Banbury Lane Bridge, WCML

[Geoffrey Mortimer]

Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in Northamptonshire,
was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge was built to accommodate a
normal two lane road, but the roadway was made up as a single lane with two
very wide pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

[A Woodcraft]

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in Northamptonshire,
was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge was built to accommodate a
normal two lane road, but the roadway was made up as a single lane with two
very wide pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

To reduce the chances of a vehicle crashing over the side of the
bridge and ending up on the railway line?

That or it's to give plenty of space for people to stand while
photographing the trains passing underneath ;)

Adam

[mutley]

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:38:09 +0200, "Geoffrey Mortimer"

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in Northamptonshire,
was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge was built to accommodate a
normal two lane road, but the roadway was made up as a single lane with two
very wide pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

Does the bridge or road carry a weight restriction? Would it be a rat
run without the lights?

Pete

[cupra]

Post by mutley
On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:38:09 +0200, "Geoffrey Mortimer"

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in
Northamptonshire, was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge
was built to accommodate a normal two lane road, but the roadway was
made up as a single lane with two very wide pavements, and traffic
is consequently controlled by lights. Does anyone here know hy this
absurdity has happened?

Does the bridge or road carry a weight restriction? Would it be a rat
run without the lights?

I suspect you're right with your second point - the level crossing was
frequently closed so it was always a 'gamble' as to whether it'd be quicker
to get to the A5 via the A43 or A45 from Hunsbury/Sixfields etc.. If there
were no lights, I guess traffic levels would rise significantly!

[David Hansen]

On Fri, 21 Oct 2005 16:38:09 +0200 someone who may be "Geoffrey

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in Northamptonshire,
was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge was built to accommodate a
normal two lane road,

With or without pavements?

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
but the roadway was made up as a single lane with two
very wide pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

You may think it an absurdity, others presumably do not.

I have no idea why it was done, but it does mean that two motor
vehicles should not crash into each other and then fall on the
railway. Are there any things of note, such as sharp bends on the
approaches or steep gradients?

[Paul]

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in Northamptonshire,
was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge was built to accommodate a
normal two lane road, but the roadway was made up as a single lane with two
very wide pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

Didn't they do something similar at New Cross Gate?

[Eddie Bellass]

The bridge was built to accommodate a normal two lane road, but
the roadway was made up as a single lane with two very wide
pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know why this absurdity has happened?

-------------------------------

There are one or two hump(-ish) backed highway bridges over
rail lines where this has happened in my local area in recent
years.

My guess is that because industrial and retail estates and/or
a major coach and bus depot have sprung up in years, in parallel
with the increased size of modern buses, coaches & trucks, there
is no longer enough room for two vehicles in the larger sizes
to pass. There is also the factor of the combined weight of two
HGVs or PSVs passing each other on the bridge, if there is room.

Restricting traffic flow to one direction at a time, alternately, by
means of traffic lights probably saves the expense of completely
renewing the bridge.


Regards,

DigitisED (Eddie Bellass)

Mythical Merseyside, in the Occupied Territories
of Old Lancashire, United Kingdom.

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free and checked
by a leading anti-virus system - updated continuously.

[Chippy]

Does anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

Because Rothersthorpe Parish Council wanted it that way:

"The carriageway over the new bridge should be of a single lane width
so as to restrict traffic flows".

http://tinyurl.com/dpawh

[cupra]

Post by Chippy

Does anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

"The carriageway over the new bridge should be of a single lane width
so as to restrict traffic flows".
http://tinyurl.com/dpawh

At one point the crossing was going to be closed with no replacement!

[Peter Masson]

Post by Chippy
"The carriageway over the new bridge should be of a single lane width
so as to restrict traffic flows".
http://tinyurl.com/dpawh

Sounds as though someone has actually learnt from 19th century railway
builders - single track, but with works to accommodate double track. It will
be much easier to widen the road later if necessary, than if the bridge had
only been built to single lane width.

Peter

[Jack Taylor]

Post by Geoffrey Mortimer
Banbury Lane level crossing, near Weedon on the WCML in Northamptonshire,
was replaced this year with a bridge. The bridge was built to accommodate a
normal two lane road, but the roadway was made up as a single lane with two
very wide pavements, and traffic is consequently controlled by lights. Does
anyone here know hy this absurdity has happened?

It's also happened at a number of other bridges over the WCML. Recently I've
been taking photographs from Bridge 129, just north of Ledburn Jcns., which
carries a public footpath and farm track across the railway. The right of
way is single carriageway, with two foot wide solid concrete 'pavements' at
either side, standing about nine to twelve inches high. I had presumed that
this was to prevent passing farm machinery from getting close enough to
strike the bridge parapet and cascade rubble down on to the running lines
below.

[Chippy]

Post by Jack Taylor
It's also happened at a number of other bridges over the WCML. Recently I've
been taking photographs from Bridge 129, just north of Ledburn Jcns., which
carries a public footpath and farm track across the railway. The right of
way is single carriageway, with two foot wide solid concrete 'pavements' at
either side, standing about nine to twelve inches high. I had presumed that
this was to prevent passing farm machinery from getting close enough to
strike the bridge parapet and cascade rubble down on to the running lines
below.

That may be so, but in the case of the Banbury Lane bridge it seems to
have been as a result of concerns from villages on either side of the
line that replacing the crossing would increase traffic through their
streets.

Building the bridge wide enough for two-way traffic, but using half the
width for pavements isn't a bad strategy, as, should conditions change,
the pavements could be removed. Pedestrian traffic could then be
diverted to a parallel footbridge, which could be erected with far less
disruption than would be caused by widening the roadbridge.