South West Peninsula Route Strategy March 2017 Contents 1
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
South West Peninsula Route Strategy March 2017 Contents 1. Introduction 1 Purpose of Route Strategies 2 Strategic themes 2 Stakeholder engagement 3 Transport Focus 3 2. The route 5 Route Strategy overview map 7 3. Current constraints and challenges 9 A safe and serviceable network 9 More free-flowing network 9 Supporting economic growth 9 An improved environment 10 A more accessible and integrated network 10 Diversionary routes 15 Maintaining the strategic road network 16 4. Current investment plans and growth potential 17 Economic context 17 Innovation 17 Investment plans 17 5. Future challenges and opportunities 23 6. Next steps 31 i R Lon ou don to Scotla te nd East London Or bital and M23 to Gatwick str Lon ategies don to Scotland West London to Wales The division of rou tes for the F progra elixstowe to Midlands mme of route strategies on t he Solent to Midlands Strategic Road Network M25 to Solent (A3 and M3) Kent Corridor to M25 (M2 and M20) South Coast Central Birmingham to Exeter A1 South West Peninsula London to Leeds (East) East of England South Pennines A19 A69 North Pen Newccaastlstlee upon Tyne nines Carlisle A1 Sunderland Midlands to Wales and Gloucest M6 ershire North and East Midlands A66 A1(M) A595 South Midlands Middlesbrougugh A66 A174 A590 A19 A1 A64 A585 M6 York Irish S Lee ea M55 ds M65 M1 Preston M606 M621 A56 M62 A63 Kingston upon Hull M62 M61 M58 A1 M1 Liver Manchest A628 A180 North Sea pool er M18 M180 Grimsby M57 A616 A1(M) M53 M62 M60 Sheffield A556 M56 M6 A46 A55 A1 Lincoln A500 Stoke-on-Trent A38 M1 Nottingham A52 Derby A50 A483 A5 A453 A38 A42 A46 A458 M54 Norwich A5 M42 A47 M6 M6 Toll Leicester A47 M69 A1 Birmingham M6 Peterborough A12 A5 M5 M42 A1(M) Coventry A14 A11 A49 M45 M1 A45 A14 Worcesester A14 A46 A5 A428 A421 Cambridge M40 A11 M50 A1 Ipswich A43 Milton A12 A14 A40 Keynes M1 A120 A40 Glou A417 A5 A1(M) cester A120 Oxford M11 M5 A34 M25 M48 M40 A419 A12 M4 Swindon M4 A404 M4 SoSouuthethendnd--onon-S-Seea Br A13 istol M32 Reading London M4 M2 A249 A34 M5 A36 A303 M26 M3 M25 A2 M20 A3 Crawley M23 A36 A303 A21 A20 Folk A23 estoonne Yeovil A31 A259 M27 A3(M) Exeter A27 A30 A30 A27 Bright A259 A35 Portsmouth on Torquay A30 Plymouth A38 Engliglishsh Chhanannel 0 k ilometres 60 0 mi les 40 Highways Agency media se © C rvices MCR N1302 rown copyright and dat 06 abase rights 2015 Ordna nce Survey 100030649 ii z 1iii z Highways England 1. Introduction The modernisation of England’s motorways and major A roads, also known as the strategic road network (SRN), is making a vital contribution to economic wellbeing and growth. This Route Strategy – one of 18 such reports – provides a statement on the current performance of, and perceived pressures on, the South West Peninsula route to inform the planning of future investment. The SRN supports national and local economic prosperity by: ▪ linking together major cities ▪ connecting with extensive local road networks ▪ providing links to major ports, airports, and rail terminals ▪ enabling good access to regions and cross-border routes between the nations of the United Kingdom The establishment of Highways England through the Infrastructure Act 2015 has changed fundamentally the way we plan investment in the network. Funding is now determined every 5 years, in the Road Investment Strategy (RIS), which is set by Government. We are currently delivering on the commitments that were set out in the first RIS covering 2015 to 2020, which are already making a difference for road users across the network. At the same time, we are working closely with the other 3 bodies with statutory responsibility for the RIS – Department for Transport, Office of Rail and Road and Transport Focus – on preparing for the next RIS (RIS2) for the period after 2020. 1 2 South West Peninsula Route Strategy RIS1 Strategic Vision as reiterated in “RIS Post 2020: Planning ahe ad” Purpose of Route Strategies RIS1 Strategic Vision as reiterated in “RIS Route Strategies provide a high level view of the current Post 2020: Planning ahe ad” performance of the SRN as well as issues perceived by E conomy Environment our stakeholders that affect the network. They are one of the key components of research required for developing E conomy Environment the RIS. This suite of Route Strategies builds upon the Network Integration analysis underpinning the first set of Route Strategies capability undertaken between 2013 to 2015, which together Network capability Integration provided the first comprehensive assessment of the entire Safety network. This time the Route Strategies aim to: bring together information from key partners, Safety ▪ motorists, local communities, construction partners, Figure 1.1 - RIS1 strategic vision environmental groups and across the business Highways England Strategic Business ▪ achieve a better understanding of the condition Plan’s key outcomes and performance of our roads, and local and Highways England Strategic Business regional aspirations Plan’s keyS outcomesupporting economic growth through a modernised and reliable network that reduces delays, cr eates jobs ▪ shape our investment priorities to improve the service and helps business compete and opens up new areas Suppforo dretingvelo epcmeo nnot m ic growth through a modernised for road users and support a growing economy and reliable network that reduces delays, cr eates jobs and helps business compete and opens up new areas help inform the next RIS1 More free-flowing network where routine delays ▪ for developme nt are more infrequent, and where journeys are safe r and more reliable More free-flowing network where routine delays Strategic themes are more infrequent, and where journeys are safe r andS mafeor ea ndrelia sbelerv iceable network where no one The Government’s vision for transforming the SRN is should be harmed when travelling or work ing on the network described in the Road Investment Strategy post 2020: Safe and serviceable network where no one Planning Ahead document available on www.gov.uk. This should be harmed when travelling or work ing on vision builds on the 5 broad aims published in the Road the Inmeprtworkoved environm ent where the impact of our activities is further reduced, ensuring a long-term and Investment Strategy for 2015-2020: economy; network sustainable benefit to the environment Improved environm ent where the impact of our capability; integration; safety; and the environment. It also activities is further reduced, ensuring a long-term and builds on Highways England’s 5 strategic outcomes (see susMtaoinraeb alecc beensse fitib tloe tahnde e innvtiroegnrmeatendt network that gives peop le the freedom to choose their mode of Figures 1.1 and 1.2). Using the evidence from this and the transport and enable safe movement acro ss and other 17 Route Strategies, we will develop proposals that Moalore nagccsideess thibel en eatndwor ikn t egrated network that gives peop le the freedom to choose their mode of can help bring the Government’s vision for roads to life. transport and enable safe movement acro ss and alongside the network Figure 1.2 - Highways England strategic outcomes 1See Chapter 6 for more information on the next RIS 2 Highways England Transport Focus We commissioned Transport Focus, the road user watchdog, to undertake research on road user priorities. Stakeholder engagement More than 4,400 interviews were undertaken with drivers Building on the engagement we started in the first across the SRN. Figure 1.4 below shows the breakdown round of Route Strategies, we have continued to work by user type and purpose. closely with a wide range of stakeholders to enhance our Completed interviews understanding of the strategic road network, and identify where users and other stakeholders feel investment 3,487Completed interviews79% is needed. We used a number of methods to collate information. 3,487322 79%7% For example, we launched an online tool for customers and stakeholders over the summer of 2016 to inform us 322 7% of the issues and challenges on our roads that affected 407 9% them. As well as information collated from a range of people within Highways England, more than 300 different 206407 5%9% stakeholder organisations provided important feedback on the network during the evidence collection period. 206 5% There were also more than 370 individual members of the Commuting 501 11% public who contributed information. In total, around 2,700 individual points were raised by external stakeholders. Commuting 501 11% Business 1,367 31% Business Leisure 2,4571,367 56%31% 233 354 Figure 1.4 - Driver sample breakdown Business Leisure250 fleet managers2,457 from a56% mix Local authority of industries, size and regions 716 STBs/LEPs 250 fleet managers from a mix Individuals of industries, size and regions Others 1,233 166 The research found that 61% of the users of the South West Peninsula route rated their experience of the route as either extremely good or fairly good. However, as Table 1.1 shows, 41% of users still experienced problems using Figure 1.3 - External stakeholder responses the route, with congestion and then roadworks cited as the two main causes. We are increasingly working with subnational transport bodies (STBs), including Midlands Connect, England’s The full report has been published on Transport Economic Heartland and Transport for the North, so we Focus’s website www.transportfocus.org.uk/research- can ensure that their developing strategies and planning publications/publications/road-to-the-future. are integrated into our thinking (and vice versa). We will continue to work closely with Transport Focus to understand customer priorities to ensure that the next RIS reflects their needs.