Cambridge.
I'm sure that plenty of other places have similar issues!
Yes - and yet the growth continues.
This afternoon, I have been dipping in and out of the proceedings of the planning committee of my local council, East Cambs, which is taking place via Zoom and going out on YouTube thanks to the coronavirus crisis. One proposal is to add 110 houses in single development to the village of Isleham, which apparently has an existing population of 2300. At a guess, 110 houses is going to add 300-400 to that in a village that has almost no amenities. One sop offered by the developer is to put in a new bus stop - but one with no shelter, and for a service that amounts to just one bus per day. Almost all of the new residents will have to drive elsewhere to work or do a decent shop, and a lot of kids will have to go to other villages/towns for school as well thanks to limited local capacity.
Another village, Wicken has a planning application to put in 19 new dwellings. Doesn't sound very much until you realise that Wicken, combined with the next place, Upware, has a total population of about 800, so again a significant percentage addition, just from this one development.
All that means more traffic on the roads.
And that's just one planning meeting - bear in mind too, that places like these have often already absorbed a lot of new development, relatively speaking.
To be honest with regards to the A10, whilst there are certain bottlenecks along the route, I actually believe that route should be downgrade in terms of status. Why does such a road continue to possess such an important name? It can be an important route in London, and past cambridge, but it seems like it should be given a three digit name rather than a two digit one that implies some level of importance.
I believe the A120, coulda t least in parts, be given a motorway upgrade, maybe M120? Between the M11 and Marks Tey. Especially if Stansted ever expands, it could be useful. I believe it was given trunk status in 2005 so the government still obviously considers it an important route
EDIT: M11 to Braintree - there are some roundabouts so unless a bypass or flyover is built around these bits it would have to stay A120
qwertyK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 18:54
To be honest with regards to the A10, whilst there are certain bottlenecks along the route, I actually believe that route should be downgrade in terms of status. Why does such a road continue to possess such an important name? It can be an important route in London, and past cambridge, but it seems like it should be given a three digit name rather than a two digit one that implies some level of importance.
What's the point? There are lots of not very important two-digit roads, many of them less important than the A10.
Where is the route that is crying out to take over the A10 designation that is more important?
Much of the A10 is in any case already HQDC. Why downgrade a road which is already important and which will only be improved/become more important in the future?
trickstat wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 19:26
I also don't want the A10's number changed as I think it is the only one of the 1-99 A roads that I have driven the whole of!
Without stressing the medical analogy, the A10 should be a main artery for this part of the country.
However it is so slow and clogged up that many would rather use lesser roads through the villages of Haddenham, Cottenham, Willingham and Longstanton to travel south.
I never wanted to use the A10, and would often cross it at Ely on the A142 and access the A14 at Newmarket if heading south of Cambridge.
North of Ely it is still accessed by lots of residential areas who have very few alternatives.
qwertyK wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 18:54
To be honest with regards to the A10, whilst there are certain bottlenecks along the route, I actually believe that route should be downgrade in terms of status. Why does such a road continue to possess such an important name? It can be an important route in London, and past cambridge, but it seems like it should be given a three digit name rather than a two digit one that implies some level of importance.
I believe the A120, coulda t least in parts, be given a motorway upgrade, maybe M120? Between the M11 and Marks Tey. Especially if Stansted ever expands, it could be useful. I believe it was given trunk status in 2005 so the government still obviously considers it an important route
EDIT: M11 to Braintree - there are some roundabouts so unless a bypass or flyover is built around these bits it would have to stay A120
The A10 is an important road in its own right, changing its name achieves nothing except useless expenditure. Its actually a rather important road through Hertfordshire. It would actually be rather nice to bypass Royston, Harston and Foxton where it is just as overloaded as Cambridge to Ely. Coupled with a modest improvement to the A1122/A1101 it could hugely improve connectivity to the Fens and Wash.
The A120 is 61 miles long upgrading it to motorway will cost one heck of a lot of money not least when it comes to providing local access roads. You cannot just wave a flag and ban all those other classes of vehicles. Its also of variable quality and shares use with the A12 around Colchester and of course forms the Bishops Stortford and Brainree bypasses. Any money available would be better spent completing the dualling IMHO.
trickstat wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 19:26
I also don't want the A10's number changed as I think it is the only one of the 1-99 A roads that I have driven the whole of!
In one go? Doubt anyone ever does that!
Not in one go. My longest journey on it would be from Royston to King's Lynn.
trickstat wrote: ↑Mon Apr 20, 2020 19:26
I also don't want the A10's number changed as I think it is the only one of the 1-99 A roads that I have driven the whole of!
In one go? Doubt anyone ever does that!
Not in one go. My longest journey on it would be from Royston to King's Lynn.
I do actually quite often use the lower section as an alternative to the M11 or A1/A1(M) to get to Ely from the M25, but I think the occasions on which someone would do it all the way from within the M25 to KIng's Lynn would be very rare indeed!
The A10 north of Ely/Littleport I always enjoyed, much quieter after the slog up there, good overtaking opportunities and a real sense of winding through and over the fens then into the higher ground closer to Lynn.
Problem with upgrading Cambridge to Ely is of course Milton. It's already a big roundabout, Freeflowing links seems rather difficult and I'm not sure what the main routes are (A10 over the top?). Doesn't seem scope to bypass and add a new junction?
Roadtester I think you meant Hertford which is bypassed by the A10 to the east Stevenage is some miles west of Hertford and bypassed to the west by the A1
millionmiledriver wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 14:46
Roadtester I think you meant Hertford which is bypassed by the A10 to the east Stevenage is some miles west of Hertford and bypassed to the west by the A1
I think he may have been referring to the section between Ware and the A120 which is a few miles to east of Stevenage. This was built about 20 years after the DC between Ware and Enfield.
millionmiledriver wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 14:46
Roadtester I think you meant Hertford which is bypassed by the A10 to the east Stevenage is some miles west of Hertford and bypassed to the west by the A1
I think he may have been referring to the section between Ware and the A120 which is a few miles to east of Stevenage. This was built about 20 years after the DC between Ware and Enfield.
Yes - that's the bit I mean, although I agree millionmiledriver is correct to say that it is too far east of Stevenage to be bypassing it as such at that stage.
I wonder if they'll ever consider another M12 as a bypass of the Eastern Avenue.
Reports from the time suggest economically it was a sound investment and would be cheaper than upgrading major bottlenecks like Gants Hill.
I guess in reality the M11 and A13 to a degree act as bypasses. All you would need to bypass in theory is the section between the M25 at Brentwood and Wanstead. Then you could have a motorway join the M11 link road.
There's a lot of countryside on that side of the A12 that could be built but I see things getting problematic as you approach Chigwell etc.
qwertyK wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 22:09
I wonder if they'll ever consider another M12 as a bypass of the Eastern Avenue.
Reports from the time suggest economically it was a sound investment and would be cheaper than upgrading major bottlenecks like Gants Hill.
I guess in reality the M11 and A13 to a degree act as bypasses. All you would need to bypass in theory is the section between the M25 at Brentwood and Wanstead. Then you could have a motorway join the M11 link road.
There's a lot of countryside on that side of the A12 that could be built but I see things getting problematic as you approach Chigwell etc.
I sincerely doubt it, the idea was justifiable then however the estimates of cost at the time look ridiculously low even corrected for inflation accurate. The idea was resurrected in the 1970's as part of the plan to build a new London Airport at Maplin Sands.
The world has changed since then, The London Boroughs and TfL would oppose it all the way, it would raise all sorts of environmental red flags and of course there is the minor problem that since the 1970's the M25 has been built and this is supposed to carry through traffic from the A12 to the M11. Last but not least there is the commitment to decarbonise transport which is hard to square with building a new motorway across north London.
qwertyK wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 22:09
I wonder if they'll ever consider another M12 as a bypass of the Eastern Avenue.
Reports from the time suggest economically it was a sound investment and would be cheaper than upgrading major bottlenecks like Gants Hill.
I guess in reality the M11 and A13 to a degree act as bypasses. All you would need to bypass in theory is the section between the M25 at Brentwood and Wanstead. Then you could have a motorway join the M11 link road.
There's a lot of countryside on that side of the A12 that could be built but I see things getting problematic as you approach Chigwell etc.
I sincerely doubt it, the idea was justifiable then however the estimates of cost at the time look ridiculously low even corrected for inflation accurate. The idea was resurrected in the 1970's as part of the plan to build a new London Airport at Maplin Sands.
The world has changed since then, The London Boroughs and TfL would oppose it all the way, it would raise all sorts of environmental red flags and of course there is the minor problem that since the 1970's the M25 has been built and this is supposed to carry through traffic from the A12 to the M11. Last but not least there is the commitment to decarbonise transport which is hard to square with building a new motorway across north London.
Yep, although I can't see how its environmentally sustainable for congested roads ,the North Circ is one of the most congested roads in the coutnry and its actually shortened the life expectancy of people on it because of how much traffic there is on it.
I still think an M12 would be reasonable for at least some of the section between the M25 and Ipswich, whether that is a brand new section of road, or upgrading the viable A12 sections that exist
qwertyK wrote: ↑Tue Apr 21, 2020 22:09
I wonder if they'll ever consider another M12 as a bypass of the Eastern Avenue.
There's a lot of countryside on that side of the A12 that could be built but I see things getting problematic as you approach Chigwell etc.
I wish, I still firmly believe it would be beneficial to finish the A12 to the A406 as at least unlike other london roads, traffic would be dispersed equally. Moreover, Canary Wharf and Stratford act as destination hubs and finally you would relieve the M25.
Following the rough lines of the boreholes, you could easily bypass the A12 to the north!
