A19 Teesside bridge upgrades

[Gav]

There are plans to relieve the bottle neck crossing of the river tees and two options seem to be on the table..

https://westdigital.arup.com/newteescro ... /Plan1.pdf
https://westdigital.arup.com/newteescro ... /Plan2.pdf
https://westdigital.arup.com/newteescro ... /Plan3.pdf

it looks like the cheaper option will be done which is a glorified slip road taking traffic from the A66 heading to the A19 on a new crossing and then a braided interchange with the A19.

[KeithW]

The primary aim is to separate local and strategic traffic flows. At present there are only two viable bridges at Middlesbrough, the Tees Viaduct and the Newport Bridge. The Newport Bridge was opened in 1934 and while the bridge itself is S4 the northern approach road is S3 (marked 2 lanes northbound and 1 southbound) and there is a roundabout at each end. It is also the designated route for cyclists and pedestrians.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57347 ... 312!8i6656

Consequently traffic flows are approx Tees Viaduct 100k and Newport Bridge 20 to 30k with a high percentage of local traffic going over the viaduct and coming off at the Portrack Lane and Newport Road junctions with the congestion that causes. The aim is to encourage traffic coming in from Darlington and Teessport along the A66 to use a new crossing. This is not just about efficient traffic flow but safety, the high level of weaving at each end of the viaduct produces a lot of RTC's. Worse for other transport modes is that NMU's are barred from using the Tees Viaduct.

Three basic options were presented but the one recommended was the A19 Tees Viaduct Capacity Enhancement which includes localised widening of the existing Tees Viaduct structure to provide three southbound lanes throughout the length of the Viaduct, in addition the provision of a new bridge crossing will carry local northbound traffic. The main alternative was to build a second Tees Viaduct, while this would provide extra capacity the cost would be much higher. Given that DfT funding will be needed under the Major Roads Programme this is definitely an issue.

This is NOT a new proposal having been under discussion for at least 2 years and chosen option was picked over a year ago. The second part of the debottlenecking is widening the A19 between Norton and Wynard which is underway.

See
https://teesvalley-ca.gov.uk/wp-content ... 241019.pdf

[ABB125]

Why have they decided to go for 4 lanes southbound but 5 northbound? I would have thought that 4 each way would suffice, and if so, presumably the existing viaduct could be configured as 2+4 to save the cost of adding an extra lane?
The fact that the proposed new bridge is much lower also aggravates my OCD! But I suppose all the industry which required the original bridge to be so high is gone now?

[jabbaboy]

Can't see any plans to change the A66 Eastbound. The weaving space to get across 2 lanes from the A19 North looks rather short, it's bad enough as it is now.

[Mark Hewitt]

I've thought I've done it many times I do find the Tees flyover nerve wracking. When going from A66E to A19N you have that initial give way where you have to look over your shoulder at the same time as joining fast traffic. Then the merge into the A19 is a lane gain but then you have to weave to the right two lanes.

[KeithW]

Why have they decided to go for 4 lanes southbound but 5 northbound? I would have thought that 4 each way would suffice, and if so, presumably the existing viaduct could be configured as 2+4 to save the cost of adding an extra lane?
The fact that the proposed new bridge is much lower also aggravates my OCD! But I suppose all the industry which required the original bridge to be so high is gone now?

Lets start with the viaduct

There are 3 lanes each way cross the main span
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.56730 ... 384!8i8192

However Lane 1 is used by the onbound/offbound slip each end of the viaduct so for there are only 2 lanes each way for through traffic and traffic levels are 100k north south over the viaduct with a high percentage of turning traffic at each end.

Now consider local traffic patterns

During the morning rush traffic coming from south Middlesbrough, east Cleveland or Ingleby Barwick uses the A19 North and either turns onto the A66 east or west or crosses the viaduct before either coming off at the Portrack Interchange or continues along the A!9.

Traffic heading south from Norton, Stockton, Hartlepool or Portrack does much the same dance. It is well that the A19/A66 junction was so well designed as otherwise it would have ground to a halt long ago. North of the river it is a different story, the junction at Portrack is a flat roundabout which struggles at peak.

The joker is A66 traffic from Redcar, Stockton and Darlington, a good portion of which takes the viaduct simply to cross the river to Portrack, Haverton Hill and Billingham. This is configured as a single slip which divides and coupled with the traffic for Teesside Retail Park produces a lot of weaving in a short distance.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.56249 ... 312!8i6656

So the intention is to put in a new bridge to carry the local northbound traffic and add a third lane southbound over the viaduct. These are to configured as far as possible to carry through traffic. The reason the Tees Viaduct was built so high was to allow ocean going ships up the river to the docks at Stockton and the wharves along the north bank used by the South Durham and Head Wrightson works. The docks have closed as have the iron works and with the building of the Tees Barrage the river above Middlesbrough is only navigable for small craft so the new bridge can be lower and thus cheaper to build.

The only current 4 lane section is the A19 southern approach. We know from other regions such as the A14 at Cambridge the problems that arise when you mix local and through traffic. The ideal would be to build a new Tees Viaduct solely for local traffic but its unlikely the DfT would pony up the money for this and the local authorities dont have the resources to do so.

The spoiler in many ways was the building of Teesside Retail Park on the old Stockton Racecourse site and making it accessible from the A66. This means the length between the Teesside Retail Park junction and the A19/A66 junction is only around 500 m which is FAR too short on what is at the end of the day a strategic road.

[KeithW]

To better visualise the proposed solution I suggest viewing this simulated flyover of the new layout.

[KeithW]

Can't see any plans to change the A66 Eastbound. The weaving space to get across 2 lanes from the A19 North looks rather short, it's bad enough as it is now.

It will remain basically the same, ultimately with only 500 m between the Teesside Retail Park Junction and the A19 junction the options are limited. The main difference will be that the slip will take you over the new bridge rather than the viaduct.

[jabbaboy]

Can't see any plans to change the A66 Eastbound. The weaving space to get across 2 lanes from the A19 North looks rather short, it's bad enough as it is now.

It will remain basically the same, ultimately with only 500 m between the Teesside Retail Park Junction and the A19 junction the options are limited. The main difference will be that the slip will take you over the new bridge rather than the viaduct.

It's the other side of the junction I was talking about there heading into Middlesbrough, if you come from the A19 North you have to get across 2 lanes to head into Middlesbrough with the A19 South also trying to get across 1 lane as the majority of the traffic wants to get into Middlesbrough.

Looking at the plans, it seems they're making the weaving space even shorter for the A19 Northbound with you not being to move across at all until the first gantry now. I thought they might've made some changes and opened it back upto 3 lanes heading into Middlesbrough with maybe a lane drop after the junction if needed.

The weaving space looks rather short, especially when you've got traffic also trying to get across the opposite way to lane 1 aswell.

[KeithW]

It's the other side of the junction I was talking about there heading into Middlesbrough, if you come from the A19 North you have to get across 2 lanes to head into Middlesbrough with the A19 South also trying to get across 1 lane as the majority of the traffic wants to get into Middlesbrough.

Looking at the plans, it seems they're making the weaving space even shorter for the A19 Northbound with you not being to move across at all until the first gantry now. I thought they might've made some changes and opened it back upto 3 lanes heading into Middlesbrough with maybe a lane drop after the junction if needed.

The weaving space looks rather short, especially when you've got traffic also trying to get across the opposite way to lane 1 aswell.

You have lost me I am afraid.

If you are travelling along the A19 from Thirsk northbound you take this sliproad off the A19 and follow it onto the A66. This will not change.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.5587701, ... 8192?hl=en

Heading south along the A19 you take the sliproad here and do the same.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.5665236, ... 8192?hl=en

Yes if the bridge becomes D3 you have the potential of being in Lane 3 but that is true of any multilane road.

I will certainly agree that the slips onto the A66 throughout Middlesbrough and Stockton are shorter than is ideal which is why it has a 50 mph limit but any changes there are the responsibility of Highways England not the Tees Valley Combined Authority and not within the scope of this project. Its not particularly unusual for an urban motorway or expressway. Consider the A167(M) in Newcastle.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.9768521, ... 6656?hl=en

With all its faults the A19/A66 junction is surprisingly good for a 1970's design, most from that era, like Simster, were simple 3 level stacked roundabouts.

[jabbaboy]

It's the other side of the junction I was talking about there heading into Middlesbrough, if you come from the A19 North you have to get across 2 lanes to head into Middlesbrough with the A19 South also trying to get across 1 lane as the majority of the traffic wants to get into Middlesbrough.

Looking at the plans, it seems they're making the weaving space even shorter for the A19 Northbound with you not being to move across at all until the first gantry now. I thought they might've made some changes and opened it back upto 3 lanes heading into Middlesbrough with maybe a lane drop after the junction if needed.

The weaving space looks rather short, especially when you've got traffic also trying to get across the opposite way to lane 1 aswell.

You have lost me I am afraid.

If you are travelling along the A19 from Thirsk northbound you take this sliproad off the A19 and follow it onto the A66. This will not change.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.5587701, ... 8192?hl=en

Heading south along the A19 you take the sliproad here and do the same.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.5665236, ... 8192?hl=en

Yes if the bridge becomes D3 you have the potential of being in Lane 3 but that is true of any multilane road.

I will certainly agree that the slips onto the A66 throughout Middlesbrough and Stockton are shorter than is ideal which is why it has a 50 mph limit but any changes there are the responsibility of Highways England not the Tees Valley Combined Authority and not within the scope of this project. Its not particularly unusual for an urban motorway or expressway. Consider the A167(M) in Newcastle.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.9768521, ... 6656?hl=en

With all its faults the A19/A66 junction is surprisingly good for a 1970's design, most from that era, like Simster, were simple 3 level stacked roundabouts.

It's when you travel off the A19 onto the A66, there's a weird scenario where there's only 2 lanes going ahead into Middlesbrough. Looking at the new plans it seems that you can't start to move across until https://goo.gl/maps/fSZW9BdYdjiFTVRr6 now if coming from the A19(N) leaving it quite short to get across to the A66 where most people want to go. It's quite bad as it is anyway and quite often causes congestion as there's too much weaving with effectively 2 slip roads trying to force itself into 2 lanes which can be quite congested as it is.

Thought they might have configured the next junction to support 3 lanes through until the junction after to try and help the A19 traffic merge easier. They've already spent the money widening the road back in 2009 but have the left lane marked out - https://goo.gl/maps/UkXXaYUTAV1b9P7L8.

https://goo.gl/maps/NFdJTJFPpmXqRiE9A - It's this area here, you can already see where there's lot of merging with everyone trying to get across to the right 2 lanes but it looks like it's going to be even worse as the space to get across is going to be shorter.

[M19]

I’m surprised that the A66 has to lose two lanes at the Newport Road / Transporter Bridge exit as I’m sure the flyover was futureproofed when built for 3 lanes - hence the shoulder.

[KeithW]

I’m surprised that the A66 has to lose two lanes at the Newport Road / Transporter Bridge exit as I’m sure the flyover was futureproofed when built for 3 lanes - hence the shoulder.

The A66 is D2 for its length between the A19 and A1032 there is a short section where the traffic for the A1032, the rail overbridge to Riverside Park Road and the A66 to sort itself out. Remember a large part of the town centre was demolished to make way for this road. Where what you call the shoulder is had been rather poor quality housing demolished to make way for it and never re used. As I recall it was one of the construction compounds.

See the pictures here for a flavour.
https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/tees ... on-8971801

[KeithW]

I’m surprised that the A66 has to lose two lanes at the Newport Road / Transporter Bridge exit as I’m sure the flyover was futureproofed when built for 3 lanes - hence the shoulder.

The A66 is D2 for its length between the A19 and A1032 there is a short section where the traffic for the A1032, the rail overbridge to Riverside Park Road and the A66 to sort itself out. Remember a large part of the town centre was demolished to make way for this road. Dont forget that when the A66 was built Middlesbrough Docks were still open and there was a fabrication yard at Dock point. That mean the turn onto Riverside Park Road had to wide enough and strong enough to handle abnormal loads. Where what you call the shoulder is had been rather poor quality housing demolished to make way for it and never re used. As I recall it was one of the construction compounds.

See the pictures here for a flavour.
https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/tees ... on-8971801

[jackal]

Why have they decided to go for 4 lanes southbound but 5 northbound? I would have thought that 4 each way would suffice, and if so, presumably the existing viaduct could be configured as 2+4 to save the cost of adding an extra lane?

I agree. The A19 northbound has only two lanes through the freeflow junction, nothing joins from there under the plans, yet it randomly widens to three lanes for the whole bridge, requiring the entire length to be widened by 3.1m. It seems wasteful when they could just reconfigure the existing width to 2+4 as you say. In fact something similar is proposed for the Simister Island improvement, where the bottom level will go from D2M to 2+4.

It's the other side of the junction I was talking about there heading into Middlesbrough, if you come from the A19 North you have to get across 2 lanes to head into Middlesbrough with the A19 South also trying to get across 1 lane as the majority of the traffic wants to get into Middlesbrough.

Looking at the plans, it seems they're making the weaving space even shorter for the A19 Northbound with you not being to move across at all until the first gantry now.

I think you mean the new ghost island on the eastbound onslip? You're right, it slightly tightens the weaving space, and is probably not a change for the better.

I’m surprised that the A66 has to lose two lanes at the Newport Road / Transporter Bridge exit as I’m sure the flyover was futureproofed when built for 3 lanes - hence the shoulder.

I agree this would have been a good opportunity to add the third lane eastbound. Possibly they think there isn't space for the merge next to the railway? https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57409 ... 312!8i6656

As it is, three out of four of the next junctions on from A19/A66 will have imbalanced numbers of lanes through them:

Newport Rd - 2 eastbound, 3 westbound
Portrack - 2+2 northbound, 3 southbound
Teeside Park Drive - 2 lanes eastbound, 3 westbound
A1130 - 3 lanes both directions

Also notable is that the four arms of the A19/A66 interchange will each be at least D4 - surely the only example of this where none of the roads are motorways.

PS - The previous thread is here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35895&hilit=new+tees+crossing
Single file high quality drawing: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/west ... ls/EP1.pdf
And the same for the rejected option 2: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/west ... ls/EP2.pdf

[KeithW]

As it is, three out of four of the next junctions on from A19/A66 will have imbalanced numbers of lanes through them:

Newport Rd - 2 eastbound, 3 westbound
Portrack - 2+2 northbound, 3 southbound
Teeside Park Drive - 2 lanes eastbound, 3 westbound
A1130 - 3 lanes both directions

Also notable is that the four arms of the A19/A66 interchange will each be at least D4 - surely the only example of this where none of the roads are motorways.

PS - The previous thread is here: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=35895&hilit=new+tees+crossing
Single file high quality drawing: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/west ... ls/EP1.pdf
And the same for the rejected option 2: https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/west ... ls/EP2.pdf

The Newport Road roundabout is large, busy and has 6 exits, Newport Road itself is an S2 urban road
Riverside Park Road was built to take traffic for the docks and Whessoe Fabrication Yard both of which have closed but new indyutry has moved onto the BOHO site and as its the ONLY road suitable for heavy and high loads its rather important
The A1130 is the major route for local traffic from Middlesbrough to Portrack
The other junctions are distributors for local traffic.

The Arup drawings are indeed high quality but were produced early in the consultation and are not necessarily what will be built. Note they are dated 2018 and the status is 'For information Only' and no contracts have been issued. With approval unlikely before late 2011 much may change.

At the major Portrack roundabout , there are 2, you have the following roads with their exits and entrances.

Haverton Hill Lane towards Stockton - D2 with turning lanes - this is a large collection of retail parks
Haverton Hill Lane towards Haverton Hill - S2 through an Industrial area
A19 On slip Northbound - 2 lanes
A19 On slip Southbound - 2 lanes

This a complex are that has evolved through many years so there are junctions, frontage roads, side roads and all the other mess that accrues, including a prison - HMP Holme House.
https://www.google.se/maps/@54.5763434, ... 8192?hl=en

[ABB125]

I've also noticed that there appears to be a right-hand diverge from the new bridge to access the Portrack roundabout. That's got to be unusual?

[jackal]

I've also noticed that there appears to be a right-hand diverge from the new bridge to access the Portrack roundabout. That's got to be unusual?

Fairly unusual. As Bryn has mentioned, there's a recentish example at the T5 exit on the M25 clockwise: https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.46386 ... 312!8i6656

[KeithW]

I've also noticed that there appears to be a right-hand diverge from the new bridge to access the Portrack roundabout. That's got to be unusual?

Its inevitable really, the new bridge is primarily intended for local traffic which means it has to access the Portrack Roundabout. A major flow is from the A66 to Portrack. If you are coming in from Darlington the only other viable option is to plough through the centre of Stockton or use the longer route via the congested Newport Road Roundabout. You also have to recognise that people will take that road from the A66 to join the A19 northbound hence the single lane diverge to an A19 on slip to allow this. Just dumping everything on the roundabout would not be a good solution. Right hand diverges are rare but not unknown especially on complex junctions.

[booshank]

It's interesting that the proposed new bridge is much lower than the existing viaduct. Presumably whatever shipping the viaduct was designed to accommodate no longer exists.