Herts, why is the traffic so bad?

Via Bank · 12 Nov 2018

Herts, why is the traffic so bad?

Decades upon decades of defective transport policy that sees buses as for poor people, cycles as toys, trains as a train set, and big important cars as the only serious means of transport for adult grown-ups doing serious business.

RailUK Forums

AM9 · 12 Nov 2018

Via Bank said:
Decades upon decades of defective transport policy that sees buses as for poor people, cycles as toys, trains as a train set, and big important cars as the only serious means of transport for adult grown-ups doing serious business.

Which is contrary to the behaviour of many motorists which is often the most juvenile of all road users. I'm reminded of this woman who virtually pushed a cyclist off a road in Norfolk and then boasted about her actions on twitter claiming that cyclists don't have any rights on the highway as they don't pay 'Road Tax', (a misconception that further typifies her and many other road users ignorance). As is obvious from the interview on the link, she is still in denial of her failing as a driver and her attitude to other road users, - according to her, her only error was to post on twitter.

PeterY · 12 Nov 2018

Bald Rick said:
Perhaps the biggest traffic problem is school traffic, as when the little darlings are on holiday the traffic just disappears in the morning.

I think that's the main problem, it seems most parents give their children a lift to school, even if it's only 300 yards. I made my daughter walk to school 1.5 miles, (she now walks long distance paths) but she also benefited from the social side walking, with a couple of her friends.

I'm self employed (gardener) and if I'm not in someones garden by 07.30 (except school holidays) then there is no point in leaving my house until 09.10.
2 days a week I cycle to Watford, mainly along the Grand Union Canal from Hemel Hempstead. I can ride it easily in 40 minutes, driving can be anything from 30 minutes to well over an hour.

bramling · 12 Nov 2018

PeterY said:
I think that's the main problem, it seems most parents give their children a lift to school, even if it's only 300 yards. I made my daughter walk to school 1.5 miles, (she now walks long distance paths) but she also benefited from the social side walking, with a couple of her friends.

I'm self employed (gardener) and if I'm not in someones garden by 07.30 (except school holidays) then there is no point in leaving my house until 09.10.
2 days a week I cycle to Watford, mainly along the Grand Union Canal from Hemel Hempstead. I can ride it easily in 40 minutes, driving can be anything from 30 minutes to well over an hour.

One can’t blame weekend congestion on school traffic though!

Regarding schools, there are a fair few independent schools throughout Hertfordshire - including in St Albans - so perhaps this does mean some pupils will be travelling a fair distance. However in many cases these independent schools run coach services, which I’d imagine most pupils use.

It might be the case that school traffic is the straw which in many cases breaks the camels back, but I’m not convinced it’s actually *that* significant in the grand scheme of things, apart from in the immediate locality of schools. There’s bound to be less traffic in school holidays as a lot of people take their annual leave at that time.

A lot of issues in Hertfordshire are down to the inadequacy and fragility of the motorway network. The A1(M) is still two lanes in many places, and is congested at many times of day, but all it takes is a breakdown to cause much wider chaos. Any form of unplanned closure of the A1(M) will quickly lead to total gridlock for miles around, right down to country lanes.

A more fit-for-purpose A1(M) between Letchworth and Hatfield would take a *lot* of traffic off local roads, but there would still be issues on feeder routes. For as long as Hertfordshire keeps being dumped with London overspill its roads will always be congested.

cactustwirly · 12 Nov 2018

bramling said:
One can’t blame weekend congestion on school traffic though!

Regarding schools, there are a fair few independent schools throughout Hertfordshire - including in St Albans - so perhaps this does mean some pupils will be travelling a fair distance. However in many cases these independent schools run coach services, which I’d imagine most pupils use.

It might be the case that school traffic is the straw which in many cases breaks the camels back, but I’m not convinced it’s actually *that* significant in the grand scheme of things, apart from in the immediate locality of schools. There’s bound to be less traffic in school holidays as a lot of people take their annual leave at that time.

A lot of issues in Hertfordshire are down to the inadequacy and fragility of the motorway network. The A1(M) is still two lanes in many places, and is congested at many times of day, but all it takes is a breakdown to cause much wider chaos. Any form of unplanned closure of the A1(M) will quickly lead to total gridlock for miles around, right down to country lanes.

A more fit-for-purpose A1(M) between Letchworth and Hatfield would take a *lot* of traffic off local roads, but there would still be issues on feeder routes. For as long as Hertfordshire keeps being dumped with London overspill its roads will always be congested.

Hmm the Thames Valley has 'London overspill' like Herts, but the traffic is nowhere near as bad.

AndrewE · 12 Nov 2018

cactustwirly said:
Hmm the Thames Valley has 'London overspill' like Herts, but the traffic is nowhere near as bad.

Perhaps it has better public transport on the arterial routes? And a less dense hinterland/a more diffused pattern of travel off the arteries?

gazthomas · 12 Nov 2018

AndrewE said:
Perhaps it has better public transport on the arterial routes? And a less dense hinterland/a more diffused pattern of travel off the arteries?

I would argue that Berkshire is less dense than Hertfordshire overall

cactustwirly · 12 Nov 2018

gazthomas said:
I would argue that Berkshire is less dense than Hertfordshire overall

It depends on which side of Berkshire you're on about.
The east side, where I'm from, is just as dense as Herts.
But I'd agree that West Berks is more rural

Teflon Lettuce · 12 Nov 2018

bramling said:
One can’t blame weekend congestion on school traffic though!

Regarding schools, there are a fair few independent schools throughout Hertfordshire - including in St Albans - so perhaps this does mean some pupils will be travelling a fair distance. However in many cases these independent schools run coach services, which I’d imagine most pupils use.

It might be the case that school traffic is the straw which in many cases breaks the camels back, but I’m not convinced it’s actually *that* significant in the grand scheme of things, apart from in the immediate locality of schools. There’s bound to be less traffic in school holidays as a lot of people take their annual leave at that time.

The generally accepted figure is between 10 and 20% less traffic during the morning peak during school holidays.. whilst some of that figure can be accounted for by more people being on holiday the majority of the reduction is from lack of school run though...

Incidently, as a bus driver I've noticed over the years that the morning peak is at it's worst during the autumn term... and there is a significant drop off after Easter as the exams start taking place and that years pupils finish before the end of term...

Bald Rick · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
One can’t blame weekend congestion on school traffic though!

Regarding schools, there are a fair few independent schools throughout Hertfordshire - including in St Albans - so perhaps this does mean some pupils will be travelling a fair distance. However in many cases these independent schools run coach services, which I’d imagine most pupils use.

It might be the case that school traffic is the straw which in many cases breaks the camels back, but I’m not convinced it’s actually *that* significant in the grand scheme of things, apart from in the immediate locality of schools. There’s bound to be less traffic in school holidays as a lot of people take their annual leave at that time.

A lot of issues in Hertfordshire are down to the inadequacy and fragility of the motorway network. The A1(M) is still two lanes in many places, and is congested at many times of day, but all it takes is a breakdown to cause much wider chaos. Any form of unplanned closure of the A1(M) will quickly lead to total gridlock for miles around, right down to country lanes.

A more fit-for-purpose A1(M) between Letchworth and Hatfield would take a *lot* of traffic off local roads, but there would still be issues on feeder routes. For as long as Hertfordshire keeps being dumped with London overspill its roads will always be congested.

Re the schools. I agree that many people will take leave during school holidays, not least teachers who do so de facto. But... I live near three secondary schools and 2 primaries. In school term time there is a queue well over a mile long up to the main road junction nearby between 0745 and 0915 (roughly). At the last half term there was no queue to speak of during these times. That can’t be coincidence.

AM9 · 13 Nov 2018

Bald Rick said:
Re the schools. I agree that many people will take leave during school holidays, not least teachers who do so de facto. But... I live near three secondary schools and 2 primaries. In school term time there is a queue well over a mile long up to the main road junction nearby between 0745 and 0915 (roughly). At the last half term there was no queue to speak of during these times. That can’t be coincidence.

I think that roads (of the kind that we're talking about here) are generally running at or near to their full capacity. Under those conditions, queues consistently form at pinch points. Any distrubance (such as a minor traffic incident) can easily tip the local road system into siezure which will often stay that way until the peak dies down. Similarly, any drop in traffic (sometimes as little as 5%) results in those queues shortening or even clearing. Thus school holidays, adult holidays taken between Easter and mid-July, national events on TV (cup finals, Wimbledon finals, royal weddings) and other shorter term events, can result in unexpectedly clearer roads.
As Bald Rick has posted earlier, regular traffic 'jams' do actually serve useful purposes in capping the general amount of congestion in a greater area by dissauding some users from making non-essential journies. That is certainly true in St Albans which accounts for the increased foot/cycle traffic on parts of the Green Route including the Alban Way. That is far better than the road lobby's position of building more roads (which just encourages more road journeys requiring more roads etc.).
Of course, there will always be the selfish motorists who insist that their journey is more important that anybody elses (especially when it patently isn't), but they are just part of the increasing self-entitlement culture that is making urban living more unpleasant.

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

AM9 said:
I think that roads (of the kind that we're talking about here) are generally running at or near to their full capacity. Under those conditions, queues consistently form at pinch points. Any distrubance (such as a minor traffic incident) can easily tip the local road system into siezure which will often stay that way until the peak dies down. Similarly, any drop in traffic (sometimes as little as 5%) results in those queues shortening or even clearing. Thus school holidays, adult holidays taken between Easter and mid-July, national events on TV (cup finals, Wimbledon finals, royal weddings) and other shorter term events, can result in unexpectedly clearer roads.
As Bald Rick has posted earlier, regular traffic 'jams' do actually serve useful purposes in capping the general amount of congestion in a greater area by dissauding some users from making non-essential journies. That is certainly true in St Albans which accounts for the increased foot/cycle traffic on parts of the Green Route including the Alban Way. That is far better than the road lobby's position of building more roads (which just encourages more road journeys requiring more roads etc.).
Of course, there will always be the selfish motorists who insist that their journey is more important that anybody elses (especially when it patently isn't), but they are just part of the increasing self-entitlement culture that is making urban living more unpleasant.

In a lot of cases Hertfordshire doesn’t have the physical space for major road upgrades.

There are a few things which ought to have been prioritised though, if for no other reason than to enhance safety. Widening the 2-lane sections of the A1(M) should have happened long ago, and a proper widening not just an inadequate smart motorway.

A decent east/west route from somewhere like Stevenage or Hatfield towards Essex wouldn’t have gone amiss either.

AM9 · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
In a lot of cases Hertfordshire doesn’t have the physical space for major road upgrades.

There are a few things which ought to have been prioritised though, if for no other reason than to enhance safety. Widening the 2-lane sections of the A1(M) should have happened long ago, and a proper widening not just an inadequate smart motorway.

A decent east/west route from somewhere like Stevenage or Hatfield towards Essex wouldn’t have gone amiss either.

I'm inclined to agree about the A1M as it is a trunk route and over the last few years, the northern stretches have been progressively improved. ISTR that it was the fix instead of making the whole route up to full motorway standards.
As for an improved E-W route from the A1 corridor to the Essex border, there are a few major issues:

the western end of the A120 would need a lot more than the Little Hadham bypass to make it suitable as part of the route
the Bishops Stortford northern bypass would need streamlining to be part of a through route - maybe bypassing the M11 J8 and joining the A120 beyond the airport slips
the A602 could be dualled throughout east of the A1M J7, and it's junction with the A10 augmented with W-N chords across the Biffa waste site, this could be accomodated with very little land take
the A414 from Hatfield could be improved to provide a secondary A1M-Essex corridor but the Hertford centre 'alley' would still be a significant constraint. Maybe if something was done to discourage through traffic using the current A119, the 'alley' traffic would be more manageable.

So the above might give a useful route from the A1M through to A12 for Harwich & Felixstowe access, but the A120 east of Braintree to Marks Tey might need further upgrades but that is already an issue within Essex.

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

AM9 said:
I'm inclined to agree about the A1M as it is a trunk route and over the last few years, the northern stretches have been progressively improved. ISTR that it was the fix instead of making the whole route up to full motorway standards.
As for an improved E-W route from the A1 corridor to the Essex border, there are a few major issues:

the western end of the A120 would need a lot more than the Little Hadham bypass to make it suitable as part of the route
the Bishops Stortford northern bypass would need streamlining to be part of a through route - maybe bypassing the M11 J8 and joining the A120 beyond the airport slips
the A602 could be dualled throughout east of the A1M J7, and it's junction with the A10 augmented with W-N chords across the Biffa waste site, this could be accomodated with very little land take
the A414 from Hatfield could be improved to provide a secondary A1M-Essex corridor but the Hertford centre 'alley' would still be a significant constraint. Maybe if something was done to discourage through traffic using the current A119, the 'alley' traffic would be more manageable.
So the above might give a useful route from the A1M through to A12 for Harwich & Felixstowe access, but the A120 east of Braintree to Marks Tey might need further upgrades but that is already an issue within Essex.

I'd agree with all of the above.

Thinking a little more, perhaps part of the issue with Hertfordshire is that there are quite a few "new towns" (both fully new towns like Stevenage, and expanded towns like Sandy or St Neots). Many of the new towns north of Stevenage have also experienced expansion in the last decade or two. The common factor in all this is the A1(M), even if many of these places aren't actually in Hertfordshire. A lot of the traffic on the A1(M) in the peak hours is vans, indicating self-employed tradesman-type people. Enhancement of public transport simply won't be of relevance here.

On the subject of east/west links within Hertfordshire, there's also no simple rail options for journeys that cross between the ECML, MML and WCML - for example journeys like Hitchin to St Albans, Stevenage to Luton, or Hatfield to Watford. Most people won't contemplate going via London by train. I did it for a few years, and didn't particularly enjoy it as the Thameslink part of the journey was too unpredictable, but most simply wouldn't do it. With the increased unreliability of the rail service recently, I suspect even fewer would now.

Bald Rick · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
In a lot of cases Hertfordshire doesn’t have the physical space for major road upgrades.

There are a few things which ought to have been prioritised though, if for no other reason than to enhance safety. Widening the 2-lane sections of the A1(M) should have happened long ago, and a proper widening not just an inadequate smart motorway.

A decent east/west route from somewhere like Stevenage or Hatfield towards Essex wouldn’t have gone amiss either.

The two lane section of the A1(M) from Welwyn to Stevenage N is going to be 3 Lane all lane running.

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

Bald Rick said:
The two lane section of the A1(M) from Welwyn to Stevenage N is going to be 3 Lane all lane running.

Which will be a fiasco, as (apart from no doubt taking 2-3 years of hell to do the conversion) the moment a breakdown or accident happens things will be back to square one - worse in fact. I can’t see how the expense of a proper widening can’t be justified. As an aside I feel uncomfortable not having the hard shoulder - it’s all another example of Britain going down the toilet thanks to population increasing too fast for the infrastructure.

cactustwirly · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
Which will be a fiasco, as (apart from no doubt taking 2-3 years of hell to do the conversion) the moment a breakdown or accident happens things will be back to square one - worse in fact. I can’t see how the expense of a proper widening can’t be justified. As an aside I feel uncomfortable not having the hard shoulder - it’s all another example of Britain going down the toilet thanks to population increasing too fast for the infrastructure.

Works ok on the M42, M6 & M1...

radamfi · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
Which will be a fiasco, as (apart from no doubt taking 2-3 years of hell to do the conversion) the moment a breakdown or accident happens things will be back to square one - worse in fact.

But presumably you could say the same about all the other schemes where the hard shoulder has been removed. Many people "breaking down" on the hard shoulder could have continued to the next exit. Accidents are very likely to occur on lanes other than the leftmost lane, so the hard shoulder isn't much help there.

DarloRich · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
Which will be a fiasco, as (apart from no doubt taking 2-3 years of hell to do the conversion) the moment a breakdown or accident happens things will be back to square one - worse in fact. I can’t see how the expense of a proper widening can’t be justified. As an aside I feel uncomfortable not having the hard shoulder - it’s all another example of Britain going down the toilet thanks to population increasing too fast for the infrastructure.

The highways people must have assessed the risk of breakdown with modern cars and cameras and decided the hard shoulder was a waste of space that could be used better and provide extra capacity for the minimum investment. I don't have a problem with it.

jon0844 · 13 Nov 2018

It does cause chaos when there's a breakdown on the M25 (Potters Bar to Enfield) where they did all lane running on the cheap.. with too few signs and refuge points. The M1 with gantries (which are huge and must cost a fortune) and loads of cameras is far more effective, but I assume all roads going forward will go for the cheap option.

There are accidents or breakdowns on the M25 and A1(M) near Welwyn (caused by cars either flooring it down the turn left lane for Welwyn and then cutting back in OR going off and coming back on further up) all the time. It's a near daily occurrence and some of the accidents are very serious (I believe there have been a few fatalities) so I do hope future road improvement works will actually improve safety as well as capacity.

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

cactustwirly said:
Works ok on the M42, M6 & M1...

Really? I'm not so familiar with the M42, however neither the M1 nor M6 are decent motorways to use. Locally the M1 is regarded as pretty horrendous to use - and speaking from recent experience, just a cool 1.5-hour tailback at 2000 in the evening heading north on the M1 recently thanks to a van broken down in the first lane on a section with no hard shoulder...

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

jon0844 said:
but I assume all roads going forward will go for the cheap option.

It seems like it. The whole M1 will be like that all the way up to Sheffield before long, and there's a massive section of the M6 between Coventry and Birmingham being "upgraded" at the moment, I bet the Rugby-Coventry section will follow.

Yet strangely a lovely gold-plated section of three-lane plus hard shoulder motorway has appeared through North Yorkshire. Perhaps they're more sensible up there!

jon0844 said:
There are accidents or breakdowns on the M25 and A1(M) near Welwyn (caused by cars either flooring it down the turn left lane for Welwyn and then cutting back in OR going off and coming back on further up) all the time. It's a near daily occurrence and some of the accidents are very serious (I believe there have been a few fatalities) so I do hope future road improvement works will actually improve safety as well as capacity.

The Stevenage to Welwyn section has become horrendous. A lot of the queuing, and accidents, is caused by two lanes of slip-road trying to join a two-lane motorway, with people already on the motorway not leaving gaps for people to join, and people joining being obsessed with getting to the outside line *now*. Then there's the new northbound layout at Welwyn which encourages people to stick to the left then cross over at the last minute. The recent change to the markings there might have eased the flow slightly at the very height of the peak, but at all other times it's made things worse by causing weaving in and out. Meanwhile on the southbound side, what idiot decided to change the third lane start on the left-hand lane which has caused problems since the day it changed?

I can't see why they don't just do a full widening on this section. The engineering can't be unfeasible - it was all planned to happen in the 1990s until cancelled by John Prescott and co soon after New Labour were elected.

AM9 · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
... On the subject of east/west links within Hertfordshire, there's also no simple rail options for journeys that cross between the ECML, MML and WCML - for example journeys like Hitchin to St Albans, Stevenage to Luton, or Hatfield to Watford. Most people won't contemplate going via London by train. I did it for a few years, and didn't particularly enjoy it as the Thameslink part of the journey was too unpredictable, but most simply wouldn't do it. With the increased unreliability of the rail service recently, I suspect even fewer would now.

Looking at the map, it seems that all of the home counties north of the Thames suffered the loss of circumferential links directly or indirectly because of Beeching. There were:

the GE Southend Victoria line to GEML links (via Maldon), all closed
the GEML to West Anglia links (Witham-Braintree-Bishops Stortford), only the Witham-Braintree stub left as a branch.
the WA to MML links (Hertford-Welwyn-Luton-Dunstable), all closed
the GN to WCML links (Hatfield-St Albans-Watford), only the St Albans (Abbey) to Watford stub left as a branch.
the MML to WCML links (Harpenden-Redbourn-Hemel Hempstead), all closed
the WCML to Rickmansworth line (Ebury Line), all closed
the Chiltern Line to GWML link (High Wycombe-Bourne End-Maidenhead), only The Bourne End-Maidenhead stub left as a branch.

South of the Thames the picture is different where much of the labyrinth of SECR/LB&SCR/LSWR lines are still there providing links between the radial corridors as well as the North Downs line.

AM9 · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
It seems like it. The whole M1 will be like that all the way up to Sheffield before long, and there's a massive section of the M6 between Coventry and Birmingham being "upgraded" at the moment, I bet the Rugby-Coventry section will follow.

Yet strangely a lovely gold-plated section of three-lane plus hard shoulder motorway has appeared through North Yorkshire. Perhaps they're more sensible up there! ...

I think that land prices are a little lower in Yorkshire.

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

AM9 said:
Looking at the map, it seems that all of the home counties north of the Thames suffered the loss of circumferential links directly or indirectly because of Beeching. There were:

the GE Southend Victoria line to GEML links (via Maldon), all closed
the GEML to West Anglia links (Witham-Braintree-Bishops Stortford), only the Witham-Braintree stub left as a branch.
the WA to MML links (Hertford-Welwyn-Luton-Dunstable), all closed
the GN to WCML links (Hatfield-St Albans-Watford), only the St Albans (Abbey) to Watford stub left as a branch.
the MML to WCML links (Harpenden-Redbourn-Hemel Hempstead), all closed
the WCML to Rickmansworth line (Ebury Line), all closed
the Chiltern Line to GWML link (High Wycombe-Bourne End-Maidenhead), only The Bourne End-Maidenhead stub left as a branch.
South of the Thames the picture is different where much of the labyrinth of SECR/LB&SCR/LSWR lines are still there providing links between the radial corridors as well as the North Downs line.

How about a light-rail link Hertford - Welwyn - Hatfield - St Albans Abbey - Watford (- Rickmansworth?), perhaps also with a branch from Welwyn - Wheathampstead - Luton - Dunstable - Leighton Buzzard?

Having said that, I know people who will still use the car for journeys like Stevenage-Welwyn Garden City, despite the journey potentially taking up to an hour at the worst times.

bramling · 13 Nov 2018

AM9 said:
I think that land prices are a little lower in Yorkshire.

That's fair enough, but can we *really* not afford the few miles of land between Welwyn and Stevenage? Less than seven miles of motorway, with surprisingly little property close by. The really frustrating thing is that it was all set to go in 1997 - I forget whether the plan was to go up to three or four lanes, but it definitely included retaining a hard shoulder.

This section would make a massive difference, more so than the other two-lane section (Hatfield to South Mimms) which isn't quite such an issue as much traffic turns off at the junctions either side.

Teflon Lettuce · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
How about a light-rail link Hertford - Welwyn - Hatfield - St Albans Abbey - Watford (- Rickmansworth?), perhaps also with a branch from Welwyn - Wheathampstead - Luton - Dunstable - Leighton Buzzard?

Having said that, I know people who will still use the car for journeys like Stevenage-Welwyn Garden City, despite the journey potentially taking up to an hour at the worst times.

well there's already a light rail link between Luton and Dunstable using diesel powered rubber tyred trams... but apparently it was a total waste of money and the only valid link would be a heavy rail option....

AM9 · 13 Nov 2018

bramling said:
That's fair enough, but can we *really* not afford the few miles of land between Welwyn and Stevenage? Less than seven miles of motorway, with surprisingly little property close by. The really frustrating thing is that it was all set to go in 1997 - I forget whether the plan was to go up to three or four lanes, but it definitely included retaining a hard shoulder.

This section would make a massive difference, more so than the other two-lane section (Hatfield to South Mimms) which isn't quite such an issue as much traffic turns off at the junctions either side.

I agree with the possibly false economy of cheap lane upgrades, but I think the land price difference is an issue which pitched against the monitoring costs and response time probably makes more sense for 'smart' in the south and plain old hard shoulder in the north - (according to a cynical DfT).

Bald Rick · 14 Nov 2018

bramling said:
Which will be a fiasco, as (apart from no doubt taking 2-3 years of hell to do the conversion) the moment a breakdown or accident happens things will be back to square one - worse in fact. I can’t see how the expense of a proper widening can’t be justified. As an aside I feel uncomfortable not having the hard shoulder - it’s all another example of Britain going down the toilet thanks to population increasing too fast for the infrastructure.

Details here. https://highwaysengland.co.uk/projects/a1m-junction-6-to-junction-8-smart-motorway/

cactustwirly said:
Works ok on the M42, M6 & M1...

I don’t think the M42 has permanent all lane running though, happy to be corrected if this is not the case. It was, however, the trail site for Managed Motorway, which became Smart Motorway. I spoke to an HA guy about it years ago, and he said it was phenomenally successful in terms of increasing capacity.

DarloRich said:
The highways people must have assessed the risk of breakdown with modern cars and cameras and decided the hard shoulder was a waste of space that could be used better and provide extra capacity for the minimum investment. I don't have a problem with it.

I understand that the risk assessments showed a small deterioration in safety for permanent all lane running, compared to permanent hard shoulder. That wouldn’t get through a rail risk assessment.

bramling said:
It seems like it. The whole M1 will be like that all the way up to Sheffield before long, and there's a massive section of the M6 between Coventry and Birmingham being "upgraded" at the moment, I bet the Rugby-Coventry section will follow.

Yet strangely a lovely gold-plated section of three-lane plus hard shoulder motorway has appeared through North Yorkshire. Perhaps they're more sensible up there!
.

I’ll take that bet about Rugby - Coventry, it’s not in any plan, and is very rarely busy.

The M1 between the M25 and Sheffield will be, after the last two bits currently under construction:

M25 to J10: 4 lane with full hard shoulder
J10 to J13: 4 lane Smart Motorway (3 lane with variable hardshoulder)
J13 to J19 (M6) 4 lane all lane running, no hard shoulder. (J13-J16 under construction now)
J19 to J21 3 lane with full hard shoulder
J21 to J21a 4 lane with intermittent hard shoulder
J21a to J23a 3 lane with full hard shoulder
J23a to J24 4 lane with full hardshoulder managed Motorway
J24 to J25 4 lane all lane running, no hard shoulder (under construction now)
J25 to J28 4 lane with intermittent hard shoulder
J28 to J35a 4 Lane all lane running, no hard shoulder (except between the M18 slip roads, and Tinsley Viaduct, which are 3 lane with permanent full hard shoulder).

No more is planned after this.

2 reasons for N Yorkshire; firstly it was conversion of the A1 to Motorway standard, effectively a new build, and secondly, that part was designed so long ago it was before all lane running was a thing.

John Webb · 14 Nov 2018

AM9 said:
Looking at the map, it seems that all of the home counties north of the Thames suffered the loss of circumferential links directly or indirectly because of Beeching. There were:

........the MML to WCML links (Harpenden-Redbourn-Hemel Hempstead), all closed......

This line closed to passenger services way back in 1947 when they were temporarily suspended - but were never reinstated. It ended somewhat short of the WCML station serving Hemel Hempstead (HH) at Boxmoor. The end of the line was only connected for a short while at Boxmoor goods yard 1959/60 to allow coal to go to HH gasworks after the line had become disused east of the gasworks connection from Harpenden, although the original intention had been to link with the L&NWR at Boxmoor. (They said 'No'.) The wholesale redevelopment of HH resulted in much of the railway infrastructure being lost at the HH end; for example there was a large brick viaduct crossing what is now the site of the so-called "Magic Roundabout" in HH - this was demolished in 1960.

Herts, why is the traffic so bad?

Member

RailUK Forums

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Established Member