Should grade separated dual carriageways without hard shoulders be redesignated as motorways?

[Peter350]

Britain is a country which has significant gaps in its motorway network. Direct routes between many major population centres involve driving along all-purpose roads, which cars and HGVs have to share with slow moving traffic, increasing journey times and reducing the level of productivity as a nation. The thing is, quite a lot of these all-purpose routes are actually built to motorway standard, but the lack of hard shoulder prevents them from becoming proper motorways. The A42 in Leicestershire is a prime example of this, as it was meant to be a motorway, but opened as an all-purpose dual carriageway just because it lacked hard shoulders as a result of budget cuts.

Hard shoulders have been a basic requirement for motorways since they were first conceived, but with them disappearing thanks to smart motorway schemes, is it time to rethink what the minimum standards for motorways should be? I think any stretch of all-purpose dual carriageway should be designated as a motorway as long as it meets the following criteria:

• It forms part of a trunk route
• It is at least 5 miles long or forms a direct continuation of an existing motorway
• All junctions are fully grade-separated. No at-grade right turns or LILOs are permitted anywhere along the route
• There are no roundabouts or traffic lights on the mainline, although they can be used at the terminus of the motorway
• Junctions are spaced at least 1 mile apart
• There are no properties directly adjoining the route
• There is a suitable alternative route available for prohibited traffic and utilities
• There is provision for emergency refuge areas to be constructed at regular intervals if the route does not already have a hard shoulder
• An average speed of 60mph or above can be achieved along the entire route in normal driving conditions

Redesignating these high quality routes as motorway would eliminate pointless gaps in the network and make routes more attractive to long distance traffic. For example, the A42 would become an extension of the M42, while the under construction A14 expressway between Cambridge and Huntingdon could open as the M14 or become an extension of the M11. Some fully dualled roads however, such as the A34 between the M3 and M40, would not be able to become motorways straight away as they lack LARs along the entire length, although this could be addressed later.

[Mark Hewitt]

https://goo.gl/maps/QixdhWfWMg82 this is a motorway

[Chris Bertram]

Some fully dualled roads however, such as the A34 between the M3 and M40, would not be able to become motorways straight away as they lack LARs along the entire length, although this could be addressed later.

I'm not aware of any frontage accesses on A34 that would require a LAR apart from service areas, and I don't think they count. Have I missed something?

[Peter350]

Some fully dualled roads however, such as the A34 between the M3 and M40, would not be able to become motorways straight away as they lack LARs along the entire length, although this could be addressed later.

I'm not aware of any frontage accesses on A34 that would require a LAR apart from service areas, and I don't think they count. Have I missed something?

There are frontages on the A34 at Botley near Oxford.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.74861 ... 312!8i6656
The purpose of this topic is to determine which dual carriageways meet my criteria to become motorways. In order for the A34 to become a motorway, it would need to bypass Oxford completely on a new alignment. Also, a LAR would need to be constructed alongside the existing rural sections to allow prohibited traffic to continue using the A34 corridor, even if there are no frontages alongside them.

[Johnathan404]

I'm not aware of any frontage accesses on A34 that would require a LAR apart from service areas, and I don't think they count. Have I missed something?

There are no frontages on the road itself, but cul-de-sacs at Tufton and Botley and a property accessed from an oxbow lay-by at Chilton which would all require alternative access, plus at least two pedestrian crossings and a lot of sliproads and side turnings that would need to be covered by the motorway regulations and therefore cleared of pedestrian access and given a suitable turning point.

[c2R]

Some fully dualled roads however, such as the A34 between the M3 and M40, would not be able to become motorways straight away as they lack LARs along the entire length, although this could be addressed later.

I'm not aware of any frontage accesses on A34 that would require a LAR apart from service areas, and I don't think they count. Have I missed something?

Fields and land accesses, e.g. here: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5106706 ... 312!8i6656

Footpaths, e.g. here: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.8678561 ... 312!8i6656

and probably various utilities buried in the road

[andrewwoods]

But why? What's the benefit?

It would be better to address the current pinch points and inefficiencies rather than spending money on LARs.

I drive the A34 south of Oxford a lot. I can just about remember being held up by a tractor once or twice in 15 years. I am held up every time by lorries slowly overtaking other lorries and by the hills, which are far too steep for a motorway. My biggest hold up is the queue at South Hinksey, which is fully grade-separated.

Putting up blue signs won't help. Crawler lanes and C/D lanes would help far more.

Andrew

[Alderpoint]

• All junctions are fully grade-separated. No at-grade right turns or LILOs are permitted anywhere along the route

Does M50J3 satisfy this or not? Both sides of the junction are LILOs....

[Steven]

and probably various utilities buried in the road

This is the killer requirement.

Special Roads can't have utilities buried in them.

[wallmeerkat]

Hard Shoulders aren't necessarily a pre-requisite of a motorway, as earlier posted the M90 doesn't bother and otherwise looks like a rural dual carriageway.

Nor is even being a Dual Carriageway a pre-requisite, technically the Aston Expressway A38(M) is single carriageway with no physical divider, the Walton Summit motorway - http://pathetic.org.uk/secretive/walton ... _motorway/ , and famously the sadly former A6144(M) http://pathetic.org.uk/former/a6144m/

So technically anything could be made a motorway, the only pre-requisites seem to be on frontage, no houses or small farm accesses directly onto the mainline, and others have said any utilities.

Roundabouts on a motorway are no issue - http://pathetic.org.uk/current/m12/phot ... _JPG.shtml - nor are traffic lights - http://www.cbrd.co.uk/blog/traffic-lights-motorways

[Peter350]

• All junctions are fully grade-separated. No at-grade right turns or LILOs are permitted anywhere along the route

Does M50J3 satisfy this or not? Both sides of the junction are LILOs....

I suppose LILOs would be okay as long as they have aceleration/deceleration lanes, which the M50 ones do. Any with give way markings like this one would not be permitted however.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.90735 ... 312!8i6656

[Peter350]

and probably various utilities buried in the road

This is the killer requirement.

Special Roads can't have utilities buried in them.

In that case, let's hope nobody goes digging up the new A14 between Ellington & Fen Ditton once it opens. It is meant to be Highways England's first proper expressway anyway.

[Chris Bertram]

Also, a LAR would need to be constructed alongside the existing rural sections to allow prohibited traffic to continue using the A34 corridor, even if there are no frontages alongside them.

Not convinced by that bit. No LAR was constructed between J49 and J50 of A1(M), since no local access was required. Prohibited traffic is (rightly) expected to use alternative routes. These will be available near A34 as well.

[James]

Theres going to be roads like the A42 which would be easily change based on this criteria: modern, no access issues and fully grade seperated, which motorway upgrading will be simply a matter of closing the parking areas and putting up blue signs.

Sadly though this will make little difference to the issues on the road. It's a nightmare to drive most of the day due to only being 2 lanes throughout. It, and the 2 lane section of the M42 really need widening to 3 lanes thougout. Not to mentioning the terrible morning congestion when it meets the M6 Toll.

The A50 east of the A38 would also be a good candidate for blue signs

[Johnathan404]

The A27 at Farlington is surely the most obvious candidate and must have no utilities seeing as it was built on the line of a motorway on reclaimed land.

[andrewwoods]

Theres going to be roads like the A42 which would be easily change based on this criteria: modern, no access issues and fully grade seperated, which motorway upgrading will be simply a matter of closing the parking areas and putting up blue signs.

Sadly though this will make little difference to the issues on the road. It's a nightmare to drive most of the day due to only being 2 lanes throughout. It, and the 2 lane section of the M42 really need widening to 3 lanes thougout. Not to mentioning the terrible morning congestion when it meets the M6 Toll.

The A50 east of the A38 would also be a good candidate for blue signs

Yes, this is it completely. We get people on the local (Oxford) news saying "they should make the A34 a motorway", but that wouldn't fix the issues, which are about capacity as much as anything. And now they're promising to do something about capacity, there are campaign groups to "save the fields".

Three lanes over blue signs any day.

[orudge]

I imagine that when they say "make the A34 a motorway", they do mean upgrade it to 3 lanes, etc (à la the A1 -> A1(M) upgrades).

[Mark Hewitt]

I imagine that when they say "make the A34 a motorway", they do mean upgrade it to 3 lanes, etc (à la the A1 -> A1(M) upgrades).

A *lot* of people think motorway means 3 lanes each way.

[KeithW]

Redesignating these high quality routes as motorway would eliminate pointless gaps in the network and make routes more attractive to long distance traffic. For example, the A42 would become an extension of the M42, while the under construction A14 expressway between Cambridge and Huntingdon could open as the M14 or become an extension of the M11. Some fully dualled roads however, such as the A34 between the M3 and M40, would not be able to become motorways straight away as they lack LARs along the entire length, although this could be addressed later.

I am afraid it has to be addressed before you make it a special road. You cannot easily extinguish existing rights or way and if you try and do so without providing a LAR you will have real problems. The A34 through Oxford is not in my opinion even close to being a HQ DC and there are too many squeeze points such as Botley to easily widen it. The section between the A420 and North Hinksey is congested and has some rather nasty junctions with very short slip roads which tight turns which is why it has a 50 mph limit. There are other roads that could be upgraded to Motorway status but honestly I doubt it makes that much difference when route planning. I certainly would not pick the A1(M) over the A19 heading for Sunderland just because one is a Motorway. One thing the current A34 does NOT need is more traffic. I have crawled at speeds of 5-30 mph all the way from the M40 to the A420 before now.

As for the A14 Expressway the best you could hope for is I think A14(M) the reality is that the A14 east of Cambridge and west of Brampton is not motorway standard nor would it be easy to raise to that level and that is the majority of the mileage. Rather than embarking on a contentious and expensive exercise to turn perfectly good D2 roads into Motorways which would not provide extra capacity I would prefer to upgrade some of the more heavily trafficked S2 roads such as the A10 from Cambridge to Downham Market or the A420 from Oxford to Swindon.

[KeithW]

Not convinced by that bit. No LAR was constructed between J49 and J50 of A1(M), since no local access was required. Prohibited traffic is (rightly) expected to use alternative routes. These will be available near A34 as well.

There is a world of difference between J49 and J50 of A1(M) and the A34 Southern bypass.
If you want to get past Oxford from the North and West the only real alternative to the A34 is to head through the middle of Oxford and avoiding that is the reason the A34 Southern Bypass was built. In any case the road is simply overloaded, a fresh look is needed but I suspect that nothing much will happen before proposals are developed for the Oxford Cambridge Expressway which will need to address this anyway,