Felixstowe to Midlands 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 10 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 27
i R o ou o to S ot a te a t o o r ta a to at tr o ateg e o to S ot a e t o o to a e e o o rou te or t e rogra e to e to a e o route trateg e o t e So e t to a Strateg Roa et or to So e t a e t orr or to a Sout oa t e tra
r g a to eter
A1 Sout e t e u a
o o to ee a t a t o g a Sout e e A19 A69 ort e Newcacastlstlee upon Tyne e Carlisle A1 Sunderland a to a e a ou e t M6 er re ort a a t a A66 A1(M) A595 Sout a 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 Worceesster 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 SoSouuthethenndd--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 estonone Yeovil A31 A259 M27 A3(M) Exeter A27 A30 A30 A27 Bright A259 A35 Portsmouth on
Torquay A30 Plymouth A38
Engliglishsh Chhanannel o etre e g ay ge y e a e r e R ro o yr g t a at a a e r g t r a e Sur ey
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 Felixstowe to Midlands 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 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
RIS1 Strategic ision as reiterated in RIS Post 2020: Planning ahe ad Purpose of Route Strategies RIS1 Strategic ision 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 Network the RIS. This suite of Route Strategies builds upon the 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 network. This time the Route Strategies aim to: Safety
▪▪ 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 Stakeholder engagement watchdog, to undertake research on road user priorities. 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 407 9% stakeholder organisations provided important feedback 206 5% on the network during the evidence collection period. There were also more than 370 individual members of the 206 5% 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 1,367 31% 2,457 56%
Business Figure 1.4 - Driver sample breakdown Leisure250 fleet managers2,457 from 56%a mix Local authority of industries si e and regions STBs/LEPs 250 fleet managers from a mix Individuals of industries si e and regions Others The research found that the Felixstowe to the Midlands route was well rated, with 63% and 60% of users rating their experience on the motorway and A road sections of the route respectively as either extremely good or fairly Figure 1.3 - External stakeholder responses good. However, as Table 1.1 shows, 30% of users still experienced problems using the route, with congestion and We are increasingly working with subnational transport roadworks cited as the two main causes. bodies (STBs), including Midlands Connect, England’s Economic Heartland and Transport for the North, so we The full report has been published on Transport can ensure that their developing strategies and planning Focus’s website www.transportfocus.org.uk/research- are integrated into our thinking (and vice versa). publications/publications/road-to-the-future. We will continue to work closely with Transport Focus to understand customer priorities to ensure that the next RIS reflects their needs.
3 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Experienced Second largest Route impacted Largest problem problems % problem
61% M25 to Solent
58% London Orbital and M23 to Gatwick
50% South Coast Central
46% Solent to Midlands
44% East of England
43% Birmingham to Exeter
41% South West Peninsula
41% North and East Midlands
40% London to Scotland East
40% South Pennines
39% Kent Corridor to M25
37% London to Scotland West
32% Midlands to Wales and Gloucestershire
30% Felixstowe to Midlands
30% South Midlands
28% London to Leeds
27% London to Wales
17% North Pennines
Delays caused Roads busy/ Congestion/ Roadworks by accidents/ high volume traffic queuing roads closed of traffic
Table 1.1 - Transport Focus summary
4 Highways England 2. The route
The Felixstowe to Midlands route provides a key connection to the Port of Felixstowe and is therefore important to both national and international freight movements. It comprises the whole of the A14 carriageway and the M6 motorway between its intersections with the M1 and M42 motorways. There are also parts of the route that branch off from this section, namely the A45 between M1 junction 15 and the A14 and the A428/A421 between M1 junction 13 and the A14.
The route is made up of 4 component parts: the A14, M6, A45 and A428/A421. These vary from stretches of single- KEY lane trunk road to 3-lane motorway. Felixstowe to Midlands route The route provides a corridor for traffic SRN moving from the ports of Felixstowe and Harwich (via the A120 and A12) on the east coast to the Midlands, passing Ipswich, Cambridge, Kettering, Bedford, Northampton and Coventry. It intercepts with the London to Scotland (East), London to Leeds (East) and East of England routes and spans the counties of Suffolk, Cambridgeshire, Bedfordshire, Northamptonshire and Warwickshire. A high proportion of these journeys are associated with freight due to the important role the route plays in linking the Port of Felixstowe with arterial freight routes. Felixstowe is the largest container port by volume in the UK and represents a major international gateway both to the region and nationally. The route therefore allows freight to be distributed to a number of wider national destinations while also providing a link for goods to be exported from the Port of Felixstowe. The A14 is a major trunk road made up of 2 and 3-lane dual carriageway sections.
It runs east to west linking the M1 near Reproduced using Ordnance Survey data © Crown Copyright 2016 Catthorpe to Felixstowe, passing the urban centres of Kettering, Cambridge, Bury St Edmunds and Ipswich. These Figure 2.1 - Route overview map are also economic centres that attract vehicles from the surrounding area, many of which use the A14 as a means of access.
5 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Investment through RIS1 means the A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon scheme, which aims to relieve traffic congestion and unlock local economic growth in the area, is currently being constructed. This, along with other planned improvements, will support economic and residential growth demands along the A14 corridor. The M6 runs from M1 junction 19 near Catthorpe via Birmingham, Stoke-on-Trent, Manchester, Lancaster and Carlisle to the border with Scotland. The section within this route links the east of Birmingham to the M1. It has 3 lanes and hard shoulder provision which enable high volumes of traffic to travel to employment centres such as Birmingham and Coventry. There is provision for non-motorised users (NMUs) at some junctions which allows pedestrians and cyclists to use these interchanges. The easternmost point of the M6 meets the M1 and A14 at junction 19 of the M1. This interchange has recently been upgraded to address congestion and safety issues with improvements including the removal of signalised roundabouts to create a direct free flowing link. Junctions 2 to 4 of the M6 are being upgraded to smart motorway standard to deal with current levels of high demand. The A45 runs on a north-east to south-west axis, enabling vehicles travelling on the A14 to access Northampton and the M1. The A45 is a single-lane carriageway for its north-eastern 6 miles with a mix of 2 and 3-lane dual carriageway sections further south-west. The interchange with the A6 at Chowns Mill experiences Felixstowe is the largest frequent incidents of congestion as well as safety issues. The A428/A421 runs on a north-east to south-west axis container port by volume and links Cambridge to Bedford and the M1 near Milton Keynes. It is predominantly dual carriageway with the in the UK and represents exception of the section between the Black Cat and a major international Caxton Gibbet roundabouts. gateway both to the region and nationally.
6 Highways England
Newcastle upon Tyne
Liverpool Manchester
Norwich Birmingham
London
Exeter
KEY
Felixstowe to Midlands route Port Airport Junction number
Blue sections are motorways Red sections are all-purpose trunk roads © Crown copyright and database rights 2013 Ordnance Survey 100030649 – N130328
Figure 2.2 - Route Strategy overview map
7 8 Highways England 3. Current constraints and challenges
This chapter outlines the emerging issues raised by stakeholders and More free-flowing network is supplemented by Highways England information. Stakeholders have raised congestion and the free flow of traffic as issues along the majority of the route.
The following text and figures within this chapter provide At-grade junctions are a cause of delay and congestion. a summary of the information collected and applied to Vehicles have to reduce speed in order to allow other our strategic themes. vehicles to leave the carriageway or to give priority at roundabouts. This occurs, for example, at the A421/A1 Black Cat junction. A safe and Congestion also occurs due to a lack of link capacity, serviceable network particularly when a section of road is single carriageway. This causes queues especially at peak times, such as at A14 junction 13, particularly on the A45 approach to this There are a number of safety and service issues at interchange. Single-carriageway sections of the A45 and various points along the route. A lack of hard shoulder A428 corridors also experience delay. provision means there are fewer safe places available for vehicles to wait when they are forced or choose to Congestion problems lead to blocking back at junctions. stop. As a result, slow moving or stationary vehicles are This results in lower journey time reliability, more left with no other option but to remain on the mainline congestion and a higher risk of collisions occurring. carriageway, putting other vehicles at risk. This is Junction 2 of the M6 where it meets the M69 and A46 particularly the case on sections of the A14, A45 and experiences blocking back for this reason, particularly A421/A428. when vehicles attempt to manoeuvre from the A46 to the M6. Limited layby and lorry parking facilities is a further constraint along the route, particularly on older sections The free flow of traffic tends to be reduced when the of the A14. These facilities provide places for vehicles route passes near to areas of economic development or to stop, as well as giving opportunities for HGVs to wait locations where nature has dictated the infrastructure – safely away from the mainline carriageway. Without this bridges, for example. Sections of the A45 corridor such provision the likelihood of safety issues is increased. as between Collingtree and Great Billing are testament to infrastructure being dictated by the environment and Due to congestion at some junctions, vehicles are not resulting in a lack of free-flowing traffic. able to cross oncoming traffic on the local highway network when trying to leave the route. Evidence of this can be seen at A14/A142 junction 37 and contributes to queuing back along off-slips which is a safety issue. Another safety issue along the route is central reserve gaps and junctions which are at-grade. These allow direct access on to the local highway network or to properties. However, they are often a source of incidents along the length of the route.
9 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Supporting economic A more accessible and growth integrated network
The route is key to serving freight traffic movements Accessibility and integration issues have been highlighted from ports in the east to the midlands, north and west. along the length of the route. These include provision Efficient and safe operation needs to be maintained to for NMUs. ensure future economic growth. Areas along the route Poor NMU provision results in severance and a lack of such as Ipswich and Bury St Edmunds will see planned willingness among pedestrians and cyclists to use the economic growth and consequently the route will have to network. This is currently an issue on the A14 between carry additional traffic generated by new employment and the A140 and A1156. residential developments. This growth will put increased pressure on sections of the route. Due to the arterial nature of the route, this pressure will be felt along its length as vehicles seek to reach economic centres. Points on the route which link large economic centres such as the A14/A12 junction 37 at Newmarket will experience an increase in vehicles as economic growth occurs. Congestion that results from economic growth in turn limits the economic benefits that would be gained from both current and planned highways improvements along sections of the route. An example of this is congestion on the A45 at Northampton which limits the effectiveness of any future improvements.
An improved environment
Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs) are currently in place on sections of the route. Any further traffic growth on sections of the route within these AQMAs may worsen the air quality situation. Other junctions along the route which are not covered by AQMAs are also an issue in terms of the environment. Any further traffic growth at the A14 Copdock junction, for example, will lead to a decrease in air quality standards. Other environmental issues such as drainage and flooding occur at various junctions along the route. The A14 between junctions 37 and 38 experiences drainage issues while a number of flooding issues have been reported to occur on the A14 between its junctions with the A45 and A428 and as well as at the A421 Beancroft Road junction. Noise issues are also reported along some sections of the route, for example, on the M6 and on the A14 south of Ipswich.
10 Highways England
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 1 of 4
Economic growth in Nuneaton and M 2 A Bedworth, Coventry and Rugby 9 6 4 5 6 M1 M will have impacts on M6 traffic M
Flooding issues at Fillongley 5 M Nuneaton AQMA covering M6 junctions 2 to 3
69 4 M6 M KEY Birmingham 3
Supporting economic growth Journey time reliability 2 Free-flowing network issues between M6 junction 3 and junction 4 Safe and serviceable network Coventry M6 Improved environment see ap Accessible and integrated network 42 M 6 4 M1 A A5
Figure 3.1 - Key challenges for the route
11 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 2 of 4
M1 A6 A5 A43
Peak hour congestion at A14 junction 13, mainly on A45 approach
A14 Kettering M6 3 7 10 13 At-grade central reserve 8 gaps are a safety risk on A14 junctions 13 to 21 A1 A509 21 A14 M45 A6
A43 see ap
Central reserve is prone A1 A45 to flooding on A14 junctions 13 to 21 There is a lack of hard Northampton shoulder and hard strips along the full length of the route. KEY
Supporting economic growth AQMA covering the A45 around Northampton. Free-flowing network Safe and serviceable network Improved environment Bedford Accessible and integrated network
A43
Milton Keynes
Figure 3.2 - Key challenges for the route A5 M1
12 Highways England
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 3 of 4 A1 A141
KEY A10
Supporting economic growth A14 Free-flowing network A14 21 24 A14 junction 33 will experience see ap Safe and serviceable network an increase in vehicles as economic growth occurs p A14 a Improved environment e e s Accessible and integrated network
33 31 The A421 Black Cat junction A428 A14 experiences delays, 36 congestion and an increased risk of collisions Cambridge Cambridge
Safety issues along the A428 corridor Bedford A6 A11 A421
Flooding issues at the A421/Beancroft Significant congestion Road junction along the A421 around Bedford A1198
M1 A6
M1 junction 13 with the A421 interchange experiences significant safety issues
M1 A1 M11
Figure 3.3 - Key challenges for the route
13 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 4 of 4
ra age ue au e ta g ater to o ur o A134 arr age ay at u t o u t o to a u t o u t o e er e e A11 g e e o o ge t o A14 43 38 37 42 44 46
u t o Newmarket e er e e o our ey t e re a ty a g Bury St A14 e e o e ay Edmunds A134 A140
A14 p a e e oor ro o s A11 o t e et ee t e a
53 Ipswich u t o o A12 arr age ay urrou g KEY e er e e ery g e e o o ge t o 58 Supporting economic growth 55 Free-flowing network Safe and serviceable network A12 Improved environment Accessible and integrated network Felixstowe Harwich
Colchester
Figure 3.4 - Key challenges for the route
14 Highways England
Diversionary Routes An essential facet of a resilient road network is the ability to effectively divert traffic away from closed carriageways in the event of an unplanned incident. The map indicates the diversionary routes that currently exist on this route and that have been agreed with the local road network operator. However, it should be noted that the provision of these routes is dependent upon the nature of the incident and the suitability and availability of the surrounding network. In some instances, the diversion route may not be suitable for HGV traffic or might not be available due to events on the local road network. A review is currently underway to improve the quality and coverage of these routes, and to improve the traffic management procedures that are relied upon to implement these routes in the event of a carriageway closure.
KEY
Route Diversion road network via local road Strategic road network o ta r a e Sur ey ata ro o yr g t a ata a e r g t
Figure 3.5 - Felixstowe to Midlands diversionary routes
15 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Maintaining the strategic road network We carry out routine maintenance and renewal of roads, structures and technology to keep the network safe, serviceable and reliable. We also ensure that our contractors deliver a high level of service on the SRN to support operational performance and the long-term integrity of the asset. The heavy year-round use of all our routes means that they require regular maintenance and inspections for repairs to keep them fully operational, in order to support economic growth. Our maintenance regime focuses on 4 key aspects of the routes: road surfaces, bridges and structures, drainage and earthworks. The summary condition of each on this route is set out below:
Road surface The surface condition across the route is considered to be sound or having some deterioration with less than 0.5% having severe deterioration that would require focused investigation.
Bridges and structures Future developments The structures across the route are mostly in very good We have taken steps to transform our approach to or good condition. According to an analysis of current maintenance by establishing an asset management data, less than 1% of our structures are in poor or very programme that develops and implements the Asset poor condition. Management Framework for Highways England. The framework aligns strategic objectives with regional Drainage asset management plans and lifecycle asset management Drainage assets are represented by both linear assets (for plans. It also includes the analysis required to plan the example pipes, channels, ditches, drains) and non-linear investment and expenditure on the strategic road network assets (for example gullies, chambers). Across the route, during the next road period, developing the business drainage assets are considered to be in good overall case options for capital renewals. It will provide a clear condition for both linear and non-linear assets. Of those articulation of the total value that will be delivered by assets inspected, just under 45% of linear assets have investment in RIS2, including the costs and benefits of no defects, while just under 55% of the non-linear assets delivering the capital renewals programme. have only superficial defects. Operations Earthworks We are establishing a nationally consistent approach to The geotechnical earthworks across the route are the management of our operational capability through considered to be in fair condition, with the total length of our Operational Excellence change programme. This will earthworks that require further investigation amounting to deepen our understanding of how our interventions impact less than 4%. on the performance of the network and on the journeys of New assets have an operational ‘life’, during which, our customers. We are using the latest analytical software under normal conditions and maintenance, the risk of to process traffic data and gain insight into: failure is expected to be low. Beyond this period, the ▪▪ how our operational services can improve safety risk of asset failure is expected to increase, although for and provide security to road users many types of asset the risk of failure remains low and ▪▪ how the attendance of a traffic officer has an impact we do not routinely replace assets solely because they on incident durations are older than their expected operational life. We use a how information provided by Highways England combination of more regular maintenance and inspection, ▪▪ can benefit road users who plan their journeys along with a risk-based approach to ensure that assets beforehand and then while on their journeys remain safe while achieving value for money from our maintenance and renewal activities. By better understanding our current operational performance, we can create a baseline from which we can identify opportunities for improvement.
16 Highways England 4. Current investment plans and growth potential
Investment in the strategic road ▪▪ commercial development – an assessment of the relationship between the main property sectors and network can make areas more the SRN attractive for inward investment, ▪▪ international gateways – a review of principal international gateways (ports and airports) and their unlock new sites for employment and contribution to the economy housing and facilitate regeneration. ▪▪ socio-economic analysis and future forecasts – mapping of socio-economic data (population, deprivation and employment) and sectoral forecasts From servicing the UK’s logistics needs, linking our up to 2030. This included identification of the likely manufacturing heartlands and connecting to our growth forecasts for all sectors with a particular focus international gateways, supporting services-driven activity on those sectors heavily dependent on the SRN in high-growth towns and cities, to meeting the needs of our visitor economy, the SRN is critically important to The Road to Growth sets out our evidence findings to servicing the UK economy. date and the steps we will take to enhance our enabling role in supporting economic growth. Economic context Innovation Highways England has been working with a wide range of stakeholders to develop a strategic economic growth In April 2016, we published our Innovation, Technology plan, which we are calling The Road to Growth. This plan and Research Strategy which set out how Highways explores the economic role of the strategic road network, England will use pioneering behaviours to help support and aims to explain how we will further increase our our strategic objectives and create value for customers contribution to the UK economy. As part of the evidence and stakeholders. base for The Road to Growth, over 400 economic The £150 million Innovation Designated Fund was hotspots – or economic opportunity areas (EOAs) – established to support innovative capital projects and to around the SRN have been identified in consultation with support developing the use of emerging technologies, Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). The figures in this new materials and ways of working. chapter highlight the EOAs which most closely align and are supported by the route. Investment plans To inform the development of The Road to Growth and assess the relationship between the SRN and economic The following figures show the location of Highways growth, a suite of evidence reports were completed. England major improvement projects which have These reports were published alongside The Road to previously been announced to help tackle some of the Growth discussion paper and were subject to public issues on the network. The Highways England website consultation from November 2016 to January 2017. and delivery plan updates should be consulted for the Alongside the engagement we have undertaken with latest information. all LEPs across England, the following evidence reports The figures also show strategic studies which have have ensured we have a more comprehensive economic been progressed during RIS1, innovation projects and evidence base and a better understanding of future economic opportunity areas. challenges and opportunities: ▪▪ economic growth and the SRN – an evidence review of the relationship between transport investment and economic growth
17 18 Highways England
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 1 of 4
M A Wolverhampton 6 5 M1 42 69 M M
KEY M1 Nuneaton Greater Golden triangle 5 (M69, M6, M1), A5 Highways England M corridor and Coventry major improvement project –Nuneaton–Leicester Innovation M6 junctions 2–4 (M69 corridor) 69 4 M M1 Strategic study Birmingham M6 Birmingham Economic opportunity areas city centre Birmingham Housing and mixed use Birmingham International and UK Central 2 Mixed employment cluster
Urban centre Coventry A14 International gateway
Industrial A46 Coventry junction upgrades Research and technology M1 42 Energy M A5 6 4 Intermodal transport hub A
Logistics
Figure 4.1 - Investment plans and economic opportunity areas
19 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 2 of 4
A M1 6 A 5 A43
KEY Kettering Highways England A14 junction 10a major improvement project A14 7 Innovation M6 3 8 10 13 Strategic study Daventry International A1 Rail Freight Terminal (DIRFT) Economic opportunity areas A45 Thrapston to Stanwick Housing and mixed use A509
A43 A 21 A14 Mixed employment cluster M45 6 A45/A6 Chowns Mill Urban centre Northampton–Daventry junction improvement 5 4 International gateway A A1 Industrial Research and technology Northampton
Energy Bedford–Kettering–Corby Intermodal transport hub
Logistics
Oxford to Cambridge Expressway strategic study
Bedford 3 4 A Milton Keynes
A M 5 1
Figure 4.2 - Investment plans and economic opportunity areas
20 Highways England
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 3 of 4
A1
1 14 KEY A
Highways England major improvement project Innovation A10 A14 Cambridge to Huntingdon Strategic study A14 21 24 Economic opportunity areas A14 Greater Cambridge 14 Housing and mixed use (inc. Huntingdon) A Mixed employment cluster
Urban centre
International gateway A428 Black Cat 33 to Caxton Gibbet 31 Industrial A14 Research and technology 36 Energy Cambridge Cambridge Bedford−Kettering−Corby A428 Intermodal transport hub
Logistics Oxford to Cambridge Expressway Bedford strategic study 11 1 A A 42 6 A
M A1198 1
A6
A1 East of England strategic study
M A1 M11 1
Figure 4.3 - Investment plans and economic opportunity areas
21 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Felixstowe to Midlands - Route Strategy: Map 4 of 4
A134
11 A
A14 43 38 44
Newmarket BuBurryy SStt Edmunds A134 A1 14 A 4
A11 Ipswich A14 corridor KEY
Sizewell Highways England major improvement project Innovation
Ipswich 12 Strategic study A
Economic opportunity areas Housing and mixed use 55 58 Mixed employment cluster
Urban centre 12 A International gateway Felixstowe Industrial
Research and technology Felixstowe Energy Harwich Intermodal transport hub
Logistics Colchester
Figure 4.4 - Investment plans and economic opportunity areas
22 Highways England 5. Future challenges and opportunities
Route Strategies have identified study areas on the strategic road network which require further investigation of the issues raised by stakeholders and identified through Highways England intelligence. These study areas will now be assessed further as part of our development for RIS2.
M1
M6 A5 Note: The map presents the extent of study M42 M69 areas within the route. Colours/shading are for presentational purposes only and no
Nuneaton prioritisation has been considered at this stage. M5
A6 Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A43 3 A1 Birmingham A45 A11 and A14 2 Kettering to Felixstowe M6 junctions A134 2 and 3 M6 A14 7 A14 Huntingdon A141 19 3 8 10 13 to Thrapston A11 Coventry A14 A10 A14 M42 Huntingdon 43 6 Rugby M1 38 44
A4 A5 A509
M45 A 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket Bury St A14 Edmunds A14 40 A45 A134 A1 A14
51 Northampton A11 A421 from M1 junction 33 13 to the M1 at Black 31a A428 14 A14 15a M1 J15 – J15a Cat roundabout and (A43 junction) 36 15 and A45 Study Cambridge Cambridge
Ipswich A12 Bedford A6 A11 A421 55 M1 A43 58 Towcester M6 A5 Milton M11 M42 M69 Keynes A12
9 Nuneaton A5 M5 Felixstowe 13 A6 A6 Harwich Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A43 M1 Stansted 3 A1 Colchester Birmingham A1 M11 A45 A11 and A14 2 Kettering to Felixstowe M6 junctions A134 2 and 3 M6 A14 7 A14 Huntingdon A141 19 3 8 10 13 to Thrapston A11 Coventry A14 A10 A14 M42 Huntingdon 43 6 Rugby M1 38 44
A4 A5 A509
M45 A 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket Bury St A14 Edmunds A14 40 A45 A134 A1 A14
51 Northampton A11 A421 from M1 junction 33 13 to the M1 at Black 31a A428 14 A14 15a M1 J15 – J15a Cat roundabout and (A43 junction) 36 15 and A45 Study Cambridge Cambridge
Ipswich A12 Bedford A6 A11 A421 55 A43 58 Towcester Milton M11 Keynes A12
9
A5 Felixstowe 13 A6 Harwich
M1 Stansted Colchester A1 M11
Figure 5.1 - Map of all study areas
23 M1
M6 A5 M42 M69 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
Nuneaton M5
A6 Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A14 Huntingdon to Thrapston A43 3 A1 Birmingham A45 ▪▪ The levels of congestion at A14 junction 13, particularly on the A45 approach, during peak 2 Kettering hours will continue to increase. A134 M6 A14 ▪▪ The risk of collisions on the A14 between 19 7 A141 3 8 10 13 Thrapston and Brampton is anticipated A11 Coventry to worsen. A14 A14 ▪ Additional traffic as a result of economic growthA10 M42 M1 ▪ Huntingdon 38 43 6 Rugby and increased Cambridge to Huntingdon 44 A4 A5 A509 capacity may exacerbate current issues. M1 M45 A 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket M6 A5 Bury St M42 M69 A14 Edmunds A14 40 A45 A134 A1 A14
51 Nuneaton Northampton A11 M5 33 31a 14 A6 A428 A14 15a 36 4 M69 Birmingham M6 Cambridge 15 A43 Cambridge 3 A1 Birmingham A45 Ipswich A12 Kettering 2 M1 J15–J15aBedford and (A43 junction) and A45 study A6 A11 A134 A421 55 A43 M6 A14 58 7 Proposed economic growth and the resultant A141 Towcester 19 3 8 10 ▪▪ 13 Milton traffic increases in Northampton may lead to a M11 A11 Coventry Keynes decline in performance of the A45. A14 A10 A14 A12 M42 Economic growth will increase the demand on Huntingdon 43 6 Rugby M1 ▪▪ 38 44
A5 A509 A4 peak hour operation. 9
M45 A5 A 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket Bury St Felixstowe 13 A14 A6 Edmunds Harwich A14 40 A45 A134 A1 A14 M1 Stansted Colchester 51 Northampton A1 M11 A11 33 31a A428 14 A14 15a 36 15 Cambridge Cambridge
Ipswich A12 Bedford A6 A11 A421 55 A43 58 Towcester Milton M11 Keynes A12
9 24 A5 Felixstowe 13 A6 Harwich
M1 Stansted Colchester A1 M11 M1
M6 A5 M42 M69
Nuneaton M5
A6 Highways England Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A43 3 A1 Birmingham A45 2 Kettering A134 M6 A14 A11 and A14 to Felixstowe M1 19 7 A141 3 8 10 13 A11 M6 A5 M42 M69 Coventry A14 A10 A14 M42 Huntingdon 43 6 Rugby M1 38 44
A4 A5 A509
Nuneaton M45 A 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket Bury St M5 A14 Edmunds A14 40 A6 A45 A134 A1 A14 Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A43 3 A1 51 Birmingham Northampton A11 A45 33 31a 2 Kettering A428 14 A14 15a A134 36 M6 A14 Cambridge 19 7 A14115 Cambridge 3 8 10 13 A11 Coventry Ipswich A14 A10 A14 A12 M42 M1 Huntingdon 38 43 6 Rugby Bedford 44
A5 A509 A4 A6 A11 A421 55 A43 58 M45 A 21 Towcester A43 6 23 Milton Newmarket Bury StM11 A14 Keynes Edmunds A14 40 A12 A45 A134 A1 A14 9 51 Northampton A5 A11 ▪▪ There are congestion issues at Felixstowe 33 junctions 53 to 58 at Ipswich, at 31a 13 A6 Harwich A428 14 A14 junctions 42 to 44 at Bury St Edmunds 15a 36 and at junction 37 of the A14. M1 Stansted 15 Cambridge Cambridge ▪▪ Areas along the route, particularly Colchester A1 Ipswich and BuryM11 St Edmunds, will see planned economic growth Ipswich A12 and consequently additional traffic Bedford generated by new employment and A6 A11 A421 residential developments will place 55 A43 58 Towcester additional pressure on the route. Milton M11 Keynes ▪▪ Growth of traffic through the port of Felixstowe would also create additional A12 pressure on the route. 9 ▪▪ Limited layby and lorry parking facilities paired with lack of hard shoulder on A5 sections of the A14 affects the free Felixstowe 13 A6 flow of traffic. Harwich
M1 Stansted Colchester A1 M11
25 M1
M6 A5 M42 M69
Nuneaton M5
A6 Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A43 3 A1 Birmingham A45 2 Kettering A134 M6 A14 19 7 A141 3 8 10 13 A11 Coventry A14 A10 A14 M42 Huntingdon 43 6 Rugby M1 38 44
A4 A5 A509
M45 FelixstoweA to Midlands Route Strategy 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket Bury St A14 Edmunds A14 40 A45 A134 A1 A14
51 Northampton A11 A421 from M1 junction 13 to the M1 at Black Cat roundabout 33 31a A428 14 A14 15a ▪▪ The number of severe incidents at A421/M1 junction 36 15 13 will likely increase in response to increasedCa mtraffic.bridge Cambridge ▪▪ Economic growth means congestion on the A421 around Bedford may worsen. Ipswich A12 Bedford ▪▪ Flooding issues will continue to exist on sections of A6 A11 A421 the A421/A428. 55 A43 58 Towcester Milton ▪▪ Upgrade to the A428 is likely to add furtherM11 pressure Keynes to the A421. A12
9
A5 Felixstowe 13 A6 Harwich
M1 Stansted Colchester A1 M11
M1
M6 M6A5 junctions 2 and 3 M42 M69 ▪▪ Population and economic growth in the areas of Nuneaton and Bedworth, Coventry and Rugby may result in more congestion along this section of the route. Nuneaton M5 ▪▪ An AQMA has been declared in Coventry (city wide) and includes the junction and area within between junctions 2 and 3 of the M6. Further congestion is likely to exacerbate the issue A6and/or extend the boundary. Birmingham 4 M6 M69 A43 3 A1 Birmingham A45 2 Kettering A134 M6 A14 19 7 A141 3 8 10 13 A11 Coventry A14 A10 A14 M42 Huntingdon 43 6 Rugby M1 38 44
A4 A5 A509
M45 A 21 A43 6 23 Newmarket Bury St A14 Edmunds A14 40 A45 A134 A1 A14
51 Northampton A11 33 31a 26 A428 14 A14 15a 36 15 Cambridge Cambridge
Ipswich A12 Bedford A6 A11 A421 55 A43 58 Towcester Milton M11 Keynes A12
9
A5 Felixstowe 13 A6 Harwich
M1 Stansted Colchester A1 M11 Highways England 6. Next steps
Our findings from this and other In the decision phase, the consultation feedback will assist the Department for Transport in developing RIS2. Route Strategies, as well as other In turn we will develop a Strategic Business Plan (SBP) setting out how we will deliver RIS2 as a business. research, will inform our first Strategic Both the RIS and SBP will be reviewed by the regulator Road Network Initial Report which of roads, the Office of Rail and Road, to ensure that we have made the most efficient decisions. The final is to be published later this year. documents are to be published in 2019. This will form the basis of a public consultation, which in turn will feed ▪▪Strategic Studies into decision-making on the next Research ▪▪Route Strategies ▪▪Highways England produces Road Investment Strategy (RIS2). (2015-18) Strategic Road Network Initial Report on the state of the network We are looking ahead to the next RIS and how we can support the Secretary of State in ensuring that value for Evidence used money investments are made in the road network. The in drafting RIS2 process for developing RIS2 is set out in our licence, and is in 3 phases: research, decision and mobilisation. ▪▪Department for Transport produces We are currently in the first phase –research phase Road Investment Strategy – where we are gathering wide-ranging evidence on Decision ▪▪Highways England produces the state of the network and how we can ensure that Strategic Business Plan (2018-19) ▪▪Office of Rail and Road reviews the improvements have maximum impact. The series of efficiency of both Route Strategies, of which this is one, is an important part of this phase alongside the outcomes of strategic studies which looked at particularly complicated RIS2 finalised problems on parts of the network and how to tackle and published them. Another key source of evidence is the Strategic Economic Growth Plan (The Road to Growth), which examines where and how the SRN can help support economic growth. This will emphasise that sectors Mobilisation ▪▪Highways England produces the Delivery Plan dependent on the road network employ 7.4 million (2020) people, that we are already doing a great deal to support growth and that we want to do even more. Now that this series of Route Strategies is published, we 1 April 2020 - Road will continue our engagement with stakeholders, including Period 2 begins other transport providers and authorities, on how best to address problems and maximise opportunities. For example, in working towards seamless end-to-end Delivery (post 2020) journeys for our customers, we will be focussing on how the strategic road network links with local roads and Figure 6.1 - RIS2 high-level process other modes of transport. Findings from the research phase will feed into Highways England’s Strategic Road Network Initial Report, expected to be published later this year, which will outline Highways England’s ambitions for the network across 2020–2025 and beyond. The Initial Report will be the subject of public consultation.
27 Felixstowe to Midlands Route Strategy
In the finalmobilisation phase, we will set out a Delivery Plan with a detailed programme of investment to be carried out in 2020 to 2025 on the basis of the commitments in RIS2. Continued investment in modernisation, maintenance and operation will further improve the road network on top of the measures and schemes currently being undertaken, and will allow us to further support users of the strategic road network and the UK’s economy. The rigorous process of developing RIS2 should ensure that the best use is made of taxpayers’ money and that investments have the maximum impact. The views and perspectives of different stakeholders, including motorists, are important to us. Stakeholders may also wish to contact one of the partner organisations. For example, stakeholders can keep up to date with Transport Focus’ work, by signing up to their monthly electronic newsletter Road User Voice. Alternatively, stakeholders may prefer to make their views known through one of the many organisations involved in RIS2. They include the AA, RAC, RAC Foundation, Road Haulage Association, Freight Transport Association, Campaign for Better Transport, Confederation of British Industry and many others. We will provide information about the process and emerging findings at events for representative organisations in spring 2017. At the same time, we are developing the dialogue with emerging STBs, local government, LEPs, business groups and environmental organisations. We want to align our analysis, and eventually our decision-making, with that of other organisations, so that we can maximise the benefit of investment, for example focusing on improving the interconnectivity between different modes and between the strategic and local road networks. This should lead to a richer discussion during public consultation on the Strategic Road Network Initial Report.
28 29 If you need help accessing this or any other Highways England information, please call 0300 123 5000 and we will help you.
© Crown copyright 2016. You may re-use this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence: visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/ write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email [email protected].
This document is also available on our website at www.gov.uk/highways
If you have any enquiries about this publication email [email protected] or call 0300 123 5000*. Please quote the Highways England publications code PR230/16
Highways England Creative job number N160375
*Calls to 03 numbers cost no more than a national rate call to an 01 or 02 number and must count towards any inclusive minutes in the same way as 01 and 02 calls. These rules apply to calls from any type of line including mobile, BT, other fixed line or payphone. Calls may be recorded or monitored.
Registered office Bridge House, 1 Walnut Tree Close, Guildford GU1 4LZ Highways England Company Limited registered in England and Wales number 09346363