M5 J12 redesign

Published On August 24, 2010 » 2134 Views» Gloucester

There has been a piece in the Citizen today about the redevelopment of J12 on the M5.

Co-incidentally I got an email from the company involved to say:

The Highways Agency has been aware of issues at the M5 J12, due to demand for the junction exceeding available capacity, particularly at peak times.

An interim measure was implemented in 2006, but following detailed studies the Highways Agency is now intending to undertake a number of permanent improvements to the junction, including modifications to the slip roads, roundabouts and overbridge, and the implementation of traffic signals in order to make the junction more efficient. These improvements have been planned and agreed in partnership with Gloucestershire County Council.

Balfour Beatty Mott MacDonald, will be undertaking the improvement work on behalf of the Highways Agency from September 2010, for a period of approximately 14 weeks. In order to carry out the work safely, a full closure of the junction including through traffic on the B4008 will be required. To minimise disruption to road users where possible, closures will be carried out overnight only.

I also received a picture of what the junction will look like.  On the description in the paper, it sounded bad, but looking at the attached file, it looks like it might work.
Have a look and see what you think. M5 J12 web leaflet

Share this post

4 Responses to M5 J12 redesign

  1. AndyR says:

    The Nortbound entry looks a little better but still not perfect. Don’t think the northbound exit dual laning goes far enough down the slip road, I think I will still be queing on the inside lane of the M5 in the evening (very scary). Suprised that there is not a dedicated left turn filter lane for the southbound exit of the M5.

    I guess that as I join the Motorway going South every day at 0515 then I am going to have to go down to J13 every morning, I will be majorly impacted by the junction closure for 3 months. That’ll increase my daily fuel consumption a little for sure. I hope that the lights are part time, I shall not be pleased sitting at two sets of red lights on an empty road at 0515 in the morning!

    Just a thought, the over bridge does not look wide enough for three lanes of traffic, wouldn’t want to be a cyclist or pedestian user of that bridge after the changes.

    I hope that it does improve things, they couldn’t really have got it more wrong, and however much money was wasted in the firat place putting the silly dual island design with single lane slip roads that we currently have? I sometimes think that none of the road designers drive cars.

  2. Eddie says:

    I think that the N-bound plan is very good – pretty much matches to what I had thought they should do… but it does need to be dual slip all the way down. If the Stonehouse lane were to be backed up by just a few cars then this would be a major block to the whole slip.

    S-bound is still a mess. Again only a small section to be dual-laned meaning that whenever the lights are red to the slip, the traffic will back up onto the main carriageway in no time.

    I am pleased to see that the roundabouts at each side are to be scrapped altogether & steps are to be taken to stop idiots who can’t read (totally inadequate) road markings from cutting from the left approach lane to go across towards Stonehouse.

  3. Eddie says:

    I pretty much agree with Eddie here

  4. Pingback: My Blog performance – 2010 in review « The murmurings of Barry Kirby

Leave a Reply