A50/A500 corridor

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.

Moderator: Site Management Team

User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

A50/A500 corridor

Post by jackal »

In February Midlands Connect published a report on the A50 and A500, which I have only now seen. The suggestions for RIS3 and RIS4 are as follows:

Western section
• Strategic improvements to M6 J15 to
resolve congestion, improve safety and
facilitate better flow of traffic on M6
and A500. This has been suggested for
submission to RIS3.
• Enhancements at Sideway to make
traffic flow more smoothly, including
strategic changes to the roundabout
and lanes at the junction and address
the signalled junctions that cause traffic
to build up on the route.
• Technology-led improvements to the
reliability and safety of the M6 between
Junction 15 and 16. Suggested for
submission to RIS4.

Central section
• Grade separation of the A50 and local
roads at two locations in Uttoxeter, with
associated slip roads to provide access
and other potential enhancements
to support growth and enhance local
active travel networks
• Enhancements to existing roundabouts
at Sudbury and Blythe Bridge to
increase capacity and reduce delays

Eastern section
• Improvements to A38/A50 Toyota
junction to improve capacity, safety
and general operation (recommended
as immediate priority to be delivered
through an appropriate source of
funding).
• Widening of the A50 south of Derby,
between Junction 2 for the A6 at
Chellaston and Junction 3 for the A514
near Aston-on-Trent (recommended to
be undertaken in RIS4).

However, the most eye catching suggestion is this:

• Building a new link road between the
A50 (near junction 1) and A42 (near
junction 14, Breedon-on-the-Hill).
This is recommended as a long-term
option to be considered for RIS5
or beyond.

Overall it's not a terrible plan but it's surprising that they are suggesting something as fanciful as an A50-A42 link road without proposing grade separation for the roundabouts at Sudbury and Blythe Road or freeflow for Sideway.

https://www.midlandsconnect.uk/projects ... -corridor/
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35755
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Bryn666 »

My cynic says the A42 link road is so you create a massive parcel of land next to the existing EMA/Donington logistics hub and infill it with sheds/houses. It doesn't strike me as a traffic flow proposal if they're ignoring the other flat A50 junctions or replacing Sideway with something more functional than the disaster that's there; it's always amused me the industrial estate immediately south got a full trumpet some 20 years before...
Bryn
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
User avatar
vlad
Member
Posts: 2586
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 16:20
Location: Near the northern end of the A34

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by vlad »

I can't really see how you can improve M6 J15 or Sideway Interchange without knocking down what's there and starting again. In both cases there are other roads in the area that also need considering, which makes things more complicated - removing access to the A519 and A5006 won't be popular!
jackal wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 11:09 • Technology-led improvements to the
reliability and safety of the M6 between
Junction 15 and 16. Suggested for
submission to RIS4.
Is this code for smartening the motorway, as they've already done to the north and south? :twisted:
"If you expect nothing from somebody you are never disappointed." - Sylvia Plath
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Big L »

vlad wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 20:32
jackal wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 11:09 • Technology-led improvements to the
reliability and safety of the M6 between
Junction 15 and 16. Suggested for
submission to RIS4.
Is this code for smartening the motorway, as they've already done to the north and south? :twisted:
That's what I'd assumed.

Unnecessary I feel; too quiet.
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by jackal »

Freeflow for Sideway:

A50 A500 - Copy.jpg
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by fras »

From 27 years of driving around the area, (I live near Crewe, BTW), Jn 15 M6 needs to become just an M6/A500 junction, and the faciity for the A519 removed. This would go a long way to deal with the congestion that is rife at this junction. So what about the A519 ? Well, a junction could be inserted where the A51 crosses. An alternative could be the A53 crossing, but this is quite near the existing Jn15, so not ideal. There are already planned re-routings of the A51 near the M6 to deal with HS2. So this could be added on. Although I suspect there is no joined-up thinking, unfortunately.
User avatar
JammyDodge
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 13:17

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by JammyDodge »

I took Jackal's layout for Sideways and put it onto a My Maps with a layout for M6 J15
In regards to J15, I am happy with my layout for the M6-A500, but am unhappy with the local junctions layout (I do think it is inadequate and should maybe be moved to the A53 or A519)
Designing Tomorrow, Around the Past
Rob590
Member
Posts: 787
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:21

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Rob590 »

jackal wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 11:09 However, the most eye catching suggestion is this:

• Building a new link road between the
A50 (near junction 1) and A42 (near
junction 14, Breedon-on-the-Hill).
This is recommended as a long-term
option to be considered for RIS5
or beyond.

Overall it's not a terrible plan but it's surprising that they are suggesting something as fanciful as an A50-A42 link road without proposing grade separation for the roundabouts at Sudbury and Blythe Road or freeflow for Sideway.

https://www.midlandsconnect.uk/projects ... -corridor/
I'm trying to work out where this would actually go. Their (very basic) map on the report draws a line across most of Castle Donnington, and either the car parks to the west of East Midlands Airport or Donnington Park circuit, depending on where you imagine the line to be. It looks very difficult to find space west of Castle Donnington from J1 of the A50 because the new industrial estate there pushes right up to the river, meaning you'd need several bridges over the meandering Trent, and the obvious line would be looking to cross the river and railway at the same point - that seems complicated.

Looking at the land, there seem to be two plausible options.

1. From J1 of the A50 to go east of Castle Donnington, and then cut west hugging the edge of the Airport (sorry plane-spotters, I may be taking your viewpoints here), squeezing between the Airport and the circuit, perhaps replacing some of the car parks there, and then cutting over the fields to junction 14 of the A42. This option might constrain the Airport somewhat.

2. To go from further west on the A50, perhaps at Shardlow services, and to run down the edge of the quarry. You could then take a fairly straight line over the Trent and head between the Airport and racing circuit to J14, or if you wanted cut west a little bit crossing the Trent west of the Priest House Hotel and running west of the racing circuit, coming to the A42 between Breedon and Tonge.

The absolute ideal route would probably go from the A6 to the A42 directly, with a full grade separated junction with the A50. That could keep traffic from Derby towards the eastern side of Birmingham off the A50 and M1 entirely, but it would seem to go very close to both Aston and Weston villages so is unlikely to be feasible.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by jackal »

JammyDodge wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 00:58 I took Jackal's layout for Sideways and put it onto a My Maps with a layout for M6 J15
In regards to J15, I am happy with my layout for the M6-A500, but am unhappy with the local junctions layout (I do think it is inadequate and should maybe be moved to the A53 or A519)
Looks good. Here's my go at M6/A500. Only one new bridge needed!

M6 A500 - Copy.jpg
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by fras »

Jn 19 is in almost equal need of a freeflow revamp. Even if the A500 West (Barthomley Link) is dualled there will still be long queues at busy times.
User avatar
JammyDodge
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 13:17

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by JammyDodge »

jackal wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 12:42
JammyDodge wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 00:58 I took Jackal's layout for Sideways and put it onto a My Maps with a layout for M6 J15
In regards to J15, I am happy with my layout for the M6-A500, but am unhappy with the local junctions layout (I do think it is inadequate and should maybe be moved to the A53 or A519)
Looks good. Here's my go at M6/A500. Only one new bridge needed!


M6 A500 - Copy.jpg
Very nice. Although I have a feeling we know deep down this is what we are unlikely to get
Designing Tomorrow, Around the Past
User avatar
Big L
Deputy Site Manager
Posts: 7517
Joined: Sun Nov 14, 2010 20:36
Location: B5012

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Big L »

fras wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 23:37 Jn 19 is in almost equal need of a freeflow revamp. Even if the A500 West (Barthomley Link) is dualled there will still be long queues at busy times.
It is, but I suspect a typo !
Make poetry history.

Did you know there's more to SABRE than just the Forums?
Help with maps using the new online calibrator.
Add your roads knowledge to the SABRE Wiki.
fras
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2012 18:34

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by fras »

Big L wrote: Fri Aug 05, 2022 07:36
fras wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 23:37 Jn 19 is in almost equal need of a freeflow revamp. Even if the A500 West (Barthomley Link) is dualled there will still be long queues at busy times.
It is, but I suspect a typo !
Sorry, Jn 16 !!!
(well a 9 is 6 upside down, and it was late at night)
User avatar
JammyDodge
Member
Posts: 484
Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2018 13:17

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by JammyDodge »

fras wrote: Thu Aug 04, 2022 23:37 Jn 19 is in almost equal need of a freeflow revamp. Even if the A500 West (Barthomley Link) is dualled there will still be long queues at busy times.
Depending on what the main flows are, you could do either:

M4 J13 Style
Screenshot 2022-08-06 022405.jpg
Just a free flow onto the M6N w/left turn slips
Screenshot 2022-08-06 023027.jpg
Designing Tomorrow, Around the Past
User avatar
danfw194
Member
Posts: 925
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 23:26
Location: Leicester

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by danfw194 »

jackal wrote: Wed Aug 03, 2022 11:09 Overall it's not a terrible plan but it's surprising that they are suggesting something as fanciful as an A50-A42 link road without proposing grade separation for the roundabouts at Sudbury and Blythe Road or freeflow for Sideway.
Completely agree with you.

The link road doesn't make any sense to me. Is there really that much traffic going between A50-A42? Never mind the fact that there is no room for it, with Castle Donington village, the River Trent, Donington Park Circuit, and East Midlands Airport all in the way. Impossible to reach J1 A50 beyond the roads already in situ.

And yes, not grade separating those roundabouts is nonsensical. Sudbury should be the easiest of the lot, looks ripe for a dumbbell to me, and probably far easier than the Uttoxeter roundabouts which they are committing to. Blythe is far trickier I'll grant them that, but still, it needs doing.

As for the Toyota junction, does it really need more capacity? Hands up, I haven't driven it at peak times so I don't know how well it holds up. "Improving safety and general operation" smacks of signalisation to me.
User avatar
Truvelo
Member
Posts: 17467
Joined: Wed May 29, 2002 21:10
Location: Staffordshire
Contact:

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Truvelo »

Here's some maps I drew ages ago. J16 has the movements of JammyDodge's designs combined into one. J15 moves the M6 connection away from the A519 so solves the weaving problem when GSJing the A519 roundabout. However, there's a steep hill to the southwest of the M6 so the new road would need to be in a deep cutting.
Attachments
M6 J16.gif
stoke.gif
How would you like your grade separations, Sir?
Big and complex.
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Peter Freeman »

Regarding the J15 trumpet, it doesn't appear to contribute to congestion (going by research on GM traffic layer). All of the congestion is due to the A519 roundabout.

The northbound merging difficulty was addressed around 2007 by stealing some hard shoulder to lengthen the on-ramp. There seems to be nothing to prevent a considerable further lengthening, which would surely address the acceleration difficulty. Perhaps extend it as far as the next northbound down-grade. This could be done at very low cost, pending it being more properly addressed by a future smart motorway upgrade.

Another appropriate minimalist action could be a mainline 60mph speed limit for the duration of the acceleration lane - either permanent, or using VSL triggered by an on-ramp traffic detector.

If the trumpet's small radius is a serious tipping, collision, or loss-of-control risk: there appears to be space to slightly enlarge the loop, and re-shape it from a constant radius to a graduated one. This action would require minor earthworks, so it's not quite as 'minimalist'. Minimal would be some extra warning signs, and/or a radar-triggered 'slow down' message.
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by jackal »

Peter Freeman wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 06:59 If the trumpet's small radius is a serious tipping, collision, or loss-of-control risk: there appears to be space to slightly enlarge the loop, and re-shape it from a constant radius to a graduated one. This action would require minor earthworks, so it's not quite as 'minimalist'.
It's definitely a small radius trumpet for such an important junction.

You can't really expand it in its current direction as the northbound offslip is constrained by the bridge immediately to the south. I don't think changing from constant radius to graduated helps as the radius is already close to the maximum it can be given the above constraint on the north-south axis. It seems better to reverse the direction of the trumpet.
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Peter Freeman »

^ It looks to me that there is space, though not a lot. The northbound off-ramp could curve further left, with its current initial radius, and so come closer to the minor road to the south. This makes room for it, and thereby for the on-ramp also, to reach farther to the south and west. Both ramps, under my re-shape, would have, at their sharpest point, a slightly smaller radius than now, but that point would be approached and left on a larger radius (the loop would be somewhat elliptical).

Agreed, the gain is small, but at relatively low cost.

Which ramp actually causes the most trouble? Northbound I know, but on or off?

(reversing the trumpet takes you into major earthworks)
User avatar
Ruperts Trooper
Member
Posts: 12031
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2012 13:43
Location: Huntingdonshire originally, but now Staffordshire

Re: A50/A500 corridor

Post by Ruperts Trooper »

Peter Freeman wrote: Wed Aug 17, 2022 08:14 ^ It looks to me that there is space, though not a lot. The northbound off-ramp could curve further left, with its current initial radius, and so come closer to the minor road to the south. This makes room for it, and thereby for the on-ramp also, to reach farther to the south and west. Both ramps, under my re-shape, would have, at their sharpest point, a slightly smaller radius than now, but that point would be approached and left on a larger radius (the loop would be somewhat elliptical).

Agreed, the gain is small, but at relatively low cost.

Which ramp actually causes the most trouble? Northbound I know, but on or off?

(reversing the trumpet takes you into major earthworks)
I'm not an engineer - but use the northbound on-slip regularly with a caravan - surely reducing the minimum radius will just increase the tipping risk - and/or - reduce the maximum safe speed.

From my driver's point of view the slow speed of merging traffic on the northbound on-slip is the issue, especially for low power-to-weight vehicles trying to accelerate up the slope - lengthening the merge distance has helped but a further increase would be useful.
Lifelong motorhead
Post Reply