Highways Agency

Introduction

Introduction

This leaflet outlines the key route problems identified on the A590 and route outcomes and actions developed through the Route Management Strategy (RMS) process.

What is a Route Management Strategy?

Route Management Strategies are designed to help formulate a plan for the operation, maintenance and improvement of a route for the next ten years. The RMS is based upon a systematic analysis of the characteristics, functions and problems on the route to enable considered investment decisions to be made consistently throughout the network.

Route Description

The RMS corridor covers the A590 Trunk Road between the A590/ A5087 roundabout, Barrow-in-Furness and the M6 Motorway atJunction 36.

Route Problems

Consultations with the general public and stake holders duringthe study highlighted the problems along the route. Here is asummary of the major issues identified on the A590 which havebeen categorised into the Government's five objective areas:

Environment

• Conflict of the route with the sensitive nature of the Lake District National Park and other designated sites.
• Noise/vibration/pollution issues due to the close proximity of houses to the route.
• Lack of up-to-date air quality information.
• The route has significant visual impact.
• Review of litter picking required in some locations.
• Impact of surface water drainage on water quality.
• Light Pollution.

Safety

• Accident cluster sites.
• Junction layout safety concerns.
• Standard, location and frequency of lay-bys.
• Vehicles travelling at inappropriate speeds.
• Inappropriate speed limits in some locations.
• Gaps in central reservation to allow access to side roads and properties.
• Safety concerns over lighting provision.
• Pedestrians using route where no facilities are provided.
• Inadequate pedestrian crossing facilities at bus stops.
• Security issues regarding secluded areas.
• Increased safety measures required to protect vulnerable users.
• Concerns over the layout of dual-carriageway terminations.
• Motorists performing U-turns at inappropriate locations.
• Parking on the A590 in urban areas causes obstruction.
• Lack of an Incident Response Plan.
• Narrow sections cause increased conflict between traffic and vulnerable users.
• Locations on the route are liable to flooding.
• Driver vision impaired by overgrown vegetation.

Economy

• Congestion in urban areas.
• Congestion caused by events.
• Congestion at pinch points.
• Limited overtaking opportunities on single carriageway sections.
• Ability of junctions to operate with future increased traffic demands due to new developments.
• Maintenance issues on single carriageway sections.
• A review of signing strategy is required.
• Variations in the standard of carriageway provision.
• Delay caused by incidents and maintenance.
• Delays caused by slow moving vehicles.
• Traffic diversions unsuitable for some traffic.
• Rat running.

Accessibility

• Severance issues for residential and development areas.
• Inconsistency in provision of facilities for alternative modes of transport; including pedestrians, cyclists and equestrians.
• Lack of vulnerable user crossing facilities.
• Lack of visibility of vulnerable user crossing facilities.

Integration

• Lack of signing to other forms of transport (e.g. Train Station).
• Lack of viable alternative to A590 for freight movements.
• Lack of integration between different types of transport.
• Green Routes for cyclists need linking up.

Route Outcomes

Following a review of the route functions, objectives and problems,a series of route outcomes has been identified. The outcomeswere identified as those improvements that the Highways Agency(HA) should aim to achieve over the ten-year timescale of theRMS. The route outcomes identified are listed below in order oftheir likely implementation timescale:

Short Term

• A review of incident planning.
• Enable the A590 to support regeneration while limiting negative impacts on the operation of the route.
• Reduce the number of accidents along the route.
• Ensure co-ordination between the operations of the HA and other organisations.
• Better understand the environmental impact of the route.
• Provide mitigation in locations that are liable to flooding.

Short/Medium Term:

• Implement a water quality review following the Water Framework Directive.
• Influence driver behaviour.
• Improve journey time reliability.
• Review signing along the route.
• Improve accessibility for vulnerable users along the route and for those crossing it.
• Promote the use and integration of different modes of transport on the route.

Medium Term:

• Undertake a review of statutory protected sites to reflect Schedule 9, Section 28G, of the Countryside Rights of Way Act.
• Reduce the impact of maintenance operations on single carriageway sections.
• Ensure that there is adequate and safe provision of appropriate facilities along the route (e.g. bus shelters).

Route Actions

Potential key actions have been developed to tackle the major problems on the route. These are categorised as:

1. Studies and Reviews

   Possible actions that would require further study or review before decision on implementation. For example:

   • Undertake a review of the speed limits across the route to develop/review speed management strategy.
   • Investigate and implement measures to encourage and promote the appropriate use of the route by vulnerable users.
2. Schemes

   Possible actions that could result in schemes without significant prior study or review. For example:

   • Develop options to improve flow of traffic through Ulverston without significant adverse effects on other users.
   • From the lay-by review, seek to ensure a consistent level of quality and safety along the route taking account of the needs of heavy goods vehicles (HGVs).
3. Partnerships

   Possible actions that will be implemented through the further development of partnerships or that will require a significant amount of partnership working in their implementation. For example:

   • Liaise with vulnerable user organisations regarding provision along the route.
   • Encourage the provision of travel plans by developers.
4. Operations

   Possible actions that relate to the day-to-day operation and maintenance of the route. For example:

   • Use low noise surfacing for renewals.
   • Continue to monitor accident cluster sites and identify measures to address key issues.
5. Policy

   Possible actions that relate to policy or development control. For example:

   • Where opportunities arise, consider the potential for joint funding arrangements to secure necessary improvements.

The A590 Route Management Strategy will be reviewed every five years to ensure the successful implementation of the actions above and to identify any new actions or changes to existing action plans where required.

Who Can I Contact with Queries?

Queries should be directed to:

Lindsay Alder, Highways Agency,
City Tower, Piccadilly Plaza, Manchester, M1 4BE.
e-mail: Lindsay.Alder@highways.gsi.gov.uk

Mouchel Parkman Ltd.
St Johns House, Queen Street, Manchester, M2 5JB.
e-mail: A590@mouchelparkman.com