Whatever happened to Expressways?

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

User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31476
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by roadtester »

Does anyone know what the current status of Expressways is?

Are they still part of current policy, or has the whole idea run into the sands?

I'm guessing they are nominally still relevant to projects like the new Lower Thames Crossing, the Oxford to Cambridge corridor and any new Trans-Pennine route but has the on again/off-again attempt to blue line the new Cambridge to Huntingdon A14 section shown that the whole thing isn't worth the faff?

It seemed to me that there was always a good idea in there somewhere trying to get out - in particular the need to recognise the UK's many green-signed HQDC roads that might qualify/almost qualify as motorways elsewhere - but it just all became a bit complicated, with different levels of expressway, some of which would be motorway, some not, and a possible blurring/change in the meaning of an Ax(M) designation from "full motorway standard road forming part of an A road corridor" to "motorway that isn't quite as good as an Mx motorway" - which to be fair is probably closer to the general public's (mis)understanding of what it means.

I think something a bit simpler - just shifting the bar down slightly to extend the blue on the map to all the obvious places (e.g. much of the A2 west of the M2) might be worth salvaging from the confusion.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
Ruperts Trooper
Member
Posts: 12031
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 13:43
Location: Huntingdonshire originally, but now Staffordshire

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Ruperts Trooper »

roadtester wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 09:17 Does anyone know what the current status of Expressways is?

Are they still part of current policy, or has the whole idea run into the sands?

I'm guessing they are nominally still relevant to projects like the new Lower Thames Crossing, the Oxford to Cambridge corridor and any new Trans-Pennine route but has the on again/off-again attempt to blue line the new Cambridge to Huntingdon A14 section shown that the whole thing isn't worth the faff?

It seemed to me that there was always a good idea in there somewhere trying to get out - in particular the need to recognise the UK's many green-signed HQDC roads that might qualify/almost qualify as motorways elsewhere - but it just all became a bit complicated, with different levels of expressway, some of which would be motorway, some not, and a possible blurring/change in the meaning of an Ax(M) designation from "full motorway standard road forming part of an A road corridor" to "motorway that isn't quite as good as an Mx motorway" - which to be fair is probably closer to the general public's (mis)understanding of what it means.

I think something a bit simpler - just shifting the bar down slightly to extend the blue on the map to all the obvious places (e.g. much of the A2 west of the M2) might be worth salvaging from the confusion.
The obsession with covering maps with blue lines needs to end - the objective should be to provide roads of appropriate physical capacity for their demand regardless of their classification.

In this modern age, the ubiquitous sat nav will select routes usually based on speed, taking traffic levels into account - drivers see a recommended route regardless of whether sections are motorway, dual carriageway or single carriageway.

Let's see money and effort spent on improving the road network, not tidying up the bureaucracy!
Lifelong motorhead
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by c2R »

Ruperts Trooper wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 09:39

The obsession with covering maps with blue lines needs to end - the objective should be to provide roads of appropriate physical capacity for their demand regardless of their classification.
I disagree, there are many reasons why modern strategic roads would be better by being special roads or motorways - not least that it is legislatively no more difficult to make them so if you're already putting in a DCO.

You may not agree with all of my reasoning, but nobody has ever been able to give concrete reasoning why we should build new motorways not as "A" roads, other than the sort of ridiculous comments that perhaps it is so the swampys don't notice that motorway building by stealth is going on....
me wrote: * Light goods vehicles are restricted to a slower speed on non-motorways when compared to special roads. This causes goods to move less efficiently, and creates an additional speed differential
* HGVs may use the outer lane on non-motorways - which may lead to them overtaking three abreast - again, this creates a speed differential and could cause additional driver frustration, with the HGV in the outer lane being restricted to 90kmh under current legislation, while at the same time cars are permitted to travel at 112kmh
* Learner drivers will be permitted to travel on the new route without professional instructor accompaniment, while at the same time they will be able to drive on the new road without a dual control car. Clearly, the amendments to allow them on motorways did so with the safety of other road users in mind in such high traffic busy situations
* Road signage on "A" roads uses different fonts and spacing to motorways. Motorway signage uses the Motorway Permanent font to allow directions and numbers to be read clearly at motorway speeds, whereas the equivalent green signage is more cluttered and less suitable for such purposes
* It is my understanding that special roads provide exemption from the application of local charging schemes based on vehicle emissions under the road traffic act (Note that in Scotland this has been made explicit in the Transport Scotland Act 2019). It is proper that such a strategic route is protected from attempts by local councils to create low emission zones - any such charging on strategic routes must come from national government as part of a unified charging scheme, if there is appetite to enact them and not as separate local schemes
* It is not permitted to bury utilities in the road for special roads - while there is no suggestion that there are presently utilities in place in the road, what are you planning to put into place to avoid any utilities companies applying to do so in future
* Different protections are in place alongside motorways to prevent future low-standard applications for additional site accesses that may attempt to gain planning along on the route.
*In route planning and navigation terms, here's technically no difference on a map or satellite navigation between this new road and the very substandard A505 between Royston and Baldock, both being marked as primary Class I dual carriageway roads. A motorway designation would facilitate better routing of traffic, after all, to all intents and purposes this road is a de-facto motorway, and traffic should be encouraged to use it rather than less suitable alternative routes; while non motorised and vulnerable users should have clear indication when route planning that the road is unsuitable for their user.
*A blue line on the map is also important in showing that the region is open for business and investment.
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
JF2309
Member
Posts: 242
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2015 12:43

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by JF2309 »

So what you’re saying is that you want fast, high capacity roads that move traffic quickly fron A to B?

Simple solution to this is to build that type of road then, we already have them, they have a name, they’re called Motorways.

Other than that you’re left with an underpowered, underperforming, underfunded mess that Is built to accommodate various inappropriate accesses and costs a hell of a lot more to fix in the not to distant future. They have a name. D2AP.

That why we have ‘bureaucracy‘.
User avatar
Patrick Harper
Member
Posts: 3202
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 14:41
Location: Wiltshire

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Patrick Harper »

Expressways was the idea of converting higher quality A-roads into all-lane-running smart motorways. However, smart motorways themselves have been put 'on hold' since January (projects that were supposed to hit the ground since then haven't happened) putting both initiatives in limbo.

If it really is the end of the road for ALR motorways, and a programme to either revert or 'correct' changes with traditional widening is on the cards, it would only make sense to expand this to routes that were planned to be expressways and probably have an even worse accident record than existing ALR motorways. A big shot in the arm for civil engineering firms that would be.
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Conekicker »

I can see lots of benefits to installing the technology aspects of SMs onto "A" roads and ideally improving some junctions and closing up a few accesses where alternatives exist.

I'm less convinced about reclassifying them as motorways though, especially where reasonable alternative routes for non-motorway traffic aren't available.

Time and the HE will tell what happens.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by c2R »

Conekicker wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 10:34
I'm less convinced about reclassifying them as motorways though, especially where reasonable alternative routes for non-motorway traffic aren't available.
No,absolutely - there needs to be alternative provision made where any existing route is upgraded.

Of course, in the case of the A14 and A2 improvements, we have that....
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
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16908
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Chris5156 »

Ruperts Trooper wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 09:39The obsession with covering maps with blue lines needs to end - the objective should be to provide roads of appropriate physical capacity for their demand regardless of their classification.

In this modern age, the ubiquitous sat nav will select routes usually based on speed, taking traffic levels into account - drivers see a recommended route regardless of whether sections are motorway, dual carriageway or single carriageway.

Let's see money and effort spent on improving the road network, not tidying up the bureaucracy!
Where do you see an obsession with covering maps in blue lines, outside of SABRE? There certainly isn't one to be found in any branch of Government. There has been a widespread and persistent reluctance to create any new blue line for about the last 30 years.

What we've seen with the "Expressways" policy is:
- The DfT wanted HE to rationalise the highly variable standard of high-speed A-roads as part of RIS2.
- Highways England's policy arm produced lots of shiny proposals under the banner of "expressways", including to redesignate the highest tier as motorways. This was - from my conversations with people at DfT - a bit of a surprise to Whitehall, who hadn't asked for it.
- The rest of HE has, since then, made an effort to create one motorway-grade expressway in Cambridgeshire, which failed; it has shown no willingness to pursue that any further and no interest in designating any other existing road or future scheme as motorway since.

Vague talk of other roads becoming motorways has either gone silent or has actively stopped - the LTC, for example, was once shown in mock-ups with blue signs but is now categorically described as an A-road without motorway restrictions.

In short, if you want to see money and effort spent on physical improvements without regard to whether they then operate under motorway regulations, then congratulations! Your wish is granted by transport policy of the last 30 years and, regardless of talk about "expressways" in recent years, it is also granted by the actions of Highways England today.

FWIW I agree with c2R on this: if you're building a road specifically for the use of high speed motor traffic then it should have appropriate restrictions placed on it, for the safety of everyone, and alternative provision for classes of traffic that cannot use it safely. Doing that by an assortment of traffic regulation orders that differs from one scheme to the next makes no rational sense. Those roads should be motorways, so everyone knows where they stand. But that entirely logical and rational position is not one that anybody in Government seems to consider worthwhile.
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by jervi »

I believe that HE are not just going to start designating expressways immediately, what is the point of only having two expressways in the country (A14 & LTC), that would just be confusing to the majority of the public.
At the moment they are focusing on converting all non-smart motorways (and DHS) to ALR or managed motorway, I think that once they have implemented that technology on the majority of the motorway network they will then focus on making the rest of the network up to similar standards (i.e. expressway). At that point (maybe 2030s) there will be a backlog of a few roads that could immediately become expressways, since they would fully meet the standards (such as A14 & LTC). After that other roads would be converted into expressways at the same pace as we have seen SM rolled out.

Of course I want them to be given their expressway/motorway clarification now, however at least we can be happy that they have been built to such a high standard.
someone
Member
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:46
Location: London

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by someone »

Ruperts Trooper wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 09:39The obsession with covering maps with blue lines needs to end - the objective should be to provide roads of appropriate physical capacity for their demand regardless of their classification.

In this modern age, the ubiquitous sat nav will select routes usually based on speed, taking traffic levels into account - drivers see a recommended route regardless of whether sections are motorway, dual carriageway or single carriageway.
Sorry, are you saying that sat navs should be a legal requirement? Even on horses?

Cyclists are not allowed on the new and improved sections of the A14, though they are allowed on the A3, advisable or not, with bicycles painted on the edge of the road and cuttings to cross slip roads.

Looking at a map, how is a cyclist supposed to know which of those roads they are allowed on and which they are not? How is a sat nav supposed to know?

Even on a motorcycles you a sat nav cannot give the best route. King's Road in Reading as an eastbound one-way road for most vehicles, but motorcyclists can use the westbound bus lane. Sat navs do not know this.

Some people may have good reason for not using a sat nav, some people may not be able to use a sat nav, but that does not take away their legal right to use public highways.

Restricting roads with no indication in classification makes it difficult to impossible to properly plan journeys for those no on four or more wheels, as well as some of those who are.

So yes, it does matter that roads which are designed for high speed traffic and unsafe for other road users, are easily identifiable. Yes, it does matter that roads which can only be used by high speed traffic are easy identifiable.

If something is a motorway for all intents and purposes it should be marked as one.

This is just the usual arrogance of car drivers, thinking roads only exist for them and so long as they are okey then considering the needs of other road users is bureaucracy.
User avatar
roadtester
Member
Posts: 31476
Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 18:05
Location: Cambridgeshire

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by roadtester »

I don't think there is much point in classifying roads at all unless that gives some sort of indication of the road's standards.

For that reason, roads that have all of the features of a motorway should be classified as such. If they have most of the features, there may be a case for whatever upgrades are needed being made, or a bit of relaxation of the rules.

At the moment, A roads can cover everything from a single carriageway with passing places to an all-singing all-dancing D4 that is way better than the average standard of roads classified as motorways in most parts of the world.

Of course the actual standard of the road is the most important thing, especially with sat nav, but maps, and the impression they give, still count. Imagine a potential big inward investor who is relatively unfamiliar with the UK road network doing an early stage assessment. Think how easily the UK could miss out on a new factory because such an investor doesn't realise the A14 is a near-motorway standard road - or parts of the A50, or the A19 or the A55 or whatever without doing detailed down on the ground research.
Electrophorus Electricus

Check out #davidsdailycar on Mastodon
User avatar
Chris Bertram
Member
Posts: 15744
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
Location: Birmingham, England

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Chris Bertram »

someone wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:14 This is just the usual arrogance of car drivers, thinking roads only exist for them and so long as they are okey then considering the needs of other road users is bureaucracy.
With respect, that's a bit of an extreme take from Rupert's post.

And I am under the impression that sat navs *can* distinguish between different modes of transport, including walking routes. Am I wrong?
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
User avatar
c2R
SABRE Wiki admin
Posts: 11162
Joined: Fri Jul 05, 2002 11:01

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by c2R »

Chris Bertram wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 13:32
someone wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 12:14 This is just the usual arrogance of car drivers, thinking roads only exist for them and so long as they are okey then considering the needs of other road users is bureaucracy.
With respect, that's a bit of an extreme take from Rupert's post.

And I am under the impression that sat navs *can* distinguish between different modes of transport, including walking routes. Am I wrong?
Some can. However, very few maps and databases used for routing have details about whether a road has a footway and is in any way suitable for non motorised users. OSM is getting better in this regard, and, if tagged correctly can determine surfacing and usage restrictions.

To look at an example some primary dual carriageways have separate footways, e.g. https://www.google.com/maps/@51.9130923 ... 312!8i6656 and this is marked on OSM (although I've just corrected it as the footpath is only on the left, not both) but many do not have paths, or any indication as to whether there is a path, e.g. https://www.google.com/maps/@52.0175903 ... 312!8i6656
...so the information is sporadic at best.

And yes, I appreciate that the path is not shared use, and you legally can walk or cycle along the A505 - but I just personally wouldn't as I wouldn't feel safe in doing so.

So being a a motorway makes it much easier for maps when routing. And even better if it is an upgrade of an existing route and NMU infrastructure has to be provided - I'm hoping that LTN 1/20 is going to improve things further in that regard.
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
someone
Member
Posts: 512
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 10:46
Location: London

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by someone »

Chris Bertram wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 13:32And I am under the impression that sat navs *can* distinguish between different modes of transport, including walking routes. Am I wrong?
As c2R says, showing where you can legally walk and what you would want to walk are two very different things.

For example, I just asked Google to show me a walking route from Burpham to Cobham. A large part of the result was along the A3, including the entire length of the Ripley Bypass rather than the only slightly longer alternative of the quieter B2215.

So, would you consider expecting someone to walk along the edge of the carriageway of a 70 mph D3 road which has no pavement to be a walking route?

Legally it is. To the very many people who use Google as a sat nav it apparently is. But I doubt you will find many pedestrians who will agree.

So my answer would be that you are wrong, although you may think such routing to be perfectly acceptable.
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by jervi »

someone wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 15:53
Chris Bertram wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 13:32And I am under the impression that sat navs *can* distinguish between different modes of transport, including walking routes. Am I wrong?
As c2R says, showing where you can legally walk and what you would want to walk are two very different things.

For example, I just asked Google to show me a walking route from Burpham to Cobham. A large part of the result was along the A3, including the entire length of the Ripley Bypass rather than the only slightly longer alternative of the quieter B2215.

So, would you consider expecting someone to walk along the edge of the carriageway of a 70 mph D3 road which has no pavement to be a walking route?

Legally it is. To the very many people who use Google as a sat nav it apparently is. But I doubt you will find many pedestrians who will agree.

So my answer would be that you are wrong, although you may think such routing to be perfectly acceptable.
Never use google for walking directions in a rural environment (and don't depend on it for the best routes in an urban environment either)
Have a look at this google brains doing this route
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/dir/50.89 ... m2!4m1!3e2
And osm on the same route https://www.openstreetmap.org/direction ... 68/-0.1951

I believe that most routers that use OSM use information such as maxspeed, sidewalk, lit, foot=designated in conjunction with the highway class to decide what roads to use when there are no other suitable ways to use to find the best route. For this reason I add this information onto OSM, especially for A roads and primary routes because routers assume them to be highspeed roads with no pavement, when they are commonly not. So rarely will they ever put you on a 70mph DC with no footway. However it all depends on the quality and accuracy of the data, I ended up cycling along a bit of the A1 with no path because someone had put a cycle path next to the A1 when there wasn't one for example.
User avatar
Debaser
Member
Posts: 2219
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 16:57

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Debaser »

Just a reminder for everyone, to my knowledge these are still the 'core requirements' for an expressway;
Expressways Technical Note - March 2016 wrote: 1. A route or scheme can only be designated as an expressway if all of the core requirements are present and the length exceeds 10 miles or the terminal junctions intersect with another expressway, motorway or edge of conurbation/ major transport hub such as an airport.
2. Expressway designation gateway and exit signing. [Consideration being given to introducing a new class of road].
3. Maximise opportunities for environmental, aesthetic and community enhancement of expressway corridors. Requirements and advice to be determined.
4. Non-motorised Users (NMUs) and slow moving vehicles shall be prohibited from using an expressway. Where practicable, alternative provision shall be considered so that NMUs journey experience should at a minimum, be no worse for any group than before the implementation of the scheme. This will need to be assessed on a scheme by scheme basis and considered at a regional level.
5. Highest quality geometry dual 2 or 3 lane all purpose trunk road (APTR) carriageway operating at national speed limit; clearway; grade separated junctions or left only movements; and no central reserve gaps. In addition to these requirements there shall be no direct public access/egress to/from an expressway other than at junctions with ‘B’ classified roads or greater.
6. Central reserve rigid concrete barrier (RCB) shall be provided.
7. Emergency turnaround provision - emergency crossing points shall be provided in the central reserve and shall be supplemented by hardened verges (where required) to support vehicles with a large turning circle. Where practicable, consideration shall be given to co-locating emergency crossing points with emergency refuge areas (ERAs) to provide the required turning area.
8. VMS for incident/traffic management with wind down or ladder access. Signing/carriageway signalling and customer information with spacing/visibility requirements in accordance with IAN 161 – the requirements for smart motorways. Provision of variable mandatory speed limits (VMSL) for congestion management. Compliance and enforcement measures are to be determined.
9. Standardised ERA design that is consistent with a smart motorway ERA design except the expressway requirements includes double yellow lines and it is combined with a maintenance hardstanding area. ERAs co-located with VMS sites (refer to Annex C) to also facilitate maintenance access – technology devices shall be clustered at an ERA wherever practicable.
10. Provision of an above ground traffic detection system.
11. Pan-tilt-zoom (PTZ) closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras providing comprehensive coverage.
12. Technology assets integrated into Highways England traffic management system (CHARM) controlled from regional control centres (RCC).
13. Traffic Officer ‘On road’ and Control Centre support – service level is currently being determined to meet the performance objectives.
14. Off network rest/service areas at not more than 28 mile intervals and no more than 30 minutes driving time apart in accordance with TD 69 and DfT Circular 02/2013 “The strategic road network and the delivery of sustainable development.
15. Junction numbering and ‘on road’ reference (e.g. 500m spaced driver location signs) system.
Uncle Buck
Member
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2020 23:33

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Uncle Buck »

Debaser wrote: Fri Aug 28, 2020 17:31 Just a reminder for everyone, to my knowledge these are still the 'core requirements' for an expressway;
Expressways Technical Note - March 2016 wrote: 1. A route or scheme can only be designated as an expressway if all of the core requirements are present and the length exceeds 10 miles or the terminal junctions intersect with another expressway, motorway or edge of conurbation/ major transport hub such as an airport.
2. Expressway designation gateway and exit signing. [Consideration being given to introducing a new class of road].
3. Maximise opportunities for environmental, aesthetic and community enhancement of expressway corridors. Requirements and advice to be determined.
4. Non-motorised Users (NMUs) and slow moving vehicles shall be prohibited from using an expressway. Where practicable, alternative provision shall be considered so that NMUs journey experience should at a minimum, be no worse for any group than before the implementation of the scheme. This will need to be assessed on a scheme by scheme basis and considered at a regional level.
5. Highest quality geometry dual 2 or 3 lane all purpose trunk road (APTR) carriageway operating at national speed limit; clearway; grade separated junctions or left only movements; and no central reserve gaps. In addition to these requirements there shall be no direct public access/egress to/from an expressway other than at junctions with ‘B’ classified roads or greater.
6. Central reserve rigid concrete barrier (RCB) shall be provided.
7. Emergency turnaround provision - emergency crossing points shall be provided in the central reserve and shall be supplemented by hardened verges (where required) to support vehicles with a large turning circle. Where practicable, consideration shall be given to co-locating emergency crossing points with emergency refuge areas (ERAs) to provide the required turning area.
8. VMS for incident/traffic management with wind down or ladder access. Signing/carriageway signalling and customer information with spacing/visibility requirements in accordance with IAN 161 – the requirements for smart motorways. Provision of variable mandatory speed limits (VMSL) for congestion management. Compliance and enforcement measures are to be determined.
9. Standardised ERA design that is consistent with a smart motorway ERA design except the expressway requirements includes double yellow lines and it is combined with a maintenance hardstanding area. ERAs co-located with VMS sites (refer to Annex C) to also facilitate maintenance access – technology devices shall be clustered at an ERA wherever practicable.
10. Provision of an above ground traffic detection system.
11. Pan-tilt-zoom (PTZ) closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras providing comprehensive coverage.
12. Technology assets integrated into Highways England traffic management system (CHARM) controlled from regional control centres (RCC).
13. Traffic Officer ‘On road’ and Control Centre support – service level is currently being determined to meet the performance objectives.
14. Off network rest/service areas at not more than 28 mile intervals and no more than 30 minutes driving time apart in accordance with TD 69 and DfT Circular 02/2013 “The strategic road network and the delivery of sustainable development.
15. Junction numbering and ‘on road’ reference (e.g. 500m spaced driver location signs) system.
Sounds pretty much like a motorway to me, so why not call it one? That way everybody knows what the rules are and what to do. No confusion.

“Expressway” to my mind should be an engineering term as opposed to a class of road, applicable for heavy-duty roads where motorways would be inappropriate and roundabouts can sometimes be used. The A30 in Devon and Cornwall, or the A78 between Ayr and Ardrossan would fit this. You could even have single carriageway expressways which would resemble the A39 in Cornwall or better parts of the A82 from Balloch to Tarbert.
User avatar
jervi
Member
Posts: 1596
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 16:29
Location: West Sussex

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by jervi »

Expressways Technical Note - March 2016 wrote: 9. Standardised ERA design that is consistent with a smart motorway ERA design except the expressway requirements includes double yellow lines and it is combined with a maintenance hardstanding area. ERAs co-located with VMS sites (refer to Annex C) to also facilitate maintenance access – technology devices shall be clustered at an ERA wherever practicable.
Wasn't aware of this, I thought they would be identical as the ALR ERA..
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by Bryn666 »

Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
DB617
Member
Posts: 1286
Joined: Mon Dec 25, 2017 00:51
Location: Bristol

Re: Whatever happened to Expressways?

Post by DB617 »

Adding fuel to the fire of this ever ongoing debate, I find myself wondering how much more a D2M/D2H would cost than a newbuild 'smart' expressway with three lanes? Specifically in the case of newbuilds, because all the expressway conversions would obviously be on existing roads which required more capacity, not more safety. Since there's so much fuss, delays and political turmoil associated with technology equipped roads, it would be so much simpler to build something analogous to the M48 rather than still having no road at all ten years down the line, or a technology equipped road which opens without the legal authority to actually use the ludicrously expensive technology (the A14!!). I also think there must be a way to build lightweight low-footprint gantries for the ubiquitous MS4s; the ones on the A14 are beyond a joke.

My thinking is that by the time you have included the land take for the absolutely massive gantries or even the as-yet-unseen roadside AMIs, you may as well put in a minimum width, possibly intermittent hard shoulder. Of course 'hard shoulder' has for the moment become a swear word within HE design circles.

Say what you like about the M50, it's far better that it exists in its weird, "that's good enough" form with strange junctions and soft verges than for it to not exist at all and traffic having to use the A49/A40 instead. Perhaps we have become far too picky and it's costing us a lot of time and totally sunk money.

And I will never stop carrying the torch for conventional widening with new intermittent hard shoulders instead of demolishing structures anyway and putting in gantries.
Post Reply