Highways Agency

M18 (M1-M62)

The Strategy

---

back to top

Introduction

Route Management Strategies have been devised by the Highways Agency to enable the effective and efficient management of the motorway and trunk road network. Each individual strategy will concentrate on investigating the current problems associated with the route and tackle them on an individual basis.

All Route Management Strategies will culminate in the production of a ten-year Management Plan which will be reviewed and updated during the lifetime of the strategy. The Management Plan will include the problems, which have been highlighted by local authorities and organisations, and anyone who uses or is affected by the route.

Parsons Brinckerhoff, is currently undertaking the M18 RMS in consultation with the local authorities, regional planning authorities, transport organisations and the police.

Investigation of the route functions and objectives has brought to light the route problems and a plan of action has been developed.

---

back to top

Route Functions and Objectives

Route Functions

Route functions are based on the nature of journeys that occur on the route and other parts of the national and local transport infrastructure and regional land use development.

F1	To provide an efficient network;
F2	To provide reliable journey times;
F3	To provide safe transportation of people and goods;
F4	To be environmentally acceptable;
F5	To be part of an integrated transport system;
F6	To be part of the link from the Northeast to the Midlands and the South;
F7	To provide a route to ports of Hull, Immingham, Goole and Grimsby;
F8	To be a diversion route for closures on the M1;
F9	To provide a key link to support South Yorkshire Objective 1 status;
F10	To be the main access for communities to the wider trunk road network;
F11	To provide commercial access to Doncaster, Rotherham and Sheffield;
F12	To provide access to Humberside and Robin Hood Airports;
F13	To provide an alternative route for traffic travelling between the South and the Northeast of the region;
F14	To facilitate regional regeneration;
F15	To provide a commuter route for Doncaster, Rotherham, Sheffield and other communities;
F16	To act as a local distributor for the region and provide access to local facilities;
F17	To act as a Doncaster Southerly Bypass between Junctions 2 and 4;
F18	To provide a route for emergency services; and
F19	To provide a route for abnormal loads.

---

back to top

Policy Objectives

Policy objectives are defined as wider planning, economic and transport objectives that are pertinent to the route. They provide a rationalised collection of other national, regional and local objectives to which the final RMS would aim to contribute.

Economy
Ec1	To contribute to regeneration (Memorandum of Understanding - Objective 1);
Ec2	To balance the strategic, regional and local functions of the route;
Ec3	To improve journey time reliability along the route;
Ec4	To minimise traffic disruption during road maintenance, and ensure coordination of works with the relevant local authorities;
Ec5	To plan all works to achieve optimum whole life costs with minimal disruption to users; and
Ec6	To maximise the availability of the route for users, and the serviceability of the road, structures and other highway equipment.
Safety
S1	To maintain or improve road safety for all road users;
S2	To investigate where the provision of lighting would improve safety; and
S3	To achieve a high standard of driver information along the route.
Environment
En1	To work in partnership with local authorities to help improve air quality along the length of the route;
En2	To identify locations where noise levels are high and seek to mitigate;
En3	To ensure effective measures are in place to protect watercourses from pollutant spillage on the highway;
En4	To protect and enhance existing flora and fauna;
En5	To protect and enhance the landscape character of the route; and
En6	To protect the HA investment in off-site planting.
Accessibility
A1	To address the needs of non-motorised users including those crossing at junctions.
Integration
I1	To work in partnership with road users, transport providers and operators to integrate operations;
I2	To improve user information; and
I3	To make appropriate provisions to encourage the use of public transport.

Route Problems

The following problems have been highlighted during the original round of investigations, each problem has been categorised into the Highways Agency's five policy objectives for transport.

Economy

• The expected level of traffic flow increase in ten years is likely to result in significant increases in queuing on all slip roads at Junction 3. As well as more delays, the risk of accidents at these locations will be increased.
• Increases in delays along nearly all links are also predicted in 2013. Changes generally range from 0% to 100% but the M1 Interchange and the adjacent link is predicted to experience the greatest increases.
• The M180 RMS confirmed the presence of queuing at Junction 1 of the M180.
• There are specific concerns about traffic impacts of significant developments such as Robin Hood Airport and Hatfield Power Park and how they will integrate with the existing network. There are more general concerns about the impact of the increased rate of development expected from the Objective 1 status of this area.

Safety

• The M18 has one of the lowest accident rates in the country. However, Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) ratios are highest between the M1 and M18 Junction 1, at Junction 4, and on the M62 westbound to M18 southbound slip road.
• There are general concerns about the possibility of congestion, particularly stationary traffic, increasing the risk of high-speed collisions. The northbound approach to Junction 3 also experiences significant weaving.
• There are concerns about traffic merging from the M18 southbound on to the M1 southbound with vehicles overshooting the acceleration lane and encroaching into the hard shoulder.
• High levels of water spray were identified as an issue in a couple of isolated sections.

Environment

• The noise severity index is high at Thurcroft, and near Bramley and Wickersley.
• There is no route-specific biodiversity action plan
• Significant lengths of the route are incompatible with landscape character, highway planting is incompatible with the local authority biodiversity action plans that exist, and the success of planting for screening is poor.
• Concerns about the potential environmental impact of new development, particularly around Junction 3.

Accessibility

• There is an issue with difficult access to the motorway service area at Junction 5 for employees without access to a car.

Integration

• A need for interchange facilities has been identified between the M1 and Junction 4 but few opportunities are available.