Highways Agency

• 1 Introduction
• 2 Route management strategy
• Figures
• Tables
• Appendices

2 Route management strategy

2.1 Strategy Framework

This Route Management Strategy provides a framework against which proposals for works on or improvements to the A1 or A1(M) between London and Peterborough will be considered. It will ensure that appropriate works can be implemented to provide a consistent standard of route and that they are compatible with the agreed route objectives and route functions.

All proposed improvement works along the route must be reasonably practicable and provide value-for-money. In some instances, proposed schemes will not fully support the Route Strategy and there will need to be a balance struck between the individual elements of the Strategy when considering the scheme's suitability. Whilst the Route Strategy provides an overview of route requirements, it does not remove the need for development and assessment of schemes through the relevant statutory procedures and other processes.

The Route Strategy is presented below under the Government's five main objectives for transport, Environment, Safety, Economy, Accessibility and Integration.

Environment

• To minimise environmental impacts along the route corridor where reasonably practicable

Safety

• To improve safety for all users by ensuring that existing junctions are safe to use and by reducing the frequency of side accesses/junctions or crossovers on the non-motorway sections
• To provide a safe route of consistent standard through maintenance, route signing, lighting and user facilities

Economy

• To reduce congestion by improving traffic flows and reducing delays at key locations
• To manage the conflict between strategic/regional traffic and local traffic to facilitate efficient use of the route by all traffic on roads of appropriate standard

Accessibility/Integration

• To facilitate public transport and non-motorised use of the route through appropriate route improvements
• To reduce community severance caused by the existing route alignment and traffic use of the road

The strategy presented above is based on the agreed route objectives with each of the individual elements of the strategy being supported by specific route objectives. The full table of supporting route objectives is provided in Appendix B.

2.2 Route Management Strategy Overview

2.2.1 General

The Route Management Strategy looks ahead for a period of 10-years. It predicts the likely changes in use of the route over that time and aims to ensure that appropriate measures are put in place to meet those demands. Information on likely changes in development and housing are indicated in Local and Regional Plans and Local Transport Plans provide information on regional traffic changes expected. These documents have been reviewed to ensure that the proposed Actions are compatible with local needs and aspirations.

The London to South Midlands Multi-modal Study is undertaking a wider review of changes and requirements across the area through which the A1 passes and it will be commenting on the future role of the A1 within the region's road hierarchy. Recommendations from this Study will be likely to have a significant impact on the scale and type of future improvements required to the A1. Clearly this has influenced the Actions identified as being desirable through the RMS and the current Route Management Plan will need to be reviewed when the outcome of the Multi-modal Study (MMS) has been assessed. Pending these findings, some Actions along the route are specifically noted as being dependent on the MMS outcome. Other Actions proposed are either required irrespective of the MMS or could have initial planning commenced prior to the MMS publication.

Development of all Actions will be subject to the Highways Agency requirements for providing value for money, to the outcome of statutory and other procedures and to the availability of funds to implement the proposed Action.

2.2.2 A1 Rowley Lane to Junction 1 (M25)

This short section of route provides a link between the more rural section of motorway to the north of the M25 and the increasingly urban road network south of the M25. It is of dual 3-lane standard, adequate for the present daily traffic flow of around 50,000 vehicles per day. It has one junction (Dyrham Park) on each carriageway.

Problems identified on this section of the route related to the junctions at Dyrham Park and lay-bys on the route which are not to an appropriate standard for a high speed road and the strategy aim is to address these problems (Actions H1 &M5).

2.2.3 A1(M) Junction 1 to Junction 10

The route standard along this length is variable, with sections of both dual 2-lane and 3-lane motorway. Driver information facilities are poor and the lack of road lighting is perceived to be a safety hazard.

This section of the route suffers from peak period congestion at junctions and along some of the sections of dual 2-lane motorway where traffic flows are high. Problems are also experienced at many of the motorway junctions along this section, with congestion, queuing, safety problems and severance for non-motorised users a common cause of concern. Traffic flows at Junctions 3 and 4 are also increased by east/west traffic using this section of the route.

The Route Management Strategy focuses on junction improvements (Actions H4, H8, M1, L2, L3 ) that will address the existing problems identified at the junctions; a number of junctions have schemes (typically proposals for the installation of signals) already being prepared (Programmed Scheme P1) and it is expected that these will be progressed.

Major upgrading of the 2-lane sections of motorway is subject to the outcome of the route review under the London to South Midlands Multi-Modal Study (LSMMMS). However, the on-line widening between Junction 6 and Junction 8 from the existing dual 2-lane section to dual 3-lane standard is subject to further investigation (Highways Agency announcement of 8 August 2001). The outcome of this assessment will help inform the appraisal of the LSMMMS recommendations when they are published and will also subsequently determine whether the suggested Action of providing climbing lanes through this section (H6) would be required.

A programmed scheme (P2) to introduce traffic management facilities (cameras, Variable Matrix Signs, upgraded communications etc) along this section will address some of the current congestion and safety concerns, particularly following incidents. The implementation of other traffic management suggestions (e.g. bus lanes (L6) or 4-lane southbound running through Hatfield Tunnel (L9)) would be dependant on a full communications system along the route and hence these additional measures are programmed for further assessment late in the Plan period.

2.2.4 A1 All-purpose Section Stotfold to Alconbury

The all-purpose section of the route consists of dual 2-lane carriageway throughout its length. However, the road standard varies from modern sections with grade-separated junctions and metre strips (which provide additional road space for safety and improved maintenance capability), to sections with numerous frontage and side road accesses, at-grade junctions and no metre strips. Local traffic has difficulty accessing the route safely, particularly at peak periods, and the mix of higher speed through traffic and lower speed local traffic accessing the route causes conflict and a safety issue. More built-up sections along the route also suffer problems of severance, noise and safety concerns from traffic on the A1.

The strategy for this section of the route aims in the longer term to better manage this conflict between local traffic use and needs of the route and the different requirements of the longer distance traffic. The balance between the two uses should be identified through the work being undertaken in the London to South Midlands Multi-modal Study, although the current function of the route as a strategic route is expected to be retained.

Medium and longer-term Actions (H1, H3 &M7) are included for both improvements to existing junctions and for reducing/rationalising the number of accesses and gaps by local improvements. These would include grade-separation and provision of access or service roads, such as those schemes at Langford and Tempsford (Completed Scheme F1). The perception of the RMS consultation is that such schemes can successfully segregate local traffic movements from the longer-distance movements without major off-line works or new bypasses. Typical schemes could be developed for other locations along the route with similar problems - e.g. at Southoe and Diddington.

Other locations need different solutions. Grade separation of the Biggleswade roundabouts (Actions H3 &M7) will address growing peak-period congestion and assist with local traffic access and safety. Targeted improvements at other sub-standard junctions and accesses along this section will improve route safety.

A review of the provision of a new roundabout at the junction of New Road with A1 in Beeston (part of Action H1) is included in the Strategy as a short-term measure, which may help reduce the congestion at the Sandy roundabout, particularly on Bedford Road.

Alternative proposals were considered for bypasses to Sandy, Beeston, Wyboston and Buckden. These schemes would need to be compatible with recommendations from the LSMMMS and the A421/A428 Route Management Strategy and as such are not currently included in the Route Management Plan, but could be incorporated later if appropriate.

Development of such schemes will take some time and a short-term proposal is included to better manage traffic speeds along parts of the route (Action H2). This aims to better match traffic speeds to road alignment or frontage development and also at improving safety and reducing the present disparity in traffic speeds. However, it is not compatible with the strategic, longer distance function role of the route that looks for a uniform standard of route along its length.

Noise concerns raised will be addressed. Between Stotfold and Alconbury, several lengths of road have been recently resurfaced using lower noise surfacing which should have reduced road noise levels. The Eaton Socon Bypass is due for resurfacing shortly which should similarly reduce road noise. A review of the noise impact on Biggleswade from traffic on the bypass had been made previously but a further review will be undertaken as a specific Action (H7).

2.2.5 A1(M) J14 to J17

This section was opened to traffic in December 1998. It is of modern construction and few problems were noted. Those issues that were raised related to some concerns over signing and markings, the levels of water spray during wet periods and to the severance effect of the route on local bus access and for walking. Appropriate Actions (C2, M4 &L10) to address these problems are included. Concerns about noise at Sawtry were also raised and further monitoring is anticipated.

2.2.6 Actions throughout the Route

A number of Actions have been included in the Route Management Plan to address issues applicable throughout the route. These include:

• A proposed examination of the provision of signing to railway stations along the route, which will need to be undertaken jointly with Railtrack and the Train Operating Companies (Action H5)
• A review of the provision, condition and configuration of signs, markings and lighting (Action M4)
• A review of the number, location and standard of laybys along the route (Action M5)
• A review of road drainage outfalls to assess the need for improvements - this is a requirement of the Highway Agency's Strategic Plan for the Environment (Action M6)
• Examination of the issues regarding lack of accessibility across the route for pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians. This work is on-going through the separate study for all non-motorised user crossings of trunk roads, arising from the Highway Agency's Strategic Plan for Accessibility (Current Work C2)
• Ongoing work to prepare Biodiversity Action Plans and Landscape Management Plans for the whole route, which are a requirement of the Highway Agency's Strategic Plan for the Environment (Current Work C3 and C4)

2.3 Route Management Strategy Actions

Following the public consultation, the final Strategy has been produced and the 10-year Plan developed. This Plan contains all the Actions recommended in order to manage the route over the next ten years. These Actions are in addition to several schemes that are currently being undertaken (or have recently been completed) or have been allocated funds and are programmed for commencement in the near future. The final list of Actions forming the Route Management Strategy is given in the following sections. Specific details regarding the High, Medium and Low Priority Actions are provided in Appendix C:

2.3.1 Completed Schemes

(Schemes that have been completed since the commencement of the RMS, up to the date of this report).

F1 Langford and Tempsford Grade-separated junctions.
F2 Carriageway resurfacing between Buckden and Alconbury.
F3 New street lighting between Buckden and the C340 Brampton slip roads.
F4 Improved road markings and intelligent road studs between Brampton Hut and Alconbury.

2.3.2 Current Work

C1 Study of short-term safety &congestion improvements at Junction 1.
C2 Small Schemes Accessibility Study to assess the need for pedestrian, cyclist and equestrian facilities.
C3 Preparation of Biodiversity Action Plans focusing on aspects of the local ecology which are in need of protection or conservation.
C4 Preparation of Landscape Management Plans focusing on landscape maintenance, preservation and enhancement measures.
C5 Reduced speed limit from Biggleswade to Beeston.

2.3.3 Programmed Schemes

P1 Safety and congestion improvements at Junctions 1, 3, 4 &9.
P2 Package of Variable Information Signs, CCTV cameras and Incident Detection Systems between Junctions 1 &10.
P3 Carriageway resurfacing between Junctions 1 &2, Langford and Biggleswade and the Eaton Socon Bypass.
P4 Installation of traffic signals at the Brampton Hut Junction.

2.3.4 High Priority Actions

H1 Improvements to local access, including possible service roads, junction closures or improvements and central reserve gap closures.
H2 Assess speed reduction measures (short-term action pending implementation of other measures).
H3 Grade-separation of the Biggleswade South roundabout (includes closure of the Watkiss gap).
H4 Provide hazard signing.
H5 Provide signing to railway stations along route.
H6 Package of climbing lanes between Junctions 6 &8.
H7 Carry out noise and street lighting impact studies at Biggleswade.
H8 Review options for easing congestion between Junctions 3 &4.

2.3.5 Medium Priority Actions

M1 Review possible improvements at Junctions 6, 7 &8.
M2 Review A428 Junction.
M3 Realign carriageway at Tempsford Bridge (if other measures not implemented).
M4 Review signs, markings and street lighting along route.
M5 Review provision of lay-bys and implement recommendations.
M6 Review drainage outfalls and implement improvements.
M7 Grade-separation of the Biggleswade North roundabout.

2.3.6 Low Priority Actions

L1 Review provision of lighting between Junctions 1 &2 and Junctions 8 &9.
L2 Future review of modifications to the layout of Junctions 3 &4.
L3 Review Junction 9 including Baldock and Letchworth access.
L4 Improve design of Little Paxton North Junction.
L5 Review widening between Junctions 1 &3.
L6 Review High Occupancy Vehicle or Bus Lanes between Junctions 6 &9.
L7 Review road signs/markings at the Brampton Hut Junction.
L8 Review of need for road lighting between Brampton Hut and Alconbury.
L9 Traffic management improvements in the Hatfield Tunnel and between Junctions 6 &9.
L10 Monitor incidence and extent of water spray between Junctions 4 &5 and Junctions 14 &17.