Highways Agency

• 1. preamble
• 2. introduction
• 3. a description of the a500 stoke pathfinder project and its surroundings
• 4. procedural submission - application for adjournment
• 5. the case for the highways agency
• 6. the case for the supporters
• 7. the case for the objectors
• 8. conclusions
• 9. recommendations

A500 City Road & Stoke Junction Improvement

5. THE CASE FOR THE HIGHWAYS AGENCY

The material points were:

Background

5.1. Most junctions on the A500 had flyovers or underpasses, the exceptions being the roundabouts at Stoke Road and City Road in the central section of the Potteries 'D' Road. This section, Queensway, was constructed between 1974 and 1977. It had originally been intended to have the A500 pass over Stoke Road on a flyover and beneath City Road in an underpass. In the event, the underpass and flyover were omitted and roundabouts were built instead.

5.2. Traffic congestion steadily increased and in 1993 a proposal was published both to widen Queensway and to add the flyover and underpass. An alternative of two underpasses had then been discarded on the grounds of cost. Further development was suspended during a governmental review of the national roads programme. The project was subsequently reintroduced into the national road programme and announced in the 1998 Targeted Programme of Improvements (DETR A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England.) as a scheme the primary objective of which was to assist with regeneration and integration. Resulting from a 1999 House of Commons motion, proposals were developed by the design and build contractor appointed by the Highways Agency; and the scheme became known as the A500 Stoke Pathfinder Project.

Policy statements

National policy

5.3. Issuing from the current transport White Paper (A New Deal for Transport Better for Everyone published in July 1996.), the Government's policy for trunk roads (DETR A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England) included the proposed scheme. The new approach to appraisal of such schemes, documented in Guidance on the Methodology for Multi-Modal Studies (GOMMS), was applied to the project, the results of which are addressed in paragraph 8.22 below.

Regional policy

5.4. The proposals complied with the Regional Planning Guidance for the West Midlands (RPG 11.). This document was under review, but the scheme also conformed with the urban renaissance, balance of economic growth across the region, accessibility and mobility, conservation and environmental enhancement, management and development of the region's highway network, and priorities for investment set out in the RPG's new draft.

Local planning policy

5.5. The Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Structure Plan contained policies concerned with enhancing the strategic highway network, improving the free flow of traffic - particularly commercial traffic - on the A500 trunk road, enhancing the local landscape, safeguarding biodiversity, protecting water resources, and enhancing existing conservation areas and green spaces. The proposed scheme conformed closely with these local policies.

5.6. The scheme supported, or conformed with, the current City of Stoke-on-Trent Local Plan's policies of land take-up, provision of pedestrian and cycling facilities, extension of the network of open spaces, improvement of the city's watercourses, reduction of flood risk, enhancement of wildlife habitats, and the conservation of any important archaeological finds. The scheme also conformed with the published deposit draft of the City Plan Review 2011.

Local Transport Plan

5.7. Stoke-on-Trent's Local Transport Plan (City of Stoke-on-Trent Local Transport Plan 2001/02 to 2005/06.) provided for enhancement of the city's economic development by the implementation of the scheme's proposals. Using the Pathfinder approach, the partnership of the scheme's contractor with the City Council was expected to ensure the scheme integrated with, and complemented, the latter's own proposals for adjacent roads published in the Local Transport Plan.

Canal Strategy

5.8. The Stoke-on-Trent Canals Strategy provided for a continuous green corridor along the River Trent suitable for recreation, and identified potential riverside improvements, some of which were addressed by the proposed scheme.

Need for the scheme

5.9. This section of the A500 suffered from severe traffic congestion, particularly during peak times, with long queues building at both roundabouts. The A500 corridor was difficult to cross on foot and on bicycles and so divided the important parts of the city centre. Subways were particularly poor, and existing bridges and walls were both unattractive and had an adverse effect on the city's environment, including its waterways.

5.10. Problems arising from the existing road plan.

5.10.1. Congestion. The busiest sections of the A500 (between Stoke Road and Shelton New Road) carried up to 60,000 vehicles per day, which was well in excess of the desirable maximum flow for a two-lane dual carriageway. Because of the severe congestion at the two roundabouts, which occurred for long periods during the day, it was anticipated there could be no increase in traffic flows until improvements were made.

5.10.2. Safety. Even though they caused only slight injuries on account of the relatively low vehicle speeds involved, most accidents on this section of the trunk road did occur on the approaches to the two roundabouts. Elsewhere within the limits of the proposed scheme the A500 had a significantly higher accident rate than the national average for roads of a comparable standard.

5.10.3. Severance. Due to the difficulties of crossing the A500 corridor, particularly on foot and on bicycles, important parts of the city had tended to become isolated from each other. These included: to the east the university and railway station, and to the west the civic centre and town hall, Hartshill Park, and the conservation area of St Peter's churchyard. Industrial sites, housing and shopping centres lay on both sides, as did several buildings of local interest.

5.10.4. Development. The present congestion and environmental problems brought about by traffic emissions were acting as major constraints to the development of many vacant sites abutting, or near to, the A500.

Purposes of the scheme

5.11. The purpose of the scheme was to improve safety and relieve congestion at the existing roundabouts at Stoke Road and City Road. Its declared objectives were:

5.11.1. To reduce congestion at these junctions by means of a scheme compatible with the city's transport proposals and supportive of the objectives for regeneration and employment.

5.11.2. To assist in the creation of a transport system which encouraged access by the most appropriate form of transport to development sites and to the general urban area.

5.11.3. To provide an environmentally acceptable scheme which protected and enhanced the built and natural environment.

5.11.4. To improve safety for all road users.

5.11.5. To improve access across the A500 trunk road for pedestrians, cyclists and public transport, and in particular to facilitate access to the railway station and Stoke town centre.

Alternative schemes considered by the Highways Agency

5.12. The length of the trunk road under consideration already existed. Given the space constraints imposed by the surrounding urban environment a new off line route was rejected at an early stage, the only exception being relatively minor line adjustments to accommodate new slip roads. Widening to three lanes in each direction was to be achieved largely within the existing highway boundary.

5.13. An alternative replacement of the Stoke Road roundabout with a flyover had been considered, and indeed had been announced by the then Department of Transport in August 1993, before the project was subsequently suspended. In 1998, using the New Approach to Appraisal methods, four contactors tendered design solutions taking account of the 1993 preferred route announcement, but endeavouring to improve on it whilst ensuring that the environmental impact was equivalent to, or better than, the 1993 scheme. The successful submission included replacing the former plan for a Stoke Road flyover with an underpass.

5.14. The gist of alternative solutions considered were:

5.14.1. Taking Stoke Road over or under the existing A500: rejected due to the presence of the canal and the need to limit demolition along Stoke Road.

5.14.2. Provide a flyover for the A500 over Stoke Road: rejected on the balance of environmental disbenefits.

5.14.3. Taking City Road over or under the A500: rejected for reasons similar to those in 5.14.1.

5.14.4. Provide a flyover for the A500 over City Road: rejected on the balance of environmental disbenefits, particularly with regard to St Peter's Churchyard conservation area.

5.14.5. Retaining existing roundabouts with upgraded traffic lights and pedestrian subways: rejected because they would not provide the required levels of access, safety, or environmental improvements.

5.14.6. Geometrical adjustments to the existing roundabouts: rejected because of their inferior landscape and spatial qualities, the reduced availability of public open space land, their continuing adverse impact on the canal area, and highway alignment issues.

5.14.7. At Whieldon Road a layout using the principle of linked slip roads: rejected due to complications connecting into the A50 junction.

Reasons for chosen scheme

5.15. Tender submissions were assessed on quality and price; the winning choice was the contractor with the best overall submission which met the scheme's objectives. One reason for not proceeding with a flyover was that it would have necessitated the demolition of the Glebe Street bridge, generating consequences for the local road network now deemed unacceptable.

The Proposed Scheme

New junctions

5.16. Two existing roundabouts would be removed and replaced by underpasses taking the line of the A500 at both junctions significantly below existing ground level. The underpasses would be more compact than the roundabouts. New bridges at the Stoke Road and City Road junctions would provide direct links across the A500 at a similar level to the present roundabouts. Both these bridges would include priority measures for buses, and improved access for pedestrians and cyclists. Both Stoke and City Roads would be straightened through the centre of the former roundabouts.

Waterways

5.17. At Stoke Road the Trent and Mersey Canal would be realigned to follow its 19th Century route which would improve navigation for boat users. At City Road the River Trent would be taken out of its culvert to run in an open channel on a new course to the west of the A500. Existing vertical concrete walls would be replaced with sloping grassed banks.

Shelton New Road to Stoke Road

5.18. The A500 would be widened to three lanes in each direction with on and off slip roads at the Shelton New Road and Stoke Road junctions. On the western side of the A500 there would be improvements near to Stoke Road including a new open channel for the Fowlea Brook.

Stoke Road to City Road

5.19. This section of the A500 would remain as two lanes in each direction but would be rebuilt within the current wide central reservation. The existing A500 carriageways would be converted into new link roads running on either side of the new carriageways between Stoke Road and City Road. Some sections of the link roads would be reduced in level to enable the canalside wall to be reduced in height. There would be a new northbound on-slip just to the south of Glebe Street bridge, and a new southbound on-slip to the south of Stoke Road. Glebe Street bridge would remain unchanged. Emergency lay-bys for traffic travelling in both directions would be positioned in the vicinity of the underpasses.

City Road to A50

5.20. New links would be built on either side of the A500 between City Road and Whieldon Road, and new slip roads would be provided south of Whieldon Road to connect the links to the A500. The existing Whieldon Road underpass would be retained. The A500 would be widened to three lanes in each direction within the existing carriageway boundary.

Measures to reduce environmental effects

5.21. Placing sections of the trunk road below existing ground level would itself reduce the environmental effect of the scheme. To this end additional works were proposed, namely:

5.21.1. Low noise road surface treatment.

5.21.2. New environmental barriers and replacement of existing barriers with less intrusive ones.

5.21.3. New tree and shrub planting and the treatment of retained structures with high quality materials.

5.21.4. Enhancement of watercourses to improve appearances and benefit wildlife.

5.21.5. New footpaths and cycleways adjacent to the new open channel for the River Trent.

5.21.6. With regard to the canal conservation area, a reduction of the number of bridges spanning it; improved pedestrian and cycle access to it; and improved screening, new paving, new lighting, new tree and shrub planting, and the provision of seating along it.

5.21.7. The enhancement of St Peter's churchyard conservation area with new planting and the realignment of the Church Street footpath outside the churchyard's boundary wall.

5.21.8. New lighting along the trunk road corridor to minimise light spillage.

5.21.9. Demolition of the existing subways and their replacement with improved access and safer road crossings for pedestrians and cyclists.

Benefits of proposed scheme

5.22. The benefits of the proposals were expected to be:

5.22.1. Assistance with the economic regeneration of Stoke-on-Trent by the removal of development constraints.

5.22.2. Relief of the current severe traffic congestion on this section of the A500, particularly at peak periods on the Stoke and City Roads roundabouts. Traffic capacity would increase to accommodate the forecast 50,000 vehicles per day, with peaks of 4,500 vehicles per hour, in each direction.

5.22.3. Provision of better access for public transport, pedestrians and cyclists across the A500 corridor, and improved safety along it.

5.22.4. Reductions in total emissions from road traffic, including reductions of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide.

5.22.5. A general improvement in the immediately surrounding townscape's quality and character.

Effect on road safety

5.23. Compared with existing conditions, the proposed scheme would offer a significant reduction in the number of road casualties along the A500. On the other hand, there presently having been a relatively large measure of traffic suppression, these reductions would be offset by additional accidents brought about by induced traffic. COBA analysis results for the 30 year evaluation period were:

Environmental Effects

Environmental Statement

5.24. A full Environmental Statement assessing the environmental impact of the proposed scheme was published with the draft Orders in March 2002 in accordance with EC Directive 85/337 as amended by EC Directive 97/11 as applied by Section 105A of the Highways Act 1980 as amended by the Highways (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1999. It contained detailed assessments of the scheme's impacts on landscape integration, noise, air quality, townscape, the built heritage, archaeology, geology, the water environment, biodiversity, accessibility, journey ambience, and disruption due to construction, together with assessments of all mitigation measures proposed for the scheme.

Landscape integration

5.25. The scheme supported the majority of national, regional and local land-use policies. The expected minor loss of development land would not fit with local policies, but this disbenefit would be more than outweighed by the other potential benefits of the scheme for development. The scheme would have no effect on agriculture.

Assessment: Beneficial.

Noise

5.26. Noise levels were predicted to rise due to increased road traffic capacity and usage. Environmental barriers would reduce some of the impact. Although some properties and amenity areas within the study area would experience a reduction in noise, the majority of properties and some amenity areas would experience perceptible increases.

Assessment: Adverse.

Air quality

5.27. Within and adjacent to the A500 corridor air pollution levels were predicted to rise marginally, although no dwelling would experience adverse effects. Otherwise local air pollution would reduce after the road works were completed, compared with existing levels.

Assessment: Neutral.

Townscape

5.28. Improved screening and the lowering of the main road would reduce visual intrusion. The townscape would further benefit from restoration of the river and canal; the reduced size of the road junctions and some existing structures; and the improved design of new and existing structures, including the use of better quality finishes.

Assessment: Large Beneficial.

Built heritage

5.29. For the three conservation areas: there would be a moderate beneficial effect on the canal area, a slight beneficial effect on St Peter's Churchyard, and a neutral effect on the Winton Square (Winton Square is the area of the railway station and associated North Staffordshire Hotel.) conservation area.

Assessment: Slight Beneficial.

Archaeology

5.30. Out of the one scheduled ancient monument and 40 sites of regional or local importance, the scheme would have a slight beneficial effect on 12 sites, a moderately adverse effect on one, a slight adverse effect on 8, and a neutral effect on the rest.

Assessment: Neutral.

Geology

5.31. There are no designated geological sites within the study area. Within the 165,000 cubic metres of material to be removed to licensed landfill sites, there would be 40,000 cubic metres of contaminated material. Removal of this contaminated material together with an increase in hard cover would reduce exposure to contaminated soils and would reduce the potential for contaminating water resources.

Assessment: Neutral.

Water environment

5.32. Apart from one negligible decrease and one negligible increase there would be no change to flood risks from the watercourses.

Assessment: Neutral.

5.33. Water quality would be improved because of the removal of long stretches of the River Trent and Fowlea Brook from culverts; introduction of oil interceptors, spillage containment and reed beds to control pollution from road run off; ceasing A500 drainage into the canal; replacement of roundabouts with underpasses which would reduce the probability of a serious accidental spillage; and the removal of road drainage connectivity to groundwater.

Assessment: Slight Beneficial.

Biodiversity

5.34. The overall effects on the canal would be neutral. The River Trent and Fowlea Brook would benefit from reductions in culvert lengths and from habitat creation. Other areas have negligible to lower biodiversity value or would not be affected by the proposals.

Assessment: Minor Gain.

Accessibility

5.35. Accessibility over the A500 would be improved, and severance would be reduced for pedestrians, especially the disabled, elderly and children. Cyclists would experience a lesser beneficial effect.

Assessment: Moderate Beneficial.

Journey ambience

5.36. The scheme would bring reduced traffic congestion, improved road layout, improved navigation on the canal, and improved links for pedestrians and cyclists. Separation of through traffic from local traffic and a co-ordinated system of direction signs would reduce traveller stress. The scheme would enhance views on local roads on the one hand, but restrict them on the A500 on the other.

Assessment: Large Beneficial.

Disruption

5.37. Construction would last for two years. Work would be sequenced to maintain full traffic flow on the A500 as well as access across it. Construction traffic would be directed away from residential areas and sensitive buildings. There would be some night time working. Flows on the River Trent and Fowlea Brook would be maintained by means of temporary diversions in order to avoid flood risk, but navigation on the canal and access to the towpath would be interrupted for a limited period during winter.

Assessment: Temporary Slight Adverse.

Cumulative effects

5.38. The majority of localities would experience a mixture of adverse (relating to noise), beneficial and neutral impacts which would result in no overall cumulative effect. Some properties would experience adverse cumulative effects resulting from a low adverse visual effect and an increase in noise levels.

5.39. A few properties on Liverpool Road would experience a beneficial cumulative effect made up of a medium beneficial improvement in visual impact and a decrease in noise levels. Conversely, some other properties would experience an increase in noise levels.

5.40. There would be a beneficial cumulative effect on both the canal and the River Trent.

Disruption during construction

5.41. During construction existing junctions would be operated under signal control; two traffic lanes on the A500 would be maintained, albeit with reduced widths; noise, dust and vibration would be minimised; and there would be no high noise activities such as pile driving at night. Construction works would have a moderate adverse impact on journey ambience.

Economic Assessment

Scheme cost

5.42. The estimated scheme cost, including works by other authorities, compensation, design and supervision was £35.5M (excluding VAT), based on first quarter 2001 prices.

Transport Economic Efficiency

5.43. A standard cost benefit analysis evaluation using the TUBA (Transport User Benefit Appraisal.) and QUADRO (QUeues And Delays at ROadworks.) models calculated the future financial benefits of the scheme, discounted to a 1998 base year, to be:

• for low traffic growth the Net Present Value would be £89.75M, representing a Benefit/Cost Ratio of 4.03.
• for high traffic growth the Net Present Value would be £87.925M, representing a Benefit/Cost Ratio of 3.97.

Journey time reliability

5.44. Based on Governmental Advice (Guidance on the Methodology for Multi-Modal Studies, Volume 2, Appendix I) the impact of the scheme on journey time reliability was assessed as slightly to moderately beneficial.

Wider economic impacts

5.45. The proposed scheme would provide access to an area of Stoke-on-Trent with recognised regeneration status under the Single Regeneration Budget initiative (A national scheme to provide funding in support of regeneration activities carried out in partnership with local groups.). Additionally, the city's flagship development of the adjacent railway site would not proceed without the A500 scheme. The overall assessment of the proposals were that they would achieve the Government's Wider Economic Impacts objective.

Appraisal Summary Table

5.46. An Appraisal Summary Table had been produced by the Highways Agency to conform with the Guidance on the Methodology for Multi Modal Studies. This is at Inquiry Document 2.31A.

Effect of the Orders

Trunk Road and Slip Roads Order

5.47. The effect of the Trunk Road and Slip Roads Order would be to authorise the Secretary of State:

5.47.1. To construct approximately 3.2 kilometres of new main road, generally along the line of the existing A500, between a point on the south side of Shelton New Road overbridge and a point on the north side of the A50 interchange north overbridge, which, on completion, would become a trunk road.

5.47.2. To construct 14 sections of slip roads to connect the main route with other highways at Shelton New Road, Stoke Road, under Glebe Street Bridge, City Road, Whieldon Road and the A50.

Side Roads Order

5.48. The effect of the Side Roads Order would be to authorise the Secretary of State:

5.48.1. To improve the following highways:

• Stoke Road.
• Vernon Road.
• Shelton Old Road.
• Access to Glebe Street.
• Liverpool Road.
• Church Street
• City Road
• Whieldon Road
• Stairs and ramp access to the Trent and Mersey Canal

5.48.2. To stop up the following highways:

• 316 metres of the Stoke Road / Shelton Old Road roundabout.
• 135 metres of the connection from Stoke Road / Shelton Old Road roundabout to Liverpool Road.
• The subway footway, stairs and ramps at Stoke Road junction.
• 232 metres of the City Road / Church Road roundabout.
• 404 metres of the A500 East Side Footway.
• The subway footways, stairs and access ramps at the City Road junction.
• 133 metres of Whieldon Road.

To stop up an existing private means of access to the west of the Whieldon Road underpass and replace it with new means of access.

5.48.3. To divert the Trent and Mersey Canal running from a point 97 metres east of Stoke Road to a point 55 metres west of Stoke Road on the north of the new trunk road, and provide a new length of watercourse with a minimum width of 8.85 metres and a minimum depth of 1.5 metres.

5.48.4. To construct a new bridge over the realigned Trent and Mersey Canal.

De-trunking Order

5.49. The effect of the De-trunking Order would be to authorise the Secretary of State to cause 223 metres of the existing A500 to cease to be classified as a trunk road.

Compulsory Purchase Order

5.50. The effect of the Compulsory Purchase Order would be to authorise the Secretary of State to purchase 141 parcels of land or the right to enter those parcels in the City of Stoke-on-Trent. This land was required to be available at the appropriate time to construct the new trunk road and to improve the existing one; to construct or improve other highways; to provide new means of access; to divert the Trent and Mersey Canal; to execute works on other watercourses, including their diversion; to use during the course of construction; and to mitigate the adverse effects of the scheme on its surroundings. The land to be compulsorily purchased amounted only to that which was sufficient to build the scheme and reasonably mitigate its effects.

5.51. Land was required now so that work may commence in September 2003. The scheme was included in those targeted by the Government, and funds would be available for construction in that year.

Proposed Modifications

5.52. Following receipt of objections and representations to the draft Orders, the Highways Agency had proposed modifications to the scheme which would affect three of them as follows:

Affecting the Trunk Road and Slip Roads Order

5.53. In response to representations, and to overcome an objection to the Trunk Road and Slip Roads Order, the Highways Agency had proposed providing a U-turn facility at the Whieldon Road underpass, which would not require any further land. The Trunk Road and Slip Roads Order would need to be amended as I indicate in Appendix C to provide the necessary short additional length of highway.

[Note. This proposal is illustrated in Appendix A6 to the Highways Agency's proofs of evidence at Inquiry Document 4.1.9.]

Affecting the Side Roads Order

5.54. To overcome objections from cyclists the Agency had agreed to provide dedicated bus lanes across the Stoke Road and City Road bridges, together with consequential on-road facilities for cyclists. Detailed design matters would have to be agreed with the local highway authority.

Affecting the Compulsory Purchase Order

5.55. Land registry details, recently to hand, informed the Highways Agency that the rights to enter, inspect and maintain a retaining wall on land adjoining the City Road junction were already possessed. Nothing further would be required, so plots 17/1 and 17/2 should be removed from the Schedule to the Compulsory Purchase Order.

5.56. The Agency had agreed to amend proposals with regard to the dimensions of a raised planting bed in St Peter's Close so as to overcome an objection concerning a footway access. The size of plot 4/1 should be reduced from 55 to 38 square metres.

5.57. After CPO publication it had been agreed that works to part of an existing Church Street retaining wall could be carried out without the need for encroachment onto privately held land. As a consequence the Agency had requested plots 4/3 and 15/2 be deleted from the Schedule to the Compulsory Purchase Order, and the sizes of plots 4/2 and 15/1 be amended to 402 and 57 square metres respectively.

5.58. In response to a representation, and to overcome a further objection, design of the proposed culvert works in Brook Street had been amended in order to reduce the impact on adjacent offices and to maintain full traffic movement at the junction of Brook Street and St Peter's Close. Plot 1/41 would no longer be needed and should be deleted from the Schedule to the Compulsory Purchase Order.

[Note. The Highways Agency's modified proposals for this area of the scheme are illustrated in Appendix A3 to the proofs of evidence which is at Inquiry Document 4.1.9.]

5.59. Plots 19/1 and 19/2 had been conveyed to Claymoss Properties Ltd.

Consultation

5.60. All relevant statutory and non-statutory organisations have been consulted. In particular there were consultations with:

5.60.1. Stoke City Council, British Waterways and the Environment Agency on environmental issues.

5.60.2. English Heritage, Stoke City Museum, the Potteries Heritage Society and the Commission of Architecture and Built Heritage on heritage issues.

5.60.3. The Environment Agency and Stoke City Council on drainage issues, including the proposed diversion of the River Trent.

5.60.4. Developers and landowners with sites and land near the proposed scheme.

5.61. Interested organisations and members of the public were first given the opportunity to comment on, object or support the proposals during a public exhibition in January 1993. Subsequently the draft Orders were published and a public exhibition of the current proposals was held on 11 to 13 April 2002 at the start of a 6 week consultation period.

5.62. English Nature had confirmed that in their view the scheme was not contentious due to its urban setting.

Views of Other Authorities

5.63. Staffordshire County Council, Stoke City Council, the North Staffordshire Chamber of Commerce, the North Staffordshire Partnership and the Freight Transport Association all strongly supported the proposed scheme.