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.
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:09
Worth pointing out that there are toll routes in the Ile de France. The A14, bypassing the oldest bit of the A13 (opened in 1946!) is tolled as is the A86 Ouest tunnel.
Most of the motorways in the Paris, Lille, and Marseille areas are the oldest in France - older than ours for sure. That's Marshall Aid for you...
Yes, and of course the A1, A4, A5, A6, A10, and A13 all have there toll sections start within the Ile de France. The A4 even has that tiny bit of toll road at Courtevroult east of Disneyland before going toll free for a short distance before the toll kicks in until Metz.
Yes, those older bits of autoroute, fun even by the standards of French autoroutes!
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!
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:09
Worth pointing out that there are toll routes in the Ile de France. The A14, bypassing the oldest bit of the A13 (opened in 1946!) is tolled as is the A86 Ouest tunnel.
Most of the motorways in the Paris, Lille, and Marseille areas are the oldest in France - older than ours for sure. That's Marshall Aid for you...
Yes, and of course the A1, A4, A5, A6, A10, and A13 all have there toll sections start within the Ile de France. The A4 even has that tiny bit of toll road at Courtevroult east of Disneyland before going toll free for a short distance before the toll kicks in until Metz.
Yes, those older bits of autoroute, fun even by the standards of French autoroutes!
The Coutevroult barrier is a weird one, it seems to have been built to put you off driving into Paris from Meaux - the A140/A4 bypassing the N36 were built first because the road through Couilly and Quincy-Voisins is bobbins.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:34
The Coutevroult barrier is a weird one, it seems to have been built to put you off driving into Paris from Meaux - the A140/A4 bypassing the N36 were built first because the road through Couilly and Quincy-Voisins is bobbins.
Absolutely bizarre as the toll is only 2,30€ on that one. The toll section feels to be just the run up each side to the barrier, paying a toll just to use the toll booth.
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!
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:34
The Coutevroult barrier is a weird one, it seems to have been built to put you off driving into Paris from Meaux - the A140/A4 bypassing the N36 were built first because the road through Couilly and Quincy-Voisins is bobbins.
Absolutely bizarre as the toll is only 2,30€ on that one. The toll section feels to be just the run up each side to the barrier, paying a toll just to use the toll booth.
That's pretty much it - although I suspect before Disneyland opened it made a bit more sense as there were fewer junctions west of it, there was also that god awful concrete surface too...
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 10:34
The Coutevroult barrier is a weird one, it seems to have been built to put you off driving into Paris from Meaux - the A140/A4 bypassing the N36 were built first because the road through Couilly and Quincy-Voisins is bobbins.
Absolutely bizarre as the toll is only 2,30€ on that one. The toll section feels to be just the run up each side to the barrier, paying a toll just to use the toll booth.
That's pretty much it - although I suspect before Disneyland opened it made a bit more sense as there were fewer junctions west of it, there was also that god awful concrete surface too...
May also be a legacy of when the A4 was largely an open toll system.
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!
Going back to what you'd number a 'free' BNRR as - I'd go for M42. Although M63 and M68 are available and in the correct zone, navigationally M44 follows logically from M42. In a more ideal world, the M42 north of Water Orton would be renumbered as something - maybe this (and an improved A42) could become the M68 with the M42 forming a West Midlands D-road.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
trickstat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 09:15
If it was as simple as that it would be OK to build toll motorways anywhere to relieve a little congestion here and there. It has to be worth the loss of what the land was previously used for and the disruption to those near it. I think in the M6 Toll's case this wasn't that great because it largely runs close to existing A road rather than wide open countryside.
A toll road will only be viable if there is enough traffic to recover the costs and cover maintenance. The very first Freeways in the USA were toll roads simply because at the time roads had to be funded at state or county level. The classic example is the New Jersey Turnpike. It was planned as a state road . When the builder suggested landscaping it and adopting a better standard the response of the governor was tha the wanted a road to take the interstate traffic off New Jersey's existing roads. Since 85 percent of the traffic at that time was estimated to be from out of state, why spend additional funds on landscaping. Essentially the State Government was unwilling to spend more money than was absolutely essential. The only way to square the circle was charging tolls. Its now Interstate 95 but the tolls are still in place. The road was so successful it had to be widened withing 5 years of opening;
The reality was that it took the introduction of the Interstate Highway System was introduced before new strategic roads would be 90% funded by the federal government and 10% from the state. Pre Intestate long distance roads looked like this
trickstat wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 09:15
If it was as simple as that it would be OK to build toll motorways anywhere to relieve a little congestion here and there. It has to be worth the loss of what the land was previously used for and the disruption to those near it. I think in the M6 Toll's case this wasn't that great because it largely runs close to existing A road rather than wide open countryside.
A toll road will only be viable if there is enough traffic to recover the costs and cover maintenance. The very first Freeways in the USA were toll roads simply because at the time roads had to be funded at state or county level. The classic example is the New Jersey Turnpike. It was planned as a state road . When the builder suggested landscaping it and adopting a better standard the response of the governor was tha the wanted a road to take the interstate traffic off New Jersey's existing roads. Since 85 percent of the traffic at that time was estimated to be from out of state, why spend additional funds on landscaping. Essentially the State Government was unwilling to spend more money than was absolutely essential. The only way to square the circle was charging tolls. Its now Interstate 95 but the tolls are still in place. The road was so successful it had to be widened withing 5 years of opening;
The reality was that it took the introduction of the Interstate Highway System was introduced before new strategic roads would be 90% funded by the federal government and 10% from the state. Pre Intestate long distance roads looked like this
DanT97 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 21, 2022 19:26
What the hell were the thinking back in ‘03 anyway? Why couldn’t they just open a normal motorway?
Decisions to build it as a toll road were taken in the early 1990s, design and public consultation took place during the 1990s and construction began in 2000 or 2001. So in 2003 they were probably thinking “we’ll, we’ve built it now, I suppose we should open it”.
Matches my recollection that it was built as a test to see how tolling would take root for future developments. Also by 2003 it would have cost a lot of money, see the Skye Bridge, to buy into public hands and remove the tolls due to how these are financed.
Not only was the concept of tolling welcomed as a way of bringing in extra funding as a proto-PFI to get the "Roads for Prosperity" programme built, but it tuned into the expectation that private sector delivery would lead to better performance for service users, as in other sectors of the economy. The New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 provided the powers required for this new generation of private roads, and this extract from the debate on the then-Bill's clauses in Parliament at the time gives a flavour of the positive results anticipated: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/ ... 9.0#g227.0
"The promoter of a scheme will have a strong incentive in the form of profit to undertake the necessary preparatory work as quickly as possible. The private sector may choose to buy land on a voluntary basis at above market value if it were in the longer term interest of the project. That is something that the public sector cannot do. Therefore, the overall procedure could well be quicker. All those who want a quicker implementation of the roads programme are in tune with public demand."
It was not without strong expectation that the Act required the Department to report annually on the number of private roads agreed to be built and opened (section 18 of the Act) because the initiative would be so successful...
respublica wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 15:03
Not only was the concept of tolling welcomed as a way of bringing in extra funding as a proto-PFI to get the "Roads for Prosperity" programme built, but it tuned into the expectation that private sector delivery would lead to better performance for service users, as in other sectors of the economy. The New Roads and Street Works Act 1991 provided the powers required for this new generation of private roads, and this extract from the debate on the then-Bill's clauses in Parliament at the time gives a flavour of the positive results anticipated: https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/ ... 9.0#g227.0
"The promoter of a scheme will have a strong incentive in the form of profit to undertake the necessary preparatory work as quickly as possible. The private sector may choose to buy land on a voluntary basis at above market value if it were in the longer term interest of the project. That is something that the public sector cannot do. Therefore, the overall procedure could well be quicker. All those who want a quicker implementation of the roads programme are in tune with public demand."
It was not without strong expectation that the Act required the Department to report annually on the number of private roads agreed to be built and opened (section 18 of the Act) because the initiative would be so successful...
Interesting, thanks.
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!
There are other tolled PFI motorways run by private companies, however the tolls are paid by the government. One such is the A1(M) Peterborough to Alconbury. This system is called "shadow tolling".
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:10
In a more ideal world, the M42 north of Water Orton would be renumbered as something - maybe this (and an improved A42) could become the M68 with the M42 forming a West Midlands D-road.
or even "... an UN-improved A42 ...", since motorways without shoulders are not unknown.
DanT97 wrote: ↑Tue Apr 19, 2022 21:48
And what is preventing the relevant authorities from funding this from the same money that looks after every other motorway in the entire country?
Well for one there would be less money to maintain all the other trunk roads and given the size of the debt left over from the covid pandemic the treasury would most certainly vigorously oppose it. As for the left leaning press I can see the headlines now.
nowster wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 22:04
There are other tolled PFI motorways run by private companies, however the tolls are paid by the government. One such is the A1(M) Peterborough to Alconbury. This system is called "shadow tolling".
Most people are unaware of shadow tolls although they are now quite common both on motorway and non motorway routes. PFI pushes the debt down the line to other people. But also is a show that retrofitting tolls onto a system that operated without tolls is going to be problematic. Introducing vignettes is something that could be done, as other countries have shown, but in a UK context would need corresponding VED reductions, and an agreement between the four governments on a common scheme if they do not want to have four different ones.
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!
exiled wrote: ↑Sat Apr 23, 2022 11:31
Most people are unaware of shadow tolls although they are now quite common both on motorway and non motorway routes. PFI pushes the debt down the line to other people. But also is a show that retrofitting tolls onto a system that operated without tolls is going to be problematic. Introducing vignettes is something that could be done, as other countries have shown, but in a UK context would need corresponding VED reductions, and an agreement between the four governments on a common scheme if they do not want to have four different ones.
In August 2011 the UK Parliamentary Treasury Select Committe announced that PFI deals were an "extremely inefficient method of financing [public infrastructure] projects" and that the rules needed to be reformed to prevent the promotion of PFI funding of infrastructure development though misleading cost calculations and perverse "off balance sheet" incentive.
exiled wrote: ↑Sat Apr 23, 2022 11:31
Most people are unaware of shadow tolls although they are now quite common both on motorway and non motorway routes. PFI pushes the debt down the line to other people. But also is a show that retrofitting tolls onto a system that operated without tolls is going to be problematic. Introducing vignettes is something that could be done, as other countries have shown, but in a UK context would need corresponding VED reductions, and an agreement between the four governments on a common scheme if they do not want to have four different ones.
In August 2011 the UK Parliamentary Treasury Select Committe announced that PFI deals were an "extremely inefficient method of financing [public infrastructure] projects" and that the rules needed to be reformed to prevent the promotion of PFI funding of infrastructure development though misleading cost calculations and perverse "off balance sheet" incentive.
Yes, it kicks the debt down the line, keeps it off the books even if it costs more.
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!
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:10
Going back to what you'd number a 'free' BNRR as - I'd go for M42. Although M63 and M68 are available and in the correct zone, navigationally M44 follows logically from M42. In a more ideal world, the M42 north of Water Orton would be renumbered as something - maybe this (and an improved A42) could become the M68 with the M42 forming a West Midlands D-road.
Of course however, if this was a country that used joined up thinking, actual logical approaches to things, and wasn’t counting pennies while the pounds fly through the window we’d have sorted the M54/M6Toll abomination and the whole thing from (Nearly) Shrewsbury to until at least M42 J9 would have one number.
However we do not exist in that Country but I am sure it exists somewhere in the Multiverse
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:10
Going back to what you'd number a 'free' BNRR as - I'd go for M42. Although M63 and M68 are available and in the correct zone, navigationally M44 follows logically from M42.
If it weren't for the M42 north of Water Orton having to be renumbered, make me a dictator and I'd reclassify the M6 Toll as well as the adjoining section of M42 to Catshill as the M45, creating a continuity with the M25.
"I see the face of a child. He lives in a great city. He is black. Or he is white. He is Mexican, Italian, Polish. None of that matters. What matters, he's an American child"
- Richard Nixon
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:10
Going back to what you'd number a 'free' BNRR as - I'd go for M42. Although M63 and M68 are available and in the correct zone, navigationally M44 follows logically from M42.
If it weren't for the M42 north of Water Orton having to be renumbered, make me a dictator and I'd reclassify the M6 Toll as well as the adjoining section of M42 to Catshill as the M45, creating a continuity with the M25.
And what happens to the current M45?
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Bryn666 wrote: ↑Fri Apr 22, 2022 12:10
Going back to what you'd number a 'free' BNRR as - I'd go for M42. Although M63 and M68 are available and in the correct zone, navigationally M44 follows logically from M42.
If it weren't for the M42 north of Water Orton having to be renumbered, make me a dictator and I'd reclassify the M6 Toll as well as the adjoining section of M42 to Catshill as the M45, creating a continuity with the M25.
And what happens to the current M45?
Put in an at-grade roundabout where it crosses the A5 and declassify it. Sorted
How would you like your grade separations, Sir? Big and complex.
