A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

The study of British and Irish roads - their construction, numbering, history, mapping, past and future official roads proposals and general roads musings.

There is a separate forum for Street Furniture (traffic lights, street lights, road signs etc).

Registered users get access to other forums including discussions about other forms of transport, driving, fantasy roads and wishlists, and roads quizzes.

Moderator: Site Management Team

Post Reply
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by jackal »

There was a consultation on these schemes in January. The main change is at Grovehurst, which would see a low capacity dumbbell with an S2 bridge replaced with a two-bridge roundabout.

https://kccconsultations.inconsult.uk/c ... tationHome
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3853
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Brenley Corner »

Thanks for highlighting these documents

These are two junctions with which I'm very familiar. I'm particularly interested to see the upgrade to the Grovehurst Road junction which has suffered congestion ever since B2005 Swale Way was tied into it, well at least prior to the pandemic. It was designed as being one end of the Iwade bypass and an access point into central Sittingbourne from the Sheppey direction, not the point at which a major local relief road from new housing and industrial areas, also acting an unofficial eastern<->northern bypass, linked to the A249.

Tony
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
User avatar
jackal
Member
Posts: 7549
Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2008 23:33
Location: M6

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by jackal »

The scheme webpage indicates that this is to start in May. We'll see if that really happens. At any rate it has planning consent and a £38m award from the Housing Infrastructure Fund.

The layout for Grovehurst, where the main changes are happening, is here: https://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/p ... t-pdfa.pdf This is one of the more sensible signalised two-bridge roundabouts I've seen, as it can reuse the dumbbell bridge, and there are too many arms to handle more exotic designs like an SPUI or DDI.
User avatar
Ben302
Member
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 15:27
Location: Gillingham, Kent

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Ben302 »

As a daily user of the Grovehurst interchange I think this scheme is long overdue. The existing layout wasn't designed to handle the traffic it does. The roundabouts themselves are too small and tight considering the amount of HGV traffic that uses it.
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3853
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Brenley Corner »

I use the interchange once or twice weekly and have noticed that vegetation clearance is happening at Grovehurst; so a May start looks likely. It'll be interesting to see how they phase the works especially with the Sheppey-facing slip-roads needing to be moved, and the new bridge built over the existing ones.
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Bryn666 »

jackal wrote: Sat Mar 25, 2023 11:00 The scheme webpage indicates that this is to start in May. We'll see if that really happens. At any rate it has planning consent and a £38m award from the Housing Infrastructure Fund.

The layout for Grovehurst, where the main changes are happening, is here: https://www.kent.gov.uk/__data/assets/p ... t-pdfa.pdf This is one of the more sensible signalised two-bridge roundabouts I've seen, as it can reuse the dumbbell bridge, and there are too many arms to handle more exotic designs like an SPUI or DDI.
I'd prefer a bit more ambition on the active travel side but as two bridge roundabouts go this is an alright design. I've seen much worse elsewhere.
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Peter Freeman
Member
Posts: 1390
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2012 07:52
Location: Exits 9 & 10, M1 East, Melbourne, Australia

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Peter Freeman »

1. Do these interchanges really justify intervention, at this priority? Google Maps' traffic displays show only limited congestion, and only at maximum am and pm peaks.

2. As usual, the same old tired designs - build a new bridge and wipe out two roundabouts, only to then create a new roundabout!

3. Grovehurst Road treatment should be: (a) addition of parallel bridge, as proposed, (b) widening the existing bridge, (c) a generous signalised diamond treatment on the north side, (d) a signalised larger roundabout on the south side. Item (d) is only because UK appears to believe that this many arms intersecting at one place can't be efficiently designed with signals - which is untrue.

4. Key Street: the proposed tinkering with this roundabout should be sufficient. Closing southbound merging onto A249, and sending that traffic down Chestnut Street instead, seems strange though. Why do this? I suppose it's somehow connected with, or influenced by, the current re-work at M2J5, but I can't fathom it.
AnOrdinarySABREUser
Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 16:49

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by AnOrdinarySABREUser »

In my opinion, preferred junction layout for both of these schemes are inadequate. The Key Street Junction doesn't require modification to begin with, and at most, Grovehurst Junction should have a parallel bridge added with the U-turns at the roundabouts removed to create a dogbone layout, which would be more cost-effective than building a larger roundabout. Even if Swale Way were to be completed, I wouldn't envisage anything more than this as being necessary to fix any issues at the junctions present. Perhaps the schemes could be a pilot scheme for proper cycling infrastructure as we've seen in the Netherlands?
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3853
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Brenley Corner »

Boards have gone up on the A249 saying “work starts here” on 4th September until Winter 2024 for the Grovehurst scheme.
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
User avatar
Ben302
Member
Posts: 1103
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 15:27
Location: Gillingham, Kent

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Ben302 »

VMS signs gone up on the A249 saying that the Sheppey bound entry and exits are closing from the 6th of September until March 2024, so I can imagine they will be working on one side at a time. I know that Phase 1 involves closing the western portion of Grovehurst Road for the duration of the project and during Phase 2 Swale Way and the eastern side of Grovehurst road will be closed. I imagine the bobbing and the Swale Halt junctions will take the diverted traffic and the unofficial route which will come into play once phase 2 is underway is for traffic that would use Swale Way, to divert along the unadopted route around Ridham Dock and come out at Swale Halt to rejoin the a249 or use the old Kingsferry bridge to head on the Isle of Sheppey.

While this improvement is needed I thought they could have waited until Stockbury was done before starting on this.
User avatar
Brenley Corner
Member
Posts: 3853
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2002 19:28
Location: nr. Canterbury, Kent

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Brenley Corner »

Ben302 wrote: Wed Aug 23, 2023 22:55 VMS signs gone up on the A249 saying that the Sheppey bound entry and exits are closing from the 6th of September until March 2024.
I saw these on Tuesday morning too, but by yesterday the VMS had been changed to December 2023. I suspect that this may just be a Christmas 'break' as other signs indicate a number of weeks for the closure that would preclude Christmas.

As for coinciding with Stockbury, I suspect it is to with availability of funds. I do note that the schemes are both due to conclude in Winter 2024.

I suspect the mainline A249 will not be too affected apart from a speed limit and closures for beam lifts etc.
Brenley Corner: congesting traffic since 1963; discussing roads since 2002
Darren
Member
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 11:33

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Darren »

Brenley Corner wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 08:04 As for coinciding with Stockbury, I suspect it is to with availability of funds. I do note that the schemes are both due to conclude in Winter 2024.

I suspect the mainline A249 will not be too affected apart from a speed limit and closures for beam lifts etc.
The reason they're doing it now is that unless they spend the funds now, they're lost... so they had no choice due to the bureaucracy involved.

It's going to be a truly miserable year for those (like me) going from Sittingbourne to Sheppey each day.

Going from Key Street to Sheppey, we have, all at the same time:

* Works at Key Street roundabout, to close off the existing A249 onslip. This involves a new roundabout to access a housing estate being built along the old A249 by the Tudor Rose pub; this will have a horribly short "kink" to get onto the A249 towards the M2.
* Works at Bobbing along the old A249 to install a roundabout to replace a T-junction to the services there.
* Works at Grovehurst, as already mentioned. There is mention of running a single lane through the junction at times, but nobody seems to know the details! If it's anything other than a very brief period it'll be utter chaos.

As for the speed limit, the plan is to run a 50 limit for 3 miles southbound, from a couple of miles on Sheppey to the Grovehurst junction, including the bridge. Considering the utter cock-up they made the last time they tried setting a 50 limit over the bridge, good luck with that! The average speed cameras on the stretch will be left at 70, so unless the police are around any 50 on Sheppey at least will just be ignored. I think the reason they're doing it is to avoid a 50 at the bottom of the bridge, which is what would be needed in advance of the Grovehurst junction.

Heading northbound the 50 stretch is a much shorter length, finishing before the Sheppey Crossing.
Last edited by Darren on Thu Aug 24, 2023 17:01, edited 1 time in total.
Darren
Member
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 11:33

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Darren »

AnOrdinarySABREUser wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2023 22:37 Perhaps the schemes could be a pilot scheme for proper cycling infrastructure as we've seen in the Netherlands?
Hah, oh... that's funny.

No, the reason for the schemes are a) to cater for the trashing of Iwade and allowing thousands of houses to be built in the area and b) to allow access to even more housing in the immediate future - there are thousands more houses with planning granted.

Politics means Swale Way, the Sittingbourne northern bypass, is most unlikely to ever see completion, let alone the southern extension to a new junction 5A on the M2. It's a pity, as this would remove a large chunk of traffic from the Key Street area, but hey-ho... ironically the reason is because it'd lead to even more houses, but we'll get them anyway in the end.

(Iwade has quadrupled in size since 2000, FWIW, all thanks to the A249 bypass being built. I don't think anyone quite expected such a rapid mass of housebuilding to appear!)
AnOrdinarySABREUser
Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 16:49

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by AnOrdinarySABREUser »

Darren wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 16:59
AnOrdinarySABREUser wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2023 22:37 Perhaps the schemes could be a pilot scheme for proper cycling infrastructure as we've seen in the Netherlands?
Hah, oh... that's funny.

No, the reason for the schemes are a) to cater for the trashing of Iwade and allowing thousands of houses to be built in the area and b) to allow access to even more housing in the immediate future - there are thousands more houses with planning granted.

Politics means Swale Way, the Sittingbourne northern bypass, is most unlikely to ever see completion, let alone the southern extension to a new junction 5A on the M2. It's a pity, as this would remove a large chunk of traffic from the Key Street area, but hey-ho... ironically the reason is because it'd lead to even more houses, but we'll get them anyway in the end.

(Iwade has quadrupled in size since 2000, FWIW, all thanks to the A249 bypass being built. I don't think anyone quite expected such a rapid mass of housebuilding to appear!)
Sorry, I’m getting carried away with what we could have. I forgot that we have a inept government incapable of thinking beyond the next 5 years. To hell with innovation! Reactionism is the way forward!

If there really was a desperate need for housing, why can’t we build denser and smaller developments and move past the notion of building roads in pursuit of creating the biggest, most useless and isolating concrete jungle (suburbs) to date?

I drove through Iwade the other day, and I must say it’s quite nice. It’s unfortunate that it’s been transformed by the new developments, and that’s not in a positive way. I thought Boris Johnson ought to intervene in housing policy when it came to cycling given his promotion of the Cycle Superhighway network in London when he was mayor. Another example of the government’s ineptness to act.
User avatar
Bryn666
Elected Committee Member
Posts: 35754
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 20:54
Contact:

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Bryn666 »

AnOrdinarySABREUser wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 18:56
Darren wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 16:59
AnOrdinarySABREUser wrote: Wed Aug 16, 2023 22:37 Perhaps the schemes could be a pilot scheme for proper cycling infrastructure as we've seen in the Netherlands?
Hah, oh... that's funny.

No, the reason for the schemes are a) to cater for the trashing of Iwade and allowing thousands of houses to be built in the area and b) to allow access to even more housing in the immediate future - there are thousands more houses with planning granted.

Politics means Swale Way, the Sittingbourne northern bypass, is most unlikely to ever see completion, let alone the southern extension to a new junction 5A on the M2. It's a pity, as this would remove a large chunk of traffic from the Key Street area, but hey-ho... ironically the reason is because it'd lead to even more houses, but we'll get them anyway in the end.

(Iwade has quadrupled in size since 2000, FWIW, all thanks to the A249 bypass being built. I don't think anyone quite expected such a rapid mass of housebuilding to appear!)
Sorry, I’m getting carried away with what we could have. I forgot that we have a inept government incapable of thinking beyond the next 5 years. To hell with innovation! Reactionism is the way forward!

If there really was a desperate need for housing, why can’t we build denser and smaller developments and move past the notion of building roads in pursuit of creating the biggest, most useless and isolating concrete jungle (suburbs) to date?

I drove through Iwade the other day, and I must say it’s quite nice. It’s unfortunate that it’s been transformed by the new developments, and that’s not in a positive way. I thought Boris Johnson ought to intervene in housing policy when it came to cycling given his promotion of the Cycle Superhighway network in London when he was mayor. Another example of the government’s ineptness to act.
Too many people making money off the status quo - why would we change things and upset that apple cart?
Bryn
Terminally cynical, unimpressed, and nearly Middle Age already.
She said life was like a motorway; dull, grey, and long.

Blog - https://showmeasign.online/
X - https://twitter.com/ShowMeASignBryn
YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/@BrynBuck
Darren
Member
Posts: 201
Joined: Mon May 09, 2005 11:33

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by Darren »

Confirmation today that the traffic management plan includes coning off a lane in each direction for the Grovehurst junction, starting on the 4th southbound and the 6th northbound, the closures to remain in place until "Winter 2024" - i.e. a year and a quarter.

It will cause utter chaos and gridlock in both Sittingbourne and the western end of Sheppey.

I give it a week until they have to remove it all and come up with a better, more viable plan. (Luckily the MP for the area lives on Sheppey, so he'll have to join the queues each day. He's not the sort to put up with that for long!)
AnOrdinarySABREUser
Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 16:49

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by AnOrdinarySABREUser »

Bryn666 wrote: Fri Aug 25, 2023 12:03
AnOrdinarySABREUser wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 18:56
Darren wrote: Thu Aug 24, 2023 16:59
Hah, oh... that's funny.

No, the reason for the schemes are a) to cater for the trashing of Iwade and allowing thousands of houses to be built in the area and b) to allow access to even more housing in the immediate future - there are thousands more houses with planning granted.

Politics means Swale Way, the Sittingbourne northern bypass, is most unlikely to ever see completion, let alone the southern extension to a new junction 5A on the M2. It's a pity, as this would remove a large chunk of traffic from the Key Street area, but hey-ho... ironically the reason is because it'd lead to even more houses, but we'll get them anyway in the end.

(Iwade has quadrupled in size since 2000, FWIW, all thanks to the A249 bypass being built. I don't think anyone quite expected such a rapid mass of housebuilding to appear!)
Sorry, I’m getting carried away with what we could have. I forgot that we have a inept government incapable of thinking beyond the next 5 years. To hell with innovation! Reactionism is the way forward!

If there really was a desperate need for housing, why can’t we build denser and smaller developments and move past the notion of building roads in pursuit of creating the biggest, most useless and isolating concrete jungle (suburbs) to date?

I drove through Iwade the other day, and I must say it’s quite nice. It’s unfortunate that it’s been transformed by the new developments, and that’s not in a positive way. I thought Boris Johnson ought to intervene in housing policy when it came to cycling given his promotion of the Cycle Superhighway network in London when he was mayor. Another example of the government’s ineptness to act.
Too many people making money off the status quo - why would we change things and upset that apple cart?
It reeks of brown envelopes…
AnOrdinarySABREUser
Member
Posts: 254
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2022 16:49

Re: A249 Key Street and Grovehurst Road junction improvement schemes

Post by AnOrdinarySABREUser »

I've updated OpenStreetMap with the new plans for Grovehurst Junction. It should take a while to render fully but it's now appearing on my screen. :D

I think that the signalised roundabout is the wrong way to go about improving the junction. I'd remove the signals and narrow the roundabout to 2 lanes. The 3 lane setup seems overkill to me and is only going to facilitate further car dependent growth off the A249 here. This isn't how the government should be addressing present housing problems and a more sustainable approach should be taken to tackling this issue. :roll:

That being said, I do think that the junction should still be improved. The pedestrian and cycle infrastructure is good but a segregated cycleway would be preferred over the current solution. As I have a preference for removing the signals, the cycleway will need to be completely separated from the roundabout for both safety reasons and better traffic flow. What, if anything, would you do instead? :type:

For ease of access:
OpenStreetMap
Post Reply