A303 Sparkford to Ilchester

[Herned]

I'm surprised that they didn't use a standard dumbbell for the Hazel Grove GSJ.

Is there any terrain/land/geometry-related reason why a standard dumbbell wouldn't have worked here? The layout they've chosen seems pretty unintuitive, especially when trying to get onto the A303(E).

Was this design changed/refined at some point or was this the intended design from the beginning?

Hazelgrove School and grounds have some level of protection, so the design was chosen to limit the impact on the site. I think it was originally proposed as a standard dumbbell but then changed. It will be explained somewhere in all the consultations

[RichardEvans67]

I'm surprised that they didn't use a standard dumbbell for the Hazel Grove GSJ.

Looking at it on Google Earth. I think a dumbbell would have destroyed more trees. I'm not saying that is definitely the reason, but it's something that seems to matter a lot these days.

[Keiji]

I'm surprised that they didn't use a standard dumbbell for the Hazel Grove GSJ.

Is there any terrain/land/geometry-related reason why a standard dumbbell wouldn't have worked here? The layout they've chosen seems pretty unintuitive, especially when trying to get onto the A303(E).

Was this design changed/refined at some point or was this the intended design from the beginning?

Hazelgrove School and grounds have some level of protection, so the design was chosen to limit the impact on the site. I think it was originally proposed as a standard dumbbell but then changed. It will be explained somewhere in all the consultations

That makes sense. Thanks! If there was ever a published design for the arrangement with a dumbbell in it, I may have seen it and subconsciously taken that in hence my surprise.

[Chris5156]

Thanks AAndy!

and the Ilchester/Yeovilton exit when heading East: https://youtu.be/GfIN0VOj8QI

Aha, the forbidden destination “London” finds its way onto another sign!

[SouthWest Philip]

Thanks AAndy!

and the Ilchester/Yeovilton exit when heading East: https://youtu.be/GfIN0VOj8QI

Aha, the forbidden destination “London” finds its way onto another sign!

And botched too. The half mile sign normally just has the exit destinations. Forward destinations are applied on the sign at the diverge.

There's another botched sign where the side road meets the slip road onto the eastbound A303. The flag to the right should be green as it leads directly onto the A303 whereas it is white and has the A303 in brackets.

[Chris5156]

Thanks AAndy!

and the Ilchester/Yeovilton exit when heading East: https://youtu.be/GfIN0VOj8QI

Aha, the forbidden destination “London” finds its way onto another sign!

And botched too. The half mile sign normally just has the exit destinations. Forward destinations are applied on the sign at the diverge.

There's another botched sign where the side road meets the slip road onto the eastbound A303. The flag to the right should be green as it leads directly onto the A303 whereas it is right and has the A303 in brackets.

Ugh. Signage is a lost art.

[DavidBrown]

And botched too. The half mile sign normally just has the exit destinations. Forward destinations are applied on the sign at the diverge.

Not sure if there's something in the regs that allows forward destinations on half mile T-junction style map signs rather than fork ones? Only seeing forward destinations on these type of signs seems to be a fairly common thing, rightly or wrongly.
A34 Newbury
A30 Whiddon Down
A30 Fraddon
That said, I really wish there wasn't a place for junctions like this on major high speed roads. Either do it properly or not at all, being forced to accelerate or brake very hard isn't exactly the safest or most economical way of driving.

[jackal]

I'm surprised that they didn't use a standard dumbbell for the Hazel Grove GSJ.

Is there any terrain/land/geometry-related reason why a standard dumbbell wouldn't have worked here? The layout they've chosen seems pretty unintuitive, especially when trying to get onto the A303(E).

Was this design changed/refined at some point or was this the intended design from the beginning?

Hazelgrove School and grounds have some level of protection, so the design was chosen to limit the impact on the site. I think it was originally proposed as a standard dumbbell but then changed. It will be explained somewhere in all the consultations

I believe weaving to the next junction east, only 1km away, was a major consideration.

I posted the options from the TAR in the middle of the first page of this thread. The designs for both junctions were basically dumbbells (though the B3151 had no junction in most of them).

[solocle]

Thanks AAndy!

and the Ilchester/Yeovilton exit when heading East: https://youtu.be/GfIN0VOj8QI

Aha, the forbidden destination “London” finds its way onto another sign!

I think London's kosher as it goes. Or at least, it really is ubiquitous.

And that goes for the former alignment too:

[Chris5156]

Aha, the forbidden destination “London” finds its way onto another sign!

I think London's kosher as it goes. Or at least, it really is ubiquitous.

Signs are supposed to indicate the next primary destinations, so from the area of Sparkford that would be Andover and maybe Basingstoke. Signposting “(M3)” might also be legit. London is beyond numerous other primary destinations in that direction so - going by the rules - it’s not the right thing to show at that point. The fact it’s still there is because new signs on the A303 have just been copying old ones for decades. I don’t disagree, though, that from a common sense point of view a lot of people heading up the A303 will be hoping to find their way to London.

However, I was alluding to a thread a year or two ago where some highway professionals were arguing that “London” should never appear on signs and that “(M25)” is better in almost all cases…

[SouthWest Philip]

Signs are supposed to indicate the next primary destinations, so from the area of Sparkford that would be Andover and maybe Basingstoke. Signposting “(M3)” might also be legit. London is beyond numerous other primary destinations in that direction so - going by the rules - it’s not the right thing to show at that point. The fact it’s still there is because new signs on the A303 have just been copying old ones for decades. I don’t disagree, though, that from a common sense point of view a lot of people heading up the A303 will be hoping to find their way to London.

However, I was alluding to a thread a year or two ago where some highway professionals were arguing that “London” should never appear on signs and that “(M25)” is better in almost all cases…

Since the introduction of primary destinations, the A303 always consistently had Andover and London signed eastbound and Honiton and Exeter westbound. London and Exeter are obviously legacies from the days of superprimary destinations, but still make sense in the context of this particular road.

Honiton, being relatively near Exeter, always seemed to be disproportionately signposted at the expense of places like Yeovil and Taunton which have tended to replace it on newer signs going westbound. Salisbury perhaps would've been a useful addition eastbound?

[jackal]

Andover London/Honiton Exeter are such classic pairings. There's a lot to be said for consistency even if it's "wrong".

Honiton does feel overrepresented for its size and proximity to Exeter, though the latter does at least mean the pairing can be used for some distance.

What would be better? Taunton could hardly be signed at the Exeter end, while Salisbury is close to Andover. Maybe Yeovil would have been best, but Honiton is reasonable given, unlike alternatives, it's actually on the road (in the sense that the A30 bypasses it...).

Other destinations are frequently signed, especially further east. For instance, the A3057 ADS has straight ahead for

Exeter A303
Devizes (A342)
Marlborough (A346)
Salisbury (A343)

Horribly cluttered IMO.

Even worse, at Southfields the ADS says

Exeter
Honiton

A crime against nature.

[AAndy]

Nearside view both ways: https://youtu.be/rC4hBCpgH7g
& nearside of the Ilchester/Yeovilton exit road: https://youtu.be/pXfFopnd12Y

[Bryn666]

Thanks AAndy!


Aha, the forbidden destination “London” finds its way onto another sign!

And botched too. The half mile sign normally just has the exit destinations. Forward destinations are applied on the sign at the diverge.

There's another botched sign where the side road meets the slip road onto the eastbound A303. The flag to the right should be green as it leads directly onto the A303 whereas it is right and has the A303 in brackets.

Ugh. Signage is a lost art.

The A500 has ahead info on the 1/2m signs too now, it appears that whoever is doing ADS design for NH has spent a lot of time in Ireland and Germany where this is standard on 500m advance signs and forgotten they're in the UK.

[NICK 647063]

Signs are supposed to indicate the next primary destinations, so from the area of Sparkford that would be Andover and maybe Basingstoke. Signposting “(M3)” might also be legit. London is beyond numerous other primary destinations in that direction so - going by the rules - it’s not the right thing to show at that point. The fact it’s still there is because new signs on the A303 have just been copying old ones for decades. I don’t disagree, though, that from a common sense point of view a lot of people heading up the A303 will be hoping to find their way to London.

However, I was alluding to a thread a year or two ago where some highway professionals were arguing that “London” should never appear on signs and that “(M25)” is better in almost all cases…

Since the introduction of primary destinations, the A303 always consistently had Andover and London signed eastbound and Honiton and Exeter westbound. London and Exeter are obviously legacies from the days of superprimary destinations, but still make sense in the context of this particular road.

Honiton, being relatively near Exeter, always seemed to be disproportionately signposted at the expense of places like Yeovil and Taunton which have tended to replace it on newer signs going westbound. Salisbury perhaps would've been a useful addition eastbound?

I was recently visiting family in Winterbourne Stoke and noticed the Westbound direction sign entering the village prior to the 40 signs now shows Exeter and Warminster A303, not even a (A36) for Warminster, the old sign showed Exeter and Honiton A303 previously but that sign was knocked down years ago and can be seen on historic streetview as can the new one.
https://maps.app.goo.gl/LgJNSYRvz6f7MMWV6?g_st=ic

Old one

https://maps.app.goo.gl/8Z6oDdyzmwpcxFFs7?g_st=ic

[ikcdab]

I have driven the new alignment several times, today was the first on daylight.
The text on the signs does seem particularly large. Is this a new standard or just me?

[SteveA30]

One carriageway each side of the A303 at the Sparkford end is being surfaced, ready for transfer of traffic at some point in the next few weeks. However, the crossover point each side is still grass, so perhaps a slight rerouting while the old road is dug up and the 2 halves joined. Not imminent though and the bypass has been reduced to 1 lane for about half its length, along with the S2/1 down to S2. Result as expected, much overspilling into Sparkford on the old road westbound. Good Friday March 29 2024

[SteveA30]

The Hazelgrove bridge can be seen beyond the rbt, surfacing underway.
Sparkford will take priority this year as this will be the last time the village is blessed troubled by through traffic.

[Debaser]

I have driven the new alignment several times, today was the first on daylight.
The text on the signs does seem particularly large. Is this a new standard or just me?

No. It's from Appendix E of Chapter 7 of the Traffic Signs Manual, or Appendix A of the old LTN 1/94 (they're the same). You are going from the old A303, a 'high standard' rural single carriageway with 85th %ile speeds of say 41-50mph (giving an advance direction sign 'x' height of 150mm) to a new high standard dual carriageway with 85th%ile speeds of say 61-70mph (advance direction sign 'x' height of 250mm).

You should be worried if the text heights remained the same.

[Cryoraptor]

Nice to see that work is finally being done after such a long period of indecision on what to do with the A303. I haven't been down it for nearly nine years now, I'll have to go down there again at some point. Now that we have a serious plan for sorting out Stonehenge, the remaining single carriageway will be high priority to improve. The M4 corridor is already a congested mess, I'm sure commuters and other regular users would welcome the loss of the holiday traffic over the summer.

Realistically the A303 should've been rerouted some distance from Stonehenge on D2 decades ago as soon as it was realised that a modern dual carriageway was needed along the route. Without the Stonehenge bottleneck, far more holiday traffic would be using the route from day one and upgrading the rest would've been urgent priority when wholesale, ambitious upgrades were still the norm.

I agree that the final upgrade will be a dualling of the A358 to Taunton, and the Blackdowns will not be completed. This should be done first anyway as local demand has made a decent north-south link in this area a clear priority. It is a bit jarring on the map, but it's either the A358 or nothing and the Blackdowns remain a bottleneck in the holiday season.

I'm sure the Blackdowns will be dualled if it was absolutely necessary, but I imagine we'd see a D4M A358(M) before the government seriously suggests building a dual carriageway through a relatively undisturbed AONB in the modern age

While HE barely gives a stuff about road numbers these days, as this route deals with a lot of tourists who may not be familiar with all the roads in the area, I would think there is a serious chance that the A303 could be rerouted onto an upgraded A358, signing for Exeter, Taunton et al., and the existing section redesignated with a currently-unused A3xxx number signing for Honiton and local villages.

It would be interesting to see how an upgraded A303-(currently) A358-M5 corridor copes with taking on the correctly-bound holiday traffic from the M4-M5 corridor. If there is a significant surge then I would say a rebuilding of the A303-A358 junction to fix the TOTSO and both that and the A358-M5 junction to be free-flowing would be necessary to keep the route moving at an acceptable pace.

Of course, in the end, the real long-term solution is to encourage less private vehicles to use the road and more people to make long-distance journeys by high-speed rail, however as long as the significant, multi-term investments to bring our railway network out of the 19th century and bring ticket prices to an acceptable level for most customers, it isn't viable to do this. The serious problems with public transport in this country have to be addressed first.