Highways Agency

• Executive summary
• 1 introduction
• 2 existing conditions
• 3 description of proposed route
• 4 engineering assessment
• 5 environmental assessment
• 6 traffic and economic assessment
• 7 consultation
• 8 conclusions

1 introduction

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of Report

Capita Symonds was commissioned by The Highways Agency in June 2004, under the Consultancy Framework Agreement for Design Services (CFADS) to undertake preparation work to consider the feasibility of improving the A64 from York to Scarborough. This is for two options that were identified in the A64 Broad Based Study and Economic Impact Report (EIR) that Steer Davis Gleave (SDG) completed in August 2003. The first option is to improve the whole route between York and Seamer to dual two lane carriageway standards. The second option is to improve the route from York to Whitwell and from Malton to the proposed Rillington Bypass to dual two lane carriageway standards with the remainder of the route being improved to modern single carriageway standards.

The brief required Capita Symonds to review existing and relevant information to determine if either of the above options is sufficiently robust in terms of current highway economic and environmental standards of achieving entry into the Targeted Programme of Improvements. The work has involved developing a robust cost estimate so that a decision can be made on the value for money that the options would provide. This could then be balanced against the likely job creation highlighted in the EIR.

In addition it has been necessary to carry out an assessment of the environmental impact on the corridor of the route, and measures to mitigate the impacts identified and priced.

The findings of the commission are to be presented in a Study Report that generally follows the content of a Stage 1 Scheme Assessment Report but without the engineering assessment but with a more detailed economic assessment and a section on the in confidence consultation. This report has been prepared generally in accordance with the requirements of the Design Manual for Road and Bridges, Volume 5, Section 1, Part 2 (TD37/93:Scheme Assessment Reporting).

1.2 Background

The existing A64 is a major east/west link and forms part of the main commuter and business route between Scarborough and York and the West Yorkshire conurbation. The route also carries large volumes of holiday traffic particularly between West or South Yorkshire and the North Yorkshire Moors National Park or the Yorkshire East Coast resorts. Local traffic and slow moving agricultural vehicles also use the A64. It is built to mixed standards, dual carriageway bypasses to York and Malton linked by single carriageway standard, with a dual carriageway through Barton Hill. The majority of the route is subject to 60 and 70 mph national speed restrictions. The road carries approximately 22,700 vehicles per day (2003 AADT), including approximately 2200 HGVs. There is a marked increase in traffic flows on the A64 during the summer months and on bank holidays. In 2003 the average 24 hour daily two way flow varied from approximately 18,000 vehicles in January to approximately 28,000 vehicles in August with a peak flow of 30,000 vehicles during the August bank holiday. Sections of the route are considered to be of an unsatisfactory standard for both the volume of traffic it carries and its role in the strategic transport network.

At a meeting in Scarborough on 3 March 2004 with the local MP and stakeholders, the Minister requested that the HA should undertake additional study work on the A64 to allow a final decision to be made on whether preparation work should proceed on improving the substandard links between York and Scarborough. The A64 Broad based Study Economic Impact Report that Steer Davies Gleave completed in August 2003 identified two options, considered as being worthy of further consideration.

1.3 Previous Studies

The A64 has been subject to a number of improvement schemes. Major improvements that have been carried out are Malton Bypass between 1976 and 1978 and Whitwell-onthe-Hill bypass, both of which are two-lane dual carriageways. Minor improvements have included the provision of a climbing lane up Golden Hill, improving visibility at junctions and the replacement and updating of road signs.

In the late 80's and early 90's schemes to dual the remaining single carriageway sectionswere considered by Bullen Consultant's Limited to the west of Malton and Brian Colquhoun's (now part of the URS Corporation) to the east of Malton. Work was progressed on both these sections to a stage where a preferred route was identified and taken to public consultation. These proposals to upgrade the A64 to consistent dual carriageway standards between York and Scarborough were consequently removed from the Roads Programme in a review undertaken in 1995.

Following the 1995 review, three scheme identification studies were undertaken on the A64. The first study was limited to identifying the options for terminating the western end of Malton Bypass in a safer manner. The second study was commissioned to identify the opportunities for smaller scale Local Network Management Schemes (LNMS), aimed at reducing the frequency and severity of accidents over the whole length of the A64 between York and Scarborough.

In November 2000 a Stage 1 Scheme Assessment Report was produced by WS Atkins to consider options to improve the Welburn to Malton section of the A64 whilst limiting the impact on the environment to an acceptable level. This report recommended that an on-line single carriageway improvement should be further assessed at stage 2.

A Route Management Study was undertaken by Hyder Consulting on behalf of the Highways Agency, culminating in the "A64 Route Management Strategy (A1 to Scarborough)" of September 2002.

The Strategy gave a number of options for the way forward: two of the main ones being the 4-10 year Route Management Plan (RMP) and 3 year Route Action Plan (RAP). The RAP noted there was a need to introduce further safety improvements to reduce the number of fatal and serious injuries, particularly for the unimproved single carriageway sections and at accident problem sites. The RMP recommended progressive improvement of existing single carriageway sections to current standards to full 60mph design speed, with improved junctions and overtaking opportunities. In addition, it was recommended that the programme looked to improve existing dual carriageway sections by closing central reserve gaps and removing ground level junctions. This strategy is currently being developed by the Highways Agency and is considered to be the "dominimum" option for the route.

Hyder Consulting on behalf of the Highways Agency produced an additional report titled "A64 from A1 to Scarborough Upgrading Assessment Report" in September 2002. This report considered the route to the east and west of Malton with two options for each. These basically comprised of an improved single carriageway or a dual carriageway option. This report concluded that on the basis of the technical and environmental evidence available as set out in the report, including traffic and economic analysis, the need for the upgrading of the whole of the A64T to dual carriageway standard had not been established. The report went on to state that the option of modernising and widening the older single carriageways along the route appears to be the more costeffective option.

In 2003 Steer Davis Gleave were commissioned to carry out a Broad Based Study and Economic Impact Assessment of the likely wider economic impacts of four transport options being considered. It did this against the background of a review of the current functioning of the regeneration areas within the study corridor. This report concluded that there was no single preferred highway strategy emerging from the study, but there was a strong case for further assessment of two preferred options. The option that dualled some sections and improved the single carriageway of the remainder of the route provided the best pound for pound return on investment and did provide some safety benefits and removed the majority of the reliability problems along the route. The option that dualled the whole route provided the greatest potential for job creation, the most safety benefits and solved the reliability issues but did not give as good a return on investment and scored poorly on environmental grounds. Following the issue of the Broad Based Study the Countryside Agency commissioned TRL Limited to provide a technical note on the Study.

1.4 Objectives

The purpose of this study is to review the existing and relevant information for the York to Scarborough section of A64 and determine if the two schemes identified by Steer Davis Gleave are sufficiently robust in terms of their current highway economics and environmental standards and in the light of today's public expectations to achieve entry into the Targeted Programme of Improvements. The results of the study will be submitted to Ministers who will make the final decision. The options being considered will be assessed on how they contribute to the following Government's Objectives:-

• Environmental
• Traffic/Economic
• Accident/Safety
• Accessibility
• Integration

The Steer Davis Gleave Broad Based Study and EIR did not give detailed information on the routes of their proposed options. The Capita Symonds commission did not require any engineering work to establish a preferred route for either option. Consequently at this stage it was accepted that the preferred routes previously identified by Bullen Consultants Limited and Brian Colquhoun's to the west and east of Malton respectively would be used to allow more detailed estimates of cost to be established. The preferred route identified by Brian Colquhoun's to the east of Malton was off-line and followed the railway line to the north of the existing A64. The SDG route indicated within the EIR to the east of Malton is generally on-line with local bypasses of villages. It was decided to consider both these options to the east of Malton, as it was uncertain as to which option would be preferable from both the economic and environmental perspective.

In addition there was a requirement in the brief to keep local stakeholders and statutorybodies informed and to allow their views and comments to be taken into account in the development of the scheme.

The report summarises the assessment undertaken and the consultation process and concludes with a recommendation for consideration by Ministers on whether additional work is justified for future entry into the Targeted Programme of Improvements.

1.5 Approach and Scope

The Study Report generally follows the content of a Stage 1 Assessment Report without the engineering assessment but with a more detailed economic assessment. The reason for this is that as the route had previously been assessed from an engineering perspective and preferred routes had been developed that would be perfectly adequate at this stage for producing a cost estimate that could be used in the economic assessment. The report starts by considering the existing conditions and then describes the proposed route options.

The traffic and economic assessment then follows this section. As a specific route has been used to develop the cost estimate it is possible to carry out a more detailed economic assessment than required at a Stage 1 Assessment. The report describes the existing and future traffic conditions and includes an economic assessment of the options being considered.

The report identifies the environmental affects of constructing a scheme within the corridor associated with the proposed options. The methodology and reporting follows the guidance offered by the Design Manual for Road and bridges, Volume 11.

The environmental effects are grouped under the following topics:

• Policies and Plans;
• Land Use;
• Landscape and Visual Amenity;
• Water Quality and Drainage;
• Ecology and Nature Conservation;
• Archaeology and Cultural Heritage;
• Air Quality;
• Traffic Noise and Vibration;
• Vehicle Travellers;
• Disruption due to Construction;
• Pedestrians, Cyclists, Equestrians and Community Effects.

As far as practicable, a common approach has been adopted towards the assessment of topics: baseline conditions; constraints / opportunities / scope for mitigation; and requirements for further work.

Each topic is assessed in accordance with the DMRB and then, where appropriate, in accordance with the WebTAG requirements. For the WebTAG appraisal, the ASTs and work sheets for each topic are included in Appendix B.

Figures are included within Volume 2.