M65 extension into Yorkshire

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

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by jackal »

Telegraph & Argus wrote:Talks have been held between Bradford Council and Transport for the North (TfN) about the possibility of extending the M65 from Colne, where it currently ends, into the Keighley area.
stu531 wrote:The fork between Leeds and Bradford, and thereby the creation of a proper Leeds Outer Ring Road, would be ideal.
Owain wrote:Why not go all the way to Scarborough?
That escalated quickly.
User avatar
6637
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 12:14
Contact:

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by 6637 »

stu531 wrote:As a Harrogatonian, yes - it goes too close to a number of spots like Almscliffe Crag. However... there is something in this. If we get tunnel building, and we need to speak to a few Norwegian folk about it, then I would love this to happen. The fork between Leeds and Bradford, and thereby the creation of a proper Leeds Outer Ring Road, would be ideal. (And it would go some way to rebalancing the NW/Yorks motorway deficit.)

Probably a bit dodgy around Ilkley and Follifoot areas. There are a lot of horses around there.
I have an idea. For the questionable sections of the route (scenic areas where there is likely to be opposition), just cover it up. Build a motorway, then make a really wide bridge over the motorway, covered in grass. Where "really wide" means "several miles wide".

This is similar to a cut-and-cover tunnel, but doesn't involve digging down. Rather, the motorway would be at ground-level, and the grass bridge over the top would be like a little hill.

It's not cheap, but it's probably cheaper than digging a tunnel.
Owain wrote:Why not go all the way to Scarborough?
I didn't think there would be enough demand for a motorway extension past York. I think the A64 has traffic problems, but nothing like as bad as those on the A1237.

That being said, it would probably be useful to make a dual carriageway between York and Scarborough. Possible map: http://i.imgur.com/AXOF9Ns.png
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Stevie D »

6637 wrote:Right. Here's an alternative route:

http://i.imgur.com/RBYBthl.jpg

It's closer to the A59, rather than the densely-populated Aire Valley route. I added a link road going past Leeds-Bradford Airport and Bradford.

As a bonus, it also fixes the congestion on the A1237.

Is this any more feasible, or are there still too many rich people and tourists along this route as well?
East of Harrogate, it's moderately plausible, although I don't know why you don't go for an online upgrade of A658/A59 between Pannal and Moor Monkton, as the road is already there on a good alignment, and it would save a lot of cost and destruction.

But west of Harrogate it's still a complete non-starter. You need to draw the route on an OS map so that you can see just how many contour lines you are crossing. Or just accept that there is no possible surface route out of the Aire Valley. Because there isn't.
User avatar
Stevie D
Member
Posts: 8000
Joined: Wed Dec 20, 2006 17:19
Location: Yorkshire

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Stevie D »

6637 wrote:That being said, it would probably be useful to make a dual carriageway between York and Scarborough. Possible map: http://i.imgur.com/AXOF9Ns.png
The A64 doesn't need massive improvement east of Malton. Bypasses at Rillington and Sherburn would almost certainly be sufficient for the foreseeable future, it's been York and Malton that it desperately needs to be improved. But if the road was to be given an offline dual carriageway upgrade then it would almost certainly just run alongside the railway to Seamer, rather than carving a new corridor. This would minimise disruption and destruction.
User avatar
Owain
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 26212
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:02
Location: Leodis

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Owain »

6637 wrote:
Owain wrote:Why not go all the way to Scarborough?
I didn't think there would be enough demand for a motorway extension past York. I think the A64 has traffic problems, but nothing like as bad as those on the A1237.

That being said, it would probably be useful to make a dual carriageway between York and Scarborough. Possible map: http://i.imgur.com/AXOF9Ns.png
Old road becomes A1039. I see what you did there. :yes:
Former President & F99 Driver

Viva la Repubblica!
User avatar
6637
Member
Posts: 660
Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2011 12:14
Contact:

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by 6637 »

Stevie D wrote:
6637 wrote:That being said, it would probably be useful to make a dual carriageway between York and Scarborough. Possible map: http://i.imgur.com/AXOF9Ns.png
The A64 doesn't need massive improvement east of Malton. Bypasses at Rillington and Sherburn would almost certainly be sufficient for the foreseeable future, it's been York and Malton that it desperately needs to be improved. But if the road was to be given an offline dual carriageway upgrade then it would almost certainly just run alongside the railway to Seamer, rather than carving a new corridor. This would minimise disruption and destruction.
Yep. Hence why I didn't propose an A64 upgrade east of Malton initially - it's one of those things that would be useful, but isn't necessary.

And good point about running it alongside the railway, that does make more sense in hindsight.
Stevie D wrote: East of Harrogate, it's moderately plausible, although I don't know why you don't go for an online upgrade of A658/A59 between Pannal and Moor Monkton, as the road is already there on a good alignment, and it would save a lot of cost and destruction.
True. Now you mention it, it's a better idea to run along the A58/A659 line.
But west of Harrogate it's still a complete non-starter. You need to draw the route on an OS map so that you can see just how many contour lines you are crossing. Or just accept that there is no possible surface route out of the Aire Valley. Because there isn't.
I did have a quick look at an OS map, but wasn't sure whether it would be too steep.

If it is too steep, as you say, one option is a viaduct. Map: http://i.imgur.com/4mQmMv6.png

Normally, something like that would be completely impossible (too obtrusive), but if you design it to look good and blend in with the landscape, like the Pont du Gard or Millau Viaduct, then it might be possible.

If a viaduct isn't possible, then you'd have to just use a few tunnels to get down to the level of the Aire Valley gradually.
User avatar
stu531
Member
Posts: 2332
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 23:10
Location: Harrogate

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by stu531 »

Stay classy!

Yeah I think that an upgrade along the A658/A59 line would probably be the most sensible, although benefits-wise, I think an A659 alignment would probably be better - running it along the Wharfe valley, although again, the NIMBY crowd around Ilkley would go bananas - despite the fact that the town badly needs a bypass anyway. Sadly, and as we've said, this has NIMBY written all over it - certainly the section to the west of Crosshills, anyway.

(Interesting how comparative areas, like the South of Manchester, have lived with Motorway building for some time. There are parallels with the north of Leeds to the south of Manchester - airport, decent scenery, affluence - major difference being relief; Cheshire is pretty flat.)

6637's idea of cut-and-cover would probably be the most likely to get any sense of traction if it were to be badged as a 'tunnel'.
User avatar
hat
Member
Posts: 251
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 11:25

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by hat »

http://www.transportforthenorth.com/#programmes
We are working with DfT and Highways England to inform priorities for road investments in the North, from 2020 onwards. We are also working on three major strategic road studies, looking at improvements to Northern Trans-Pennine routes, transforming journeys around the M60 North West Quadrant and the possibility of a Trans-Pennine Tunnel linking Greater Manchester and Sheffield City Region.
bit short on detail. Nothing in this initiative talks about the M65 or Aire valley, despite this being quoted by the local media:
Talks have been held between Bradford Council and Transport for the North (TfN) about the possibility of extending the M65 from Colne, where it currently ends, into this area.
the studies on this site are concentrated on the A66/A69 across the North Pennines
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by jackal »

^The local authorities have spoken to TfN and published an economic study on Central Trans-Pennine connectivity (link) but so far there have been no strategic studies of the M65 extension specifically.

Interesting update by Graham Jones, MP for Hyndburn:
I've raised the importance of an M65 extension to Leeds 3x in the House of Commons. (see links below)

Now a new report by Lancashire County Council supports the proposal. "M65 extension and improved rail link key to Northern Powerhouse in East Lancashire: http://bit.ly/2osOl1z"

It is vital the east-west road and rail links are at the heart of Transport for the North planning and the Department for Transports desk.

Most East Lancashire Councils have backed the idea as have many in Yorkshire. There is clear momentum. The benefits of a new link with a spur to the North East connecting deprived communities, Leeds Bradford Airport and significant parcels of former industrial brown field site are huge.

This has to happen if the government are serious about the Northern Powerhouse.

My questions in the House of Commons
Hansard: http://bit.ly/2osGEZd
Video: https://goo.gl/mMvUtB, https://goo.gl/mZ2NLd, https://goo.gl/mZ2NLd.
The mention of 'a spur to the North East' presumably explains why he asked ministers both 'When are the Government going to facilitate a debate on the northern powerhouse, so that we can talk about the most significant project that needs to be completed: the M65 east-west extension between Preston and Leeds?' (9 March 2017) and 'Can we extend the M65 all the way to Scotch Corner?' (15 September 2016). Can't be faulted for lack of ambition :)
User avatar
Norfolktolancashire
Member
Posts: 1185
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 22:34
Location: Cornwall

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Norfolktolancashire »

jackal wrote: The mention of 'a spur to the North East' presumably explains why he asked ministers both 'When are the Government going to facilitate a debate on the northern powerhouse, so that we can talk about the most significant project that needs to be completed: the M65 east-west extension between Preston and Leeds?' (9 March 2017) and 'Can we extend the M65 all the way to Scotch Corner?' (15 September 2016). Can't be faulted for lack of ambition :)
That would sort the Blubberhouses A59 landslips dilemma then!
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by jackal »

The recent TfN road study identifies 'Central Trans-Pennine Corridor Connectivity' as number 5 out of 13 connectivity priorities:
Considering phased improvements to MRN connections between Liverpool City
Region, Central and East Lancashire, Greater Manchester and Yorkshire.
Ultimately provides enhanced and more resilient M6-M1/A1(M) links
encompassing M65/A59 and M62 corridors, with potential for strengthened
onward links to international connectivity assets such as Port of Liverpool,
Leeds Bradford Airport and the Port of Hull via RIS1 schemes and Connectivity
Priorities 4 [Port of Hull to A1/M1 and westwards] and 6.
No. 6 on the list is 'Leeds City Region NW Quadrant':
A new or enhanced connection between the A1 (M), Leeds Bradford Airport,
the Central Trans-Pennine Corridor and the M62 / M606 to the east of Bradford.
Facilitates improved connectivity and network resilience across the MRN in
multiple LEP regions and employment growth aspirations in West Yorkshire in
particular around Leeds Bradford Airport. Complements Connectivity Priority 5.
Together they sound like an extension of the M65 joining to a 'new or enhanced' ring road around the northern and western sides of Leeds.

http://www.transportforthenorth.com/wp- ... Report.pdf
User avatar
Osthagen
Member
Posts: 3342
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 15:01
Location: Mercia

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Osthagen »

jackal wrote:The recent TfN road study identifies 'Central Trans-Pennine Corridor Connectivity' as number 5 out of 13 connectivity priorities:
Considering phased improvements to MRN connections between Liverpool City
Region, Central and East Lancashire, Greater Manchester and Yorkshire.
Ultimately provides enhanced and more resilient M6-M1/A1(M) links
encompassing M65/A59 and M62 corridors, with potential for strengthened
onward links to international connectivity assets such as Port of Liverpool,
Leeds Bradford Airport and the Port of Hull via RIS1 schemes and Connectivity
Priorities 4 [Port of Hull to A1/M1 and westwards] and 6.
No. 6 on the list is 'Leeds City Region NW Quadrant':
A new or enhanced connection between the A1 (M), Leeds Bradford Airport,
the Central Trans-Pennine Corridor and the M62 / M606 to the east of Bradford.
Facilitates improved connectivity and network resilience across the MRN in
multiple LEP regions and employment growth aspirations in West Yorkshire in
particular around Leeds Bradford Airport. Complements Connectivity Priority 5.
Together they sound like an extension of the M65 joining to a 'new or enhanced' ring road around the northern and western sides of Leeds.

http://www.transportforthenorth.com/wp- ... Report.pdf
I'd have sent it further north, personally.
"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
User avatar
ScottB5411
Member
Posts: 4153
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 20:04
Location: St. Louis, Missouri, USA

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by ScottB5411 »

A key point that seems to go missed about an M65 extension to Leeds and/or the A1(M) is the relief it would bring to the M62, I'm guessing a nice chunck of traffic would be swayed to this route and giving much needed relief to the M62
How about some more beans Mr. Taggart?
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by jackal »

I think they've noticed that! Most of the report is about how dependent on the M62 the North is, and how new or improved East-West routes are needed.
McNessA720 wrote: I'd have sent it further north, personally.
The bit on the Central Trans-Pennines Corridor talks about the M65/A59 corridor, suggesting a more northerly route. But then the bit on Leeds NW Quadrant talks about connecting to the new Trans-Pennine route. Possibly Leeds and Bradford wanted one thing, the North East LAs another, so they've both made it to the list for now.
User avatar
Osthagen
Member
Posts: 3342
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 15:01
Location: Mercia

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Osthagen »

What really should be considered is an extension of the M66 so that it actually meets the M65.

This could be done as an online upgrade of the present A56 (getting rid of the annoying roundabouts, obviously) or by (at least in part) constructing an entirely new route, maybe terminating closer to Burnley.

I'd also consider a road (either D2M or HQD2) linking the western end of the '65 with the Liverpool area, as a sort of reincarnation of the planned M59. The M6, in my opinion, could do with a more direct link to Liverpool, with the M58 requiring Liverpool-bound traffic from the M6 south to take a 90 degree turn.
"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

From the SABRE Wiki: M59 :


Unconstructed Liverpool - Preston Motorway, running from junction 2 on M58 to Preston.

... Read More
User avatar
nowster
Treasurer
Posts: 14805
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 16:06
Location: Manchester

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by nowster »

McNessA720 wrote:This could be done as an online upgrade of the present A56 (getting rid of the annoying roundabouts, obviously) or by (at least in part) constructing an entirely new route, maybe terminating closer to Burnley.
It's incredibly hilly on that route. The current A56 route round Haslingden is the only favourable for a dual carriageway, given the geography.
User avatar
wrinkly
Member
Posts: 8990
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 12:17
Location: Leeds

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by wrinkly »

In the distant past there seems to have been a plan for improvements, realignments and maybe dualling of the then A56 (now A682), which is why the present A56 is not the major road at the fork junction at Bent Gate near Rawtenstall. But the valley is very narrow, steep and built up, and the trunk road was re-routed to what is now the A56.
Robert Kilcoyne
Member
Posts: 966
Joined: Sun May 28, 2017 11:41
Location: Birmingham

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Robert Kilcoyne »

McNessA720 wrote:I'd also consider a road (either D2M or HQD2) linking the western end of the '65 with the Liverpool area, as a sort of reincarnation of the planned M59. The M6, in my opinion, could do with a more direct link to Liverpool, with the M58 requiring Liverpool-bound traffic from the M6 south to take a 90 degree turn.
Any extension of the M65 from south of Preston towards Liverpool would put even more pressure on an already inadequate Switch Island. Ideally, Switch Island should be rebuilt as a stacked roundabout, maybe similar to Tarbock, with free flow from the 'M59 / M65' to the A5036 and from the M57 to the A5758, which would be upgraded to dual carriageway.

From the SABRE Wiki: M59 :


Unconstructed Liverpool - Preston Motorway, running from junction 2 on M58 to Preston.

... Read More
User avatar
Osthagen
Member
Posts: 3342
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 15:01
Location: Mercia

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by Osthagen »

Robert Kilcoyne wrote:
McNessA720 wrote:I'd also consider a road (either D2M or HQD2) linking the western end of the '65 with the Liverpool area, as a sort of reincarnation of the planned M59. The M6, in my opinion, could do with a more direct link to Liverpool, with the M58 requiring Liverpool-bound traffic from the M6 south to take a 90 degree turn.
Any extension of the M65 from south of Preston towards Liverpool would put even more pressure on an already inadequate Switch Island. Ideally, Switch Island should be rebuilt as a stacked roundabout, maybe similar to Tarbock, with free flow from the 'M59 / M65' to the A5036 and from the M57 to the A5758, which would be upgraded to dual carriageway.


Would it not be possible to have the route enter Liverpool at a different angle?
"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

From the SABRE Wiki: M59 :


Unconstructed Liverpool - Preston Motorway, running from junction 2 on M58 to Preston.

... Read More
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: M65 extension into Yorkshire

Post by jackal »

Extending the M65/M59 to Liverpool looks like a solution in need of a problem. The M6 and M58 already provide a direct motorway route. Freeflowing the three substandard system interchanges (M65/M6, M6/M58, M58/M57) would seem a better investment.
Post Reply