HE won't be bothered about losing mileage as it means they won't have to maintain it.
M181
Moderator: Site Management Team
Re: M181
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: M181
HE won't have designed the scheme, they aren't the ones who want anything to change. The design is produced by whoever wants the change to be made - in this case either Lincolnshire or the developer. As long as it meets the appropriate standards HE won't object because they won't be responsible for any of the resulting highway once it opens.
They will consent because HE's interest will terminate at the give way line on the new roundabout. Whether the junction works won't be their problem. As long as their motorway has a compliant terminus they won't care whether Lincolnshire are choosing to make an entirely avoidable mess of their highway network.But don’t they still have to consent before it’s handed over to local highways??
Roads.org.uk
-
- Member
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Tue Feb 05, 2008 00:51
- Location: B1189, Lincolnshire
Re: M181
Is the bridge definitely a replacement? It looks to be on exactly the same alignment as the existing.Bryn666 wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 16:10A conventional diamond would interfere with the M180 trumpet, but a "compact" GSJ would fit within and, even if the limit was lowered to suit the reduced weaving space, would be better than a roundabout under a replacement bridge.jgharston wrote: ↑Tue Jan 22, 2019 16:07 Browsing the Wiki trying to find an example to point at, the M6/A5022 junction illustrating Diamond interchange is exactly what I'd put there. The M181 already goes under the B1450, it "just" needs the four slip lanes.
I must admit, at first glance I didn't realise the bridge was staying open to vehicular traffic and thought it was just being maintained for the benefit of NMUs. Now I've realised that's not the case, I agree it's a mess.
I could understand not retaining the existing bridge and converting to a diamond, as there's probably not the width for the right turn lanes on it, and adding a second bridge to convert to a roundabout GSJ would inherently be more expensive than a flat roundabout...but the currently proposed mess is just rubbish, especially if the bridge is indeed a replacement.
From the SABRE Wiki: Diamond interchange :
A Diamond Interchange is a compact and relatively low-cost Grade Separated Junction where the minor road and major road are connected by simple slips, with simple give way junctions at the end of the slip roads onto the minor road. This forms a rough diamond shape between the four slips.
Favoured for connections to B roads and quiet A roads in the early days of motorway building, many have needed to be improved over the years to cope with modern traffic levels. The easiest
Re: M181
as you will never see a police car laid in wait on M181
plus there are 4 bad undulations as if road subsidence noticeable at speed from Scunthorpe to M180
Re: M181
Re: M181
Re: M181
It's certainly true that not every entrance to a motorway is separated from other roads by a roundabout, especially at the start of motorways. For an example of this look no further than Barnetby Interchange just along the M180: nothing stopping non-motorway traffic on the A180 "accidentally" continuing along the motorway.jackal wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 01:33 If they put a compact GSJ in the slips would be a bit of a Redhouse situation, with A1077 in one direction and M180 spur in the other on the same section of S2. That's the kind of 'interesting' scenario that has consultants reaching for a roundabout, unfortunately.
Re: M181
Given the numerous motorway restriction screw ups recently such as the A14, A494, and A1(M) I doubt they'd be bothered.
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
-
- Member
- Posts: 59
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2019 07:32
Re: M181
It turns out the bridge is actually the existing one, and they have been undecided what to do with this bridge. A revised and approved planning document shows the bridge still in situ, but now with no access to the roundabouts for vehicles - the bridge will only be for cyclists and pedestrians. All traffic will be required to pass through the new roundabout system, which just looks absolutely ridiculous! Why they couldn't have turned the bridge into something similar to J2 on the M180 I don't know.
Re: M181
Also as discussed earlier this seems to be only one of two roundabouts planned for the current M181 mainline, the other being further north at Brumby Common Lane:
https://www.greaterlincolnshirelep.co.u ... nction.jpg
I haven't been able to find any plans for the design but confusingly it seems to be planned for before the southern junction:
https://www.greaterlincolnshirelep.co.u ... -junction/
The access arrangements are extremely stingy for a £1.2bn project...
Re: M181
Now if they wanted a central spine road that's great but that will be solid with traffic because that development layout screams car dependency.
Also this Northern Powerhouse and Midlands Engine branding is the worst. It's meaningless drivel to big up projects that were overdue 25 years ago.
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: M181
Ah great, a 3 lane circulatory with no spiralling either so not only will it be congested it will also have side-swipe collisions.
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
- Johnathan404
- Member
- Posts: 11478
- Joined: Tue Feb 01, 2005 16:54
Re: M181
Re: M181
The official guidance for roundabout marking is terrible. It basically goes "you can mark a roundabout like this, or like this, or like this…", giving a number of options, but not explaining why or when you'd use any of them. As a result, a large number of roundabouts end up with useless markings.Johnathan404 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:34 I assumed it had just been sketched like that to make the CAD easier. You mean they still build them like that?
We could do with a standard for roundabout lane markings that actually guides developers to finding the best solution for the location. (For what it's worth, I can't see much reason to use markings other than spiral or turbo on a large roundabout, and small roundabouts are typically only one lane wide anyway.)
Re: M181
I can't see why that roundabout would be busy enough to need 3 lanes on the approach or circulation. Yet another example of theory trumping reality.