Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Moderator: Site Management Team
-
- SABRE Developer
- Posts: 11057
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 21:58
- Location: Belfast N Ireland
- Contact:
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
The prohibition on cyclists is unenforceable as you can't prove where they joined. The Broadway offslip has blue No Pedestrians signs, which because they are not on a motorway are probably unenforceable too.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
The A500 easily fits within this category - however I don't know about utilities buried underneath it, from what I understand it was mainly built on old railway and colliery land so I can't imagine there would be a great deal beneath.
Can't imagine any cyclists are using it either !
Can't imagine any cyclists are using it either !
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Disused mine workings.
Mind you, just about everything in North Staffordshire is built on top of old mineshafts - it's a wonder more of it hasn't fallen down one.
"If you expect nothing from somebody you are never disappointed." - Sylvia Plath
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Large parts of the M6 and Keele Services are over 'hollow ground' too. You can definitely tell something is moving about because a new dip has appeared near the Wolstanton exit of the A500 !
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Bridges or tunnels would need to be provided for existing rights of way, there is one access road which lines up with an existing railway bridge that provides farm access. The road is often used by tractors, something to be considered as they will face inconvenience due to their loss of right of way.
As the speed limit will remain at 70mph blue signs will not make my journey to work any quicker.
- Chris Bertram
- Member
- Posts: 15744
- Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2001 12:30
- Location: Birmingham, England
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
They will if tractors and other non-motorway traffic are banned. Though I must say I've never encountered a tractor on that stretch. And the one access I can remember seemed to be for access *to* the railway only, something that Network Rail would surely arrange a workround for.trigpoint wrote: ↑Wed Jun 27, 2018 12:33Bridges or tunnels would need to be provided for existing rights of way, there is one access road which lines up with an existing railway bridge that provides farm access. The road is often used by tractors, something to be considered as they will face inconvenience due to their loss of right of way.
As the speed limit will remain at 70mph blue signs will not make my journey to work any quicker.
“The quality of any advice anybody has to offer has to be judged against the quality of life they actually lead.” - Douglas Adams.
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!
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!
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Plus, enforcement of the 70 limit seems to be more relaxed (i.e. non-existent) on motorways than dualled A-roads (where it is occasional).Chris Bertram wrote: ↑Wed Jun 27, 2018 13:49They will if tractors and other non-motorway traffic are banned. Though I must say I've never encountered a tractor on that stretch. And the one access I can remember seemed to be for access *to* the railway only, something that Network Rail would surely arrange a workround for.trigpoint wrote: ↑Wed Jun 27, 2018 12:33Bridges or tunnels would need to be provided for existing rights of way, there is one access road which lines up with an existing railway bridge that provides farm access. The road is often used by tractors, something to be considered as they will face inconvenience due to their loss of right of way.
As the speed limit will remain at 70mph blue signs will not make my journey to work any quicker.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
In the same vein, the A57(M) is unenforceable, as there's nothing to stop a pedestrian turning right here Garwood St
-
- SABRE Developer
- Posts: 11057
- Joined: Tue Dec 26, 2006 21:58
- Location: Belfast N Ireland
- Contact:
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
To be fair, blue No pedestrians information signs on an offslip are a recent thing, but I agree that's one location that needs them.
- Alderpoint
- Member
- Posts: 1682
- Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2015 14:25
- Location: Leamington Spa
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
They need to go and discover the M45 or M50 - both 2 lanes each way for their whole length.
Or the A46 hereabouts - which is 3 lanes (with parking laybys).
Let it snow.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Or indeed the A23 here - Welcome to BrightonAlderpoint wrote: ↑Wed Jul 06, 2022 21:39They need to go and discover the M45 or M50 - both 2 lanes each way for their whole length.
Or the A46 hereabouts - which is 3 lanes (with parking laybys).
And that's a road I've cycled on (at 4:56:26). Really sadly the footage cuts out shortly after joining, before the real fun began.
It was actually fun! But only because the coned off lane for the veteran cars, which was my escape route, combined with weight of traffic meant traffic speed varying between 20 and 30 mph, so I was very quickly keeping up. Even better, as waves of slowness approached, there were conveniently positioned huge gaps in the outside lane that I used.
So anyone who thought that road was a motorway then had me overtaking them on a bicycle in the "fast lane".
- MotorwayGuy
- Member
- Posts: 1002
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
- Location: S.E. London
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form. They might be grade separated but have small local access slip roads, footpaths running alongside and utilities running along them.
There are a few exceptions to this, such as the new A14 which was intended to be a motorway originally (and indeed restricts the same things a motorway does in a messy way) but due to political issues was never classified. The A2 between the M2 and the M25 is another example that is D4 with hard shoulders but the excuse given was there was no alternative route for non-motorway traffic, so this indeed has no restrictions.
There are a few exceptions to this, such as the new A14 which was intended to be a motorway originally (and indeed restricts the same things a motorway does in a messy way) but due to political issues was never classified. The A2 between the M2 and the M25 is another example that is D4 with hard shoulders but the excuse given was there was no alternative route for non-motorway traffic, so this indeed has no restrictions.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
It makes you wonder whether it would be easier to explicitly permit certain classes of traffic on certain small stretches of motorway rather than the reverse, which is to de facto ban almost all cyclists on fast D2+ roads via excessive danger and then artificially restrict other classes with ever larger signs. A bit of legal innovation probably required too in order to make this easier to do. No point in putting millions into blue lines on the map but putting a few tens of thousands into it might be worth it for a consistent and understandable network.MotorwayGuy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:13 There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form. They might be grade separated but have small local access slip roads, footpaths running alongside and utilities running along them.
There are a few exceptions to this, such as the new A14 which was intended to be a motorway originally (and indeed restricts the same things a motorway does in a messy way) but due to political issues was never classified. The A2 between the M2 and the M25 is another example that is D4 with hard shoulders but the excuse given was there was no alternative route for non-motorway traffic, so this indeed has no restrictions.
Of course, you can say that it would be hard to interpret for the excepted classes, but honestly who is looking at a road atlas of the UK figuring out how to drive their tractor from John O'Groats to Lands End? Local knowledge will be enough in 99% of cases and the other 1% is probably unfamiliar users who "end up" on a given road and will be grateful for the exception but would probably have just ploughed on anyway.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
It would be good if Highways Whatever they are called set aside a portion of their budget each year to deal specifically with the dodgy little bits left on major dual carriageways. Things like Pathfinder junction on the A30, which don't necessarily have a business case on their own, but make the roads more consistentMotorwayGuy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:13 There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form. They might be grade separated but have small local access slip roads, footpaths running alongside and utilities running along them.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Well they do do that. Roads like the A1 and A19 have had large numbers of reserve gaps closed without much fanfare.Herned wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:37It would be good if Highways Whatever they are called set aside a portion of their budget each year to deal specifically with the dodgy little bits left on major dual carriageways. Things like Pathfinder junction on the A30, which don't necessarily have a business case on their own, but make the roads more consistentMotorwayGuy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:13 There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form. They might be grade separated but have small local access slip roads, footpaths running alongside and utilities running along them.
Where a GSJ is required there generally needs to be more of a well publicised scheme with substantial funding, and unfortunately Pathfinder falls into that category. Even if they could (as I believe) reuse an existing bridge, slip roads would be required, so it's somewhat beyond a barrier and LILO in both cost and land take.
- Steven
- SABRE Maps Coordinator
- Posts: 19172
- Joined: Tue Feb 12, 2002 20:39
- Location: Wolverhampton, Staffordshire
- Contact:
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
As a reminder, there is no such thing as "motorway standards". A motorway is simply a Special Road which allows Class I and II traffic, and no others. There's absolutely nothing wrong legally with a single carriageway motorway with at-grade junctions.MotorwayGuy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:13 There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form.
You can't legally do such a thing.
What you can do is allow additional classes onto a Special Road, but then as above it's then not a motorway.
However, there's no reason why there couldn't be more Special Roads that only allow pedestrians and cyclists, much like the footpath alongside the M48 Severn and Wye Bridges. That would permit the "mainline" to be classified as a motorway, but also allow relevant traffic to use the parallel appropriate route.
Steven
Motorway Historian
Founder Member, SABRE ex-Presidents' Corner
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Motorway Historian
Founder Member, SABRE ex-Presidents' Corner
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki today!
Have you browsed SABRE Maps recently? Try getting involved!
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
With that example would it be so inconvenient for west-bound traffic trying to get to Pathfinder to continue to Cherton Bishop and use the overpass there and go back?Herned wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:37It would be good if Highways Whatever they are called set aside a portion of their budget each year to deal specifically with the dodgy little bits left on major dual carriageways. Things like Pathfinder junction on the A30, which don't necessarily have a business case on their own, but make the roads more consistentMotorwayGuy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:13 There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form. They might be grade separated but have small local access slip roads, footpaths running alongside and utilities running along them.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
Well yes that's obviously currently impossible, but what I suppose I'm essentially arguing for is for 'motorway' to really become a brand that can be applied to any motorway-like special road, used for roads of some good standard and sometimes used in accordance with a plate like 'slow vehicles permitted until J8'.
I think I've seen others talk about 'happy car' roads where bikes etc. are not permitted, but that doesn't get across the high quality of the road on the signage or mapping.
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
It would only really need an offslip from the westbound carriageway, anyone heading west can use the existing road. How much is a single slip road these days? <£5m?jackal wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 13:02 Where a GSJ is required there generally needs to be more of a well publicised scheme with substantial funding, and unfortunately Pathfinder falls into that category. Even if they could (as I believe) reuse an existing bridge, slip roads would be required, so it's somewhat beyond a barrier and LILO in both cost and land take.
- MotorwayGuy
- Member
- Posts: 1002
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 15:37
- Location: S.E. London
Re: Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?
The Cambridge dictionary defines the word Motorway as "a wide road for fast-moving traffic, especially in the UK, Ireland, and some other countries, with a limited number of places at which drivers can enter and leave it". I know legally that isn't the definition, but it's what the vast majority of the public think a motorway is, and it's safe to say that the chances of a new non-grade seperated Motorway being even considered is highly improbable.Steven wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 13:45As a reminder, there is no such thing as "motorway standards". A motorway is simply a Special Road which allows Class I and II traffic, and no others. There's absolutely nothing wrong legally with a single carriageway motorway with at-grade junctions.MotorwayGuy wrote: ↑Thu Jul 07, 2022 11:13 There are many roads that should be motorways but don't meet the standard in their current form.