I would imagine that a bypass for Cross Gates is one of the major reasons for building this new road.
What is the current timeframe for the road to be completed and is it planned to open in stages or all in one go?
Moderator: Site Management Team
I would imagine that a bypass for Cross Gates is one of the major reasons for building this new road.
Supposed to be autumn 2022 and I would guess it's on schedule or ahead.Rillington wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 19:50
I would imagine that a bypass for Cross Gates is one of the major reasons for building this new road.
What is the current timeframe for the road to be completed and is it planned to open in stages or all in one go?
Due to fully open Spring 2022, it’s massively ahead of schedule, the A64 roundabout is getting tied in over 2 weekend closures in October, the A58 in November, Thorner Lane was the end of an era for such a busy short cut, I did notice the kerb line on the A64 on the westbound new section opposite Thorner lane is set back about 4 metres where it joins the old kerb line, this will be temporary as the A64 will be widened there summer 2023 as part of the scholes lane traffic signals, basically the A64 will have 2 westbound lanes from east of scholes lane to ELOR.wrinkly wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 20:04Supposed to be autumn 2022 and I would guess it's on schedule or ahead.Rillington wrote: ↑Fri Sep 24, 2021 19:50
I would imagine that a bypass for Cross Gates is one of the major reasons for building this new road.
What is the current timeframe for the road to be completed and is it planned to open in stages or all in one go?
I would guess it'll open in one go.
Thorner Lane is now permanently closed between its junction with the A64 and the cemetery entrance. Skeltons Lane is now reopened; traffic on it keeps left round what will be the roundabout at its junction with the ELOR.
The Springs Roundabout is an at-grade roundabout Manston Lane Link Road (known as William Parkin Way) meets the Springs retail park. It opened in November 2018, providing access to the retail park only. In 2019, the bridge over the railway was opened to the north of the roundabout, extending William Parkin Way to the Manston Lane Roundabout.
|
The plan is for the bridge to connect to a footpath heading out into the surrounding countryside. https://thorpeparkleeds.com/masterplan/c2R wrote: ↑Tue Oct 05, 2021 07:33 I took a walk around the area last night; the overbridge by The Springs Roundabout is interesting - it's very wide and substantial looking, and pointless because it doesn't go anywhere and duplicates at grade pedestrian crossings nearby - I've got a photo of it that I need to get off my phone.
I wouldn't be surprised if one day this is used for vehicles in one way or another. Although that would ruin the landscaping that presumably is a selling point of the nearby houses!
As usual for this development, pedestrian desire lines have been ignored, so they're going to end up with more walking across grassed areas/through flower beds I'm sure!
The Springs Roundabout is an at-grade roundabout Manston Lane Link Road (known as William Parkin Way) meets the Springs retail park. It opened in November 2018, providing access to the retail park only. In 2019, the bridge over the railway was opened to the north of the roundabout, extending William Parkin Way to the Manston Lane Roundabout.
|
It was never planned as a GSJ, it was always a 'green bridge' intended as a continuation of the 'central park' area onto Brown Moor. An underpass was originally planned but that was changed to a bridge.Achmelvic wrote: ↑Thu Oct 07, 2021 11:17 Co-incidentally I was walking around Thorpe Park last week as well whilst waiting for the missus to finish at the dentists.
Similarly I walked up onto the overbridge which really is a strange one. Previously having I'd driven under it I assumed it was destined to be a road bridge as it's wide enough and has the design and feel of one so was very surprised it's just got a few metre wide foot path in the middle of it. Its very strange they'd build such a substantial structure in that design for just foot and cycle use rather than something more aesthetically pleasing.
Did the plans change at some point and it was meant to be a GSJ and the bridge was built before they decided to put the roundabout and light controlled junctions to either sides instead? Seems very out of place, especially given the landscaping on the west side to give foot and cycle access to the housing development.
Personally I don't feel the bridge feels part of the park - it looks very tacked on and the gradients don't help. Clearly it's not finished yet on the Brown Moor side and being generous, maybe it will look better in a few years' time once the planting has has time to grow.Upon reaching the MLLR,
Central Park no longer goes under the road via an underpass but it is now proposed
to take all public rights of way over the bridge via a green bridge. The detail of the
bridge will be subject to a condition but is currently designed at around 10-12m wide
with a shared access route for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians and suitable
landscaping. There will be wide landscaped access points onto the bridge at gentle
gradients to ensure the green bridge feels part of and a continuation of Central Park
and Brown Moor
Righto, thanks. In that case it is indeed a poor design for the role, doesn't really scream 'green bridge' or attractive to pedesitrans, and like you say the gradients up to it aren't good.quantinghome wrote: ↑Thu Oct 07, 2021 12:17
It was never planned as a GSJ, it was always a 'green bridge' intended as a continuation of the 'central park' area onto Brown Moor. An underpass was originally planned but that was changed to a bridge.
From the planning document https://democracy.leeds.gov.uk/document ... 20PARK.pdf:
Personally I don't feel the bridge feels part of the park - it looks very tacked on and the gradients don't help. Clearly it's not finished yet on the Brown Moor side and being generous, maybe it will look better in a few years' time once the planting has has time to grow.Upon reaching the MLLR,
Central Park no longer goes under the road via an underpass but it is now proposed
to take all public rights of way over the bridge via a green bridge. The detail of the
bridge will be subject to a condition but is currently designed at around 10-12m wide
with a shared access route for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians and suitable
landscaping. There will be wide landscaped access points onto the bridge at gentle
gradients to ensure the green bridge feels part of and a continuation of Central Park
and Brown Moor
Poor Leeds indeed. I've noticed a lot of preexisting junctions being butchered by rebuilding them as hamburgers. The reason why quite escapes me.Peter Freeman wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 01:32 New DC road, existing busy trunk road, a whole hectare of available space - and the NEW BUILD intersection choice is - wait for it - an at-grade six-arm signalised hamburger! Poor Leeds.
NICK 647063 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 07, 2022 21:33 I’ve attached a few photos, the new A6120 looks to be opening mid July.
B9B74853-D517-45E3-972F-A76DB6C15255.jpeg
I will try and add some more photos but for some reason it’s refusing to upload anymore even though I have reduced image size!
The A58 don’t get me started, I expected this to happen, always seems to be confusion with the council!roadphotos wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 20:35 Such a shame that this dual carriageway is having at grade junctions (an opportunity missed), also why do the new signs show the A58 as a Primary Route when it clearly isn't ?.
I think the council have lost all expertise in sign design, certainly no-one is checking designs - whether produced internally or externally - before this stuff gets on street. There could be a dedicated thread of 'Bad Signing in Leeds', such is the number and variety of mistakes.NICK 647063 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 20:45 The signage is very random on this scheme, the one in the photo is the A6120 SB approach to the A64 that has both York A64 and A1(M) mentioned, yet on the A6120 NB the first sign simply shows A1(M) with York A64 appearing on the secondary signage, surely both should be on the first sign with say Scholes on the secondary signage.
I’ve said this before, but every new direction sign put up by Leeds City Council suggests that whoever designs them thinks they have a much better grasp of the rules than they actually do. They’ve got the idea of colour coding, panels, patches, primary destinations and so on, but haven’t properly grasped how to apply them.Debaser wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 06:23I think the council have lost all expertise in sign design, certainly no-one is checking designs - whether produced internally or externally - before this stuff gets on street. There could be a dedicated thread of 'Bad Signing in Leeds', such is the number and variety of mistakes.NICK 647063 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 20:45 The signage is very random on this scheme, the one in the photo is the A6120 SB approach to the A64 that has both York A64 and A1(M) mentioned, yet on the A6120 NB the first sign simply shows A1(M) with York A64 appearing on the secondary signage, surely both should be on the first sign with say Scholes on the secondary signage.
They've found the polyline tool in AutoCAD...Chris5156 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 10:19I’ve said this before, but every new direction sign put up by Leeds City Council suggests that whoever designs them thinks they have a much better grasp of the rules than they actually do. They’ve got the idea of colour coding, panels, patches, primary destinations and so on, but haven’t properly grasped how to apply them.Debaser wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 06:23I think the council have lost all expertise in sign design, certainly no-one is checking designs - whether produced internally or externally - before this stuff gets on street. There could be a dedicated thread of 'Bad Signing in Leeds', such is the number and variety of mistakes.NICK 647063 wrote: ↑Wed Jun 08, 2022 20:45 The signage is very random on this scheme, the one in the photo is the A6120 SB approach to the A64 that has both York A64 and A1(M) mentioned, yet on the A6120 NB the first sign simply shows A1(M) with York A64 appearing on the secondary signage, surely both should be on the first sign with say Scholes on the secondary signage.
The sign a few posts up grates on me because it’s in a category that’s one of my pet hates: map-type signs where the designer has angled every line to match its real world location, when the left and right arms could just be horizontal and the straight on arm could just be vertical. For a simple layout the odd angles offer no benefit to wayfinding, and the unusual shapes and angles actually make the whole sign harder to comprehend. Again, best of intentions, but a sign that whoever made it thought they were doing a better job than they actually were.
As of yet no but signage is still incomplete, I would expect them, obviously all the old ones will need changing on the old A6120, a couple on the A6120 that will become the A64 at Seacroft so let’s hope they get them right!Rillington wrote: ↑Thu Jun 09, 2022 15:40 Are there route confirmation signs on this new road?
Also, are there new route confirmation signs on the A64 and A587 at the new junctions?