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.
mehere wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 01:11
Also I note it clearly smashes through residential areas , so a lot of demolition? And what safeguarding is in place to prevent, house builders / industrial parks springing up alongside ( as Happened with the A63 Selby Bypass ) , the flythrough and map I downloaded, show some lovely open countryside, with a lovely lock and key side , I wonder what mitigation they will offer there !.
I believe there will be 3 properties demolished on station road (West of Waddington), the rest of the route doesn't require any demolishment (except the roman artifacts that litter the area). NHRR is targeted as a relief road, rather than a bypass, as such it is designed to support development along its route. The A15 Eastern bypass was designated as a "bypass", although it is turning out to be more of a relief road too, prioritising development opportunities rather than vehicular route away from development.
mehere wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 01:11
Noone doubts Lincoln needs a full GSJ, ' orbital ', and the A15 North to the M180 dualled with ideally free flow links west and eastbound .
To get to Lincoln along the A15 is a joke , so this ' coast road' is all well and good , but it's past time they tackled the A15, it should also be GSJ / expressway , such a large university , and stunning old town yet unless coming from the A1 it's a nightmare, and that too needs to be dualled if it's not already.
It's really only the Western Bypass (and bit of the northern bypass) that is a "strategic" route, and should be GSJ'd. So from Fosse Way to Humber (A46-A15) should be trunk in my opinion, and built to a "expressway" standards, fully GSJ'd. As much as I'd like to have the whole Lincoln Ring Road being GSJ'd, it certainly isn't suitable for its traffic flows or purpose. The whole of the A46 between the A1 and Lincoln is already dualed, with most junctions GSJ (although not what would be called expressway standards)
mehere wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 01:11
Hi guys it's been a while since I posted, hope your all well and safe, very bad health has kept me occupied for a long time .
But looking at this and thinking back to following the A46 Dualling during the early 2000's ( I can't think exactly where but am sure was Leicestershire ), point is that was much higher quality.
Grade seperated , this plan here will only cause jams, the old saying build it and they will come.
Also I note it clearly smashes through residential areas , so a lot of demolition? And what safeguarding is in place to prevent, house builders / industrial parks springing up alongside ( as Happened with the A63 Selby Bypass ) , the flythrough and map I downloaded, show some lovely open countryside, with a lovely lock and key side , I wonder what mitigation they will offer there !.
Noone doubts Lincoln needs a full GSJ, ' orbital ', and the A15 North to the M180 dualled with ideally free flow links west and eastbound .
To get to Lincoln along the A15 is a joke , so this ' coast road' is all well and good , but it's past time they tackled the A15, it should also be GSJ / expressway , such a large university , and stunning old town yet unless coming from the A1 it's a nightmare, and that too needs to be dualled if it's not already.
Equally of course, with looming bans on fossil fuel vehicles in 9 years time , it might be cheaper to use a train , so on Ballance I hope they have a few rail schemes in Lincolnshire..
I dont think such road development could be justified for Lincoln, the only strategic road is the A46 that skirts the North West edge of the city and even that is not that busy with around 30,000 traffic movements a day. The A15 is the next busiest at around 12,000. Most suburban high streets see that level of traffic. Cars powered by petrol and diesel may be going out of production but there will be plenty of electric cars on the road and there will still be HGV's pounding up the A46 to Immingham.
As for rail Lincoln has a relatively good rail connections, you can see the departures board here but the line speeds are not good. as I understand it that is as much an issue of antiquated signalling and lots of level crossings as anything else. https://ojp.nationalrail.co.uk/service/ldbboard/dep/LCN
If there is any extra money around for transport infrastructure I would prefer it was used to improve the local rail system, at the least removing the remaining level crossings and at best electrification. I see that signalling is being upgraded on the Lincoln to Newark line which will raise the line speed from a ridiculously low 50 mph in places to 75 mph, replace some level crossings and automate others. Additionally it seems that Azumas are being introduced on the LNER London service which can run in full electric mode where available.
jervi wrote: ↑Tue Dec 01, 2020 01:47
It's really only the Western Bypass (and bit of the northern bypass) that is a "strategic" route, and should be GSJ'd. So from Fosse Way to Humber (A46-A15) should be trunk in my opinion, and built to a "expressway" standards, fully GSJ'd. As much as I'd like to have the whole Lincoln Ring Road being GSJ'd, it certainly isn't suitable for its traffic flows or purpose. The whole of the A46 between the A1 and Lincoln is already dualed, with most junctions GSJ (although not what would be called expressway standards)
Realistically all you really need to do is upgrade the 20 miles or so from Lincoln to the M180. The A15 is pretty good from M180 J5 to the Humber Bridge, GSJ'd and D2. RAF Scampton already has a loop east to skirt one runway, extend it south a couple of miles and you could bypass Scampton altogether. Realistically along that route most of the junctions are with B or C class road. The only major GSJ's needed would be at the A46 and A631 (Caenby Corner).
Balfour Beatty has been appointed as the scheme contractor, main construction is due to start in November 2025 (previously mentioned as just 2025) with construction due to last for 3 years with the road opening by the end of 2028.
Cost has increased from £155m to £179m-£212m, however it appears that the Government's "Large Local Majors programme" will still only provide £110m of the funding.
The "full report" will be available this Friday as it will be discussed on the 7th March at a council meeting.
https://ehq-production-europe.s3.eu-wes ... 98b16fe778
Shows that there has been minor changes to the proposed route from the 2006 preferred route. Its it is tagged as the "2018 route" showing the Lincoln Eastern Bypass as "proposed", even though it opened in 2020, so they must of been sitting on this for a while.
This consultation is just asking people about how the proposed road crosses over Station Road & Public rights of way at Sommergate Lane.
The scheme is due to submit its planning application in Spring 2023.
This week there was another information event, however at the current time the material is not on the scheme's page - apparently they are waiting on the council to sort it out, so all the information should be on there next week including a new fly through video.
I spent about an hour speaking to one of the guys on the scheme and covered pretty much every aspect of the scheme after asking a trillion questions- so I'll summarise what I found out.
Road Numbering - Not yet finalised. I asked if the whole ring road would get a single number and he said it may be one of the options they have been looking at - but it is up to the DfT to decide.
Parking Laybys - None are current included in preliminary designs, but it would be a decision the council would make and looked at, at a later date.
Steepness of the hill on carriageway - up to 8%
Steepness of the hill on cycleway - 4% (I think he said)
Options for interoperability between carriageway and cycleway for cyclists wishing to rejoin the cycleway after using carriageway on decent. Not possible due to standards (although I'm not entirely convinced that standards prevent a dual carriageway linking to a cycleway)
ERA (in event of no laybys) on the uphill section - Not explored.
Escape Lane - None are currently included and unlikely for any to be included due to length of road following the decent.
Lighting - Section between North Hykeham Roundabout & South Hykeham Roundabout (I think) would have lighting, along with the roundabouts - rest of the route would not have lighting, including the cycleway.
Speed limit - Currently, LCC wants the whole route to be NSL. Although RSA may reduce the limit.
VRS / verge separating carriageway and cycleway. No VRS proposed between carriageway & cycleway, except where other hazards require (bridges etc). 1m Hard strip, 2m drainage, 1m grass verge, 3m cycleway, 1m verge and then a 1:3 embankment to ground level.
Bridge information over the River - Three span with 5m clearance from existing tow path tracks.
Area specific:
North Hykeham Roundabout:
*Constrained by National Grid Pylon
*Subjected to NH approval
*NMU crossings to run in-phase with traffic phases
*Access to services to be moved. Either existing access to be moved to where shown on drawing, or the existing exit (further South) to become the entrance and exit.
*Existing PRoW across the NW quadrant, would be extinguished and directed around the roundabout.
*Hamburger layout was explored
*Not designed for any future improvements to the A46 - out of remit of scheme.
Station Road
*Bridge would have shared 3m cycleway/footway, not a 2m footway as plans indicates. - Carriageway would be 7.3m and southern verge's width was not specified, but would not have a pavement. I enquired about additional width for future proofing the crossing for additional NMU provisions when development eventually occurs here.
*Would not have a controlled crossing for those continuing along the route. I asked why and apparently Station Road would not meet the requirements in terms of amount of traffic & speed.
*The ziggy zaggy NMU path up/down the hill has not had its alignment finalised, and just to show proof of concept that a suitable gradient is achievable.
*I asked if that desire lines from the tips of the zig zags would be provided for those who don't mind steepness, and that some sort of provision may be made.
Grantham Road Roundabout:
*Viking Way (Long Distance Path) has been diverted to a grade separated bridge nearer the roundabout instead on the existing line.
*New cycle/footway provided along A607 to existing traffic signal controlled junction at the entrance to RAF Waddington which would be modified to include a toucan crossing to connect onto the existing sub-par cycleway.
It's a very impressive road. My main complaint is that the left turn facility off the relief road onto the A46 has a signal-controlled merge. It's big enough to be a freeflow segregated left turn with just the NMU crossing signalised.
It's a very impressive road. My main complaint is that the left turn facility off the relief road onto the A46 has a signal-controlled merge. It's big enough to be a freeflow segregated left turn with just the NMU crossing signalised.
Not with two lanes like that though, you'd need a single lane left turn slip and a standard taper merge, what is shown there requires signalisation or it's unsafe.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
It's a very impressive road. My main complaint is that the left turn facility off the relief road onto the A46 has a signal-controlled merge. It's big enough to be a freeflow segregated left turn with just the NMU crossing signalised.
Not with two lanes like that though, you'd need a single lane left turn slip and a standard taper merge, what is shown there requires signalisation or it's unsafe.
I was speaking in general terms - it is on the scale of a freeflow left turn. But yes, the exact arrangement would be different.
It's a very impressive road. My main complaint is that the left turn facility off the relief road onto the A46 has a signal-controlled merge. It's big enough to be a freeflow segregated left turn with just the NMU crossing signalised.
Not with two lanes like that though, you'd need a single lane left turn slip and a standard taper merge, what is shown there requires signalisation or it's unsafe.
The second lane is only through the lights and presumably to increase capacity at the stop line. Is there any reason it couldn’t be a single lane with a merge afterwards?
It's a very impressive road. My main complaint is that the left turn facility off the relief road onto the A46 has a signal-controlled merge. It's big enough to be a freeflow segregated left turn with just the NMU crossing signalised.
Not with two lanes like that though, you'd need a single lane left turn slip and a standard taper merge, what is shown there requires signalisation or it's unsafe.
The second lane is only through the lights and presumably to increase capacity at the stop line. Is there any reason it couldn’t be a single lane with a merge afterwards?
I agree, it could easily be that - the only reason it isn't seems to be to prevent having a demand activated crossing.
Bryn Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already. She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.
Went to the public information event today for the NHRR.
Design of the route has been revised and I've uploaded photos of new arrangement drawings here - but they should be on the LCC website by the end of Next week, along with a new video.
I asked about the road number again, and the person I was speaking to said he had confirmation from LCC this morning that the number would be A1461* for the new section of road. I delivered my view that the whole ring road should be numbered/renumbered as the A150, he said that he would speak to LCC about the number as we both agree that proposed numbering would be silly.
I asked about how destinations would be signed around the ring road, and he said that is something that LCC is currently working out, but he said that signs all around the ring road would likely be altered to be consistent. I also asked if this resigning would involve providing junction numbers, and he said that is not something that has been looked into, but potentially could be at a later stage.
Changes since the March Public Information Event:
*Footpath North of Middle Lane services would be extinguished and new footway installed along Middle Lane to connect to Thorpe-on-the-Hill.
*Middle Lane Services entrance/exit to remain as existing (was previously proposed to combine exit & entrance into 1 crossover).
*North Hykeham Roundabout proposed to be enlarged more than previously proposed & with some additional circular lanes & maybe with longer approach flaring.
*Wath Lane Bridge (Bridleway/Farm Accommodation) footpath connection on Northern Side.
*New Bridleway to follow Southern side of new Road between Wath Lane and River using proposed farm track to connect to existing public bridleway/track SHYKE/906/1, passing under the new road at the river bridge.
*Sommergate Lane remains open to Brant Road. - This was the same as previous but didn't mention it.
*NMU path down the hill has one switchback removed, and alignment changed to suit.
*New Public Footpath to connect Viking Way to Station Road and Grantham Road, to continue the existing footpath without severing it.
*Viking Way Bridge at Grantham Road has been moved closer to roundabout.
*Throughout the scheme minor vertical alignment changes to better fit cut/fill
*Throughout the scheme minor horizontal alignment changes
*Additional noise mitigation barriers
*Various Balancing Ponds relocated.
*That's him recalling what was emailed to him, and then me remembering what he said, so that might not be 100% correct - hold back on creating a wiki page on it.
A158 (with or without the eastern bypass renumbered) could also be a sensible number for the new road, especially since the intention is that traffic to and from the A1 will use the southern route to get to Skegness, and aside from on the short A15-A607 link that is the only major through movement that isn't better off on existing roads. It's possible A150 is reserved for something else.
Just your average mapper, bringing you a map-focused take on today's world
Potentially daft question from a non-enthusiast and non-local, but once the route is complete, if I'm coming from the south (Newark) and wanting to head north (Scunthorpe/M180) will the existing A46 route still be the quickest option, or will this also provide a quicker route once connected to the eastern bypass?
mdthln wrote: ↑Tue Jun 13, 2023 23:55
Potentially daft question from a non-enthusiast and non-local, but once the route is complete, if I'm coming from the south (Newark) and wanting to head north (Scunthorpe/M180) will the existing A46 route still be the quickest option, or will this also provide a quicker route once connected to the eastern bypass?
probably still qucker to use existing bypass if coming from Newark and wanting to take the A 15 north -
ETA - as coming round to the east when the NHRR is opened to head A15 north will require you to use the pretty poor A158-A46N - A15 N stretch of the original bypass or bundu bash from the A158 through Nettleham on the lanes to the A 15
Last edited by Nicola_Jayne on Tue Sep 05, 2023 16:27, edited 1 time in total.
NHRR is being discussed at a council meeting in 8 days time to approve minor changes to its adopted policy alignments & other changes to its design.
Its estimated cost has gone down to 208m from 212m, although this is still higher than previous cost estimates from a few years ago, even with no changes to its proposed construction period. https://lincolnshire.moderngov.co.uk/do ... ndices.pdf
It is hoped that a planning application for the road will go in by the end of the year, which then has to get through the CPO formalities & other requirements for the estimated construction start in November 2025, and completed November 2028.
Don’t get me wrong, I do support the latest phase of the bypass. But I think it’s aimed more at improving connectivity for villages east of Lincoln really.
It won’t really help long/distance traffic one way or another, except for distributing it a bit more evenly.
If it is built and opened by 2028, that would mark 25 years since it was first proposed.
Berk wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2023 02:16
Don’t get me wrong, I do support the latest phase of the bypass. But I think it’s aimed more at improving connectivity for villages east of Lincoln really.
It won’t really help long/distance traffic one way or another, except for distributing it a bit more evenly.
If it is built and opened by 2028, that would mark 25 years since it was first proposed.
It's likely to take the coast-bound (A158) traffic off the existing bypass and in terms of local traffic will take a significant amount of traffic off the 'unofficial southern bypass' of Tower lane / Harmston Hill / Aubourn and Haddington '
There are a few changes since the public event in June.
* Access arrangement to services at Hykeham Roundabout
*Wath Lane bridge alignment & bridleway & cycleway linking to South Hykeham Road.
*Approx alignment of oil pipeline diversion now shown.
*Bat bridge near Wath Lane
*Design of River Witham bridge. The ditches on the sides will be put into culverts, so the tow tracks are accessible from proposed cycleway/bridleways.
*NMU crossing on station road are now shown with zigzag markings, however labels show "uncontrolled". Maybe Toucan crossings (hopefully)
*New cycleway along Sleaford Road (between the Sleaford Road Roundabout & Bloxholm Lane), this before was proposed as a footway.
In the ES, there were maps showing the boreholes in the area, which included maps of the Lincoln Relief Road scheme in the 70s/80s. I found these quite interesting as I've never seen the other proposals for the Western and Northern Bypasses.
I've put these into a google map https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid= ... sp=sharing
