A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

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
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19201
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by KeithW »

Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 11:38 I have argued for a while that it's ridiculous that these pre-motorway duals have the same speed limit as much better quality roads.

For me I'd raise the motorway limit to 75 to match the design speed and reduce the speed on all-purpose duals to 60. If a HQDC is good enough to be a motorway, it should be a motorway.
But it isnt and is never likely to be unless an expensive LAR is built and I dont seen those being built for the A1, A2, A3, A11, A12, A13, A14, A34, A19, A66, A20 etc. Note that quite a few of the D2 roads in that list were either built or upgraded AFTER the motorways they link to were opened. The A19 from the Tees Viaduct to Wolviston is being widened to D3 as we speak and is arguably of higher quality than the A1(M) Darlington and Durham bypasses.

This is what the A19 to the A1 at Thirsk looked like in 1970.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.23787 ... 8192?hl=en

This was the A2 into Dover in the same year
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.13556 ... 6656?hl=en
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Bryn666 »

KeithW wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 12:37
Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 11:38 I have argued for a while that it's ridiculous that these pre-motorway duals have the same speed limit as much better quality roads.

For me I'd raise the motorway limit to 75 to match the design speed and reduce the speed on all-purpose duals to 60. If a HQDC is good enough to be a motorway, it should be a motorway.
But it isnt and is never likely to be unless an expensive LAR is built and I dont seen those being built for the A1, A2, A3, A11, A12, A13, A14, A34, A19, A66, A20 etc. Note that quite a few of the D2 roads in that list were either built or upgraded AFTER the motorways they link to were opened. The A19 from the Tees Viaduct to Wolviston is being widened to D3 as we speak and is arguably of higher quality than the A1(M) Darlington and Durham bypasses.

This is what the A19 to the A1 at Thirsk looked like in 1970.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.23787 ... 8192?hl=en

This was the A2 into Dover in the same year
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.13556 ... 6656?hl=en
I know how HQDCs came into being. The point is this class of road should never have existed in the first place. The offline sections of the A19 should have been a motorway, or European style 'expressway' signed with the car symbol. Allowing them to function exactly the same as, say, a heavily urbanised dual carriageway like the A23 through Streatham is just stupid and sums up why we have so many problems with road safety in this country.

A good example to compare this section of A64 with is the Dutch N200 to Zandvoort. It's the same era, twisty, at-grade junctions, but all the bus stops and footways are set back so no-one is surprised. It also has advisory speeds posted on sharp bends.

https://goo.gl/maps/RexEnLVQJo3kLjmu5
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
Herned
Member
Posts: 1362
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2017 09:15

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Herned »

Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 12:49 I know how HQDCs came into being. The point is this class of road should never have existed in the first place. The offline sections of the A19 should have been a motorway, or European style 'expressway' signed with the car symbol. Allowing them to function exactly the same as, say, a heavily urbanised dual carriageway like the A23 through Streatham is just stupid and sums up why we have so many problems with road safety in this country.
Totally agree
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16908
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Chris5156 »

Peter Freeman wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 11:29Lots of good suggestions above. OK, I'll make myself unpopular by saying, in addition to some of those minor improvements, lower (and enforce) the speed limit. It's an accident blackspot!
If you ask a highway authority for a cheap fix on a road like this, when there is zero budget currently allocated, I'd suggest that this is the most likely thing they will do in response.

A 60 limit between the end of the Tadcaster bypass and the start of the York bypass would certainly highlight the very different character of this stretch, which would be a benefit. Right now it's not apparent that the hazards are much greater because there is no transition from HQDC to dual carriageway with footpaths and property accesses, and as has been noted upthread, that means that many drivers don't seem to realise just how much more alert you need to be on this section.
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19201
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by KeithW »

Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 12:49
I know how HQDCs came into being. The point is this class of road should never have existed in the first place. The offline sections of the A19 should have been a motorway, or European style 'expressway' signed with the car symbol. Allowing them to function exactly the same as, say, a heavily urbanised dual carriageway like the A23 through Streatham is just stupid and sums up why we have so many problems with road safety in this country.

A good example to compare this section of A64 with is the Dutch N200 to Zandvoort. It's the same era, twisty, at-grade junctions, but all the bus stops and footways are set back so no-one is surprised. It also has advisory speeds posted on sharp bends.

https://goo.gl/maps/RexEnLVQJo3kLjmu5
Short of mass demolition which is economically and politically impossible we have to work with what is there, most of the urban sections of the A19 are offline BUT there are sections that inevitably flow through urban areas, the most obvious example is through Jarrow to the Tyne Tunnel, In the case of Teesside there was mass demolition when the A19 and A66 were being run through the town. most the housing demolished was substandard terraced housing in an old industrial area where levels of ground contamination were so high its was considered unfit for human habitation and only now, 40 years later is it being reused and that is mostly for light industry and offices. To get some idea of the scale of the works look here.
https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/tees ... on-8971801

70% of North Ormesby was demolished along with Cargo Fleet and most of South Bank, here is what is left of the latter.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57620 ... 6656?hl=en

The approach to the Tees Viaduct ran through a gap between Thornaby and Middlesbrough that was dominated by the decaying remains of the derelict Ironworks, the 'hill' that dominates the White Water centre is actually the reprofiled and reclaimed slag heap.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Bryn666 »

Yes, but none of that prevented building appropriate provisions alongside or adjacent to new-build offline roads in the 1970s.

The fact that 50 years later cyclists have had to be banned from the A19 shows this "let everyone share the road" mentality is nonsense.
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
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19201
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by KeithW »

Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:37 Yes, but none of that prevented building appropriate provisions alongside or adjacent to new-build offline roads in the 1970s.
Shortage of money did that, there was a major recession, high unemployment and high levels of inflation between 1973 and 1979. Things only improved gradually in the 1980's. This is why there was a 10 year gap between the building of most of the M20 and J8 to J9 between Maidstone and Ashford and why the final section between Dover and Folkestone was completed as the dual carriageway A20, something I was acutely aware of as I was living in Kent at the time. It was also a period of stagnation for the A1 and many other roads. Come to that there are still numerous roundabouts on the A1 south of Buckden and the section through Sandy is a national disgrace, in comparison the A64 is a super highway.

In fact the section of A64 that really needs improvement in my opinion is between Leeds and the A1(M). Not only would it improve the route from Leeds to the Yorkshire coast but it would reduce the amount of weaving on the A1(M) between the M1 and A64.

As for the A19 Tees Viaduct there is and always has been adequate alternate provision over the Newport bridge and along the A1032 to Billingham.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57217 ... 8192?hl=en
Last edited by KeithW on Wed May 05, 2021 16:17, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Bryn666 »

KeithW wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:58
Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:37 Yes, but none of that prevented building appropriate provisions alongside or adjacent to new-build offline roads in the 1970s.
Shortage of money did that, there was a major recession, high unemployment and high levels of inflation between 1973 and 1979. Things only improved gradually in the 1980's. This is why there was a 10 year gap between the building of most of the M20 and J8 to J9 between Maidstone and Ashford and why the final section between Dover and Folkestone was completed as the dual carriageway A20, something I was acutely aware of as I was living in Kent at the time. It was also a period of stagnation for the A1 and many other roads. Come to that there are still numerous roundabouts on the A1 south of Buckden and the section through Sandy is a national disgrace, in comparison the A64 is a super highway.

As for the A19 Tees Viaduct there is and always has been adequate alternate provision over the Newport bridge and along the A1032 to Billingham.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57217 ... 8192?hl=en
Ah yes, the old "save 2p today, have to spend £2,000,000 next week" mentality that riddles British infrastructure planning.
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
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7544
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by jackal »

First off, there were 8 gaps in the central reservation as recently as 2004. They closed them all when they built the GSJ. So 20 years is not really a useful period to be looking at as the road was fundamentally less safe at the start of that.

Assuming there is still a safety issue once an appropriate period is used, the appropriate response will depend on the kinds of accidents we're talking about:

- Pedestrians? Work out the desire lines and build NMU infrastructure as appropriate.
- Vehicles using accesses? Improve or close them.
- Drunk/high people speeding? Increase enforcement.
- General high speed relative to road quality? Reduce speed limit.
Last edited by jackal on Wed May 05, 2021 16:21, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 16:18 First off, there were 8 gaps in the central reservation as recently as 2004. They closed them all when they built the GSJ. So 20 years is not really a useful period to be looking at as the road was fundamentally less safe at the start of that.

Assuming there is still a safety issue once an appropriate period is used, the appropriate response will depend on the kinds of accidents we're talking about:

- Pedestrians? Work out the desire lines and build NMU infrastructure as appropriate.
- Vehicles using accesses? Improve or close them.
- Drunk/high people speeding? Increase enforcement.
- General high speed relative to road quality? Reduce speed limit.
This is basically the evidence led approach the road needs - fundamentally we have a rubbish 1930s road between two better quality 1970s roads and that will always cause problems. It's how you tackle those problems.

I'd also hazard a guess, without access to the STATS-19 data that many of the collisions on the A64 can be traced back to people local to the area 'knowing the road like the back of their hand' until something goes wrong. This is how so many people died on the old 'Death Road' in Bolivia. They knew the road off by heart, but, oh, there was a rainstorm yesterday that washed some more of the edge away - and over the side you go! Dead.
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
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19201
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by KeithW »

Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 16:11
KeithW wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:58
Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:37 Yes, but none of that prevented building appropriate provisions alongside or adjacent to new-build offline roads in the 1970s.
Shortage of money did that, there was a major recession, high unemployment and high levels of inflation between 1973 and 1979. Things only improved gradually in the 1980's. This is why there was a 10 year gap between the building of most of the M20 and J8 to J9 between Maidstone and Ashford and why the final section between Dover and Folkestone was completed as the dual carriageway A20, something I was acutely aware of as I was living in Kent at the time. It was also a period of stagnation for the A1 and many other roads. Come to that there are still numerous roundabouts on the A1 south of Buckden and the section through Sandy is a national disgrace, in comparison the A64 is a super highway.

As for the A19 Tees Viaduct there is and always has been adequate alternate provision over the Newport bridge and along the A1032 to Billingham.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57217 ... 8192?hl=en
Ah yes, the old "save 2p today, have to spend £2,000,000 next week" mentality that riddles British infrastructure planning.
Its hard to ignore a full blown recession combined with high levels of unemployment, inflation, borrowing and having to go cap in hand to the IMF because the country is bankrupt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_UK_sterling_crisis
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Bryn666 »

KeithW wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 16:24
Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 16:11
KeithW wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:58

Shortage of money did that, there was a major recession, high unemployment and high levels of inflation between 1973 and 1979. Things only improved gradually in the 1980's. This is why there was a 10 year gap between the building of most of the M20 and J8 to J9 between Maidstone and Ashford and why the final section between Dover and Folkestone was completed as the dual carriageway A20, something I was acutely aware of as I was living in Kent at the time. It was also a period of stagnation for the A1 and many other roads. Come to that there are still numerous roundabouts on the A1 south of Buckden and the section through Sandy is a national disgrace, in comparison the A64 is a super highway.

As for the A19 Tees Viaduct there is and always has been adequate alternate provision over the Newport bridge and along the A1032 to Billingham.

https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.57217 ... 8192?hl=en
Ah yes, the old "save 2p today, have to spend £2,000,000 next week" mentality that riddles British infrastructure planning.
Its hard to ignore a full blown recession combined with high levels of unemployment, inflation, borrowing and having to go cap in hand to the IMF because the country is bankrupt.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_UK_sterling_crisis
Again, I am aware of all this. None of it explains why we still do half-assed jobs today does it? Making a mistake 50 years ago is not justification for repeating it.
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
NICK 647063
Member
Posts: 1717
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 17:48
Location: Leeds

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by NICK 647063 »

Not convinced that lowering the speed limit will be of use, but certainly lighting wouldn't go amiss. As for NMU issues, there's half decent paths to the side of the A64 there (or at least there was when I cycled it in the 90s, and apart from Bilborough Top, I'm not sure where any other crossing points would needed/justified? It passes through a lot of nothing, so just wondering where the pedestrians come from?
The main issue with pedestrians are the ones who are unfamiliar with the road, many have been workers getting off buses and crossing to either services, we have had a local and his dog killed after I suspect misjudging the traffic, my Dads place is at Steeton which is a good mile west of Bilbrough Top, he has land at both sides and my gran is opposite, we always cross, highways England even provided crossing points when the new barrier was installed, walkers use the public foot paths that cross so again need to cross......

As for the speed limit I’m normally against lowering it but as others have said we can easily do 70 knowing the road but by having an enforced 60 limit it would be clear the road standard is lower, with streetlights it would help, I know they have tried reflective plates on the barriers on the bends, also had solar road studs but now replaced with standard ones, for me it seems crazy to have a 70 limit along the whole road as suddenly you go from driving on a high quality road onto one with many more obstacles.
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Stevie D »

Peter Freeman wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 11:29Lots of good suggestions above. OK, I'll make myself unpopular by saying, in addition to some of those minor improvements, lower (and enforce) the speed limit. It's an accident blackspot!
Without knowing what has caused the accidents, lowering the speed limit is a sticking plaster on your finger that might turn out to be treating a broken foot.

Were the accidents caused by drivers doing between 65 and 80mph with their speed being too fast for the conditions? If not then it's unlikely that reducing the limit will make any difference. If the accidents were mostly caused by drivers going faster than that then a better approach would be to enforce the existing limit as it doesn't appear that the speed limit is the problem.

Were the accidents caused by drivers turning in or out of side roads and access points? (And I'm including in that the situations where those drivers were doing nothing wrong, but eg were rear-ended by an inattentive driver behind as they slowed down). If so then we should improve the road layout at junctions to provide better acceleration/deceleration zones, better visibility for turning traffic, better advance warning signs, etc.

Were the accidents caused by pedestrians crossing the road? If so, why were they crossing the road? If they could sensibly have used the bridge at Bilbrough Top (or Tadcaster) then better signage to direct them to the appropriate bridge and potentially a fence on the central reservation to reinforce that it is not a crossing point. If people are regularly crossing the road at points where detouring to one of the bridges would be really inconvenient then we need to look at providing a safe crossing point, ie a footbridge or underpass, because even with an enforced 60mph limit it is still going to be a dangerous road to cross.
User avatar
Conekicker
Member
Posts: 3754
Joined: Sat Dec 10, 2005 22:32
Location: South Yorks

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Conekicker »

The only problem with a footbridge these days is it would need ramps as well as stairs, which would bump the cost up a fair amount.
Patience is not a virtue - it's a concept invented by the dozy beggars who are unable to think quickly enough.
Micro The Maniac
Member
Posts: 1175
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2015 13:14
Location: Gone

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Micro The Maniac »

Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:37 The fact that 50 years later cyclists have had to be banned from the A19 shows this "let everyone share the road" mentality is nonsense.
Who are you, and what have you done with Bryn? :shock:

Separation (cf Netherlands, Germany) should be the way ahead, keeping those entitled motorists and entitled cyclists and entitled pedestrians apart.
User avatar
SouthWest Philip
Member
Posts: 3478
Joined: Sun Mar 31, 2002 19:35
Location: Evesham, Worcestershire

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by SouthWest Philip »

KeithW wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 12:37 But it isnt and is never likely to be unless an expensive LAR is built and I dont seen those being built for the A1, A2, A3, A11, A12, A13, A14, A34, A19, A66, A20 etc.
Actually there is a relatively recent precedent of a dodgy section of dual carriageway between sections of much better quality road, comparible to the A64 example, being replaced. The A14 was rebuilt over a similar length section at the Haughley Bends.

The A23 past Handcross is perhaps another example, although less clear cut because that was a widening scheme.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by Bryn666 »

Micro The Maniac wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 20:18
Bryn666 wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 15:37 The fact that 50 years later cyclists have had to be banned from the A19 shows this "let everyone share the road" mentality is nonsense.
Who are you, and what have you done with Bryn? :shock:

Separation (cf Netherlands, Germany) should be the way ahead, keeping those entitled motorists and entitled cyclists and entitled pedestrians apart.
The A19 is pretty much where cars belong, impeding them there is silly - your local high street isn't. :wink:
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
User avatar
the cheesecake man
Member
Posts: 2462
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
Location: Sheffield

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by the cheesecake man »

A reasonable comparison might be A1 Red House - Darrington.

This has bridges where anybody might want to cross such as this bus stop.

However all bus stops have been removed.

Where bridges haven't been provided there are clear warning signs such as here at Wentbridge.

I've never seen anyone crossing. Perhaps part of the reason for the incidents on the A64 is that traffic is a bit less than on the A1 so people are tempted to cross where the A1 is so busy they wouldn't be?
User avatar
KeithW
Member
Posts: 19201
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 13:25
Location: Marton-In-Cleveland North Yorks

Re: A64 Tadcaster to York accident issues

Post by KeithW »

SouthWest Philip wrote: Wed May 05, 2021 21:40
Actually there is a relatively recent precedent of a dodgy section of dual carriageway between sections of much better quality road, comparible to the A64 example, being replaced. The A14 was rebuilt over a similar length section at the Haughley Bends.

The A23 past Handcross is perhaps another example, although less clear cut because that was a widening scheme.
The Haughley Bends were rather more extreme than the A64 at Bilbrough Top.
Post Reply