Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Moderator: Site Management Team
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
I like it - you could probably fit it in under 120km/h design speed with a couple of departures for maybe offside lane narrowing and it would still be a damn sight more efficient and safe than what's there now.
Given it's D5M at present and given NH don't care about hard shoulders being present either, a decent concrete barrier between C/D lanes akin to the M20 at Maidstone seems extremely achievable. Good luck finding anyone competent to do the direction signs, you'll have some hideous gantries spat out
Given it's D5M at present and given NH don't care about hard shoulders being present either, a decent concrete barrier between C/D lanes akin to the M20 at Maidstone seems extremely achievable. Good luck finding anyone competent to do the direction signs, you'll have some hideous gantries spat out
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
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
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
I like it too! Ambitious, yet practical....
To be fair to the existing structure, I've never found any of the various movements nor the proximity of the M1-M62 and M1-M621 interchanges to be either dangerous or particularly bad for delays, but a junction like Lofthouse really shouldn't be using roundabouts.
To be fair to the existing structure, I've never found any of the various movements nor the proximity of the M1-M62 and M1-M621 interchanges to be either dangerous or particularly bad for delays, but a junction like Lofthouse really shouldn't be using roundabouts.
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
It's bad particularly heading southbound at rush hour - lots of weaving and conflicting movements causing accidents and delay - although I suspect part of the cause are the queues for the roundabout itself tailing back to the main line.Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:41 I like it too! Ambitious, yet practical....
To be fair to the existing structure, I've never found any of the various movements nor the proximity of the M1-M62 and M1-M621 interchanges to be either dangerous or particularly bad for delays, but a junction like Lofthouse really shouldn't be using roundabouts.
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
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Get involved! - see our guide to scanning and stitching maps
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
My most common direction would be M62 from W to M1 S - the queues can stack up there, but never quite seem to reach back as far as the M62 mainline, or the freefrow M62-M1 slip.c2R wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:44It's bad particularly heading southbound at rush hour - lots of weaving and conflicting movements causing accidents and delay - although I suspect part of the cause are the queues for the roundabout itself tailing back to the main line.Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:41 I like it too! Ambitious, yet practical....
To be fair to the existing structure, I've never found any of the various movements nor the proximity of the M1-M62 and M1-M621 interchanges to be either dangerous or particularly bad for delays, but a junction like Lofthouse really shouldn't be using roundabouts.
But certainly the roundabout has to go. I'm struggling to think of any other country in Europe that uses roundabouts on motorways, apart from Ireland and the Netherlands (where I think most of the ones that were there have now been removed).
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
The Dutch examples were always stop-gap measures pending traffic need, the final 'original' roundabout at Joure has since been replaced with a big directional-T. There are still a few diamonds connecting two motorways though - a notorious example being the A27/A59 here: https://goo.gl/maps/nyp1udV3QBZqkqAK9Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:51My most common direction would be M62 from W to M1 S - the queues can stack up there, but never quite seem to reach back as far as the M62 mainline, or the freefrow M62-M1 slip.c2R wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:44It's bad particularly heading southbound at rush hour - lots of weaving and conflicting movements causing accidents and delay - although I suspect part of the cause are the queues for the roundabout itself tailing back to the main line.Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:41 I like it too! Ambitious, yet practical....
To be fair to the existing structure, I've never found any of the various movements nor the proximity of the M1-M62 and M1-M621 interchanges to be either dangerous or particularly bad for delays, but a junction like Lofthouse really shouldn't be using roundabouts.
But certainly the roundabout has to go. I'm struggling to think of any other country in Europe that uses roundabouts on motorways, apart from Ireland and the Netherlands (where I think most of the ones that were there have now been removed).
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
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
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Would the timeline be such that A1(M) works around Doncaster etc would be completed in advance of this?
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
I would be willing to wager that since doing anything major around Doncaster will require land purchase and extensive Development Consent Order work, whereas this Lofthouse scheme could be underway within 3 years if it was fast tracked (no land purchase for one, the time consumption is detailed design and construction phasing), that no.
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
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
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Option C is the obvious answer. As we’re talking highway planning in a UK context, option A will be chosen with awful roundabout entry path overlap generating geometries thrown in for good measure.
I hope I’m wrong.
I hope I’m wrong.
M19
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Shocker!.... I've never noticed that one before.Bryn666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 11:40The Dutch examples were always stop-gap measures pending traffic need, the final 'original' roundabout at Joure has since been replaced with a big directional-T. There are still a few diamonds connecting two motorways though - a notorious example being the A27/A59 here: https://goo.gl/maps/nyp1udV3QBZqkqAK9Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:51 My most common direction would be M62 from W to M1 S - the queues can stack up there, but never quite seem to reach back as far as the M62 mainline, or the freefrow M62-M1 slip.
But certainly the roundabout has to go. I'm struggling to think of any other country in Europe that uses roundabouts on motorways, apart from Ireland and the Netherlands (where I think most of the ones that were there have now been removed).
- JammyDodge
- Member
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 13:17
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Pretty much perfect in layoutjackal wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 09:25Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.JammyDodge wrote: ↑Mon Nov 01, 2021 20:52I got the crayons out
J42-43 theoretical braiding solution
M1 J42-43 Braid.jpg
Your sketch has the right idea but it has mainline weaving north of M1 J43 on both M1 and M621, and it also severs access from the M1 to M621 J7. This plan resolves these issues:
M1 M621 - Copy.JPG
The basic concept is the same as yours, i.e., (1) remove the M1 TOTSO and (2) resolve route choice at Lofthouse (J42) north of J43. So the section between J42 and J43 consists of the M1 mainline (inner carriageways) and extended slips from Lofthouse (outercarriageways). But there are also C/D lanes (M1) and braiding (M621) north of J43 to handle weaving there while maintaining full access.
It might actually be possible to fit all of the C/D lanes under existing bridges, which have a decent amount of space, though the speed limit may have to be dropped in places as sightlines would suffer. The M1 J43 to J44 C/D lanes would just be 2+2, so fit under the Wakefield road bridge, which is D3M plus verge. J42 to J43 definitely fits for 3+2, accommodating two lanes for the turning movements at Lofthouse as at present. (3+3, allowing three lanes for the turning movements, might require the Sharp Lane bridge to be replaced, though I'm not convinced the extra lane is actually needed if weaving issues are resolved.)
J43 itself would need one new bridge (the existing bridge is the other bridge needed there) and two more are required for the braiding north of there. So though this looks very complex it may require only three new bridges, and the only significant landtake is for J43 and the braiding north of there.
I would make it quad 3 lane with shoulder from J42-43, which maintains the M1's 3 lanes through the junction and allows 4 into 3 at J42 on the collector (could be an extension of the M621?)
Would require the rebuild the Sharp Lane bridge and extensions of the ones over the A654
If it was designed compactly, it would also be feasible to build wholly withing NH's existing land
Designing Tomorrow, Around the Past
-
- Member
- Posts: 988
- Joined: Sun Apr 14, 2002 19:54
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
I've been over that on the A27 and never realised what was underneath.Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 21:38Shocker!.... I've never noticed that one before.Bryn666 wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 11:40The Dutch examples were always stop-gap measures pending traffic need, the final 'original' roundabout at Joure has since been replaced with a big directional-T. There are still a few diamonds connecting two motorways though - a notorious example being the A27/A59 here: https://goo.gl/maps/nyp1udV3QBZqkqAK9Owain wrote: ↑Tue Nov 02, 2021 10:51 My most common direction would be M62 from W to M1 S - the queues can stack up there, but never quite seem to reach back as far as the M62 mainline, or the freefrow M62-M1 slip.
But certainly the roundabout has to go. I'm struggling to think of any other country in Europe that uses roundabouts on motorways, apart from Ireland and the Netherlands (where I think most of the ones that were there have now been removed).
The Dutch have sorted most of the mad at grade stuff now, the A2/A67 roundabout and as Bryn says the A6/A7 roundabout are new gone. Last time I was there they had also tidied up the roads around Leeuwarden, but seem to continually tinker with the A7/N7 around Groningen.
- the cheesecake man
- Member
- Posts: 2480
- Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2019 13:21
- Location: Sheffield
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
The current roundabout is unusual as it signs all right turns to use both lanes. Traffic lights aim to avoid having more than one right turn on the roundabout at once. It mostly works but inevitably still leads to traffic flows merging hence vehicles needing to cross over. If everyone's going slowly, has used the junction many times, is alert to this and signals then collisions can usually be avoided but it's still a cray situation to create. So clearly freeflow is needed.
There's certainly a place for widening existing roundabouts, adding left-turns cut-offs etc. But demolishing an overloaded roundabout just to build a slightly bigger one is totally bonkers.
It is however refreshingly honest of NH to admit their proposals are pants as A and B clearly are.
There's certainly a place for widening existing roundabouts, adding left-turns cut-offs etc. But demolishing an overloaded roundabout just to build a slightly bigger one is totally bonkers.
It is however refreshingly honest of NH to admit their proposals are pants as A and B clearly are.
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
I've had a go at a more 'realistic' upgrade of J43 and surrounds. The braiding I previously suggested for the M621 had to go due to cost, lack of space, and proximity to the estate to the west. Instead we have a short Q2 C/D lane section on the M621, similar to that on the M1 for J43-J44.
Remarkably the whole improvement down to Lofthouse requires only one new bridge. Admittedly it would take a lot of road - there are ten parallel carriageways at one point!
Remarkably the whole improvement down to Lofthouse requires only one new bridge. Admittedly it would take a lot of road - there are ten parallel carriageways at one point!
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
For option C they propose to widen the ECML bridge and an adjacent road bridge on the M1 southbound to accommodate the revised merge. They're in blue here:
The extra width merges in even though it's halfway to J41 at that point with the difficult bit widened. I'd suggest that they should take that through as a fifth lane to J41, allowing a double lane gain from Lofthouse. This is the only section of motorway at Lofthouse that doesn't have a double lane gain/drop, so clearly there are the turning volumes to warrant it. It's already five lanes northbound with double lane drop.
It may require replacement of a gantry and old (60s?) accommodation bridge here but that shouldn't be a show stopper.
The extra width merges in even though it's halfway to J41 at that point with the difficult bit widened. I'd suggest that they should take that through as a fifth lane to J41, allowing a double lane gain from Lofthouse. This is the only section of motorway at Lofthouse that doesn't have a double lane gain/drop, so clearly there are the turning volumes to warrant it. It's already five lanes northbound with double lane drop.
It may require replacement of a gantry and old (60s?) accommodation bridge here but that shouldn't be a show stopper.
- FleetlinePhil
- Member
- Posts: 2100
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 11:26
- Location: Calder Valley
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
A bit of mainstream coverage on the BBC News webpage for Leeds & West Yorkshire yesterday, although no mention on their pages for adjoining parts of the region whose drivers may still use the junction.
It's probably overshadowed at the moment by the crisis at Yorkshire County Cricket Club, but it might lead to a few more people viewing the proposals.
It's probably overshadowed at the moment by the crisis at Yorkshire County Cricket Club, but it might lead to a few more people viewing the proposals.
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
All the things I really want to say about this have already been covered upthread, but I can't let this pass by without adding a quick "+1", because it is a joy to see NH proposing (and seemingly throwing their weight behind) an upgrade to free-flow which is appropriate, cleverly designed and which will make a lasting improvement that will stand for decades. And, being from just up the road, I'm particularly delighted to see that it's happening at Lofthouse.
Let us pray that option C is taken forward. I've just filled in the consultation to make my views on that clear.
Let us pray that option C is taken forward. I've just filled in the consultation to make my views on that clear.
Chris
Roads.org.uk
Roads.org.uk
-
- Member
- Posts: 1418
- Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
- Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
... that as we see, with relief, the end of this one, we're building more.
- JammyDodge
- Member
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 13:17
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Blame the Treasury and its obsessiveness around CBA, which is almost always short sighted. It will almost always show a 3-level stack-about as the best C-B ratio for a new strategic route interchange.Peter Freeman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 06, 2021 03:59... that as we see, with relief, the end of this one, we're building more.
Although it is to be noted, that we have seemingly learned to build them wider from the start now, as shown by Black Cat. (The M25/A3 proposals are a true atrocity of traffic engineering)
Designing Tomorrow, Around the Past
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
Can't blame the treasury on that one. An option with freeflow for all major movements got only 27% support in public consultation because it was too "complex". 60% supported the stackabout. The myth of the big roundabout that solves everything is deeply embedded in the British psyche.JammyDodge wrote: ↑Sun Nov 07, 2021 07:05Blame the Treasury and its obsessiveness around CBA, which is almost always short sighted. It will almost always show a 3-level stack-about as the best C-B ratio for a new strategic route interchange.Peter Freeman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 06, 2021 03:59... that as we see, with relief, the end of this one, we're building more.
Although it is to be noted, that we have seemingly learned to build them wider from the start now, as shown by Black Cat.
Re: Lofthouse Junction Upgrade Consultation
But how much weight is given to public preference? This is a relatively technical subject where the public is not really to be expected to be able to have an informed opinion.jackal wrote: ↑Sun Nov 07, 2021 08:24Can't blame the treasury on that one. An option with freeflow for all major movements got only 27% support in public consultation because it was too "complex". 60% supported the stackabout. The myth of the big roundabout that solves everything is deeply embedded in the British psyche.JammyDodge wrote: ↑Sun Nov 07, 2021 07:05Blame the Treasury and its obsessiveness around CBA, which is almost always short sighted. It will almost always show a 3-level stack-about as the best C-B ratio for a new strategic route interchange.Peter Freeman wrote: ↑Sat Nov 06, 2021 03:59
... that as we see, with relief, the end of this one, we're building more.
Although it is to be noted, that we have seemingly learned to build them wider from the start now, as shown by Black Cat.