Post on 11-Jul-2018
TRANSPORT & INFRASTRUCTURE
DESIGN
ROXHILL East Midlands Gateway
Strategic Rail Freight Interchange
HIGHWAY IMRPOVEMENTS GEOMETRIC DESIGN STRATEGY RECORD
BWB Consulting Ltd Registered in England 5265863
consultancy | environment | infrastructure | buildings www.bwbconsulting.com
TRANSPORT &
INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN East Midlands Gateway
Strategic Rail Freight Interchange
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS
GEOMETRIC DESIGN STRATEGY RECORD
Birmingham Livery Place, 35 Livery Street, Colmore Business District Birmingham, B3 2PB +44 (0)121 233 3322
Leeds Whitehall Waterfront, 2 Riverside Way Leeds LS1 4EH +44 (0)113 233 8000 London 15 Weller Street
London, SE1 1QU
+44 (0)20 7234 9122 Manchester 4th Floor Carvers Warehouse, 77 Dale Street Manchester, M1 2HG
+44 (0)161 233 4260 Nottingham 5TH Floor, Waterfront House, Station Street Nottingham,NG2 3DQ +44 (0)115 9241100
www.bwbconsulting.com
PROJECT NUMBER: NTH2058 REPORT REFERENCE: NTH2058 DRT
VERSION DATE AUTHOR CHECK APPROVE COMMENTS
1 11.04.2014 S. Hilditch D. Mackrory D. Mackrory Issued with departure applications
2 23.07.2014 S. Hilditch S. Dunhill D. Mackrory Amended to reflect latest scheme design
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 3
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................. 5
Introduction .......................................................................................................... 5
Overview of the Scheme ......................................................................................... 5
2.0 GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS ....................................................................... 8
Existing situation ................................................................................................... 8
Standards used ..................................................................................................... 8
3.0 HORIZONTAL DESIGN OF LINKS ....................................................................... 10
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link .......................................................................... 10
A50EB to M1 J24 interchange link .......................................................................... 13
M1SB to J24 interchange link ................................................................................ 14
Extension to existing M1SB to A50WB interchange link ............................................. 17
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50 WB interchange link ................................... 17
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge .......................................... 19
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road ............................................................ 21
A453 Northbound (South of J24) ........................................................................... 22
A453 Southbound (South of J24) ........................................................................... 23
A6 Kegworth Bypass ............................................................................................ 24
4.0 SIGHT DISTANCE ON LINKS ............................................................................. 28
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link .......................................................................... 28
A50 EB to M1 J24 interchange link ......................................................................... 28
M1 SB to J24 interchange link ............................................................................... 28
Extension to existing M1 SB to A50 WB interchange link ........................................... 29
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50 WB interchange link ................................... 29
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge .......................................... 30
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road ............................................................ 30
A453 Northbound (South of J24) ........................................................................... 30
A453 Southbound (South of J24) ........................................................................... 31
A6 Kegworth Bypass ............................................................................................ 31
5.0 VERTICAL ALIGNMENT OF LINKS ...................................................................... 33
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link .......................................................................... 33
A50EB to M1 J24 interchange link .......................................................................... 34
M1SB to M1 J24 interchange link ........................................................................... 34
Extension to existing M1SB to A50WB interchange link ............................................. 35
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50WB interchange link .................................... 35
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge .......................................... 35
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road ............................................................ 35
A453 Northbound (South of J24) ........................................................................... 36
A453 Southbound (South of J24) ........................................................................... 36
A6 Kegworth Bypass ............................................................................................ 37
6.0 CROSS SECTION OF LINKS ............................................................................... 41
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link (IL2C and IL1A) .................................................. 41
A50 EB to M1 J24 interchange link (IL1C) ............................................................... 42
M1 SB to J24 interchange link (IL1A and IL2C) ........................................................ 42
Extension to existing M1 SB to A50 WB interchange link (IL2A) ................................. 42
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50WB interchange link (IL2C) .......................... 43
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge (D4M for SB) ....................... 44
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road (MG1A) ................................................ 46
A453 (South of J24) ............................................................................................. 46
A6 Kegworth Bypass (S2) ..................................................................................... 46
7.0 M1 JUNCTION 24 ROUNDABOUT ....................................................................... 48
General Layout .................................................................................................... 48
A50 to A453 NB SLTL ........................................................................................... 49
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 4
A453 NB to A50 SLTL ........................................................................................... 50
Abnormal Load Bay .............................................................................................. 52
8.0 A453 DEVELOPMENT ACCESS / A6 KEGWORTH BYPASS JUNCTION .................. 53
9.0 A6 KEGWORTH BYPASS JUNCTIONS AND FEATURES ........................................ 54
Overtaking opportunities ...................................................................................... 54
Ashby Road Junction ............................................................................................ 54
Whatton Road Junction ......................................................................................... 54
Farm access points .............................................................................................. 55
Non-motorised user (NMU) crossing points ............................................................. 55
A6 London Road roundabout ................................................................................. 55
10.0 MOTORWAY SIGNALLING AND SIGNAGE .......................................................... 58
M1 Southbound ................................................................................................... 58
A50 Eastbound .................................................................................................... 63
11.0 SUMMARY OF DEPARTURES .............................................................................. 64
12.0 REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 69
Figures 3.1 to 3.4 – TD22/06 Merge and Diverge Assessments .................................. 70
Appendix A – Scheme layout drawings ....................................................................... 71
Appendix B – Long section drawings .......................................................................... 72
Appendix C – Cross section drawings ......................................................................... 73
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 5
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Introduction
1.1 BWB Consulting have been appointed by Roxhill to undertake the design of the major
improvement to M1 Junctions 24 and 24A (“the Scheme”) that is associated with their
Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (SRFI) known as East Midlands Gateway (EMG). The
location of the scheme is shown on Figure 1.1.
1.2 The M1, A50 and A453 are part of the strategic trunk road network that is maintained
and operated by the Highways Agency (HA) on behalf of the Secretary of State for
Transport.
1.3 The report is based on the following information:
Highways Agency design standards listed in Chapter 2 below
Topographical survey information prepared by Greenhatch
OS mapping, aerial photos and Google Streetview
Various site visit carried out during 2012 to 2014
1.4 The purpose of this report is to confirm the strategy for the geometric design for the new
slip roads. The strategy is prepared in accordance with IAN149/11 “Existing Motorway
Minimum Requirements” paras 1.13-1.16. Although only the M1 is classed as an existing
motorway, the DSR will cover the entire J24 and J24A improvement scheme, A453 site
access junction and the A6 Kegworth Bypass, as it serves to create a useful auditable
record of design decisions that have been made.
1.5 For each aspect of geometric design this report will describe the proposed geometry.
Where relaxations are proposed then a justification will be provided. Where departures
from standard are required, these will be highlighted and cross referenced to the formal
departure applications.
1.6 This report does not include analysis of the local highway works that are to be designed
in accordance with the 6Cs design guide.
Overview of the Scheme
1.7 The purpose of the Scheme is to provide sufficient capacity on the highway network to
facilitate the development of the SRFI. The Scheme will:
Provide a ‘free-flow’ link from the A50 Eastbound to the M1 Southbound through
construction of a new merge onto the M1 at J24A. This has consequential changes to
the M1 J24 SB diverge slip road.
Improve the capacity of the M1 J24 roundabout with removal of the A50EB to M1SB
traffic and construction of segregated left turn lane from the A453NB to A50WB
Further improve the capacity of the M1 J24 roundabout with signalisation of the
A453SB approach.
Remove four existing conflicts on the A50 between J24 and J24A (Church Street
junction, Main Street junction, the Hilton Hotel access and a field access).
Provide a southern bypass for Kegworth.
Provide a new junction on the A453 between J24 and J23A to serve the Kegworth
Bypass and the SRFI development.
1.1 The scheme will involve the construction of and alteration to the following links:
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link
A50 EB to M1 J24 interchange link
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 6
M1 SB to J24 interchange link
Extension to existing M1 SB to A50 WB interchange link
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50 WB interchange link
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road
A453 Northbound (south of J24)
A453 Southbound (south of J24)
A6 Kegworth Bypass
1.8 Refer to Figure 1 for the site location plan. The drawings contained at Appendix A
show the scheme layouts.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 7
Figure 1.1 Location plan
EMG SRFI SITE
M1 J24 / J24A
IMPROVEMENT
A6 KEGWORTH
BYPASS & SITE
ACCESS
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 8
2.0 GEOMETRIC DESIGN STANDARDS
Existing situation
2.1 The M1 north of J24 is a dual 3 lane rural motorway and has a 120kph design speed,
south of J24 (to J23A) it is a dual 4 lane rural motorway and again has a 120kph design
speed.
2.2 The A50 west of J24A is a dual 3 lane all purpose road up to J2 (the A6 Derby Spur), and
has a 120kph design speed.
2.3 Between J24 and J24A the A50 north / west bound is effectively a 2 lane rural all-
purpose road with 70mph speed limit and 120kph design speed. South / east bound it is
effectively a 2 lane rural all-purpose interchange link with 50mph speed limit and 85kph
design speed.
2.4 The A453 north of J24 is currently a 2 lane rural single all purpose road with 100kph
design speed but is in the process of being widened to a dual 2 lane rural all purpose
road with 120kph design speed. This is due to open in mid 2015 and is assumed to be
fully open before this Scheme is constructed.
2.5 The A453 south of J24 is a dual 2 lane all purpose road with 120kph design speed.
2.6 The existing roundabout at J24 is currently being amended as part of the ‘Pinch Point’
funding programme. These works are due to be completed by early 2015 and are
assumed to be completed before this Scheme is constructed.
2.7 The M1, A50 and J24 roundabout have street lighting that is on during all hours of
darkness. The A453 is not lit apart from its immediate approaches to J24.
2.8 The A6 through Kegworth is a single carriageway of varying standard, and south of
Kegworth is a rural dual carriageway until just north of Hathern.
Standards used
2.9 The Scheme layout does not include any managed motorway technology and will thus be
designed in accordance with the following standards:
TA46/97 “Traffic flow ranges for use in the assessment of new rural roads”
TA91/05 “Provision for Non-motorised Users”
TD9/93 “Highway Link Design”
TD16/07 “Geometric Design of Roundabouts”
TD18/85 “Criteria for the Use of Gantries for Traffic Signs and Matrix Traffic Signals
on Trunk Roads and Trunk Road Motorways”
TD22/06 “Layout of Grade Separated Junctions”
TD27/05 “Cross-Sections and Headrooms”
TD41/95 “Vehicular Access to All-Purpose Trunk Roads”
TD42/95 “Geometric Design of Major/Minor Priority Junctions”
TD46/05 “Motorway Signalling”
TD50/04 “The Geometric Layout of Signal-Controlled Junctions and Signalised
Roundabouts”
TD51/03 “Segregated Left Turn Lanes and Subsidiary Deflection Islands at
Roundabouts”
TD69/07 “The Location and Layout of Lay-bys and Rest Areas”
IAN149/11 “Existing Motorway Minimum Requirements”
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 9
2.10 The A6 Kegworth Bypass will be designed to the above standards and an assessment of
the bypass is included in this report. However, other local roads will be designed to the
6Cs design guide that is used by Leicestershire County Council (LCC), the local highway
authority. Analysis of the roads designed to the 6Cs standard is not included in this
report.
2.11 The use of the above standards is described in detail in the following chapters.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 10
3.0 HORIZONTAL DESIGN OF LINKS
3.1 The interchange links roads consist of various elements, the link itself and the upstream
or downstream diverge or merge. Each element of each interchange link is analysed
below.
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link
3.2 The link commences at the eastern end of the dual 3 lane all-purpose A50 at the back of
the nose of the diverge of the A50EB to M1NB interchange link. This diverge is
unaffected by the Scheme, but is a Diverge Layout C (lane drop) and it generally meets
the requirements of TD22/06 with the exception of a lack of near straight on the A50 EB
to M1 NB interchange link downstream of the diverge nose. However, as this link is
unaffected by the Scheme a departure is not required.
3.3 The link will be an all-purpose road until the proposed fork, downstream of which it will
be under motorway regulations.
3.4 The design speed for this link is 85kph which is derived from TD22/06 Table 4/1.
Horizontal alignment
3.5 The following table summarises the horizontal alignment elements for the interchange
link. The details of any junction features including merges and diverges are itemised
separately below.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
59.533-
102.292m
Transition
curve to
right hand
curve
~85m length
transition curve
designed to 120kph
design speed
(TD22/06 para 4.6)
~43m length
transition
curve to
1440m radius
Relaxation of q to 0.6m
permitted by TD9/93
para 3.16 due to
geometrical constraints
102.292-
276.539m
Right hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 1440m radius None
276.539-
319.298m
Transition to
straight
No curve needed as
radius is 1440m for
85kph design speed
None
proposed None
319.298-
515.465m Straight None
455.883-
526.983m
Quarry
access
junction
See below See below
515.465-
639.865m
Transition
curve to
right hand
curve
~244m length
transition curve
~122m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to 0.6m
permitted by TD9/93
para 3.16 due to
geometrical constraints
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 11
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
639.865-
828.687m
Right hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 180m radius
3 steps below desirable
minimum is a permitted
relaxation. Required in
order to provide
junction within overall
land and existing
highway constraints.
However, this
relaxation in
conjunction with the
relaxation for stopping
sight distance noted in
chapter 4 is a
departure from
standard and is dealt
with by departure
application EMG4.
828.687-
953.088m
Transition to
straight
~244m length
transition curve
~122m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to 0.6m
permitted by TD9/93
para 3.16 due to
geometrical constraints
953.088-
980.006m
Transition to
left hand
curve
~54m length
transition curve
~27m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to 0.6m
permitted by TD9/93
para 3.16 due to
geometrical constraints
Fork to
develop A50
EB to M1 J24
IL
See below See below
Downstream of the fork the interchange link is under motorway regulations
980.006-
1315.859m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 810m radius None
1315.859-
1391.600m Near straight
1020m min radius
over 115m length
Transition
from 810m to
3000m radius
Best fit curve complies
with near straight
requirements
1391.600-
1555.447m
Merge to M1
SB See below See below
Quarry access junction
3.6 The private means of access is designed to TD41/95 which permits direct vehicular
access to all purpose roads of design speed of 85kph or less. The direct access is located
on a straight as noted in the above table. The quarry access is only for vehicles
travelling eastbound on the interchange link and is an access only, with the egress sited
at J24. An egress at this location is not proposed due to the weaving length with the
downstream fork.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 12
3.7 Due to the fact that the quarry access will, by its nature, serve a significant number of
HGVs, and the flow on the main carriageway being significantly greater than 7000 AADT,
it is considered important that an auxiliary lane be provided to allow deceleration to take
place off the main carriageway. It is therefore proposed to design the quarry access in
accordance with TD42/95.
3.8 The provision of an auxiliary lane is proposed for the reasons stated above and follows
the advice given in TD42/95 para 7.56. The 2D geometrical design elements of the
access are summarised in the table below.
Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Direct taper
length 15m 15m None
Deceleration
length 55m 55m None
Fork for A50EB to M1J24 Interchange link
3.9 For the diverge of the A50EB to M1J24 interchange link from the A50EB to M1SB
interchange link, due to the balance of traffic flows, a single lane fork is considered to be
the most appropriate design. Forks are permitted within interchanges and should be
designed to TD22/06 para 4.31. TD22/06 Figure 4/7 gives the appropriate layout.
3.10 The 2D geometrical design elements of the fork are given in the table below.
Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Hardened offside verge
start taper length 40m 40m None
Nose length 40m 40m None
Minimum Nose ratio 1:12 1:8
1:8 is permitted and is
required to allow
downstream
hardshoulder width with
40m nose length, it is
not considered to give
an excessive angle at
the fork.
Hardened offside verge
end taper length 40m 40m None
M1 J24A SB merge
3.11 Traffic flows have been applied to TD22/06 Figure 2/3MW and Layout B or F is required
in the AM or PM peak hour accordingly. The flows are shown on Figure 3.1 of this
report.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 13
3.12 Due to the downstream weaving section, full details of which are given below, 4 lanes are
required downstream of this merge and as such a lane gain is required. Therefore from
TD22/06 Figure 2/3MW, Layout F would be appropriate. However, it is not possible to
construct a Layout F merge within the existing constraints as it would require
reconstruction of the existing bridge at M1 J24. IAN149/11 para 3.3.3 permits Layout E
to be substituted for Layout F as a relaxation. Due to the aforementioned constraints, a
Layout E merge is thus proposed for the Scheme. Note that this will require the
upstream link to have a single lane and this is dealt with in the Cross Sections chapter,
below.
3.13 The 2D geometrical design elements of the Layout E merge are given in the table below.
As this is a new slip road on an existing motorway, IAN149/11 is the relevant design
standard. The near straight is provided as shown above.
Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Nose length 115m 115m None
Minimum Nose ratio 1:40 1:29
1:29 is permitted and is
required to allow
upstream hardshoulder
width with 115m nose
length, it is not
considered to give an
excessive angle at the
merge.
3.14 The location of the merge is upstream from the merge for J24. As such, TD22/06 para
4.30 and Figure 4/5 apply (this is not amended by IAN149/11). This requires a
minimum distance of 3.75V m between the tips of noses for successive merges, where V
is the design speed. The M1 SB design speed is 120kph and therefore a minimum
distance of 450m is required. A distance of 830m is proposed for the Scheme.
3.15 Downstream of the merge the widening of the M1 SB to 4 lanes is assessed under the
paragraph “Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge (D4M for SB)” of this
report. This includes the weaving assessment.
A50EB to M1 J24 interchange link
3.16 This link commences at the end of the fork from the A50EB so M1SB interchange link and
continues to the merge with the M1SB to J24 interchange link. It will be an all-purpose
road throughout.
3.17 The design speed for this link is 85kph which is derived from TD22/06 Table 4/1.
3.18 The location of the merge with the M1 SB to J24 interchange link is downstream from the
fork from the A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link. As such, TD22/06 para 4.30 and Figure
4/5 apply. This requires a minimum distance of 3.75V m between the tips of noses for
successive merges, where V is the design speed. The interchange link design speed is
85kph and therefore a minimum distance of 319m is required. A distance of 369m is
proposed for the Scheme.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 14
Horizontal alignment
3.19 The following table summarises the horizontal alignment elements for the interchange
link. The details of any junction features including merges and diverges are itemised
separately below.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
432.259 –
528.138m
Transition
curve to
straight
(from radius
used at fork)
~172m length
transition curve
≥86m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to 0.6m
permitted by TD9/93
para 3.16 due to
geometrical constraints
528.138-
714.979m Straight None
Merge with
M1 SB to J24
IL
See below for M1 SB
to J24 IL
See below for
M1 SB to J24
IL
M1SB to J24 interchange link
3.20 This link commences at relocated M1 J24 southbound diverge and continues to the J24
roundabout. It is under motorway regulations until the merge with the A50EB to J24
interchange link and is all-purpose road downstream of this point.
3.21 The design speed for this link is 85kph which is derived from TD22/06 Table 4/1.
Horizontal alignment
3.22 The following table summarises the horizontal alignment elements for the interchange
link. The details of any junction features including merges and diverges are itemised
separately below.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
M1 J24 SB
diverge See below See below
0-
116.761m Near straight
1020m radius over
80m length
1020m radius
over 80m
length
None
116.761-
227.162m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 1020m radius None
227.162-
257.901m
Transition
curve to
straight
~43m length transition
curve
~30m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.42m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16 due
to geometrical
constraints
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 15
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
257.901-
319.379m
Transition
curve to
right hand
curve
~86m length transition
curve
~61m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.42m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16 due
to geometrical
constraints
319.379-
544.981m
Right hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 510m radius None
Merge with
A50 EB to
J24 IL
See below See below
Downstream of the merge the interchange link is an all purpose road
544.981-
606.460m
Transition
curve to
straight
~86m length transition
curve
~61m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.42m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16 due
to geometrical
constraints
606.460-
667.939m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~86m length transition
curve
~61m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.42m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16 due
to geometrical
constraints
667.939-
752.037m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 510m radius None
753.686-
815.165m
Transition
curve to
straight
~86m length transition
curve
~61m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.42m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16 due
to geometrical
constraints
815.165-
918.227m Straight
M1 J24 SB diverge
3.23 Traffic flows have been applied to TD22/06 Figure 2/5MW and Layout A is required. The
flows are shown on Figure 3.2 of this report.
3.24 The location of the diverge is downstream from the diverge for J24A. As such, TD22/06
para 4.30 and Figure 4/5 apply (this is not amended by IAN149/11). This requires a
minimum distance of 3.75V m between the tips of noses for successive diverges, where V
is the design speed. The M1 SB design speed is 120kph and therefore a minimum
distance of 450m is required. A distance of 620m is proposed for the Scheme.
3.25 Likewise, TD22/06 requires the same distance between the tips of noses for the M1 J24
SB diverge and M1 J24A SB merge. A distance of 678m is proposed for the Scheme.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 16
3.26 The 2D geometrical design elements of the Layout A diverge are given in the table below.
As this is a new slip road on an existing motorway, IAN149/11 is the relevant design
standard. The near straight is provided as shown in the table above.
Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Diverge taper 170m 170m None
Nose length 80m 80m None
Minimum Nose ratio 1:15 1:15 None
M1SB to J24 IL / A50EB to J24 IL merge
3.27 Traffic flows have been applied to TD22/06 Figure 2/3AP and Layout E is required. The
flows are shown on Figure 3.3 of this report. Due to the link becoming all–purpose road
south of the merge, the all-purpose diagram has been used – which is considered to be
more onerous than the motorway diagram.
3.28 The 2D geometrical design elements of the Layout E merge are given in the table below.
Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Nose length within
interchange 75m 75m None
Minimum Nose ratio
within interchange 1:25 1:11.5
1:11.5 is permitted and
is required to allow
upstream hardshoulder
width with 75m nose
length, it is not
considered to give an
excessive angle at the
merge.
Weaving length downstream of interchange link merge
3.29 There is a weaving section on the interchange link between the merge of the M1SB to
J24 IL / A50 EB to J24 IL, and the downstream signalised roundabout.
3.30 The minimum weaving distance for all-purpose roads, as defined by TD22/06 para 4.36
and 4.38, is 1km.
3.31 Based on TD22/06 Figure 4/10, the actual weaving distance proposed, Lact, is 447m.
This is a departure from standard and is dealt with by departure application EMG6.
Full justification is provided in the departure application together with proposed
mitigation measures. The principal reason for this departure is that there is insufficient
space for a longer weaving distance to be provided.
3.32 We note that, although it does not apply to this situation as it is not an existing
motorway, IAN149/11 permits the minimum weaving length to be reduced to the upper
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 17
graph in TD22/06 Figure 4.14 (IAN149/11 para 3.4.11). For comparison purposes if this
graph were followed then it would give a minimum weaving length of 250m.
Extension to existing M1SB to A50WB interchange link
3.33 The existing M1SB to A50WB interchange link runs from J24A to the existing roundabout
with the A50. This existing roundabout will be removed as part of the Scheme and thus
this existing interchange link will be extended to meet the M1 J24 to A50WB interchange
link at the existing merge on the A50, just west of the existing roundabout.
3.34 As the existing M1SB to A50WB interchange link is under motorway regulations, the
motorway regulations will be extended to the end of the link as it would be confusing for
drivers if the route standard were to change part way along the link.
3.35 The extension will run from the end of the existing link and will have a 85kph design
speed as required by TD22/06 Table 4/1. Note that the existing link, upstream of the
roundabout, has a 70kph design speed for much of its length as there is a 40mph speed
restriction in place on the existing loop.
Horizontal alignment
3.36 The following table summarises the horizontal alignment elements for the extension of
the interchange link. The details of any junction features including merges and diverges
are itemised separately below.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
0-
130.668m Straight None
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
No curve needed as
radius is 1440m for
85kph design speed
None
proposed None
130.668-
421.431m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius 1440m radius None
Transition
curve to
straight
No curve needed as
radius is 1440m for
85kph design speed
None
proposed None
3.37 Downstream of the above, the interchange link will use the existing A50 westbound
mainline up to the point where it meets the M1 J24 to A50WB interchange link at the
existing merge. This short section of existing A50 mainline meets the geometrical
standards for this interchange link, with the exception of cross section which is dealt with
below.
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50 WB interchange link
3.38 The Scheme will improve the existing M1 J24 to A50 WB interchange link through
removal of the following existing conflicts:
A50 / Church Lane junction
A50 / Direct farm access
A50 / Hilton Hotel private access
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 18
A50 / Main Street junction
3.39 These conflicts exist as a result of the history of this section of road as it was the A6 for
many years. As a result of the Scheme there will be no intermediate junctions or direct
accesses between M1 J24 and the downstream merge with the M1 SB to A50 WB
interchange link.
Segregated left turn lane (SLTL) from A453 northbound
3.40 The geometry of this SLTL is dealt with in a separate chapter below.
Horizontal alignment
3.41 The following table summarises the horizontal alignment elements for the improved
interchange link. The proposed alignment follows the existing alignment as noted below.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design (existing where
noted)
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Segregated
left turn lane
from A453
See below See below
62.032-
332.372m
Right hand
curve
510m desirable
minimum radius
340m
(existing)
Between 1 and 2 steps
below desirable
minimum – permitted
relaxation due to
alignment constraints.
However, this
relaxation in
conjunction with the
relaxation for stopping
sight distance noted in
chapter 4 is a
departure from
standard and is dealt
with by departure
application EMG13.
332.372-
461.419m
Transition
curve to
straight
~129m length
transition curve
~129m length
transition
curve
(existing)
None
461.419-
463.827m Straight None
463.827-
585.706m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~122m length
transition curve
~122m length
transition
curve
(existing)
None
585.706-
618.793m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius
360m radius
(existing)
1 step below desirable
min radius – permitted
relaxation due to
alignment constraints
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 19
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design (existing where
noted)
Details Relaxations /
Departures
618.793-
740.671m
Transition
curve to
straight
~122m length
transition curve
~122m length
transition
curve
(existing)
None
740.671-
861.121m Straight None
861.121-
982.999m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~122m length
transition curve
~122m length
transition
curve
(existing)
None
982.999-
1238.992m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable min
radius
360m radius
(existing)
1 step below desirable
min radius – permitted
relaxation due to
alignment constraints
1238.992-
1348.32m
Transition to
left hand
curve with
radius >
1440m
~122m length
transition curve
~122m length
transition
curve
(existing)
None
3.42 As can be seen from the above, the horizontal alignment of the existing interchange link
is generally considered to be acceptable but there is a need for one departure from
standard.
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge
3.43 As noted above, the Scheme will include widening of the M1 Southbound to 4 lanes
between the new merge at J24A and the existing merge at J24. From this point south
the existing motorway is already 4 lanes as far as the diverge for J23A.
3.44 The widening is required as a result of the weaving assessment as discussed below.
Horizontal alignment
3.45 The horizontal alignment of the M1 southbound between the J24A merge and J24 merge
is a long sweeping right hand curve of radius greater than 2880m, which is the minimum
radius that does require elimination of adverse camber or transitions for a 120kph design
speed. As such, no further consideration of the general horizontal alignment is required
M1 J24A SB merge
3.46 The geometry of the M1 J24A SB merge is dealt with above.
M1 J24 SB merge
3.47 Traffic flows have been applied to TD22/06 Figure 2/3MW and the flows plot within
Layouts E (AM) and B (PM), but are both close the boundary with Layout A. The flows
are shown on Figure 3.4 of this report.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 20
3.48 As there will be four lanes upstream, layout E is discounted. Following TD22/06 para
2.29, careful consideration has been given to the flows as to the choice between Layouts
B and A. As the merge is at a point where the mainline gradient is uphill and steeper
than 3%, Layout B is considered appropriate. Note that the criteria of TD22/06 para
4.29(ii) are not met to mean Layout B must be provided, but the gradient is a
consideration in the selection of Layout B for this element of the Scheme.
3.49 For junction capacity reasons, 2 lanes are required to leave the J24 circulatory
carriageway onto the J24 SB merge slip road. A reduction taper will therefore be
required in order for the Layout B merge to be provided, this is assessed in the cross
section chapter below.
3.50 Under TD22/06 para 4.23 the length of the auxiliary lane has been reviewed. The peak
hour traffic flows will be less than 85% of the capacity of this four lane section of
motorway, as such no lengthening is proposed.
3.51 Likewise, under TD22/06 para 4.25 the termination point of the auxiliary lane has been
reviewed. The uphill gradient does not require a climbing lane and, whilst the gradient is
steeper than 2%, the %HGV is less than 10% and the crest is significantly beyond 500m
past the end of the standard auxiliary lane. As such the termination point of the auxiliary
lane is considered to be correct.
3.52 The 2D geometrical design elements of the Layout B merge are given in the table below.
As this is an amended slip road on an existing motorway, IAN149/11 is the relevant
design standard. The near straight is provided as shown referenced below for the M1 J24
SB merge slip road.
Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Nose length 115m 115m None
Minimum Nose ratio 1:40 1:23
1:23 is permitted and is
required to allow
upstream hardshoulder
width with 115m nose
length, it is not
considered to give an
excessive angle at the
merge.
Auxiliary lane length 230m 230m None
Taper length 75m 75m None
Weaving length – J24A to J23A
3.53 The weaving distance between the proposed merge at J24A and existing diverge at J23A,
Lact, will be 2.5km. This is greater than the desirable minimum weaving distance of 2km
under TD22/06 para 4.35 which is the relevant standard for new schemes. However,
weaving calculation is required between the J24A merge and J23A diverge in accordance
with TD22/06 para 2.71.
3.54 The weaving equation (TD22/06 para 2.71) requires 3.87 lanes to be provided in the AM
peak hour, and 4.12 in the PM peak hour. Using these figures and following TD22/06
para 2.72 it is considered that 4 lanes is appropriate between J24A and J23A. As such,
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 21
the Scheme includes 4 lanes between the proposed J24A merge and existing J24 merge,
as four lanes already exist between the merge at J24 and diverge at J23A.
Weaving length – J24 to J23A
3.55 An assessment of the weaving length is required between the new merge at J24A,
altered merge at J24 and the downstream diverge at J23A.
3.56 The existing weaving length between the J24 merge and J23 diverge, Lact, is ~1.37km
which is measured in accordance with TD22/06 Figure 4/13 (the existing J24 merge is
Layout F1, the existing J23A diverge is Layout D1).
3.57 IAN149/11 para 3.4.10 states that where Lact is less than 2km, the existing distances
between preceding merge nose top and succeeding diverge nose tip must be maintained.
3.58 As noted above, the existing J24 Layout F1 merge is proposed to be amended to a
Layout B merge. When it is amended the existing nose does not need to be altered and
therefore the criterion set out in IAN149/11 para 3.4.10 is met. However, the weaving
length will be amended because the distance is calculated differently for Layout B
merges. The revised distance, Lactaltd, will be 1.46km an increase of some 90m.
Furthermore the J24 merge will carry less traffic than existing. Therefore the Scheme is
considered to have benefits in provision of increased weaving distances on the M1
southbound.
3.59 It is noted that the minimum weaving distance calculated using IAN149/11 para 3.4.11 is
~500m, and both existing and amended distances are greater than this figure.
3.60 Thus, as the weaving distance between the amended J24 merge and downstream J23A
diverge complies with IAN149, a departure is not required.
Combined weaving length – J24A & J24 to J23A
3.61 The combined effect of the merge at J24A followed by J24, in advance of the J23A
diverge is a situation, as far as weaving is concerned, that is not covered by existing
standards.
3.62 From a review of the VISSIM model, it is considered that a substantial majority of drivers
merging at J24A will have completed their merge onto the M1 prior to the merge at J24.
This being the case, then the J24A merging traffic can be counted as being on the M1
mainline prior to the J24 merge, and no further weaving calculations are necessary.
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road
3.63 With the construction of the Scheme, in particular the free flow A50 EB to M1 SB link, the
existing J24 SB merge will have a reduction in traffic flow over the existing situation and
will therefore be amended to be a single lane. The merge will be Layout B for the
reasons stated above.
3.64 The slip road will have a 70kph design speed in accordance with TD22/06 Table 4/1.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
0 –
106.456m Straight None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 22
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
No curve needed for
radius ≥ 1020m for
70kph design speed
None
proposed None
106.456 -
286.915m
Left hand
curve
360m desirable
minimum radius 1990m None
286.915 -
525.895m Near straight
1020m radius over
115m
> 1020m
radius for over
115m
None
Merge with
M1 SB See above See above
M1 J24 SB merge
3.65 The merge is assessed above under the M1 widening paragraph.
A453 Northbound (South of J24)
3.66 The A453 northbound between J23A and J24 will be amended due to the construction of
the proposed development access / A6 Kegworth bypass junction. The approach to J24
will also be amended with the construction of the segregated left turn lane (SLTL) to the
M1 J24 – A50WB IL.
3.67 The A453 between a point south of the proposed junction, and J24, will have a 50mph
speed limit and the design speed is therefore taken to be 85kph unless stated otherwise
below.
3.68 The following table assess the horizontal alignment of the A453 that is affected by the
scheme. It does not include the SLTL as this is dealt with separately.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
0-
163.463m
Right hand
curve
1020m desirable
minimum radius
(120kph design speed
changes to 85kph
towards end of the
curve)
2450m None
Transition
curve to
straight
No curve needed for
radius ≥ 1440m for
85kph design speed
None
proposed None
163.463 -
281.209m Straight None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 23
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
281.209 –
600.352m
Proposed
development
access / A6
Kegworth
Bypass
junction
TD50/04 Refer to separate assessment for the
junction design
600.352 –
795.228m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable
minimum radius 705m None
795.228 –
830.775m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~62m Transition
length
≥31m
Transition
Length
Relaxation of q to 0.6m
permitted by TD9/93
para 3.16 due to
geometrical constraints
830.775m
–
1355.362m
Existing
horizontal
alignment
retained
No changes to existing geometry
1355.362
–
1512.474m
Right hand
curve
510m desirable
minimum radius 220m
Between 2 and 3 steps
below desirable
minimum. This is a
permitted relaxation
under TD9/93 para 3.4
Segregated
left turn lane
to A50 WB
TD51/03 Refer to separate assessment for the
SLTL design
Lay-bys
3.69 The existing lay-by close to J24 will be removed as part of the Scheme. It is noted that
this existing lay-by does not conform to the requirements of TD69/07.
3.70 The existing lay-by close to J23A will be retained as part of the Scheme. This is currently
less than 450m from J23A and approx 450m from the Ashby Road junction. Its
proximity to J23A does not conform to the requirements of TD69/07 but this is
unaffected by the Scheme. It will be more than 450m from the proposed A453 /
development access / Kegworth Bypass junction.
A453 Southbound (South of J24)
3.71 The A453 southbound between J24 and J23A will be amended due to the construction of
the proposed development access / A6 Kegworth bypass junction. The exit from J24 will
also be amended with the removal of the third lane that is currently being constructed as
part of the pinch point scheme.
3.72 The A453 between J24 and a point south of the proposed junction will have a 50mph
speed limit and the design speed is therefore taken to be 85kph unless stated otherwise
below.
3.73 The following table assess the horizontal alignment of the A453 that is affected by the
scheme.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 24
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
Existing
horizontal
alignment
retained
No changes to existing geometry
0 –
111.733m
Left hand
curve
510m desirable
minimum radius 1020m None
111.733 –
471.046m
Proposed
development
access / A6
Kegworth
Bypass
junction
TD50/04 Refer to separate assessment for the
junction design
471.046 -
521.702m
Right hand
curve
510m desirable
minimum radius 648m None
521.702 –
593.870m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~61m transition length
curve
≥61m
transition
length curve
None
Existing
horizontal
alignment
retained
Note design speed
changes to 120kph No changes to existing geometry
Lay-bys
3.74 The existing lay-by south of J24 will be retained as part of the scheme. TD69/07 para
3.7 requires a lay-by to be 3.75Vm away from a junction or access, where V is the
design speed. As the design speed will be 85kph, the lay-by will need to be 318.75m
away from both J24 and the proposed junction. Assuming the distance is measured from
the start or end of the lay-by taper, for the upstream and downstream respectively, then
the proposed distances are:
Upstream: 372m between exit from J24 roundabout and start of lay-by taper
Downstream: 471m between end of lay-by taper and private means of access (which
is just before the proposed junction)
3.75 It is therefore confirmed that retention of the existing lay-by would not require a
departure from TD69/07. Any signage related to the proposed junction will be provided
after the lay-by to comply with TD69/07 para 3.7.
3.76 The existing lay-by close to J23A will be retained as part of the Scheme. This is currently
less than 450m from J23A and approx 450m from the Ashby Road junction. Its
proximity to J23A does not conform to the requirements of TD69/07 but this is
unaffected by the Scheme. It will be more than 450m from the proposed A453 /
development access / Kegworth Bypass junction.
A6 Kegworth Bypass
3.77 The bypass will run from the A453 west of the M1, by the existing A453 / Ashby Road
junction, to the existing A6. The designs of the junctions are assessed separately.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 25
3.78 The link will be all purpose single carriageway (S2). In accordance with TD9/93 para
1.6, the design speed has been determined by calculating the layout constraint (Lc) and
alignment constraint (Ac). These have been calculated using the methodology contained
in TD9 and are:
Lc: 21
Ac: 10.9
3.79 Using the above factors, a design speed of 100A (100kph Band A) for the link has been
determined using TD9/93 Figure 1.
Horizontal alignment
3.80 The following table summarises the horizontal alignment elements for the interchange
link. The details of any junction features are itemised separately below. The elements
are analysed heading east.
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
0-246.171m Straight None
162.967m Ashby Road
junction TD42/95
See junction
assessment
below
246.171- 386.259m
Transition
curve to
right hand
curve
~140m length
transition curve
~140m
length
transition
curve
None
386.259-578.365m Right hand
curve
720m desirable
min radius 510m radius
1 step below
desirable min radius
– permitted
relaxation due to
alignment
constraints
575.400-648.409m Transition to
straight
~140m length
transition curve
~70m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.6m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16
due to geometrical
constraints
648.409-718.453m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~140m length
transition curve
~70m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.6m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16
due to geometrical
constraints
732.536m
Whatton
Road
junction
TD42/95
See junction
assessment
below
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 26
Chainage Element Standard
Proposed Design
Details Relaxations /
Departures
718.453-911.668m Left hand
curve
720m desirable
min radius 510m radius
1 step below
desirable min radius
– permitted
relaxation due to
alignment
constraints
911.668-981.712m Transition to
straight
~140m length
transition curve
~70m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.6m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16
due to geometrical
constraints
981.712-1055.866 Straight None
1055.866-1125.910m
Transition
curve to left
hand curve
~140m length
transition curve
~70m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.6m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16
due to geometrical
constraints
1125.910-1505.950m Left hand
curve
720m desirable
min radius 510m radius
1 step below
desirable min radius
– permitted
relaxation due to
alignment
constraints
1505.950-1575.994m Transition to
straight
~140m length
transition curve
~70m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.6m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16
due to geometrical
constraints
1575.994-1675.223m
Transition
curve to
right hand
curve
~198m length
transition curve
~99m length
transition
curve
Relaxation of q to
0.6m permitted by
TD9/93 para 3.16
due to geometrical
constraints
1675.223-1683.440m Right hand
curve
720m desirable
min radius 360m radius
2 step below
desirable min radius
– permitted
relaxation due to
alignment
constraints
1683.440-
1723.135m Straight None
1723.135
London
Road
roundabout
TD16/07
See junction
assessment
below
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 27
3.81 Note that relaxations in horizontal alignment are permitted on the immediate approaches
to junctions. TD9/93 para 1.26 only places this restriction on stopping sight distance and
vertical curvature.
3.82 The horizontal alignment does not have any radii in Band C of TD9/93 Figure 24 and the
radii used are considered to be non-overtaking sections.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 28
4.0 SIGHT DISTANCE ON LINKS
4.1 The stopping sight distance is assessed for each of the links identified above. Note that
visibility to traffic signals or roundabout give way lines are assessed separately.
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link
4.2 As noted in chapter 3 above, the design speed is 85kph and thus the desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is 160m as per TD9/93 Table 3. The stopping sight distance
along the link is assessed in the table below. Under TD22/06 para 4.17, from the back of
the M1 SB merge nose the mainline stopping sight distance applies which is 295m.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0-
Immediate
approach to
quarry access
junction
≥160m None
455.908-
697.150m None
≥160 to
high object
Min 90m to
low object
2 steps below desirable minimum SSD
is permitted under TD9/93 para 2.8.
However, this relaxation in conjunction
with the relaxation for horizontal
alignment radius noted in chapter 3 is a
departure from standard and is dealt
with by departure application EMG4.
- back of
merge nose
Immediate
approach to fork
and immediate
approach to M1
SB merge
≥160m None
Nose Merge ≥295m None
A50 EB to M1 J24 interchange link
4.3 As noted in chapter 3 above, the design speed is 85kph and thus the desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is 160m as per TD9/93 Table 3. The stopping sight distance
along the link is assessed in the table below.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0-End
Immediate
approach to
merge with M1
SB to J24 IL
≥160m None
M1 SB to J24 interchange link
4.4 As noted in chapter 3 above, the design speed is 85kph and thus the desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is 160m as per TD9/93 Table 3. The stopping sight distance
along the link is assessed in the table below.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 29
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0-End
Immediate
approach to
merge with A50
EB to J24 IL
Immediate
approach to
signalised
roundabout
≥160m None
Extension to existing M1 SB to A50 WB interchange link
4.5 As noted in chapter 3 above, the design speed is 85kph and thus the desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is 160m as per TD9/93 Table 3. The stopping sight distance
along the link is assessed in the table below.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0-End
Immediate
approach to
merge with M1
J24 to A50 WB IL
≥160m None
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50 WB interchange link
4.6 As noted in chapter 3 above, the design speed is 85kph and thus the desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is 160m as per TD9/93 Table 3. The stopping sight distance
along the link is assessed in the table below.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0-
441.419m
End of
segregated left
turn lane
120m
1 step below desirable minimum SSD is
permitted under TD9/93 para 2.8.
However, this relaxation in conjunction
with the relaxation for horizontal
alignment radius noted in chapter 3 is a
departure from standard and is dealt
with by departure application EMG13.
441.419 –
845.049m None ≥160m None
845.049 –
1419.051m None 120m
1 step below desirable minimum SSD is
permitted under TD9/93 para 2.8. Co-
incident with 1 step below desirable
minimum radius for horizontal
alignment which is considered to be an
acceptable combination of relaxations.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 30
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
1419.051 -
End
Immediate
approach to
merge with M1
SB to A50 WB IL
≥160m None
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge
4.7 The design speed of the M1 SB is 120kph and thus the desirable minimum stopping sight
distance is 295m.
4.8 A stopping sight distance of greater than or equal to 295m is already provided on Lane 3
of the existing motorway through Junction 24. This will be maintained as part of the
Scheme. As such there are no relaxations or departures from standard required for
visibility on the M1 southbound as a result of the Scheme.
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road
4.9 As noted in chapter 3 above, the design speed is 70kph and thus the desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is 120m as per TD9/93 Table 3. The stopping sight distance
along the link is assessed in the table below. Under TD22/06 para 4.17, from the back of
the merge nose the mainline stopping sight distance applies which is 295m.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0 – back of
nose
Immediate
approach to
merge with M1
SB
≥120m None
Nose Merge ≥295m None
A453 Northbound (South of J24)
4.10 As noted in Chapter 3 above the link will have a design speed of 85kph and the desirable
minimum stopping sight distance is 160m.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0 –
378.553m
Immediate
approach to
proposed signal
junction
≥160m None
476.204 –
1272.474m None ≥160m None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 31
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
1272.474 –
1512.474m
Immediate
approach to J24
roundabout and
SLTL
160m None
A453 Southbound (South of J24)
4.11 As noted in Chapter 3 above the link will have a design speed of 85kph and the desirable
minimum stopping sight distance is 160m.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0 –
116.300m None ≥160m None
116.300 –
356.300m
Immediate
approach to
proposed
junction
≥160m None
A6 Kegworth Bypass
4.12 As noted in Chapter 3 above the link will be all purpose single carriageway (S2) with a
design speed of 100kph.
4.13 The stopping sight distance in the eastbound direction of the link is assessed in the table
below.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
0-
155.135m
Immediate
approach to
Ashby Road
junction
See vertical alignment assessment
155.135 –
413.036m None ≥215m None
413.036 -
735.536m
Immediate
approach to
Whatton Road
junction
≥215m None
735.536-
1066.293m None ≥215m None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 32
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
1066.293-
1400.635m None ≥160m
1 step below desirable minimum SSD is
permitted under TD9/93 para 2.8. Co-
incident with 1 step below desirable
minimum radius for horizontal
alignment which is considered to be an
acceptable combination of relaxations.
1400.635-
1723.135m
Immediate
approach to
London Road
roundabout
≥215m None
4.14 The stopping sight distance in the westbound direction of the link is assessed in the table
below.
Chainage
Junction
features within
length
Proposed
SSD Relaxations / Departures
1723.135-
168.135m
Immediate
approach to
Whatton Road
junction
≥215m None
168.135-
0m
Immediate
approach to
A453 and Ashby
Road junctions.
See vertical alignment assessment
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 33
5.0 VERTICAL ALIGNMENT OF LINKS
5.1 The vertical alignment is assessed for each interchange link as noted below. The design
standards are taken to be TD9/93 and TD22/06 for all links, as amended by IAN149/11
for existing motorways.
5.2 Drawings showing the proposed longsections of the links can be found at Appendix B.
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link
5.3 As noted above the design speed for the interchange link is 85kph.
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
238.784 –
320.962m Sag curve 20 KF 201 KF None
320.962-
717.581m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
quarry access
55 KF 55 KF None
717.581 –
833.813m Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
fork
20 KF 20 KF None
833.813 –
1001.687m Grade
Immediate
approach to
fork
0.5% to 4% 0.8%
(uphill) None
1001.687
–
1073.576m
Sag curve 20 KF 20 KF None
1073.576
–
1206.766m
Crest
curve 55 KF 30 KF
1 step below desirable
minimum is permitted
relaxation, this is due
to alignment constrains
of this link passing over
the M1 SB to J24 IL
1206.766
–
1398.403m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
M1 SB merge
55 KF 55 KF None
1398.403
–
1486.520m
Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
M1 SB merge
20 KF 20 KF None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 34
A50EB to M1 J24 interchange link
5.4 As noted above the design speed for the interchange link is 85kph.
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard*
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
378.608 –
586.111m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
merge with
M1 SB to J24
IL
55 KF 55 KF None
586.111 –
640.842m Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
merge with
M1 SB to J24
IL
20 KF 20 KF None
M1SB to M1 J24 interchange link
5.5 As noted above the design speed for the interchange link is 85kph.
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
174.342m –
341.718m Grade 0.5 – 6%
0.5%
(downhill) None
341.718 –
388.128m Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
merge with
A50 EB to
J24 IL
20 KF 20 KF None
388.128 –
493.205m
Crest
curve 55 KF 55 KF None
493.205 –
529.673m Sag curve 20 KF ≥20 KF None
529.673 –
586.707m Grade 0.5 – 6%
1.6%
(uphill) None
586.707 –
684.891m
Crest
curve 55 KF 115 KF None
684.891 –
752.037m Sag curve 20 KF 30 KF None
752.037 –
918.227m Grade
Immediate
approach to
J24
roundabout
0.5 – 4% 3%
(uphill) None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 35
Extension to existing M1SB to A50WB interchange link
5.6 As noted above the design speed for the interchange link is 85kph.
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard*
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
0-
140.016m
Crest
curve 55 KF 52 KF
Just below desirable
minimum due to
alignment passing over
existing structure,
permitted relaxation.
140.016 –
222.648m Sag curve 20 KF 216 KF None
222.648-
338.363m
Crest
curve 55 KF 100 KF None
338.363-
476.622m Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
merge with
M1 J24 to A50
WB IL
20 KF 26 KF None
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50WB interchange link
5.7 The vertical alignment of this interchange link is dictated by the existing alignment.
There are no prominent crest curves or steep gradients on this alignment.
5.8 Based on the above it is considered that there are no relaxations or departures.
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge
5.9 The M1 southbound alignment will be retained as existing and has a sag curve through
Junction 24 followed by an uphill gradient of approx 3%. The widening of the M1
proposed as part of the Scheme will not include any significant alterations to the vertical
alignment. No existing departures from standard have been identified in relation to
vertical alignment.
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road
5.10 The improvement to the existing slip road will not include any significant changes to the
vertical alignment. No existing departures from standard have been identified in relation
to vertical alignment.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 36
A453 Northbound (South of J24)
5.11 As noted in Chapter 3 above the link will have a design speed of 85kph.
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
15.471 –
182.572m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
proposed
junction
55 KF 182 KF None
182.572 –
476.204m Grade
Proposed
junction 0.5-4% 0.5% None
476.204 –
701.307m
Crest
curve None 55 KF 30 KF
1 step below desirable
minimum Crest K
value. This is a
permitted relaxation
under TD9/93 para 4.9
701.307 –
769.270m Grade None 0.5-4% 8%
Permitted relaxation
under TD9/93 para 4.2.
See detailed
explanation for this
under the A453
Southbound
assessment, below.
769.270 –
836.323m Sag curve None 20 KF 20 KF None
5.12 North of the above, the existing vertical alignment is retained until the roundabout at M1
J24.
A453 Southbound (South of J24)
5.13 As noted in Chapter 3 above the link will have a design speed of 85kph.
5.14 North of the below, the existing vertical alignment is retained from the roundabout at M1
J24.
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
0 –
66.996m Sag curve None 20 KF 20 KF None
66.996 –
115.219m Grade None 0.5-4% 8%
Permitted relaxation
under TD9/93 para 4.2.
See detailed
explanation for this
below.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 37
Chainage
Vertical
alignment
feature
Junction
features in
section
Minimum
Standard
Proposed
Design
Relaxations /
Departures
115.219 –
230.898m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
proposed
junction
55 KF 30 KF
1 step below desirable
minimum Crest K
value. This is a
permitted relaxation
under TD9/93 para 4.9
but is not permitted on
an immediate approach
to a junction under
TD9/93 para 1.26. This
is a departure from
standard and is dealt
with by Departure
EMG9.
230.898 –
407.223m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
proposed
junction
55 KF 55 KF None
407.223 –
462.529m Grade
Proposed
junction 0.5-4% 0.94% None
462.529 –
526.718m Sag curve None 30 KF 100 KF None
526.718 –
581.304m Grade None 0.5-4% 1.58% None
5.15 An 8% gradient is proposed for approx 50m on the A453 between the proposed junction
and the existing Junction 24 roundabout. The reason for this is to enable the proposed
junction, which has to tie in to the A6 Kegworth Bypass that will bridge the M1 close to
the junction, to be on a relatively level plane. This is essential to avoid adverse camber
being created at certain points around the junction.
5.16 An 8% gradient is permitted as a relaxation but, as stated in TD9/93 para 4.2, increasing
the gradient above 4% can have an adverse effect on the capacity. The A453
Southbound (i.e. uphill) design flows in the AM and PM peaks are 879vph and 604vph
respectively. The standard capacity for a single lane on an all purpose dual carriageway
is 1600vph, and as the design flows are significantly less than 1600vph, it is not
considered that the 8% would have a detrimental effect on capacity.
A6 Kegworth Bypass
5.17 The design speed is 100kph as noted above and the proposed geometry is assessed as
follows:
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 38
Chainage Vertical alignment feature
Junction
features in section - Eastbound
Junction
features in section - Westbound
Minimum
Standard*
Proposed
Design Relaxations / Departures
0 –
320.842m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
Ashby Road
Immediate
approach to
A453
signalised
junction
and Ashby
Road
100 KF 55 KF
1 step below desirable
minimum crest curve is
permitted under TD9/93
para 4.9 but not on
immediate approach to
junction (TD9/93 para
1.26). A departure from
standard is therefore
required, which is
departure EMG17. This is
explained in detail below.
320.842-
485.608m Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
(but not
including)
Whatton
Road (N)
Immediate
approach to
Ashby Road
junction
26 KF 20 KF
1 step below absolute
minimum sag curve is
permitted but not on
immediate approach to
junction (TD9/93 para
1.26). Co-incident with 1
step below desirable
minimum radius which is
not a permitted
combination under TD9/93
para 1.24. A departure
from standard is
therefore required, which
is departure EMG18. This
is explained in detail
below.
485.608-
1344.655
m
Crest
curve
Immediate
approach to
Whatton
Road (N)
and (S)
Immediate
approach to
Whatton
Road (N)
and (S)
100 KF 100 KF None
1344.655-
1630.238
m
Grade
Immediate
approach to
(but not
including)
London
Road
roundabout
None 0.5-6% 5.2% None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 39
Chainage
Vertical
alignment feature
Junction
features in section - Eastbound
Junction
features in section - Westbound
Minimum
Standard*
Proposed
Design Relaxations / Departures
1630.238-
1694.238
m
Sag curve
Immediate
approach to
(but not
including)
London
Road
roundabout
None 26 KF 20 KF
1 step below desirable
minimum crest curve is
permitted under TD9/93
para 4.9 but not on
immediate approach to
junction (TD9/93 para
1.26). A departure from
standard is therefore
required, which is
departure EMG19. This
is explained in detail
below.
1694.238-
1723.135
m
Grade
Immediate
approach to
London
Road
roundabout
None 0.4-6% 2% None
Departure EMG17
5.18 A 1 step reduction in Crest K value, from 100 to 55 is proposed. This is on the
immediate approach to a junction and a departure is sought from TD9/93 para 1.26.
This is in order to minimise the height of the embankment to the south west of
Kegworth. The effect of this reduction in Crest K value would be that the object height,
visible at 215m, is 1.05m. This would mean that any vehicle exiting the Ashby Road
junction would be clearly visible to drivers on the Kegworth Bypass at the required
stopping sight distance and vice versa. Queuing traffic on the approach to the A453
signalised junction would also be visible.
5.19 In order to mitigate this departure, a 50mph speed limit is proposed on the bypass
between the A453 signalised junction (which will have a 50mph limit) and to the east of
the Ashby Road junction. This will have the effect of reducing the design speed to 85kph
on this section of the bypass. This is not considered to have a detrimental effect on the
operation of the bypass as it is only proposed close to the A453 junction.
Departure EMG18
5.20 Departure EMG18 is sought in order to minimise the height of the embankment to the
south west of Kegworth. It is therefore sought on environmental grounds. The sag
curve with KF of 20 is not used within the junction itself but is on the immediate
approach to the Whatton Road (N) junction as defined by TD9/93 para 1.26a. The
reduction in sag curve KF is not considered to affect visibility.
5.21 No mitigation is considered necessary as sight lines are not affected.
Departure EMG19
5.22 Departure EMG19 is sought in order to minimise the depth of the cutting and gradient on
the bypass to the south of Kegworth. The sag curve with KF of 20 is not used within the
junction itself but is on the immediate approach to the A6 London Road roundabout as
defined by TD9/93 para 1.26a. The reduction in sag curve KF is not considered to affect
visibility.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 40
5.23 No mitigation is considered necessary as sight lines are not affected.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 41
6.0 CROSS SECTION OF LINKS
6.1 The cross section is assessed for each of the links identified in chapter 3 above.
A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link (IL2C and IL1A)
6.2 The standard cross sections for the interchange link have been determined in accordance
with TD22/06 para 3.4 based on the traffic flows. As the interchange link changes
standard at the fork to the A50 EB to J24 interchange link, the cross section will change
at this point. As noted above, south of the fork motorway regulations will apply and this
will also affect the cross section.
6.3 The traffic flow on the interchange link between the fork and the M1 merge has been
assessed and, following TD22/06 para 3.4, the required section is IL2A. However, due to
the location of the upstream fork and downstream Layout E merge, there is insufficient
length for a 2 lane interchange link to be provided followed by a merge on the link itself,
prior to the merge with the M1. Therefore the proposed cross section is IL1A which
requires a departure from standard and is dealt with by departure application EMG5.
6.4 The details of the cross sections for the interchange link are given in TD27/05 Figures 4-
1b and 4-3c and are summarised as follows:
Section Verge
(m)
Hardshoulder /
hardstrip (m)
Lane 1
(m)
Lane 2
(m)
Hardstrip
(m)
Verge
(m)
IL2C 2.0 1.0 3.65* 3.65* 1.0 2.5
IL2A 1.5 3.3 3.65* 3.65* 1.0 2.0
IL1A 1.5 3.3 3.7 0.7 2.3
* may be reduced to 3.5m in accordance with TD9/93 3.14 where criteria therein apply
6.5 The cross section for the interchange link is analysed below:
Chainage Required
section
Proposed
section Relaxations / Departures
0–
287.244m IL2C IL2C None
287.244-
515.465m IL2C
See drawing
NTH/209/SK65
Reduction in NMU route width over
structure and reduction in offside verge
width mean that the cross section
requires a departure from standard
and is dealt with by departure
application EMG1.
515.465-
973.683m IL2C IL2C None
1014.616 –
1438.907m IL2A IL1A
requires a departure from standard
and is dealt with by departure
application EMG5
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 42
A50 EB to M1 J24 interchange link (IL1C)
6.6 The proposed cross sections for the interchange link have been determined in accordance
with TD22/06 para 3.4 based on the traffic flows and the required section is IL1C. The
details of the cross section for the interchange link ia given in TD27/05 4-3c and are
summarised as follows:
Section Verge
(m)
Hardshoulder /
hardstrip (m)
Lane 1
(m)
Lane 2
(m)
Hardstrip
(m)
Verge
(m)
IL1C 2.0 3.3 3.7 0.7 2.8
6.7 Cross section IL1C is provided in accordance with TD27/05 for the entire length of the
interchange link.
M1 SB to J24 interchange link (IL1A and IL2C)
6.8 The proposed cross sections for the interchange link have been determined in accordance
with TD22/06 para 3.4 based on the traffic flows. As the interchange link changes
standard at the merge with the A50 EB to J24 interchange link, the cross section will
change at this point. As noted above, north of the merge motorway regulations will
apply and this will also affect the cross section.
6.9 The details of the cross sections for the interchange link are given in TD27/05 Figures 4-
1b and 4-3c and are summarised as follows:
Section Verge
(m)
Hardshoulder /
hardstrip (m)
Lane 1
(m)
Lane 2
(m)
Hardstrip
(m)
Verge
(m)
IL2C 2.0 1.0 3.65* 3.65* 1.0 2.5
IL1A 1.5 3.3 3.7 0.7 2.3
* may be reduced to 3.5m in accordance with TD9/93 3.14 where criteria therein apply
6.10 The cross section for the interchange link is analysed below:
Chainage Required
section
Proposed
section Relaxations / Departures
0 –
(diverge to
merge)
IL1A IL1A None
(merge to
junction
approach)
IL2C IL2C None
6.11 On the immediate approach to the Junction 24 roundabout, three lanes are provided and
these are designed in accordance with the relevant junction standards.
Extension to existing M1 SB to A50 WB interchange link (IL2A)
6.12 The existing interchange link has a cross section of IL2A with the exception of the length
over the Warren Lane bridge up to the J24A roundabout, which has a cross section that
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 43
complies with the paved width of IL2C. This is an existing departure that is affected by
the scheme.
6.13 As noted above the interchange link will be under motorway regulations throughout its
length.
6.14 As the interchange link is greater than 1km a single lane interchange link is not
permitted (TD22/06 para 4.3), hence the correct cross section is IL2A. The details of the
cross section of the interchange link is given in TD27/05 Figures 4-1b and is summarised
as follows
Section Verge
(m)
Hardshoulder /
hardstrip (m)
Lane 1
(m)
Lane 2
(m)
Hardstrip
(m)
Verge
(m)
IL2A 1.5 3.3 3.65* 3.65* 1.0 2.0
6.15 The cross section for the interchange link is analysed below:
Chainage Required
section
Proposed
section Relaxations / Departures
0–
223.929m IL2A
See drawing
NTH/209/SK65
Reduction in hardshoulder width, offside
verge width and verge width mean that
the cross section requires a departure
from standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG2.
223.929-
386.593m IL2A IL2A None
386.593-
476.622m IL2A
See drawing
NTH/209/SK102
Reduction in hardshoulder width means
that the cross section requires a
departure from standard and is dealt
with by departure application EMG3.
6.16 As this is an existing motorway IAN149/11 applies. However, chapter 4 which deals with
cross sections, does not affect the standards for interchange links (para 4.1.2). As such,
para 4.7.3 which states that lengths of discontinuous hardshoulder must be limited to
30% of the relevant link length, does not apply to this interchange link. For reference,
the total link length is 1.6km of which 595m has a discontinuous hardshoulder, which is
37%. It is considered that the discontinuities are adequately addressed by departures
EMG2 and EMG3 noted above.
Improvements to existing M1 J24 to A50WB interchange link (IL2C)
6.17 The existing interchange link has a standard cross section that would meet D2UAP (dual
2 lane urban all-purpose road), but it is a rural all purpose road. One carriageway of the
D2UAP cross section does not meet the requirements which, as the link is longer than
1km, should be IL2C based on TD22/06 para 4.3.
6.18 The Scheme will improve the interchange link through removal of four junctions or direct
accesses as noted in Chapter 3 above. However, it is not proposed to upgrade the
entirety of the existing link. As the Scheme will affect the interchange link departures
from standard will be required for the existing issues.
6.19 The required cross section is IL2C which is defined as follows (TD27/05 Figure 4-3c):
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 44
Section Verge
(m)
Hardshoulder /
hardstrip (m)
Lane 1
(m)
Lane 2
(m)
Hardstrip
(m)
Verge
(m)
IL2C 2.0 1.0 3.65* 3.65* 1.0 2.5
* may be reduced to 3.5m in accordance with TD9/93 3.14 where criteria therein apply
6.20 The cross section for the interchange link is analysed below, refer to drawing
NTH/209/SK83 for proposed cross sections.
Chainage Required
section
Proposed
section Relaxations / Departures
0 –
316.62m IL2C
IL2C (with SLTL as
necessary) None
316.62 –
462.505m IL2C
As IL2C but has
kerbs and no
nearside or offside
hard strip (as
existing)
Lack of hardstrips means that the cross
section requires a departure from
standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG12.
462.505 –
565.214m IL2C
As IL2C but has
nearside kerb and
no nearside hard
strip (as existing
on nearside)
Lack of nearside hardstrip means that
the cross section requires a departure
from standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG12.
565.214 –
973.869 IL2C
As IL2C but has
kerbs and no
nearside or offside
hard strip (as
existing)
Lack of hardstrips means that the cross
section requires a departure from
standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG12.
973.869 –
1047.050m IL2C
As IL2C but has
nearside kerb and
no nearside hard
strip (as existing
on nearside)
Lack of nearside hardstrip means that
the cross section requires a departure
from standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG12.
1047.050 –
1145.063m IL2C
As IL2C but has
kerbs and no
nearside or offside
hard strip (as
existing)
Lack of hardstrips means that the cross
section requires a departure from
standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG12.
1145.063
to merge
with M1 SB
to A50 WB
IL
IL2C IL2C None
Widening of M1 SB between J24A merge and J24 merge (D4M for SB)
6.21 The existing M1 southbound between J25 and the merge at J24 is a 3 lane motorway and
the cross section complies with D3M. As noted above the Scheme will widen the M1
southbound to 4 lanes between the proposed merge at J24A to the existing merge at
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 45
J24, a distance of some 710m (excluding the J24A merge itself). The required cross
section is D4M, but as this is an existing motorway, the relevant standard is IAN149/11.
IAN149/11 permits relaxations to the cross section without the need for departures from
standard to be obtained.
6.22 As a starting point, required under IAN149/11 para 4.2.2, the required cross section is
D4M which is defined as follows (TD27/05 Figure 4-1a):
Section Verge
(m)
Hard
shoulder
(m)
Lane 1
(m)
Lane 2
(m)
Lane 3
(m)
Lane 4
(m)
Hard
strip
(m)
Central
reserve
(m)
D4M 1.5 3.3 3.65 3.70 3.70 3.65 0.7 3.1
6.23 The existing central reserve width, excluding hard strips, on the M1 southbound in the
vicinity of the scheme is generally 2.5m wide. This is a permitted relaxation under
IAN149/11 Table 4-1 Priority 2, which permits a central reserve width excluding hard
strips of 2.0m. As such the widening of the M1 southbound, except at the locations
identified below, will comply with D4M with the reduced central reserve width.
6.24 The cross section for the M1 southbound is analysed below:
Chainage
(Marker
Posts)
Required
section
Proposed
section Relaxations / Departures
185/636.046
–
185/496.973m
D4M
D4M with reduced
central reserve
width of 2.5m
Permitted relaxation under
IAN149/11 Table 4-1 Priority 2
185/496.973
–
185/325.003m
D4M IAN149/11 Table
4-1 Priority 11
Use of this section requires a
departure from standard and is
dealt with by departure application
EMG8.
185/325.003
–
185/265.407m
D4M
IAN149/11 Table
4-1 Priority 11 but
with full width
hardshoulder
Use of this section requires a
departure from standard and is
dealt with by departure application
EMG8.
185/265.407
–
185/084.885m
D4M IAN149/11 Table
4-1 Priority 11
Use of this section requires a
departure from standard and is
dealt with by departure application
EMG8.
(to M1 J24 SB
merge) D4M
D4M with reduced
central reserve
width of 2.5m
Permitted relaxation under
IAN149/11 Table 4-1 Priority 2
(J24 SB
merge)
D4M plus
Layout B
merge
D4M plus Layout
B merge with
reduced
hardshoulder
width
Requires a departure from
standard and is dealt with by
departure application EMG10 (does
not comply with TD27/05 para 4.9.6)
6.25 IAN149/11 para 4.7.3 states that discontinuities of the hardshoulder must be limited to
30% of the link length. The length of the M1 SB between the J24A merge and J24 merge
is 710m as noted above.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 46
6.26 IAN149/11 is unclear as to whether or not a ‘discontinuity’ includes the hatching of the
hardshoulder on the approach and exit from the constraint as shown on Figure 4-2. The
following table summarises the length of the discontinuity based on two methods of
calculation – including and excluding hatching where the hardshouler is 3m wide of
greater.
Length of
hardshoulder less
than 3m width
% of total link length
Including hatched areas
as part of ‘discontinuity’
174m (north bridge)
184m (south bridge)
Total: 358m
50%
Excluding hatched areas
as part of ‘discontinuity’
108m (north bridge)
118m (south bridge)
Total: 358m
32%
6.27 In either method of calculation, the length of discontinuity will be greater than 30% of
the link length and requires a departure from standard – this is dealt with by
departure application EMG8.
Improvement to M1 J24 SB merge slip road (MG1A)
6.28 The proposed cross sections for the interchange link have been determined in accordance
with TD22/06 para 3.4 based on the traffic flows and the required section is MG1A.
However, as a result of the junction capacity analysis, two lanes are required to leave the
upstream junction 24 roundabout. The existing slip road has two lanes with
hardshoulder but does not conform to MG2C. This is an existing departure from standard
that is unchanged by this scheme.
6.29 A slip road reduction taper between the existing cross section (substandard MG2C) and
required cross section MG1A will be provided prior to the Layout B merge. The slip road
reduction taper will comply with IAN149/11 para 3.3.7. From the point where the slip
road reduction taper commences, a standard 3.3m wide hardshoulder will be provided
and where the slip road has a single lane it will comply with MG1A plus the required
offside hatching to comply with IAN149/11 para 3.3.7.
A453 (South of J24)
6.30 The existing cross section for the A453 south of J24 is D2AP. With the exception of the
junction features, this cross section will be retained as part of this Scheme.
A6 Kegworth Bypass (S2)
6.31 From a review of TA46/97 Table 2.1, against the predicted opening year AADT flow of
15,000 vehicles (west of Whatton Road), a Wide Single 2 (WS2) lane carriageway is
suggested. However, TA46/97 does say that the flow ranges should be used flexibly.
There are safety issues associated with WS2 roads and it is not considered desirable to
design the bypass to this standard.
6.32 As a result of the above, a single 2 lane carriageway (S2) has been assessed using the
VISSIM modelling and this shows that the bypass will perform well during the peak hours
– refer to Report TMR4.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 47
6.33 The A6 Kegworth Bypass will be a rural all-purpose road and will have a cross section
that complies with S2 (TD27/05 Figure 4-3a).
6.34 With the exception of junction features, which are assessed separately, cross section S2
is provided throughout the length and thus no relaxations or departures are required for
the cross section. A footway / cycleway is proposed on the northern side of the link.
Climbing lanes
6.35 Consideration to the provision of a climbing lane is required on single carriageway roads
and these affect the cross section. The maximum gradient proposed on the bypass is
5.2%, which is below the 6% desirable maximum gradient (TD9/93 para 4.1).
6.36 TD9/93 para 5.9 states that a climbing lane can be considered if it can be justified where
there is a gradient steeper than 2% for more than 500m. This occurs in the westbound
direction at the eastern end of the bypass. In this location, there is a vertical rise of
28.5m over a distance of 660m.
6.37 TD9/93 requires a minimum length of climbing lane of 500m followed by a further 220m
past the point where the gradient reduces below 2%, followed by 200m of tapers.
Junctions are not permitted within the extents of climbing lanes or tapers. The Whatton
Road (S) junction is approximately 790m from the London Road roundabout, and only
some 100m past the point where the gradient drops below 2%. A climbing lane could,
therefore, not be provided in accordance with the requirements of TD9/93.
6.38 For single carriageways, there is a safety benefit in providing a climbing lane as they
permit overtaking. However, as noted in the chapter below, the overall route already
includes overtaking sections and as good overtaking opportunities exist on both sides of
the bypass, it is not required to provide one on the bypass itself.
6.39 As a result of the above analysis it is considered that there is insufficient justification to
provide a climbing lane on the Kegworth Bypass.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 48
7.0 M1 JUNCTION 24 ROUNDABOUT
General Layout
7.1 The layout of the roundabout complies with TD50/04. Lane widths have been widened
around the gyratory as necessary in accordance with TD42/95 Table 7/2.
7.2 Three lanes are shown over the south bridge – these are being constructed as part of the
pinch point scheme and require departures from standard that have been obtained by
others. This Scheme does not affect this section of the junction.
Visibility requirements for signals
7.3 With the exception of the local access road to Lockington, all entries to the roundabout
will be signal controlled. TD50/04 Paras 2.6 & 2.7 require that desirable minimum
stopping sight distance is provided on the immediate approach to the junction and this
shall include at least one primary traffic signal associated with each movement. The
visibility on the approaches are assessed below:
Approach
Design
speed (kph)
Des min
SSD (m)
Actual SSD
provided (m)
Departure from
standard?
A453 SWB 120 295 ≥ 295 No
A50 EB / SB with M1 SB 85 160 ≥ 160 No
A6 NB 85 160 ~80m
Yes – existing
departure unaffected by Scheme
M1 NB 70 120 ≥ 120 No
A453 NB 85 160 ≥ 160 No
7.4 Junction intervisibility will be provided at all traffic signals in accordance with TD50/04
para 6.11.
Local access road from Lockington
7.5 The local access road from Lockington, and the Hilton Hotel, will run along the line of the
existing A50 SB between J24A and J24. It will function as a priority controlled junction
onto the J24 roundabout and as such has to be designed in accordance with TD16/07.
The various geometrical parameters are assessed below. The design speed for this local
access road is 85kph.
Requirement Criteria Actual
provided
Departure from
Standard?
Visibility on approach 160m 86m Yes, departure
EMG22 – see below
Visibility on entry
70m at 15m
back from give way line
≥ 70m at 15m
back from give way line
No
Visibility to right on entry
70m from give
way line and
15m back from give way line
≥ 70m in both
circumstances No
Entry path curvature ≤ 100m ~ 65m No
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 49
Requirement Criteria Actual
provided
Departure from
Standard?
Entry angle 20º to 60º 44 º Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Entry radius 20m 20m Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Lane width on entry 3-4.5m 4.5m No
Departure EMG22
7.6 This is required due to the existing land constraints. The existing A50 SB approach to
the J24 roundabout does not have sufficient visibility on the approach and no land is
proposed to be taken from the hotel as part of the Scheme.
7.7 It is not considered that this departure will give rise to any significant issues as the local
access road will be lightly trafficked. As mitigation, suitable warning signs will be erected
in advance of the junction.
A50 to A453 NB SLTL
Consideration of segregated left turn lane (SLTL)
7.8 Serious consideration has been given to the provision of a segregated left turn lane
(SLTL) from the A50 – M1 J24 interchange link onto the A453 northbound. Whilst this
would be of little purpose in the existing situation as there is very little traffic from the
M1 SB to A453 NB, with the construction of the A50 to M1 interchange link, a SLTL for
A50 EB to A453 NB traffic could be appropriate.
7.9 The traffic flow data for the A50 entry arm to J24 is as follows:
AM PM
Left turning flow (vph) (L) 371 562
Total entry arm flow (vph) (F) 1869 1378
Number of lanes (E) 3 3
F / E 623 459
Is L > (F / E) ? No Yes
7.10 It can therefore be seen from the above that, following TD51/03 para 2.8, a SLTL should
be considered. However, even in the PM peak, L – F/E is less than 100 vehicles so it is
marginal.
7.11 The detailed traffic modelling for the junction has determined that a SLTL would not
improve overall junction capacity as it would deny the opportunity to provide a 3 lane
exit from the J24 circulatory carriageway onto the A453 NB.
7.12 If a SLTL were to be provided then it would need to have a merge exit onto the A453
whereas a dedicated lane would be preferred.
7.13 The proposed quarry egress joins J24 at the point where a SLTL would be located
resulting in an unusual situation.
7.14 For the above reasons, a SLTL is not included within the design.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 50
A453 NB to A50 SLTL
Traffic flows
7.15 A segregated left turn lane (SLTL) is proposed from the A453 Northbound onto the M1
J24 – A50 WB interchange link.
7.16 The traffic flow data for the A453 NB entry arm to J24 is as follows:
AM PM
Left turning flow (vph) (L) 1255 1736
Total entry arm flow (vph) (F) 1599 2209
Number of lanes (E) 4 4
F / E 400 552
Is L > (F / E) ? Yes Yes
7.17 It can therefore be seen from the above that, following TD51/03 para 2.8, a SLTL should
be considered. The detailed traffic modelling for the junction has determined that a SLTL
would improve overall junction capacity.
7.18 The SLTL is located at the end of a downhill gradient on the approach to the M1 J24
roundabout. However, the gradient on the immediate approach (as defined by TD51
para 2.29 and TD9) is less than 1% which is acceptable.
2D geometric Design – General Principles
7.19 The entry radius of the SLTL is 60m and the exit radius is 90m. From TD51/03 Table
2/1, a SSD of 120m should therefore be used in the design.
7.19.1 As the roundabout is to be signalised, and a controlled crossing provided, a physical
island is required for the SLTL.
7.20 The physical island length is approx 105m and therefore, from TD51/03 Table 2/2, the
carriageway width is determined to be 6.7m at the entry radius. As the exit radius is
larger than the entry radius, the width can be reduced in accordance with TD51/03 para
2.22. The SLTL width will therefore reduce to 6.4m at the exit radius.
7.21 However, a 3.5m lane width, as required by TD51/03 para 2.20, will be provided with the
nearside hatched accordingly.
7.22 A cycle lane along the SLTL is not proposed as there are no cycle facilities on the
upstream or downstream links. A wider review of cycle routes has been undertaken and
a route will be provided via the main development site and Lockington, thus avoiding the
busy J24 area completely.
7.23 There are no NMU crossings proposed on the SLTL and it will therefore operate in “free
flow” conditions at all times.
7.24 As the verge width for an D2AP cross section (i.e. the approach) and IL2C cross section
(i.e. the exit) is 2.5m in both scenarios, a verge width of 2.5m is proposed alongside the
SLTL.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 51
2D Geometric Design – Approach Layout
7.25 Following analysis of the flows it is considered that a dedicated lane on the approach will
provide the most suitable solute on.
7.26 The design speed of the approach is 85kph as a 50mph limit is proposed between J24
and the A453 / Site access / Kegworth Bypass junction. Using TD51/03 Table 2/5 an
entry taper length factor of 25 is therefore required. Following TD51/03 para 2.42 the
length of the entry taper is the greater of:
25 x the widening for HGVs, which is 25 x 3.2 = 80m
25 x (island width + 2 x 0.3m) which is 25 x (1.8 + 0.6) = 60m
7.27 An entry taper length of 80m is therefore required and this is included within the Scheme
design.
7.28 The widening for the HGVs is developed along the length of the entry taper as required
by TD51/03 para 2.42.
7.29 Due to the presence of traffic signals on the circulatory carriageway, the SLTL island
commences well in excess of the minimum 1.5m required by TD51/03 para 2.26.
2D Geometric Design – Exit Layout
7.30 The following is a summary of the design flows for the exit layout onto the M1J24 to A50
WB interchange link:
AM PM
From A453 NB 1255 1736
From J24 circulatory carriageway 1303 1320
7.31 Following a review of the above flows a dedicated SLTL exit lane is proposed. Two lanes
are required onto the exit from the J24 circulatory carriageway and, as there are only
two lanes on the downstream link, in order for the SLTL to have a dedicated lane a
merge on the exit from the roundabout is required.
7.32 The merge on the exit from the circulatory carriageway is designed in accordance with
TD51/03 para 2.51. The merge is completed prior to the end of the exit taper of the
SLTL, as required by this same paragraph.
7.33 The design speed of the exit is 85kph as determined by TD22/06 Table 4/1 for the M1J24
to A50 WB interchange link. Using TD51/03 Table 2/5 an exit taper length factor of 25 is
therefore required. Following TD51/03 para 2.42 the length of the exit taper is the larger
of:
25 x the widening for HGVs, which is 25 x 2.5 = 62.5m
25 x (island width + 2 x 0.3m) which is 25 x (1.5 + 0.6) = 52.5m
7.34 An exit taper length of 62.5m is therefore required and this is included within the
Scheme design.
7.35 The widening for the HGVs is removed along the length of the exit taper as required by
TD51/03 para 2.49.
7.36 Due to the merge on the exit from the circulatory carriageway, the SLTL island ends well
in excess of the minimum 6m required by TD51/03 para 2.26.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 52
Abnormal Load Bay
7.37 An abnormal load bay is proposed within the roundabout island. There are no specific
standards for abnormal load bays and they are found within roundabout islands
elsewhere on the network (such as at M6 J16).
7.38 This abnormal load bay is to replace the existing facility on the A50 east / southbound,
between J24A and J24, which will be cut off from the trunk road as a result of the
Scheme. The relocated bay will make use of part of the J24 pinch point scheme that is
currently under construction.
7.39 The relocated abnormal load bay will be provided with gates to deter inappropriate use
and a traffic regulation order will be used to enforce it. The details will be agreed with
the Highways Agency during the detailed design stage for the scheme.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 53
8.0 A453 DEVELOPMENT ACCESS / A6 KEGWORTH BYPASS JUNCTION
8.1 The layout of the signalised roundabout complies with TD50/04. Lane widths have been
widened around the gyratory as necessary in accordance with TD42/95 Table 7/2.
Visibility requirements for signals
8.2 All entries to the roundabout will be signal controlled. TD50/04 Paras 2.6 & 2.7 require
that desirable minimum stopping sight distance is provided on the immediate approach
to the junction and this shall include at least one primary traffic signal associated with
each movement. The visibility on the approaches are assessed below:
Approach
Design
speed
(kph)
Des min
SSD (m)
Actual SSD
provided
(m)
Departure from
standard?
A453 SB 85 160 ≥ 160 No
A453 NB 85 160 160 No
A6 (Kegworth Bypass) 85 160 ≥ 160 No
Development access 60 90 ≥ 90 No
8.3 Junction intervisibility will be provided at all traffic signals in accordance with TD50/04
para 6.11.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 54
9.0 A6 KEGWORTH BYPASS JUNCTIONS AND FEATURES
Overtaking opportunities
9.1 Due to the alignment of the bypass, which results from various constraints such as the
East Midlands Airport landing lights and general topography, the entire bypass is
considered to be a non-overtaking section and has been designed as such.
9.2 For single carriageway roads, TD9/93 para 7.20 requires an overtaking value of 30% to
be achieved for a Category 3 road (The bypass is considered to be a Category 3 road as
defined by TD9/93 Table 4). However, this only applies to new roads over 2km in length
which does not apply to the Kegworth Bypass.
9.3 TD9/93 para 7.23 does apply to this scheme. It is noted that the existing A6 is dualled
from a short way south of the eastern end of the proposed bypass to just north of
Hathern, and that the A453 is a dual carriageway where it runs parallel to the M1. North
of J24 all of the routes (A50, A453 and M1) are dual carriageways allowing overtaking.
It is therefore considered that there are contiguous sections of route that provide good
overtaking opportunities.
9.4 Due to the presence of roundabout junctions at either end of the bypass, it is not
considered that a lack of overtaking on the bypass itself will present a discontinuity of
the route. It is considered that the bypass will be of a much higher standard than the
existing single carriageway through Kegworth.
Ashby Road Junction
9.5 The connection to Ashby Road is designed in accordance with TD42/95. It is designed as
a rural simple junction as its use will be restricted to buses only.
9.6 The visibility standards used are an x distance of 4.5m and a y distance of 160m (to the
right) and 215m (to the left). The y distances vary as the Kegworth Bypass has a design
speed of 85kph (with 50mph speed restriction) between the A453 and this junction and
100kph between this junction and the existing A6. A relaxation in the x distance from
9m to 4.5m is permitted under TD42/95 para 7.8.
Whatton Road Junction
9.7 The connections to Whatton Road (north and south) are designed in accordance with
TD42/95. They are designed as a rural ghost island staggered crossroads junction.
Nearside diverging and merging tapers are not required.
9.8 The visibility standards used are an x distance of 9m and a y distance of 215m (as the
Kegworth Bypass has a design speed of 100kph). These comply with TD42/95 paras 7.3-
7.6.
9.9 The corner radii used are 15m with 30m tapers, as advised by TD42/95 para 7.17. A
channelising island is provided on the minor (Whatton Road) approaches.
9.10 The through lane widths used on the main carriageway are 3.65m and the turning lane
width is 3.5m.
9.11 The turning length, direct taper length and deceleration length are 10m, 25m and 80m
respectively, and are all in accordance with TD42/95.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 55
Farm access points
9.12 Direct access points into farmland are proposed from the Kegworth Bypass at 3 locations.
These will be generally designed to TD41/95 Layout 1. The visibility requirements are
assessed as follows:
Location Visibility splay
provided
Forward
visibility
restrictions
Land north of bypass, east of
Whatton Road 2.4m x 215m None
Land south of bypass, east of
Whatton Road 2.4m x 215m None
Land north of bypass, east of
Whatton Road 2.4m x 215m None
9.13 It is considered that relaxation of the x distance to 2.4m is appropriate given the low
usage of these accesses.
Non-motorised user (NMU) crossing points
9.14 Two NMU crossings are proposed over the Kegworth Bypass away from the junctions at
either end. These are at a) Whatton Road and b) Footpath L54.
9.15 The 2-way AADT for the bypass east of Whatton Road is approx 12,000. Under TA91/05
Table 6/1, this would mean that an at-grade crossing would be on the borderline
between “potentially appropriate” and “not normally appropriate”. It is therefore
proposed to provide a central refuge island at both crossing points which would result in
an at-grade crossing being assessed as “normally appropriate”.
A6 London Road roundabout
Consideration of segregated left turn lane (SLTL)
9.16 The traffic flow data for the A6 NB entry arm to the roundabout is as follows:
AM PM
Left turning flow (vph) (L) 550 587
Total entry arm flow (vph) (F) 978 1006
Number of lanes (E) 2 2
F / E 489 503
Is L > (F / E) ? Yes Yes
9.17 It can therefore be seen from the above that, following TD51/03 para 2.8, a SLTL should
be considered. Following a review of the traffic flows, it is considered that a SLTL will
give no benefit as it is a three arm roundabout and the left turn flow would need to give
way to the same right turning flow whether it is within the roundabout or at the give way
at the end of the SLTL. This is because a give way exit to the SLTL would be required as
there is only a single lane in each direction on the Kegworth Bypass (i.e. the layout has
to comply with TD51/03 para 2.48)
9.18 Furthermore, a SLTL would result in additional crossing requirements for NMUs which can
be avoided with a standard roundabout design.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 56
Review of roundabout geometry
9.19 The geometric parameters for the roundabout are assessed below for each approach.
The roundabout ICD is 50m.
Approach from Kegworth (Design speed: 60kph)
Requirement Criteria Actual
provided
Departure from
Standard?
Visibility on approach 90m ≥ 90m No
Visibility on entry
40m at 15m
back from give way line
≥ 40m at 15m
back from give way line
No
Visibility to right on entry
40m from give
way line and
15m back from
give way line
≥ 40m in both
circumstances No
Entry path curvature ≤ 100m < 100m No
Entry angle 20º to 60º 42º Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Entry radius 20m 20m Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Lane width on entry 3-4.5m 2 x 3m No
Approach from Kegworth Bypass (Design speed: 100kph)
Requirement Criteria Actual provided
Departure from Standard?
Visibility on approach 215m ≥ 215m No
Visibility on entry
40m at 15m
back from give
way line
≥ 40m at 15m
back from
give way line
No
Visibility to right on entry
40m from give
way line and
15m back from give way line
≥ 40m in both
circumstances No
Entry path curvature ≤ 100m < 100m No
Entry angle 20º to 60º 34º Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Entry radius 20m 20m Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Lane width on entry 3-4.5m 2 x 4m No
Approach from Loughborough (Design speed: 85kph – see below)
Requirement Criteria Actual
provided
Departure from
Standard?
Visibility on approach 160m 160m No
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 57
Approach from Loughborough (Design speed: 85kph – see below)
Requirement Criteria Actual
provided
Departure from
Standard?
Visibility on entry
40m at 15m
back from give way line
≥ 40m at 15m
back from give way line
No
Visibility to right on entry
40m from give
way line and
15m back from give way line
≥ 40m in both
circumstances No
Entry path curvature ≤ 100m < 100m No
Entry angle 20º to 60º 37º Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Entry radius 20m 20m Guidance as criteria
not in black box
Lane width on entry 3-4.5m 2 x 4m No
9.20 The design speed on the approach from Loughborough is taken to be 85kph as it is
proposed to provide a 50mph speed limit from the end of the dual carriageway up to the
proposed roundabout. This is because there is an existing accident problem where the
dual carriageway reverts to single carriageway near the Otter public house. In terms of
the Scheme, this will permit the forward visibility on the approach to the roundabout to
be 160m without a departure.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 58
10.0 MOTORWAY SIGNALLING AND SIGNAGE
10.1 Motorway signalling is present on the M1 corridor and on the A50 immediate approach to
J24A. The M1 southbound between J24 and J23a has gantry mounted lane signalling
(GMLS) together with strategic MS3 VMS signs related to the J23A diverge (for the A42).
Upstream of J24A the M1 southbound has strategic MS3 VMS signs.
10.2 The A50 immediate approach to J24A has GMLS.
10.3 TD46/05 is the standard for provision of motorway signalling but this has been
substantially altered by IAN149/11 for existing motorways.
10.4 The Scheme will affect the motorway signalling on the M1 southbound from north of the
J24A diverge to south of the J24 merge. It will also have an effect on the A50 eastbound
approach.
M1 Southbound
Review of existing signalling provision
10.5 Lane Signals are provided on the immediate approach to J24, through J24 and until after
the J23A diverge. These are control signals and do not display variable message speed
limits (VMSL). The signals are all gantry mounted (with the exception of start of entry
slip road control signals). The gantries do, however, have standard 2 line VMS mounted
on them.
10.6 Strategic 3 line MS3 signs are provided on the M1 southbound approach to J23A and
J24A.
10.7 Gantry mounted lane signals (GMLS) and VMS are currently located as follows:
Signal
type Location
Marker
Post (MP)
Meets
requirements
of IAN149/11
Existing
departures
Strategic
VMS
300m in advance of
Primary DS for J24A Unknown Yes None
Strategic
VMS
200m in advance of
Secondary DS for J24A Unknown Yes None
GMLS +
VMS
None provided at
Primary DS for J24 n/a No Yes
GMLS +
VMS
730m in advance of M1
SB J24 exit datum point 186/7B-25 No
Yes, should be
between 785m and
885m in advance of
exit datum point
(for ½ mile
secondary sign)
GMLS +
VMS
230m in advance of M1
SB J24 exit datum point 186/2B-50 No
Yes, should be at
exit datum point
GMLS +
VMS
M1 SB J24 exit
confirmatory signal 185/7B-30 Yes None
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 59
Signal
type Location
Marker
Post (MP)
Meets
requirements
of IAN149/11
Existing
departures
Strategic
VMS
M1 SB intra junction
J24 (but is related to
J23A) ~1890m before
J23A diverge exit
datum
185/2B-15 Yes None
GMLS +
VMS
intra junction J24 just
before J24 merge 184/9B+50
Yes as GLMS
spacing >
1200m
None
GMLS +
VMS
~70m beyond J24
merge / ~1120m
before J23A diverge
exit datum
184/4B+20
No (for signal
after the
merge)
Yes (for ⅔ mile
before J23A
diverge)
Yes as signal should
be 300m beyond
merge entry datum
point
Strategic
VMS
M1 SB strategic VMS
for J23A, ~900m before
exit datum
184/2B+5
Yes (in relation
to downstream
⅓ mile GMLS)
GMLS +
VMS
~550m before J23A
diverge exit datum 183/8B+43
Yes (for ⅓ mile
before J23A
diverge)
10.8 It is also noted that there is no 1 mile or ⅔ mile GMLS on the approach to J24 which is a
departure from IAN149/11 para 5.6.3 which requires lane signals at the primary direction
sign. It is, however, noted that this is complicated by the upstream diverge for J24A.
10.9 IAN149/11 para 5.6.1 has amended TD46 with regards to requirements for lane signals.
TD46 required their use on all 4 lane motorways but they are now only located in certain
locations. However, one of these situations is “On the approaches to strategic road
network interchanges, where a diversion route is available”. It is considered that this
applies to the J24 SB diverge.
Proposed signalling
10.10 It is proposed to retain the lane control signals on the M1 southbound approach to J24 as
the parallel A453 functions as a diversion route. There is no requirement for these to be
upgraded to Variable Message Lane Signals (VMLS) as the Scheme will not include part
or full time running of the hardshoulder. As noted above, departures for reduced cross
section will be sought where a hardshoulder cannot be provided. It is noted that control
signals are provided on the M1 southbound to J23A and retention of the signals on the
approach to J24 will maintain consistency. The provision of gantries at required spacings
will also allow future implementation of VMSL if desired by the Highways Agency.
10.11 The Scheme does not propose to provide GMLS on the southbound approach to J24A as
this is not provided at present, and there is no requirement under IAN149/11 for it to be
provided.
10.12 The following summarises the proposed signalling on the M1 southbound as a result of
the Scheme:
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 60
Signal
type Location
Meets
requirements
of IAN149/11
Reasoning Departure
required
Strategic
VMS
300m in advance of
Primary DS for J24A Yes None
Strategic
VMS
200m in advance of
Secondary DS for J24A Yes None
None
At ⅔ mile in advance
of M1 SB J24 exit
datum point
No
Due to J24A
diverge (as
existing)
Yes, departure
from standard is
required, see
departure EMG15.
None
At ⅓ mile in advance
of M1 SB J24 exit
datum point
No
Due to J24A
diverge (as
existing)
Yes, departure
from standard is
required, see
departure EMG15.
GMLS +
VMS
400m (¼ mile) in
advance of M1 SB J24
exit datum point
No as should be
515m – 590m
for ⅓ mile
secondary ADS
Co-located
with
confirmatory
direction sign
for J24A
diverge
Yes, departure
from standard is
required, see
departure EMG14.
GMLS (no
VMS)
50m downstream if
exit datum point No
Due to
proximity of
upstream
bridge and
overhead
power lines
Yes, departure
from standard is
required, see
departure EMG16.
GMLS +
VMS
50m downstream of
diverge nose tip Yes None
GMLS +
VMS
~225m downstream of
merge nose tip Yes None
Strategic
VMS
(existing)
M1 SB intra junction
J24 (but is related to
J23A) ~1890m before
J23A diverge exit
datum
Yes None
GMLS +
VMS
(existing)
~80m beyond J24
merge / ~1120m
before J23A diverge
exit datum
No
Does not
comply with
distance of
300m past
merge entry
datum point
Yes, departure
from standard is
required, see
departure EMG11.
10.13 All existing VMS and GMLS downstream of the above are retained and are unaffected by
the Scheme.
10.14 There is no requirement for an intra-junction J24 GMLS as the distance between the new
J24A merge GMLS and existing J24 merge GMLS is ~1km.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 61
10.15 In addition to the above, entry slip road control signals (MS1) are proposed in the verges
at the start of the proposed J24A merge slip road. The existing entry slip road control
signals at the J24 SB merge will be retained.
Relevant standards for signage
10.16 The signage on the M1 southbound is affected by the relocation of the J24 SB diverge slip
road northwards towards J24A. As noted in Chapter 2 above, the minimum spacing of
the successive diverges complies with TD22/06 but the signage needs to be reviewed
against IAN149.
10.17 TD18/85 gives the criteria for where gantry mounted directional signage should be used.
Gantries are currently used on the approach to J24 but not J24A. TD18/85 is not
amended by IAN149/11 for existing motorways.
10.18 TD18/85 chapter 5 gives the criteria that should be met before using gantry mounted
signage. The most relevant criteria in the case of J24A, J24 and J23A is the use of
gantries to alleviate possible dangerous situations (para 5.2), and para 5.2.2 states that
one of these criteria is “Where a series of junctions are (an average of) less than 3 km
apart measured between centres of junctions”. The spacing between diverges on this
section of the M1 southbound is:
J25 to J24A: ~7km
J24A to J24 (existing): 1.2km
J24A to J24 (as a result of the Scheme): 0.62km
J24 to J23A (existing): 2.6km
J24 to J23A (as a result of the Scheme): 3.18km
10.19 As can be seen from the above, the spacing of the diverges for J24 and J23A from the
upstream diverge are an average of 1.9km; it is thus reasonable that the existing
signage uses gantries for J24 and J23A.
10.20 TD22/06 states that “A full sequence of gantry direction signing is essential for a Ghost
Island diverge layout.” Therefore where ghost island diverges are used gantries must be
provided. This means that gantries are required for J23A irrespective of the criteria in
TD18/85.
Proposed signage
10.21 Based on the criteria in TD18/85, it is considered appropriate that gantries are used for
the J24 diverge as present. However, as the J24A diverge is unaffected by the Scheme,
and it is a reasonable distance from J25, gantry signage is not proposed for this diverge.
10.22 Due to the spacing of the diverges for J24A and J24 the signage needs to be considered
together.
10.23 Use of gantry signage for the J24 diverge would be consistent with the strategy for
gantry mounted lane signals as noted above.
10.24 The table below summarises the sequence of primary signage for the M1 southbound
approaches to both M1 J24A and J24. The signage proposals are shown on drawing
NTH/209/SK67.
10.25 It is noted that IAN149/11 does not cater for this kind of situation as it states that
primary and secondary signs must only be provided at 1 mile and ½ mile, or 2/3 mile
and 1/3 mile, and that a departure is required for any other combination or variation.
This is consistent with TD22/06 para 5.37.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 62
Distance in
advance of
J24A diverge
exit datum
point
Distance in
advance of
J24 diverge
exit datum
point
Sign type Sign complies
with TSRGD Departure required
1 mile 1⅓ mile
Verge
mounted
double
diverge sign
Yes
Yes, departure from
standard is required due to sign showing 1⅓ mile for J24
exit, see departure EMG14.
½ mile ¾ mile
Verge
mounted
double
diverge sign
Yes
Yes, departure from
standard is required due to
sign showing ¾ mile for J24
exit, see departure EMG14.
Final direction
sign ⅓ mile
Verge
mounted
double
diverge sign
Yes
Yes, departure from
standard is required due to sign at ⅓ mile being located
at 614m from exit datum
point, see departures EMG14
and EMG23.
Confirmatory
direction sign
¼ mile located
400m in
advance of M1
SB J24 exit
datum point
Gantry
No (due to
stacking of
destinations and
use of ¼ mile,
but is in
accordance with
current thinking)
Yes, departure from
standard is required due to
sign at ¼ mile J24 exit in
addition to upstream ⅓ mile
sign, see departure EMG14.
n/a Final direction
sign Gantry Yes
Yes, departure from
standard is required due to
location of sign being 50m
downstream of exit datum
point, see departure EMG16
(the same departure as
noted above for the GMLS)
n/a Confirmatory
direction sign Gantry
No (due to use
of lane arrows,
but is in
accordance with
current thinking)
None
10.26 Downstream of the above, the existing gantry signage for J23A is unaffected by the
Scheme.
10.27 Other signage (e.g. to the MSA and to tourist and local destinations) is not considered in
the above but will be reviewed at detailed design stage. Verge mounted signs will be
used for other signage.
10.28 It is noted that the existing signage on the approach to J24A has rotating prisms that
allow an alternative message to be displayed. Following consultation with both the
TechMAC and Area 7 MAC, no one is aware of what the alternative message is and this
feature is not currently used. It is therefore not proposed to replicate this feature on any
replacement signage.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 63
A50 Eastbound
10.29 The A50 eastbound approach to J24A currently has gantry mounted signage co-located
with GMLS + VMS at 600m upstream of the exit datum point for the lane drop diverge of
the A50EB to M1 NB interchange link. It has a second co-located gantry signage & GMLS
+ VMS at as a confirmatory gantry for this diverge. It does not have any signage at the
exit datum point which is an existing departure under TD22/06 para 5.37. (IAN 149/11
does not apply as the A50 is an all-purpose trunk road). However, this departure is not
affected by the Scheme and so a new departure is not sought.
10.30 It is understood that the GMLS on the A50 eastbound approach is linked to the signalling
on the M1 northbound, and an advisory speed limit is displayed above all lanes on the
A50 if there is an issue on the M1 northbound, not just over the lane that will become a
lane drop.
10.31 It is not proposed to amend the locations of the gantries on the A50 eastbound but, as a
result of the Scheme, it may be beneficial to link the lane signalling over lanes 2 and 3 of
the A50 to the M1 southbound signalling. This will be considered during detailed design.
10.32 The signage over lanes 2 and 3 on the existing confirmatory gantry will be amended to
show the downstream fork junction for the split of the A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link
from the A50 EB to M1 J24 interchange link. This is shown on drawing NTH/209/SK67.
This existing gantry is located ½ mile upstream of the fork so the location would comply
with TD22/06 para 5.37.
10.33 Signage on the A50 EB to M1 SB interchange link downstream of the confirmatory gantry
will be verge mounted as there is no requirement for gantries in this location under
TD18/85. However, during detailed design use of duplicated offside lane signage will be
considered to ensure that drivers are fully aware of the downstream fork.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 64
11.0 SUMMARY OF DEPARTURES
11.1 There are many existing departures from geometric standards that are either removed or
altered as part of the Scheme. In addition, various additional departures from geometric
standards are required in order for the scheme to be implemented. With the exception
of the Kegworth Bypass, all proposed departures from geometric standards have detailed
justifications, drawings and risk assessments provided in the respective application form.
11.2 A summary of existing departures within the extents of the Scheme, and how they are
affected by the Scheme, is given below. Note that in some locations, such as at existing
junctions, there may be several existing geometric departures.
Road / direction Standard Departure Affected by Scheme?
A50 EB approach to
J24A TD46/05
No gantry signals are provided
at the exit datum point Unaffected by Scheme
A50 EB diverge at
J24A TD22/06
Near straight not provided
downstream of diverge as
required by TD22/06
Unaffected by Scheme
A50 between J24 &
J24A TD27/05
Cross section does not conform
to D2AP
A50 SB removed. A50 NB
retained as interchange link,
see departure EMG12.
A50 / Church Street
junction TD42/95
Layout does not meet various
requirements of TD42/95
Junction removed as part
of the scheme.
A50 / Church Street
junction TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
(DAS ID 39965 partly deals)
Junction removed as part
of the scheme.
A50 / Main Street
junction TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
(DAS ID 39965 partly deals)
Junction removed as part
of the scheme.
A50 NB exit from
M1 J24 roundabout TD9/93
Combination of relaxations to
SSD and radius not permitted
Design speed changed to
85kph as part of the scheme
but there is still a
requirement for a departure
due to combination of
relaxations, see departure
EMG13.
A50 / Hilton Hotel
access TD42/95
Layout does not meet various
requirements of TD42/95
Access removed as part of
the scheme.
A50 / Hilton Hotel
access TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
(DAS ID 39965 partly deals)
Access removed as part of
the scheme.
A50 / Farm access TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
(DAS ID 39965 partly deals)
Access removed as part of
the scheme.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 65
Road / direction Standard Departure Affected by Scheme?
A50 EB approach to
J24A TD46/05
No gantry signals are provided
at the exit datum point Unaffected by Scheme
A50 EB diverge at
J24A TD22/06
Near straight not provided
downstream of diverge as
required by TD22/06
Unaffected by Scheme
A50 SB approach to
J24 TD50/04
Visibility to signals is less than
desirable minimum SSD
Approach removed as part
of the scheme.
A50 WB after J24A
roundabout past HV
pylon
TD27/05 Cross section does not conform
to D2AP
Existing cross section
retained but road should be
IL2A cross section, see
departure EMG3.
A453 NB south of
J24 TA69/07
Lay-by sited within 3.75Vm of
the roundabout
Lay-by removed as part of
the scheme.
A453 SB south of
J24 TA69/07
Lay-by sited within 3.75Vm of
the roundabout
Design speed changed to
85kph as part of the scheme
and it complies.
A453 SB south of
J24 TD9/93
Crest K value below desirable
minimum on approach to Ashby
Road junction (approx KF 65
which should be 182)
Junction amended, design
speed changed to 85kph
and visibility improved as
part of the scheme but there
is still a requirement for 1
step below des min SSD, see
departure EMG9.
A453 NB approach
to J24
TD16/07 &
TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
Design speed changed to
85kph as part of the scheme
and it complies.
A6 NB approach to
J24
TD50/04 &
TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach Unaffected by Scheme
A453 SWB
approach to J24 TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
(DAS ID 47598)
Unaffected by Scheme
A453 NEB exit from
J24 TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not
provided on immediate approach
(DAS ID 47609)
Unaffected by Scheme
M1 SB J24A diverge
slip road TD27/05
Cross section does not conform
to IL2A where it crosses over
the M1
Cross section revised merge
but will not be compliant, see
departure EMG2.
M1 SB J24 merge
slip road TD27/05
Cross section does not conform
to MG2C
For some of the lentgth the
cross section amended to
MG1A as part of the Scheme.
However, existing cross
section will remain where
unaffected by the Scheme.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 66
Road / direction Standard Departure Affected by Scheme?
A50 EB approach to
J24A TD46/05
No gantry signals are provided
at the exit datum point Unaffected by Scheme
A50 EB diverge at
J24A TD22/06
Near straight not provided
downstream of diverge as
required by TD22/06
Unaffected by Scheme
M1 SB J24 merge TD22/06 Merge layout F is not as per
standards Merge amended to layout B
M1 SB J24 merge TD27/05 Cross section does include full
width hardshoulder
Cross section for revised
merge will not include
hardshoulder, see departure
EMG10.
A453 NB north of
J23A roundabout TA69/07
Lay-by sited within 3.75Vm of
the J23A roundabout Unaffected by Scheme
A453 SB north of
J23A roundabout TA69/07
Lay-by sited within 3.75Vm of
the J23A roundabout Unaffected by Scheme
M1 SB north of J24
diverge IAN149/11
Control signals not provided at
Primary DS
Signage amended but
departure still required, see
departure EMG15.
M1 SB north of J24
diverge IAN149/11
Secondary (½ mile) DS outwith
location requirements for gantry
sign
Gantry sign removed as
part of Scheme
M1 SB north of J24
diverge IAN149/11
Final DS outwith location
requirements for gantry sign
Sign relocated but is still
outwith location
requirements, see
departure EMG16.
M1 SB at J24
diverge IAN149/11
Confirmatory DS outwith
location requirements for gantry
sign
Gantry sign removed as
part of Scheme
M1 SB at J24 merge IAN149/11 Intra-junction control signals not
located near mid-point
Control signals relocated
as part of Scheme
M1 SB south of J24
merge IAN149/11
Lane control signals outwith
location requirements
Sign retained, merge layout
amended but is still outwith
location requirements, see
departure EMG11.
11.3 The following is a summary of the departures from geometric standards that are required
in order for the Scheme to be constructed:
Road / direction
Standard Departure Departure reference
Approving authority
Current Status
A50EB – M1SB IL
TD27/05 Cross section does not comply with IL2C
EMG1 HA Approved with comments
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 67
Road /
direction Standard Departure
Departure
reference
Approving
authority Current Status
M1SB –
A50WB IL TD27/05
Cross section does not comply with
IL2A EMG2 HA
Approved with
comments
M1SB – A50WB IL
TD27/05 Cross section does not comply with IL2A
EMG3 HA Approved with comments
A50EB – M1SB
IL TD9/93
Combined relaxation of 2 steps below des min SSD and 3 steps below des min radius
EMG4 HA Submitted for
review
A50EB – M1SB IL
TD22/06 Cross section IL1A provided in lieu of IL2A
EMG5 HA Approved
M1SB – J24 IL TD22/06 Weaving distance less than 1km EMG6 HA Approved with
comments
M1SB at J24 diverge
IAN149/11
TD27/05 Discontinuous hardshoulder EMG7 HA
Approved with comments
M1SB through J24
IAN149/11 Discontinuous hardshoulder EMG8 HA Submitted for review
A453 SB south of J24
TD9/93 1 step below des min Crest K value on immediate approach to junction
EMG9 HA Submitted for review
M1SB at J24 merge
IAN149/11
TD27/05 Discontinuous hardshoulder EMG10 HA
Approved with comments
M1SB south of J24 merge
IAN149/11
GMLS does not comply with distance
of 300m past merge entry datum point
EMG11 HA Submitted for review
M1J24 – A50WB IL
TD27/05 Cross section does not comply with IL2C
EMG12 HA Approved with comments
M1J24 –
A50WB IL TD9/93
Combined relaxation of 1 step below des min SSD and 1-2 steps below des min radius
EMG13 HA Approved
M1SB north of J24 diverge
IAN149/11
Spacing of signage on approach to
Junction 24 diverge does not comply with standard rules for 1 mile (2/3 mile) primary sign, ½ mile (1/3 mile) secondary sign.
EMG14 HA Approved with comments
M1SB north of
J24 diverge IAN149/11
Control signals not co-located with primary and secondary direction signs
EMG15 HA Approved with
comments
M1SB north of J24 diverge
IAN149/11 Final DS outwith location requirements for gantry sign
EMG16 HA Approved with comments
A6 Kegworth
Bypass TD9/93
1 step below des min Crest K value
on immediate approach to junction EMG17 LCC
Submitted for
review
A6 Kegworth
Bypass TD9/93
1 step below abs min Sag K value
on immediate approach to junction EMG18 LCC
Submitted for
review
A6 Kegworth
Bypass TD9/93
1 step below abs min Sag K value
on immediate approach to junction EMG19 LCC
Submitted for
review
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 68
Road /
direction Standard Departure
Departure
reference
Approving
authority Current Status
Local access
road approach to J24 roundabout
TD16/07
TD9/93
Desirable minimum SSD not provided on immediate approach
EMG22 LCC Submitted for review
M1SB north of J24A diverge
IAN149/11 1/3 mile DS outwith location requirements for J24 diverge
EMG23 HA Submitted for review
11.4 Note that departures EMG20 and EMG21 relate to street lighting on the A453 between
J24 and J23A. As these are not departures from geometric standards they do not feature
in this report.
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 69
12.0 REFERENCES
12.1 The following design standards are referred to in this report:
Reference Title
IAN149/11 Existing Motorway Minimum Requirements
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/ians/pdfs/ian149.pdf
TA46/97 Traffic Flow Ranges for Use in the Assessment of New Rural Roads
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol5/section1/ta4697.pdf
TA91/05 Provision for Non-motorised Users
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol5/section2/ta9105.pdf
TD9/93 Highway Link Design
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section1/td993.pdf
TD16/07 Geometric Design of Roundabouts
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section2/td1607.pdf
TD18/85
Criteria for the Use of Gantries for Traffic Signs and Matrix Traffic
Signals on Trunk Roads and Trunk Road Motorways
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol9/section1/td1885.pdf
TD22/06 Layout of Grade Separated Junctions
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section2/td2206.pdf
TD27/05 Cross-Sections and Headrooms
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section1/td2705.pdf
TD41/95 Vehicular Access to All-Purpose Trunk Roads
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section2/td4195.pdf
TD42/95 Geometric Design of Major/Minor Priority Junctions
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section2/td4295.pdf
TD50/04
The Geometric Layout of Signal-Controlled Junctions and Signalised
Roundabouts
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section2/td5004.pdf
TD51/03
Segregated Left Turn Lanes and Subsidiary Deflection Islands at
Roundabouts
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section3/td5103.pdf
TD69/07 The Location and Layout of Lay-bys and Rest Areas
http://www.dft.gov.uk/ha/standards/dmrb/vol6/section3/td6907.pdf
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 70
Figures 3.1 to 3.4 – TD22/06 Merge and Diverge Assessments
EMG SRFI: Figure 3.1 J24A SB merge2016 Mitigation Case: AM peak
2016 Mitigation Case: PM peak
EMG SRFI: Figure 3.2 J24 SB diverge 2016 Mitigation Case: AM peak
2016 Mitigation Case: PM peak
EMG SRFI: Figure 3.3 SB merge within interchange2016 Mitigation Case: AM peak
2016 Mitigation Case: PM peak
EMG SRFI: Figure 3.4 J24 SB merge2016 Mitigation Case: AM peak
2016 Mitigation Case: PM peak
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 71
Appendix A – Scheme layout drawings
The following scheme layout drawings are provided:
Drawing No. Title
NTH/209/100-01 General arrangement – J24A and J24
NTH/209/100-02 General Arrangement and Long sections – A453 Development
Access
NTH/209/100-03 General arrangement – A6 Kegworth Bypass
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 72
Appendix B – Long section drawings
The following long section drawings are provided:
Drawing No. Title
NTH/209/101-01 Long sections – J24A and J24
NTH/209/100-02 General Arrangement and Long sections – A453 Development
Access
NTH/209/101-03 Long sections – A6 Kegworth Bypass
EAST MIDLANDS GATEWAY STRATEGIC RAIL FREIGHT INTERCHANGE
GEOMETRICAL DESIGN STRATEGY REPORT
NTH209 GDSR REVISION 2
Page 73
Appendix C – Cross section drawings
The following cross section drawings are provided:
Drawing No. Title
NTH/209/102-01
NTH/209/102-05 Cross sections – J24A and J24
NTH/209/102-02 Cross sections – A453 Development Access
NTH/209/102-03 Cross sections – A6 Kegworth Bypass