Feature
Better information for your journey
The National Traffic Control Centre collects real-time information on road conditions.
Quick Links
How We Manage Our Roads
In this section you can find out more about how we manage and maintain these roads and plan for the future
The Project Control Framework
On 1st April 2008 we launched the Project Control Framework. The Framework sets out how we, together with the Department for Transport, manage and deliver major improvement projects.
Traffic news on your desktop
Helpful ways to access the latest traffic information when you need it.
Study report - march 2005
8 conclusions
8 CONCLUSIONS
The study report has considered three options for upgrading the A64, which are:
- 1a York to Seamer on-line dualling
- 1b York to Malton online dualling, Malton to Seamer off-line dualling
- 2 SDG Option 3 Partial dualling and single carriageway improvements
The main environmental issues relating to the proposed route corridors are cultural heritage, ecology and landscape character. The route passes through the Howardian Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (ANOB) to the west of Malton, and affects a Site of Interest to Nature Conservation (SINC) at Gillylees; it runs close to the River Derwent SSSI. However the most severe impacts are to all aspects of cultural heritage.
Aside from the routes running through a registered park and adjacent to the Castle Howard estate and numerous listed buildings, the study area is particularly rich in archaeological remains. The key constraint is the statutory nature afforded to these features and the irreplaceable resources that may be affected. Option 1a and 1b will have the greatest adverse impact on cultural heritage resulting from the offline nature of the routes through the heritage rich landscape to the east of Malton. There is the possibility that option 1b could have less severe impacts than Option 1a as it is located well to the north of the existing route and may avoid some of the known heritage in this area, although as the potential for heritage being affected is high this would need confirming through additional investigation. Option 2 would be the least environmentally damaging as a significant length of this option is improving the single carriageway within the existing highway boundary. The major environmental impacts expected, particularly with the full dualling, might mean that the statutory bodies would object to the proposals. The traffic and economic appraisal of the improvement of the A64 between York and Seamer has demonstrated that all three options considered are economically justified. Improving the entire section to dual carriageway standard, as opposed to leaving some sections east Malton single carriageway, would provide the greatest benefits and economic justification. The level of traffic flow predicted in the scheme-opening year also indicates that dual carriageway improvement is appropriate.
As well as bringing economic benefits to road users, upgrading the A64 would also bring wider economic benefits. It is estimated that a dual carriageway improvement could result in the potential creation of new jobs and the safeguarding existing jobs.
The Route Management Strategy produced by Hyder recommended a number of measures to improve the safety of the route. Although the purpose of this study was to identify and report on the highway economics and environmental impacts of the proposed upgrading of the route the RMS should be considered as the "do-minimum" requirements of the route.
Given the above, it is concluded that there is economic justification for the proposal toupgrade the A64 to dual carriageway standard between York and Seamer. Environmentally they are major adverse impacts to landscape and ecology and especially cultural heritage and these will create a significant challenge in providing a suitable route. A proposed dualling scheme would affect the proposals for the Rillington Bypass, which is currently in the TPI. Whether or not a dualling scheme should enter the TPI and which option east of Malton is preferred needs to be resolved before proposals for the Rillington Bypass can be progressed.
At this stage consideration could be given to undertaking additional assessment work toidentify the most environmentally and economically advantageous route that would further inform Ministers and the progression of the Rillington Bypass.





