Manchester south-east junction improvements

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by jackal »

This is an RIS3 pipeline scheme. Little information is available but a TfN document refers to it as "formerly M60 J24-27 and 1-4 smart motorway". This was an RIS1 scheme described as follows: "upgrading south-eastern quadrant of the M60 to Smart Motorway between junction 24 (M67 Denton interchange) and junction 4 (M56 Kingsway interchange)".

I've not seen any public explanation of the name change, or why the scheme has slid back at least ten years (from construction to start 2015-20 to maybe starting 2025-30). Though to be fair I would prefer that they delay rather than build a pointless version of the scheme like M60 J12-18 smart motorway.

On its face there are obvious problems with both junction design and mainline capacity on this section. Most notably, a braiding-type solution is needed for J2-3, and there is an offside entry at J25. As discussed previously, ALR is difficult at J27-1, though maybe not impossible with some creativity. As Bryn mentions, sightlines are a constraint. I'm concerned that, with the name change, the scheme may have been scaled back to some minor changes to junctions, when increased mainline capacity is clearly required (see data below).

Road Junctions Standard HGVs All motor vehicles
M60 3 2 D4M 7714 163291
M60 2 1 D3M 8634 153636
M60 1 27 D3 7452 135796
M60 27 26 D3M 7860 116471
M60 26 25 D3M 6713 125971
M60 25 24 D3M 7433 136088

Some previous relevant discussion in this thread: viewtopic.php?f=1&t=28573&p=1146778#p1146778
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by Bryn666 »

Braiding between 2-3 would be a the ultimate solution for me, the D4 section here was recently extended to try and provide more weaving space but the issue is the length is too short to begin with. If braiding is impossible then a lesser optimised solution would be to replace the J2 exit fork with a loop, which could extend the 4 lane section by a further 400 metres and allow weaving to be along an 800 metre section. Given widening the M60 for braiding also involves replacing the Manchester Road overbridge as well as multiple structures this loop could be a much cheaper fix, but the trade off is it's a new loop and DMRB gets very twitchy about these unless they're gigantic - but a 50m radius loop would be similar size to the existing M56 entry loop at J3. Alternatively the existing skew structure across the M60 for the Roscoe's Spur could be incorporated and this would allow a more curvaceous off slip.

Sell it as a safety scheme by removing needless choke and conflict points, and there's the makings of a very good project - but we still need the A555.

Here's a horribly cheap sketch:
Attachments
Roscoes Loop.jpg
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: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by jackal »

Eastbound you can actually run the A34 slip around the top of the fork for a cost effective braiding-level solution.

Westbound is trickier - ideally you'd use braiding, but I've just sketched some C/D lanes, which would still be a big improvement as the main issue is taking the weaving off the mainline.

M60 J2-3 - Copy.jpg

(Now includes the link between A34 and Roscoe's spur that you'd suggested when I last posted this.)
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Thu Oct 21, 2021 14:53 Eastbound you can actually run the A34 slip around the top of the fork for a cost effective braiding-level solution.

Westbound is trickier - ideally you'd use braiding, but I've just sketched some C/D lanes, which would still be a big improvement as the main issue is taking the weaving off the mainline.


M60 J2-3 - Copy.jpg


(Now includes the link between A34 and Roscoe's spur that you'd suggested when I last posted this.)
That's quite feasible too! The westbound weaving is less of a concern as officially that is supposedly a popular movement (J2-3 are close because they function as a Cheadle bypass anyway).
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: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by jackal »

Just noticed my drawing is rubbish westbound as it creates a new weaving space up to the M56. Whoops. But equally I don't think it can be left as is (500m weaving space on 160k AADT road).

One option is to extend the C/D lane up to the loop for A34>M56, which it would join as a lane gain. But Roscoe spur traffic then cannot access the M60 (it can access the A34 and M56).

Otherwise braiding is required - specifically the offslip heading for the A34 has to diverge east of the fork, near the allotments, then go under Roscoe spur.
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by Peter Freeman »

^ Those final re-designs of J2-3-4 wb and 4-3-2 eb look good. Bryn's original loop idea was OK: it increased length for the weave, at the cost only of slightly increased travel length. It reminds me, on a very different scale, of the large spirals in Shanghai and Guangzhou, which at first look spectacularly showy and wasteful, but actually do have a purpose.

Jackal's version is better, but definitely the wb treatment should be braided, not simply CD'd. Thus the J2 Roscoes Spur merge with M60 can stay exactly where it is. J1 being relatively far away, there's not much of a wb weaving problem from 1-2, and so the J3 diverge for A34 could begin before passing the allotments, in order to gain or lose height and pass over or under both Roscoes Spur carriageways.

A link in the braid could easily still allow traffic to flow from J2 to J3 (Bryn's 'Cheadle Bypass').

Would Manchester Road (B5095) bridge really need any work? An alternative is: don't let the merge of Roscoes Spur (which appears to be metered) widen M60 mainline from 3 to 4 lanes. Then, the current wb lane 1 (1 out of 4) can carry the new J3 off-ramp under the bridge and on towards A34, separated from the mainline's 3 lanes by a barrier. It could even be not separated - just paint double white lines. Unusual, true, but why not? The only risk is that some would cheat over the lines to avoid the braid. In either case, a hard shoulder could still pass through the minor far-left aperture, as now.

(Final paragraph is me being stingy ...lengthen the bridge if necessary).
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by Peter Freeman »

jackal wrote: Thu Oct 21, 2021 13:27 This is an RIS3 pipeline scheme. Little information is available but a TfN document refers to it as "formerly M60 J24-27 and 1-4 smart motorway". This was an RIS1 scheme described as follows: "upgrading south-eastern quadrant of the M60 to Smart Motorway between junction 24 (M67 Denton interchange) and junction 4 (M56 Kingsway interchange)".

I've not seen any public explanation of the name change, or why the scheme has slid back at least ten years (from construction to start 2015-20 to maybe starting 2025-30). Though to be fair I would prefer that they delay rather than build a pointless version of the scheme like M60 J12-18 smart motorway.
1. Is J24-J4 still non-smart? If so, is it the last remaining non-smart section of M60?
2. In what way was the J12-18 smart motorway scheme "pointless" ?
Was it, partially or wholly, smartified without widening?
User avatar
Chris5156
Deputy Treasurer
Posts: 16909
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2001 21:50
Location: Hampshire
Contact:

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by Chris5156 »

Peter Freeman wrote: Wed Feb 01, 2023 04:131. Is J24-J4 still non-smart? If so, is it the last remaining non-smart section of M60?
No, far from it. IIRC the only Smart section of M60 is J8-18 at present.
2. In what way was the J12-18 smart motorway scheme "pointless" ?
Was it, partially or wholly, smartified without widening?
That's it. On that length is the Barton High Level Bridge, which was widened years ago to provide a third lane, but at minimal cost, so it has very narrow hard shoulders. Then the J12-18 length was widened in the early 1990s to reduced standards, so it has intermittent hard shoulders and lanes sufficiently narrow that there are occasional warning signs. The roadworks still, somehow, lasted three years.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by jackal »

Peter Freeman wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 09:15 Would Manchester Road (B5095) bridge really need any work? An alternative is: don't let the merge of Roscoes Spur (which appears to be metered) widen M60 mainline from 3 to 4 lanes. Then, the current wb lane 1 (1 out of 4) can carry the new J3 off-ramp under the bridge and on towards A34, separated from the mainline's 3 lanes by a barrier. It could even be not separated - just paint double white lines. Unusual, true, but why not? The only risk is that some would cheat over the lines to avoid the braid. In either case, a hard shoulder could still pass through the minor far-left aperture, as now.

(Final paragraph is me being stingy ...lengthen the bridge if necessary).
Surely there isn't the space under the main spans of the bridge for 3+1 including a barrier. It is just wide enough for 4 lanes without a barrier:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.40067 ... 384!8i8192 There would be space for double white lines I suppose but there would be low compliance.

I've contemplated digging out the retaining structures under the small spans to make way for proper vertical retaining walls, allowing these spans to be used for extended slips rather than HS only. But it may be more practical simply to replace the bridge as you mention.
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1391
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: Manchester south-east junction improvements

Post by Peter Freeman »

jackal wrote: Wed Feb 01, 2023 10:54
Peter Freeman wrote: Mon Jan 02, 2023 09:15 Would Manchester Road (B5095) bridge really need any work? An alternative is: don't let the merge of Roscoes Spur (which appears to be metered) widen M60 mainline from 3 to 4 lanes. Then, the current wb lane 1 (1 out of 4) can carry the new J3 off-ramp under the bridge and on towards A34, separated from the mainline's 3 lanes by a barrier. It could even be not separated - just paint double white lines. Unusual, true, but why not? The only risk is that some would cheat over the lines to avoid the braid. In either case, a hard shoulder could still pass through the minor far-left aperture, as now.

(Final paragraph is me being stingy ... lengthen the bridge if necessary).
Surely there isn't the space under the main spans of the bridge for 3+1 including a barrier. It is just wide enough for 4 lanes without a barrier:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.40067 ... 384!8i8192
You're right. Too tight. Those 4 lanes appear to already be slightly narrow, though not problematically so: shoe-horned in when it went from 3 to 4?
There would be space for double white lines I suppose but there would be low compliance.
Right there too! On second thoughts, my economising ran away with me. In any case, four lanes will be required in the longer term, even with J3 exiting traffic removed. And the J3 braided off-ramp would benefit from being wider than one lane.
I've contemplated digging out the retaining structures under the small spans to make way for proper vertical retaining walls, allowing these spans to be used for extended slips rather than HS only. But it may be more practical simply to replace the bridge as you mention.
'Digging out' - yes, maybe. Alternatively, depending on its general state of repair, extending a bridge by one span is usually practicable, without demolition of the existing two spans. It's not difficult engineering. However, whether this is a worthwhile economy here is debatable.

A total rebuild is more likely. In that case, it could be future-proofed for optional further mainline widening (or HS addition!). Also, the new 3-span bridge could probably be built alongside the existing one, with demolition to follow, in order to minimise traffic disruption on B5095.

Many of these considerations also apply to your eb proposals here, so perhaps that's further incentive to build new. Viewed as part of expanding/enhancing M60 in total, this location is of course small beer.
Post Reply