M4 Junction 3 to 12 Smart Motorway

[ManomayLR]

The lane layout on the Huntercombe spur is stupid as well - lane drops after the diverge instead of a simple 1+1 split and 1+1 lane gain.

It's as if the designers have no idea how traffic works.

The worst thing is, this was supposed to be a flagship scheme for NH and yet it still got watered down. The lack of TJR removes a lot of the extra capacity that would have done the motorway any good, and so the new lane becomes in effect a glorified slip road or an attached C/D lane of sorts.

[ChrisH]

I noticed at the weekend that the signage approaching J8/9 eastbound is incorrect.

On the approach to the junction, Lane 1 is signed for both A404(M) and A308(M), and Lane 2 is for A308(M) as well as M4. However, on the sliproad Lane 1 turns into a dedicated lane for A404(M), which is significantly busier than the A308(M) in any case. Disappointing attention to detail from the scheme designers and sponsors. I have emailed the project team and will pass on any replies.

I had a reply from the project team to this question I posed which said... there's no problem and they won't be changing any signs.

[ChrisH]

Interestingly I spotted that the NH web page now includes a "Consultation 2022" section, linking to https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... -motorway/ as they have submitted a "non-material change" to the development consent order, including some minor things but notably the removal of the through-junction running at J5, J6, J8/9 and J11. I find this quite astonishing because they've already built it and they're only now asking permission to change it. The documents I've looked at (though there are 300 of them) don't seem mention that it's already been built like that.

Representations are still open for another fortnight if anyone wants to comment.

I sent in a response, and also copied in the Transport Select Committee (who have an active investigation into smart motorways) and my MP.

Among the 300 documents mentioned are notes on why junctions have changed to not have through-running four lanes. Here is J11 for example. And here is a summary note describing why the changes were made. It seems to hinge on forecast flows being no more than 6000vph which can be accommodated in three lanes.

[WHBM]

Bizarrely works started at least westbound at J5, Slough East, on widening the bridges there over the roundabout. This was years ago. Then suddenly the works were stopped, with the static plant left there for years. I think the same orange edge protection boards have been laying there all along.

2017 view : https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4917407 ... 312!8i6656

Current view 5 years later : https://www.google.com/maps/@51.4917254 ... 384!8i8192

[Chris5156]

Among the 300 documents mentioned are notes on why junctions have changed to not have through-running four lanes. Here is J11 for example. And here is a summary note describing why the changes were made. It seems to hinge on forecast flows being no more than 6000vph which can be accommodated in three lanes.

Could have saved us all a lot of hassle and not bothered with the Smart Motorway project at all in that case

[jackal]

Among the 300 documents mentioned are notes on why junctions have changed to not have through-running four lanes. Here is J11 for example. And here is a summary note describing why the changes were made. It seems to hinge on forecast flows being no more than 6000vph which can be accommodated in three lanes.

Could have saved us all a lot of hassle and not bothered with the Smart Motorway project at all in that case

It is <6000vph within junctions except J7, and >6000vph between junctions. Hence the extra lane is only needed between junctions and within J7. See here:

The real discrepancy would seem to be within J4, where they have widened I believe.

[A303Chris]

Interestingly I spotted that the NH web page now includes a "Consultation 2022" section, linking to https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... -motorway/ as they have submitted a "non-material change" to the development consent order, including some minor things but notably the removal of the through-junction running at J5, J6, J8/9 and J11. I find this quite astonishing because they've already built it and they're only now asking permission to change it. The documents I've looked at (though there are 300 of them) don't seem mention that it's already been built like that.

Representations are still open for another fortnight if anyone wants to comment.

This is quite appalling since J8/9 to J12 was completed Easter 2021, but was kept with a lane closed for some bizarre reason to September, ran at 60mph for three months and open fully in early December. As someone who deals with planning on a daily basis, how can you have an amendment and consultation when the scheme is completed. Obviously planning laws do not apply in Whitehall or the public sector, well Covid told us what they think about the laws they write.

As someone who uses the road 3 to 4 times a week, it is pointless, no ones uses lane one as has been said before it is just treated as an extended slip road.

But what is really annoying is that the junction 5 bridges have been left as they were built in the 60s and converted to three lanes without hard shoulder in the early 70s. No concrete barrier, no upgrade to street lights, you still have the mix of lights from where the old areas ended. Going eastbound, It goes 4 lane ALR, 3 lane, 4 lane ALR for two hundred yards, as they left the Sutton Lane bridge as it was, lane gain to 5 lane ALR. The off slip is signed M25 lane one , M4 through traffic lane two and three. This was always a bottle neck beforehand and nothing changes.

Westbound remains 4 lane with HS, although lane one from the M25 to J5 is signed as a slip. As you join from the M25 the over head gantry says stay in lane for B470 Eton, Langely, with the M4 signed with a 45 degree arrow to the right!

Driving through J5 it just looks a mess, and as has been said J7, the westbound on looks very short and dangerous.

Four years of disruption for no gain at all!!!

[Chris5156]

As you join from the M25 the over head gantry says stay in lane for B470 Eton, Langely, with the M4 signed with a 45 degree arrow to the right!

The same tactic has been used on the westbound entry slip from J4. M25 is straight on and the M4 has a 45 degree arrow to the right.

Similarly on the mainline westbound through J4, lane 1 is signposted for M25 clockwise, and M25 anti-clockwise has a 45 degree arrow to the left.

[Phil]

The real discrepancy would seem to be within J4, where they have widened I believe.

Work too far advanced to stop when NH descoped the project (unlike J5) is the most likely explanation.

[WHBM]

As someone who deals with planning on a daily basis, how can you have an amendment and consultation when the scheme is completed.

That's bureaucracy for you. You have got to have, by legislation, consultation on amendments of this scope. So it ticks the paperwork trail to do so. Whether it is meaningful, done sensibly, or any notice is taken of it, is completely irrelevant.

[mathmo]

Update posted today on https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-road ... -motorway/:

Since the 17-mile section between junctions 8/9 at Maidenhead and 12, for Theale, was opened in December 2021, we’ve been continuing with our work on the 15-mile eastern section, between junctions 3 at Hayes and 8/9.

This week will see us start our phased opening between junctions 3 and 8/9. You’ll notice cones and barriers starting to be removed overnight on 6 July, with all lanes becoming open to traffic. Due to the length of traffic management to remove, it will take us several nights. All cones will be lifted on this stretch by 6am on 16 July.

(timetable at the above link but basically westbound roadworks removed this week and eastbound next week)

[A303Chris]

Update posted today on https://nationalhighways.co.uk/our-road ... -motorway/:

Since the 17-mile section between junctions 8/9 at Maidenhead and 12, for Theale, was opened in December 2021, we’ve been continuing with our work on the 15-mile eastern section, between junctions 3 at Hayes and 8/9.

This week will see us start our phased opening between junctions 3 and 8/9. You’ll notice cones and barriers starting to be removed overnight on 6 July, with all lanes becoming open to traffic. Due to the length of traffic management to remove, it will take us several nights. All cones will be lifted on this stretch by 6am on 16 July.

(timetable at the above link but basically westbound roadworks removed this week and eastbound next week)

Yippee!!! So four years after the cones went down, I will be able to drive between Reading and London unhindered. Thankfully one year of my regular drives to SW6 1HS were eased by lockdown and games behind closed doors.

[ChrisH]

The very low-key "consultation" on the change to not have four running lanes through junctions closed recently. The respondees to the consultation were: John McDonnell MP, Taplow Parish Council and... me

https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... 5-09-2022#

[Bryn666]

The very low-key "consultation" on the change to not have four running lanes through junctions closed recently. The respondees to the consultation were: John McDonnell MP, Taplow Parish Council and... me

https://infrastructure.planninginspecto ... 5-09-2022#

Agree with everything you've said. Pity those who "know best" will just treat any valid criticism with the usual response: ignoring it.

Suppose the plus side is in 2037 the same consultants will probably win the work to widen it properly, so trebles all round.

[c2R]

I agree as well; some of the other responses make interesting reading, like the one from the parish council.

I wasn't aware of the consultation, I have to say, or I probably would have written something similar based on my experience of the section.

[A303Chris]

Well first evening game at The Bridge last night after all works completed albeit with a 60mph between J8/9 and J3.

Well what a waste of money, speed were reduced to mandatory 40mph on approach to J6 and J5 given the amount of traffic moving into the three lanes through the junctions, I thought the object was to increase capacity not to keep it the same.

Also lane one is used as an extended slip road throughout the entire scheme. On Tuesday night coming back from J12 to J10, my partner lives in Tilehurst, I live in Woodley, as with my previous trips, if you stay in lane one you get a clear run at 70mph, except at J11 as no one uses it.

Sorry four years of pain, for absolutely no gain, it is currently embarrassing to be associated with highway industry at present given the poor service provided by public bodies.

[Bryn666]

Well first evening game at The Bridge last night after all works completed albeit with a 60mph between J8/9 and J3.

Well what a waste of money, speed were reduced to mandatory 40mph on approach to J6 and J5 given the amount of traffic moving into the three lanes through the junctions, I thought the object was to increase capacity not to keep it the same.

Also lane one is used as an extended slip road throughout the entire scheme. On Tuesday night coming back from J12 to J10, my partner lives in Tilehurst, I live in Woodley, as with my previous trips, if you stay in lane one you get a clear run at 70mph, except at J11 as no one uses it.

Sorry four years of pain, for absolutely no gain, it is currently embarrassing to be associated with highway industry at present given the poor service provided by public bodies.

A similar problem will be introduced on the eastbound M56 approaching Manchester - the extra lane between the A556 and A538 is basically an auxiliary lane and nothing more. It really is becoming a matter of "what exactly is the aim of these projects" because it is increasingly looking like a money go round for the big name consultants who are on NH frameworks and not a series of safety improvements for An Pleb using the roads.

[DB617]

Well first evening game at The Bridge last night after all works completed albeit with a 60mph between J8/9 and J3.

Well what a waste of money, speed were reduced to mandatory 40mph on approach to J6 and J5 given the amount of traffic moving into the three lanes through the junctions, I thought the object was to increase capacity not to keep it the same.

Also lane one is used as an extended slip road throughout the entire scheme. On Tuesday night coming back from J12 to J10, my partner lives in Tilehurst, I live in Woodley, as with my previous trips, if you stay in lane one you get a clear run at 70mph, except at J11 as no one uses it.

Sorry four years of pain, for absolutely no gain, it is currently embarrassing to be associated with highway industry at present given the poor service provided by public bodies.

Agreed. You don't even need a complicated model to tell you this was never going to work without TJR - anyone with any understanding of traffic could tell you. Including the many laypeople out there who like to weigh in on (smart) motorway design. The fact this scheme went ahead in this state is scandalous and - especially given its high-profile location - risks trashing the reputation of the highway industry. And perhaps rightly so.

[WHBM]

Yippee!!! So four years after the cones went down, I will be able to drive between Reading and London unhindered.

Not yet. Came along M25 on Sunday 10 September and M4 was closed, eastbound at least, between J4B the M25 and J3 at Heston. VMS Warnings from right back at Enfield.

[ManomayLR]

I’m done with this.

Elizabeth line it is.

BTW people going to Reading, you can use Contactless on the GWR IET between Paddington and Reading. Sit in Coach G and it’ll cost you a tenner off peak.

Costs the same as going to Reading on the Elizabeth line as it’s based on the stations, but takes only half an hour at upto 125mph.