A30 Carland Cross Chiverton Cross

[Berk]

Yes, that sounds about right. But either way, traffic that could overtake was not making best use of it. You basically had two lanes of traffic ambling up around 15/20 in lane 1, maybe 30 in lane 2.

It also comes back to that thing about people being very conservative about merging. And I’ve never understood why a queue is slow to proceed after a merge.

Perhaps people prefer driving at 45mph...

[crowntown100]

Yes, that sounds about right. But either way, traffic that could overtake was not making best use of it. You basically had two lanes of traffic ambling up around 15/20 in lane 1, maybe 30 in lane 2.

It also comes back to that thing about people being very conservative about merging. And I’ve never understood why a queue is slow to proceed after a merge.

Perhaps people prefer driving at 45mph...

You've not lived in Cornwall, have you?

What normally happens to me at Zelah is you get ready to go past the inevitable tractor and Doris in her Citroen C1. Just you look to go past, Doris pulls out, you get stuck doing 30 in the outside lane and then, because it's quite steep (hence the crawler lane), you can't get much speed up as Doris pulls in at the top of the hill, where you then plough into the back of the tailback from Chybucca because the six tractors in the 3 mile queue ahead of you that won't pull over. Just an observation, and Doris is obviously a fictional character, but it's a regular occurrence.

https://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornw ... en-3283890

See link - Any excitement generated by the headline is quickly dissipated when it is revealed that the 'work' is in fact referring to the utility activities already discussed.

Looks like I wasn't far off the mark, then!

[IAN]

Just a thought, does the general election and dissolution of parliament on 6th November mean the decision about whether to approve this scheme (and indeed, others in the pipeline) will be delayed beyond the planned February announcement date?

Ian (M5 Driver)

[tom1977]

Just a thought, does the general election and dissolution of parliament on 6th November mean the decision about whether to approve this scheme (and indeed, others in the pipeline) will be delayed beyond the planned February announcement date?

Ian (M5 Driver)

The GE shouldn't affect the DCO examination process, or funding of projects in RIS1 and RIS2. There is a potential for a short delay if any SoS decisions fall within the purdah or subsequent appointment of ministers periods

[RichardEvans67]

I think a bigger issue will be who ends up in government, and whether they want to continue with the current roads program or whether they want to make cuts to it.

Until construction starts next year (hopefully), it could all still get cancelled.

[RichardA35]

I think a bigger issue will be who ends up in government, and whether they want to continue with the current roads program or whether they want to make cuts to it.

Until construction starts next year (hopefully), it could all still get cancelled.

Construction will only start if a price can be agreed and the HE framework contractors have priced this at "way over" the HE estimate. After all this is Cornwall and governments hate spending money down there so my money is on a scheme review and value engineering for a year to end up with something like Temple...

[Berk]

How would the scheme differ if Cornwall Council had to deliver it??

[RichardEvans67]

by Berk » Sat Nov 02, 2019 08:34
How would the scheme differ if Cornwall Council had to deliver it??

You've got me wondering about this.
I can't see much scope for having cheaper junctions at either end.
The only significant saving I can think of would be going online on the Zelah by pass.

[Norfolktolancashire]

If Cornwall Council had to fund most of the scheme I would say that the roundabouts at either end would remain with some alterations.

[Berk]

Why would they?? They would still continue to be bottlenecks.

The Temple section doesn’t have roundabouts on (though it didn’t before either).

[Phil]

Why would they?? They would still continue to be bottlenecks.

The Temple section doesn’t have roundabouts on (though it didn’t before either).

MONEY!

County councils are pretty cash scraped at the best of times - if they have to contribute more funding then other council services (many of which are mandatory for them to provide in law like children's services and adult social care) will suffer. Given the various abuse scandals which have occurred in the past few years illustrating what happens when these services get neglected, somehow I don't think cutting budgets to fund flyovers is going to go down too well....

Cornwall was in fact one of the few areas of the UK to receive regular EU handouts due to the levels of deprivation there - yes it might look pretty when everyone is on holiday there, but with economic activity heavily skewed to the summer tourist invasion, plenty of local residents suffer the rest of the year.

In such a situation things like expensive GSJs are easy targets for the chop to try and bring the costs down to what the Council can realistically afford. Basically you want GSJs you need the Westminster Government to cough up the cash and not try and shirk its responsibility to provide a high quality strategic road network!

[RichardEvans67]

by Norfolktolancashire » Tue Nov 19, 2019 20:19

If Cornwall Council had to fund most of the scheme I would say that the roundabouts at either end would remain with some alterations.

I would hope not.

From what I hear Chiverton Cross roundabout is already dangerous, this would make it even worse. I would think a less bad option would be to build the grade separated junctions at either end, and cut back on the bit in between. Even if this means next to no improvements in between.

At least the bit in between doesn't have any major junctions to stop the traffic from moving. Also this would keep open the option of the full improvement at a later date.

[Hdeng16]

Haha... Chivvy cross is a disaster zone but only really because people can't drive properly and work out gaps. That said, I guess a hamburger might work here due to the available space and the amount of through-traffic.

That said, it would be a MASSIVE waste of money. Is it likely this scheme is going to get watered down or are we just being pessimistic?

[RichardA35]

Word reached my ears that some £50M extra has been allocated to this scheme to bring the budget closer to reality.
Whether it is enough remains to be seen...

[RichardEvans67]

by Hdeng16 » Thu Nov 21, 2019 11:39

Haha... Chivvy cross is a disaster zone but only really because people can't drive properly and work out gaps.

Unfortunately there will always be bad drivers, so they have to try and make the roads reasonably idiot proof.

[Norfolktolancashire]

Why would they?? They would still continue to be bottlenecks.

The Temple section doesn’t have roundabouts on (though it didn’t before either).

MONEY!

County councils are pretty cash scraped at the best of times - if they have to contribute more funding then other council services (many of which are mandatory for them to provide in law like children's services and adult social care) will suffer. Given the various abuse scandals which have occurred in the past few years illustrating what happens when these services get neglected, somehow I don't think cutting budgets to fund flyovers is going to go down too well....

Cornwall was in fact one of the few areas of the UK to receive regular EU handouts due to the levels of deprivation there - yes it might look pretty when everyone is on holiday there, but with economic activity heavily skewed to the summer tourist invasion, plenty of local residents suffer the rest of the year.

In such a situation things like expensive GSJs are easy targets for the chop to try and bring the costs down to what the Council can realistically afford. Basically you want GSJs you need the Westminster Government to cough up the cash and not try and shirk its responsibility to provide a high quality strategic road network!

Yep, seeing the difference between Fowey and St Austell illustrates it well, despite only being five miles apart.

Of course having both roundabouts grade separated would be best, but as you say the cost is high. Cornwall Council borrows a lot of money for these road schemes, they will have to be careful if the interest rates go up.

At the very least a dedicated slip road from the westbound carriageway onto the A39 towards Truro at Carland Cross would be of some relief.

[RichardEvans67]

I tend to disagree.

I don't think you can compare the A39 to St. Austal with the main A30, as the difference in traffic must be huge.

If they duelled Chiverton to Cartland without grade separation at each end, I can't see it making enough difference to make it actually worth doing. Each end would still be big bottlenecks, and Chiverton would become even more dangerous. This seem to me as no better than leaving everything as it is.

If they had to pick and choose, then I think Grade separating Chiverton is the priority, then see how much money if left after that.

[Phil]

I tend to disagree.

I don't think you can compare the A39 to St. Austal with the main A30, as the difference in traffic must be huge.

If they duelled Chiverton to Cartland without grade separation at each end, I can't see it making enough difference to make it actually worth doing. Each end would still be big bottlenecks, and Chiverton would become even more dangerous. This seem to me as no better than leaving everything as it is.

If they had to pick and choose, then I think Grade separating Chiverton is the priority, then see how much money if left after that.

Hmm, so you want a GSJ but have the road immediately turn to S1 straight after?

Sorry that generally doesn't happen in the UK trunk road network - and I would actually say thats probably quite logical as the presence of a roundabout makes folk slow down in preparation for the resumption of single carriageway.

The A303 doesn't have GSJs at Amesbury or Podimore do they?

Even if it does have roundabouts at each end, a long chunk of dual carriageway is still advantageous as it is safer (less doggy overtaking) and prevents hold ups due to slow moving vehicles. These benefits still accrue regardless of what the terminal junctions are constructed as.

If the current roundabout is a problem then it can be made bigger, wider, hamburgered, etc. as part of the dualling project - and STILL come in far cheaper than a GSJ.

So while it would be lovely to have GSJs at each end - if the reality is they have to be sacrificed to make the dualling project affordable then so be it. Who knows if the newly dualled road makes things that bad at Chiverton then a stand alone GSJ project for it will have a good chance of securing funding later on.

[Berk]

The A303 doesn't have GSJs at Amesbury or Podimore do they?

Not at present they don’t, but both are due to be fixed as part of their improvements.

So while it would be lovely to have GSJs at each end - if the reality is they have to be sacrificed to make the dualling project affordable then so be it. Who knows if the newly dualled road makes things that bad at Chiverton then a stand alone GSJ project for it will have a good chance of securing funding later on.

I disagree. In general terms, perhaps. But this is the Trunk Road Network we’re talking about.

I cannot see HE wanting corners cut on a major improvement project unless they are designing and funding the project themselves. And even if they are, they would seek to retain a GSJ if the design suggested it’s as a better fit for the traffic conditions.

I do not believe they would allow another road authority (such as Cornwall Council) they had sub-contracted work to, to build an inferior quality junction.

[RichardEvans67]

by Phil » Sat Nov 23, 2019 19:10

Hmm, so you want a GSJ but have the road immediately turn to S1 straight after?

Well ermm. No I want the whole scheme , but if it has to be cut back then what is the least bad option ? You may have a point with using much bigger roundabouts, perhaps also using traffic signals at the junctions they could make that work. I'd add that unlike the A303, there is the added issue of the traffic going to and from Truro.

Thinking more about my idea. How about a providing new bits of single to bypass spots where there could be holdups. The new bits would be less prone to tractors etc. so at least the traffic would be more likely to keep moving.

At the eastern end I was thinking a new single from Carland bypassing everything to the Zalah bypass (and then tie in with the existing bypass). The exiting A30 from Boxheater could tie into Henver Lane which has a junction with the existing bypass.

At the Western end, after Chiverton junction, the new road would tie into the existing A30 somewhere before Chybucca. A section of the existing A30 would become a local access coming to a dead end. Some traffic signals could be used if necessary at Chybucca junction.

In between, depending on the money, a new bit might help by bypassing Little Tresaswen and Marazanvose.

Hopefully, the bridges could be built to allow duelling at a later date.

Well, thinking about your option but with traffic signals, I'm not sure whether your option or mine is better. Of course the full HA scheme would be preferable.