4. LOCAL TRANSPORT STRATEGIES

4.3 A strategic network of transport infrastructure

·     4.3.3 STRATEGY FOR THE ROAD NETWORK

·     Road Maintenance Strategy

·     A Strategy For Bridges

·     Retaining Wall Strategy

·     Road Improvements Strategy 

·     4.3.2 A STRATEGY FOR MOVEMENT OF FREIGHT

·     Roads

·     Rail

·     Ports

·     4.3.3 A STRATEGY FOR AIRPORT SURFACE ACCESS

4.3 A STRATEGIC NETWORK OF TRANSPORT   INFRASTRUCTURE

4.3.1 STRATEGY FOR THE ROAD NETWORK

ROAD MAINTENANCE STRATEGY

a)    Policy Context

4.3.1.1 The County Structure Plan acknowledges in paragraph 5.1 that:

“an efficient transport system is essential to the future prosperity of Northumberland.  Transport policies, in conjunction with other policies on land use, have a direct bearing on the environment and on the development of the County’s economy.  They affect the manner, convenience and safety with which people and goods are able to travel about Northumberland.  In addition they can have direct effects on the local and global environment.  Maintaining and improving the transport system is an integral part of the strategy towards sustainable economic revitalisation and urban regeneration”.

b)    Problems and Opportunities

4.3.1.2 Northumberland has an extensive network of roads comprising:

                                                                                       km

Trunk (financed by Central Government)                       297.4

Principal (non-trunk)                                                      417.9

Classified (non-principal)                                             2,169.3

Unclassified                                                                  2,429.4           

Total                        5,314km   

4.3.1.3 The likely detrunking of the A696/A68 (target date 1 April 2003) within the period of this LTPwill have the effect of increasing the length of non-trunk principal roads within the County by 65 km, an increase of 16%.  The County Council requests that this additional liability is recognised in future LTP settlements for principal road structural maintenance, once the road is de-trunked.

4.3.1.4 Owing to the large mileage of highways and a small population, Northumberland, by comparison with many authorities, maintains a very high length of road per head of population.  Other counties with a comparable length of highway have two to three times the population and with more resources are able to maintain their highways to a higher standard.  Northumberland’s disadvantage in this respect has existed for many years and consequently the County’s roads have deteriorated such that they are significantly worse than the national average.

4.3.1.5 For many years the County Road network has been affected by landslip problems.  Many of these slips threaten important strategic routes and despite regular overlaying works to provide a temporary solution it is obvious that a permanent solution must be found before total collapse.  In the very wet winter of 1998 three principal roads suffered major landslips, the A1167 Sunnyside Bank, the A697 Lincomb Dene and the A686 Whitfield road all required urgent permanent work with road closures.  Work had previously been carried out on the A697 Crawley Dean requiring a specialist retaining wall costing £1.2m.  At other sites within the County important routes are seriously affected and even as an interim measure regular maintenance works are required to retain their safe use.  In most cases only a significant improvement to realign the carriageway or stabilise the ground is required for a long-term solution.  Consequently the heavy investment required has allowed strengthening and resurfacing works of only 5 km of the County’s 418 km network of principal roads in 1999/2000.

4.3.1.6 A full review of the County Council’s maintenance practices was undertaken in 1997/98 and comparisons have been made with those incorporated within the Local Authorities Association’s ‘Code of Good practice’.  The objective of the Code is to provide a common basis for assessing the overall maintenance need and to reduce the present inconsistencies in highway maintenance standards.  The only area of highway maintenance that met the requirements of the Code is that of Winter Service provision, and it is hoped that resources can be substantially increased so that there will be opportunities to raise standards.  A highway inventory was completed some years ago and is being used in conjunction with a Maintenance System for resource allocation and contract control where appropriate.  Condition inspection systems will be brought on line as resources increase to enable prioritisation of works on County Roads. The 2000/2001 programme also includes landslips at A695 Prudhoe and A697 Bridge of Aln and although the allocation increased to £3.9m this will only allow 10 km to be strengthened or resurfaced.

4.3.1.7 This Council has concluded that the provision of a network of salt barns, and the ensuing more economic use of dry salt will produce substantial savings and benefits for the expenditure involved.  Storing salt without cover results in a significant loss of material by leaching and the inability to spread wet salt at the low rates achieved by the use of dry salt.  It is estimated that, in Northumberland’s case, approximately £160,000 can be saved in salt use per annum with the introduction of salt barn storage facilities.  At present salt barns have been constructed at Haltwhistle and Berwick and funding for further developments at Alnwick and Bearl Depots are currently being investigated.

4.3.1.8The County Council has allocated £9,779,200 to the 2000/2001 Revenue Budget.  Although this allocation is similar to the 1999/2001 budget the trend since 1992/93 has been one of constant reductions and the current budget is equivalent to only 67% of funding available in 1992/93.  As a direct result of the reduced level of funding in 1996/97 a Strategic Road Network was identified, approximately 35% of the total length, followed by a Strategic Footpath Network incorporating school travel plans in 1997/98.  It was the intention that both these networks would receive funding for planned structural maintenance which would comply with the Code of Good Practice.  In 1998/99 the effects of streetlight column replacements, landslips and increased insurance premiums meant that funding was not sufficient to achieve even these standards.  Consequently it has been necessary to suspend the Strategic Network policy and all structural maintenance resources are now directed towards reactive repair of hazardous defects to all categories of roads and footpaths.

c)    Specific Objectives

• Objective M1

maintain the existing network in a safe condition for road users  (TARGET 4)

• Objective M2

Raise current standards to conform to Code of Good Practice (TARGET 38)

• Objective M3

reinstate the Strategic Networks for roads and footpaths

• Objective M4

reduce the percentage of roads with zero residual life (TARGET 40)

• Objective M5

reduce winter maintenance operational costs, improve efficiency and protect the environment using salt barns

d)    Strategy

4.3.1.9 A key element in the overall LTP Strategy is to ‘Maintain the Existing Road Network’.  Results from the NRMCS survey suggest that in Northumberland the urban Principal Road network suffers whole carriageway major deterioration 2.0 times higher than the national average with the figure for the rural Principal Road network being 1.3 times higher than the national average.

4.3.1.10 With this in mind and similar to the 2000/2001 programme the basic policy of upgrading the urban Principal roads but also addressing very urgent problems relating to the severe deterioration of the National Primary Route Network has been considered when formulating a programme for the next five years.

4.3.1.11 Recent Audit Commission Performance Indicators require that the Classified Non-Principal Network should be surveyed by Coarse Visual Inspection (CVI) as a separate indicator to the Principal Road Network. In order to analyse data from CVI’s it is necessary to implement UK Pavement Management Systems (UKPMS) which may be committed to in 2000/01. With UKPMS in place Northumberland County Council will be able to make informed judgement on highway maintenance priorities, identify critical areas and select appropriate treatment.

4.3.1.12 A High Speed Road Monitoring Survey was carried out in 1997/98 over the total principal road network.  The analysis of the HSRM survey indicated that approximately 42% of the 729 lane km showed an investigatory level for defectiveness.  Deflectograph surveys have recently been carried out on 240 lane km as a result of this HSRM Survey.  This increased Northumberland’s data coverage up to 46% and further assisted in the prioritisation of schemes within the 5 year programme.  NRMCS Survey results recently published, which exclude the 2000 survey, indicate that out of 357 km surveyed (24.7%), some 46% of the surveyed length has a residual life of less than 9 years.  Even more disturbing, 13% of this length has a residual life of less than 0 years.

4.3.1.13 The Authority’s structural survey information has, over recent years, not been resurveyed where measured deflection was already indicating a below zero residual life and new data was unlikely to alter the Authority’s assessment of its structural maintenance priorities.  It continues to be important to acknowledge the need for improving the structural strength, and extending the life of the many roads constructed in the 1960s and 70s and now nearing the end of their economic design life.  Most of the roads in this category form part of the Principal Road Network.  Works programmes are further assessed on a priority needs basis in the light of structural damage, general condition, usage of the network and the degree of risk of accidents to members of the public.  A Five Year Capital programme has been prepared (attached as Appendix 6) which identifies priority sites with structural deterioration in need of urgent work together with the associated cost estimates.  Within the five year programme schemes are identified as having a low residual life expectancy with particular emphasis also placed upon upgrading routes which have higher greater traffic and HGV flows and their importance for economic and industrial access.

e)    Policies

• Policy M1

To ensure that the condition of the transport system is maintained to such standards as are consistent with the efficient and safe movement of traffic. (TARGET 4)

• Policy M2

The prioritisation of roads will continue to have regard to those which are used by buses and programmes for winter maintenance, carriageway maintenance and arrangements for road works will take account of the impact upon the quality and reliability of bus services.  

• Policy M3

Where appropriate, consideration will be given to the use of recycled materials in the reconstruction of carriageways.

• Policy M3

to implement UK Pavement Management Systems (UKPMS) to allow the Classified Non-Principal Network to be surveyed by Coarse Visual Inspection (CVI) in accordance with Audit Commission Performance Indicators. (TARGET 39)

BRIDGES STRATEGY

a)    Policy Context

4.3.1.14 Bridges form an important and integral part of the County highway network. The County Council’s main strategic aims for this network include:

1   To ensure that the condition of the transport system is to such standards as are consistent with the efficient and safe movement of traffic.

2   To promote and develop a transport system in the County in conjunction with land use patterns which makes the most effective use of available resources to satisfy the need for convenient access to a range of activities, facilities and services.

3   Develop and maintain the Primary Route Network so that it can carry and attract the main movements of HGV’s.

4   Encourage the development of the ports of Amble, Berwick Upon Tweed, Blyth and Seahouses.

4.3.1.15References to Regional Planning Guidance, the County Structure Plan and Local Plans are made elsewhere in this LTP.

b)    Problems and Opportunities

4.3.1.16 The County Council owns 1903 road bridges and 191 highway footbridges (all of span 1500mm or greater) and several hundred smaller structures. There are 168 other bridges on the County road network that are in private ownership - including 73 belonging to Rail Property Ltd, 49 to Railtrack and 24 to Northumbrian Water.  It is vital to the prosperity of the County that the bridge stock is maintained in sound condition and strengthened where necessary to facilitate the essential movement of HGV traffic and Passenger Service Vehicles. The County Council is currently discussing with private bridge owners the maintenance, assessment and strengthening of their highway structures.

4.3.1.17 The CSS Bridges Group report “Funding for Bridge Maintenance” published in March 2000 concluded that “an annual level of funding equivalent to 1.0% of the bridges replacement cost is required in order to prevent long term deterioration”. The report put the estimated replacement cost of an “average” bridge at £215,000.

4.3.1.18 Based on the findings of the report it follows that Northumberland should be spending £4.5million per annum to maintain its bridge stock in sound order. The report further calculates that if the current backlog of maintenance works is to be overcome within a 10 year period, the level of funding required is 1.3% of the bridges replacement cost i.e. £5.85million per annum for Northumberland.

4.3.1.19 In the current year 2000/01 the County Council will be spending circa £600,000 on bridge maintenance funded from revenue and capital - i.e. only 10% of that recommended in the CSS report. The County Council has bid for additional maintenance funds in this LTP submission and will continue to use scarce financial resources in the most effective manner in the maintenance of its bridges stock.

4.3.1.20 The County Council would welcome future transport funding settlements of such a level as to facilitate increased bridge maintenance programmes.

4.3.1.21 The geography of Northumberland gives rise to specific problems of HGV access.  In the urban South East there is the need to accommodate HGV traffic due to the location of commercial and industrial sites.  In rural areas the need to provide for lorries on minor roads may be generated by forestry, quarries and farms.  In a remote area a bridge might need to be strengthened as it carries the only road to a farm or group of agricultural properties.

4.3.1.22 Higher priority is given to the strengthening of bridges on the network of HGV routes serving ports, quarries, waste disposal sites, forestry areas, industrial and commercial estates.  As part of the National bridge assessment and strengthening programme the County Council is making significant progress towards upgrading its bridges stock.  Details of progress made in the County’s assessment and strengthening programme are to be found at Appendix 7.

4.3.1.23 Opportunities exist within the period of the LTP to maintain extensive road access for HGV’s within and across the county of Northumberland by strengthening and maintaining highway bridges.  Other bridges will be the subject of interim measures or weight restrictions.  The amount of work that can be done within the Plan period will depend on the level of funding received.

c)    Specific Objectives

• Objective B1

ensure that a network of routes available for heavy goods vehicles and passenger service vehicles to all destinations within the County where there is an identified need.

• Objective B2

to liaise with neighbouring authorities on the preparation of cross boundary HGV routes to facilitate the effective movement of goods and services throughout the region.

• Objective B3

to keep the County bridges stock in sound condition in order to facilitate the safe use of the highway by the travelling public.

• Objective B4

to maintain the bridges stock in a good state of repair in order to maintain the value of its fixed assets.

• Objective B5

to implement a cost effective programme of works, carried out in a manner that causes minimum inconvenience to road users and the local community.

d)    Strategy

4.3.1.24 The Council’s capital bridgeworks strategy is outlined below:

1. Complete all First Stage bridge assessments (including those in span range 1500 to 1800 mm) in year 2002/03 and complete any Second Stage assessments by April 2004.  The programme includes the assessment of bridges belonging to Railtrack, Rail Property Ltd and others.

2. Carry out further assessment of some bridges in accordance with revised guidelines BD 21/97 and where necessitated by deteriorating condition.

3. Undertake strengthening schemes to those bridges on the county HGV network - i.e. all bridges on “A” and “B” class roads and those on “other” routes that serve generators of HGV traffic.

4. Strengthen all other bridges with assessment results less than 7.5 tonnes where HGV access is required unless suitable alternative routes are available. 

5.  Strengthen the remaining bridges generally in line with assessment results but taking due consideration of local circumstances.  This will ensure that only essential strengthening works are undertaken to meet specific needs.

6.  Carry out those maintenance works that are essential to maintain the bridges in sound condition and to prevent further structural deterioration.  The prioritisation of any scheme within this ongoing programme of works will depend on the condition of the structure and its importance to the network.

e)    Policies

• Policy B1

complete the assessment of County Council owned bridges. (TARGET 41)

• Policy B2

continue with the strengthening of County Council owned bridges. The strategy to be used is described above.

• Policy B3

continue with the application of interim measures to ensure the continuing safe use of a bridge between the receipt of a low assessment result and the implementation of measures either to strengthen the bridge or to apply a weight restriction.

• Policy B4

apply a weight restriction if funding is not available to strengthen any bridge that is deemed to have become unsafe to remain in unrestricted service.

• Policy B5

liaise and work with other organisations to facilitate the maintenance,assessment and strengthening of their highway bridges.

• Policy B6

undertake regular inspection of County bridges to ensure that they are in safe condition and to determine the extent of any maintenance works required.

• Policy B7

develop the computerised bridge database system to assist in the effective allocation of bridge maintenance funds. (TARGET 42)

• Policy B8

undertake such maintenance works that may be needed to keep the County bridge stock in good order.

• Policy B9

liaise with neighbouring authorities to cover the preparation of cross boundary HGV routes and ensure the appropriate scheduling of works.

• Policy B10

liaise with Highways Agency to ensure the appropriate scheduling of bridge maintenance and strengthening works within the County.

• Policy B11

endeavour to maintain and protect those bridges that are of special historic or aesthetic value.

RETAINING WALLS STRATEGY

a)    Policy Context

4.3.1.25 Retaining walls form an important and integral part of the County highway network. The County Council’s main strategic aims for this network are as set out in 4.3.1.14 above.

b) Problems and Opportunities

4.3.1.26 The County Council as highway authority owns 4770 retaining walls of total length 306 kilometres. 1153 of these walls are of height greater than 1500mm - total length 54 km. The predominant construction material is stone (1001 of total length 285 km) while other walls are built of brick, concrete or reinforced earth.

4.3.1.27 Opportunities exist within the period of the LTP to maintain extensive road access for HGV’s within and across the county of Northumberland by maintaining and repairing retaining walls.  Other walls will be the subject of inspection to ensure their continuing safety and suitability for purpose.

4.3.1.28 The CSS Bridges Group report “Funding for Bridge Maintenance” published in March 2000 concluded that “an annual level of funding equivalent to 0.9% of the retaining walls replacement cost is required in order to prevent long term deterioration”. The report put the estimated replacement cost of an “average” wall at £900,000 per km.

4.3.1.29 Based on the findings of the report it follows that Northumberland should be spending £2.5million per annum to maintain its retaining walls in sound order.

4.3.1.30 In recent years the County Council has been able to commit only limited resources to maintenance of its retaining walls - mainly in a reactive manner. Subject to the continued availability of funding the Council will within the LTP period implement a programme of inspection and maintenance of its walls. Initial efforts will be concentrated along the county HGV route network.

4.3.1.31 The County Council would welcome future transport funding settlements of such a level as to facilitate increased maintenance work on its retaining walls.

c)    Specific Objectives

• Objective RW1

to ensure that there is a network of roads available for heavy goods vehicles and passenger service vehicles to all destinations within the County where there is an identified need.

• Objective RW2

to keep all of the County retaining walls in sound condition in order to facilitate safe use of the highway by the travelling public and maintain the value of its fixed assets.

• Objective RW3

to implement a cost effective programme of inspection and maintenance works, carried out in a manner that causes minimum inconvenience to road users and the local community.

c) Strategy

4.3.1.32 The Council’s strategy for retaining walls is outlined below:

1.  Undertake inspection of all retaining walls on the HGV network within the period of the LTP.

2.  Commence inspection of retaining walls on other routes within the period of the LTP.

3.  Carry out maintenance and strengthening works as needed to ensure the continuing safe use of the adjacent highway.

e)    Policies

• Policy RW1

inspect all retaining walls on the HGV network within the period of the LTP.

(TARGET 43)

• Policy RW2

commence inspection of retaining walls on other routes within the period of the LTP.

• Policy RW3

maintain retaining walls in sound condition.

ROAD IMPROVEMENTS STRATEGY

a)    Policy Context

4.3.1.33 Regional Planning Guidance states that the availability of capacity in the North East’s road network has been a major factor in influencing the location of new development in recent years, but that a continuation of that trend would create unacceptable extra pressure on the highway network as the strategic capacity of roads will not be significantly increased over the next 20 years. Additional road space on this network should only be provided where it is necessary in order to:

• meet movement requirements which cannot be catered for in any other way;
• improve road safety;
• reduce adverse environmental impact; or
• achieve re-development and regeneration

4.3.1.34 On roads which are not part of the primary route network priority should be given to measures which improve safety and those which reduce impacts on residential amenity. Within residential areas, roads should be managed for convenience of buses, cycles and pedestrians rather than cars or freight vehicles.

4.3.1.35 The County Structure Plan suggests that Local Planning Authorities should assess proposals for new roads and road improvements against the extent to which they:

• assist economic development;
• lead to improved road safety;
• reduce environmental problems;
• reduce congestion;
• reduce conflict between vehicles and pedestrians, cyclists or other non-motorised road users;
• provide satisfactory access by public transport or essential services;

4.3.1.36 The County Structure Plan contains policies to encourage the DETR to fund improvements to the A1 and A69 trunk roads within Northumberland to dual carriageway standard, and to provide a bypass of Haydon Bridge as discussed in 5.3.3.28.

b)    Problems and Opportunities

4.3.1.37 The Trunk Road network

          The trunk road network in Northumberland comprises four routes; the A1 London - Edinburgh, the A19 Doncaster - Seaton Burn, A69 Carlisle - Newcastle and the A696/A68 Newcastle - Edinburgh. The non-core trunk road A696/A68 is currently the subject of detrunking discussions between the County Council and the Highways Agency. (Target detrunking date is 1 April 2003).

4.3.1.38 The A1 London - Edinburgh - Thurso Trunk Road

          The A1 in Northumberland runs from the County boundary at Seaton Burn to the Scottish Border at Marshall Meadows. The route is covered by a route management strategy administered by the Highways Agency which seeks to co-ordinate maintenance, improvement and accident remedial measures to a consistent standard throughout the route between Tyneside and Edinburgh.

On completion of the schemes to provide dual carriageway at Willowburn to Denwick and Ellingham to Newstead these sections of A1 trunk road in Northumberland will be of single carriageway standard:

• Warreners House to Felton    12.5km
• Denwick to North Charlton       7.6km
• Newstead to Highfields       35.4km.

The total length of single carriageway A1 will then be 55.5km, the total route length between Warreners House and the national border is 79.2km.

Stannington

          A series of at-grade junctions has been the location of several accidents since the Stannington bypass was opened in 1987.  The Highways Agency has prepared a scheme to eliminate these junctions and provide a grade separated interchange. Works are programmed to start in Autumn 2001 and be completed within 12 months. In the interim period a 50mph speed restriction has been introduced over a 5km stretch between Clifton and Stannington Vale, which carries around 31000 vehicles per day.  The County Council support the Highways Agency’s policy to improve the situation at Stannington, which has recently been one of the worst accident sites in Northumberland. 

Warrener’s House to West Moor

          Convoys of slow-moving traffic are a feature of this single carriageway section situated immediately north of Morpeth and between two lengthy stretches of dual carriageway. The section is being considered by the Highways Agency for the possible introduction of “two plus one” sections of carriageway with each direction having an extra lane alternately to allow more opportunities for overtaking. The County Council will support the installation of “two plus one” sections only if it can be guaranteed that the modifications will not prejudice future upgrading to dual carriageway standard.

Felton Park to Lane Head Improvement

          This improvement opened to traffic in 1999 and extends the length of dual carriageway between Felton and Alnwick from 10km to 12km.

Willowburn to Denwick

          The scheme to upgrade this section to dual carriageway is included in the national programme and works are due to commence in March 2001. The 4.2km scheme will deal with the high accident rate on the existing single carriageway road arising from a high proportion of HGV traffic, the alignment of the road and limited opportunities for overtaking.

North Charlton to Charlton Mires

Preparatory work is currently being undertaken on a scheme to improve this 2.5 km section of single carriageway where 3 people were killed in a recent accident. It is anticipated that this scheme will be implemented within the LTP period.

Ellingham to Newstead

          This scheme will extend the existing 2km length of dual carriageway at Brownieside by a further 2km northwards. Compulsory Purchase and Side Roads Orders are required and it is anticipated that works will commence during 2001/2. This scheme will ensure that there are improved chances for overtaking - opportunities for overtaking in the current stretch of dual carriageway at Brownieside are often limited by the short section length.

Adderstone to Mousen

A scheme is currently in preparation to improve this 2 km long substandard section of single carriageway.  There is a great deal of local support for the scheme which will address problems on what is probably the most poorly aligned section of the A1 in Northumberland. Construction works are currently programmed to commence in 2002.

Safelink Campaign

          The County Council welcomes these improvements to the A1, however a great deal of concern remains in Northumberland over the slow progress being made towards complete dualling of the route. This is reflected by the continuing vigour of the A1 Safelink Campaign, a coalition of public and private organisations and individuals aiming to influence at a regional and cross-border level the allocation of funding to complete the route’s upgrading. The Campaign anticipates significant economic as well as road safety benefits to the Region accruing from the upgrading of the road to dual carriageway standard throughout. The extent of these economic benefits will shortly be investigated by a consultant’s study to be commissioned by the Safelink Campaign. The dualling of the A1 is a key priority for the North East Regional Assembly. They have proposed that the Government makes resources available for the dualling in the first three years of the Governments 10 Year Transport Plan. Northumberland County Council continues to lobby for the dualling of the A1 trunk road on the grounds of road safety and economic benefits.

4.3.1.39 The A19 Doncaster - Seaton Burn Trunk Road

          The A19 in Northumberland runs from the County boundary to the south east of Cramlington westwards to join the A1 at Seaton Burn.  It forms part of a “box” of major trunk roads with the A19 passing to the east of Newcastle and Gateshead and through the Tyne Tunnel and the A1 going to the west of the conurbation.  The announcement in the Government’s “A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England” of the Tyneside Area Multi-Modal Study (TAMMS) acknowledges problems of congestion on these two trunk routes.  Problems relating to the A19 route include:

• Capacity problems, particularly at junctions, arising from development pressures. The situation may be worsened if and when the Second Tyne Crossing is opened;
• Poor safety record; and
• Pressures arising from the economic regeneration of south east Northumberland which identify the A19 corridor as a location for inward investment.

          Two of the junctions mentioned above are in Northumberland; Moor Farm roundabout at the junction with the A189, and the Seaton Burn Interchange at the junction with the A1. Peak hour capacity problems at these junctions may be limiting factors against proposals for development in south east Northumberland.

The County Council is currently party to the TAMMS consultation and is stressing the need for the safe and reliable operation of the A19 within the context of multi-modal transport solutions, and the economic regeneration of south east Northumberland. The safe and efficient operation of the A189 Moor Farm junction is particularly important to the economic wellbeing of the County - this interchange is the subject of an improvement study currently being carried out by Highways Agency.

4.3.1.40 The A69 Carlisle - Newcastle Trunk Road

          The A69 in Northumberland runs from the County boundary on the outskirts of Newcastle westwards to the boundary with Cumbria. It is the subject of a Design Build Finance and Operate contract with Roadlink (UK) for a thirty-year term. The County Council wishes to see the road improved to continuous dual carriageway standard in the longer term. 

          West of Hexham, on the single carriageway section of road there remains one village in Northumberland, Haydon Bridge, which has yet to be bypassed. There would be significant environmental and safety benefits to Haydon Bridge if through traffic were to be removed from the village and therefore the County Council will continue to campaign for the bypass. Draft Regional Guidance for the North East supports this approach. At paragraph 5.3.5, it states:

“Within the region, Haydon Bridge on the A69 is the only settlement on the core trunk road network that is not yet bypassed. A full appraisal of the bypass is urgently needed”

4.3.1.41 The A696/A68 Newcastle - Edinburgh Trunk Road

The A696/A68 runs from the County boundary at Newcastle Airport to the Scottish border at Carter Bar.  The  “New Deal for Trunk Roads in England”, published in July 1998, proposed that roads not included within the core network should be detrunked.  About 40% of the existing trunk road network in England was identified for detrunking, i.e. the removal of trunk road status and transfer from Highways Agency to local authority control.  Detrunking is seen by the DETR as a means of ensuring that the management and improvement of these roads can be fully integrated with land use planning and LTPs. Candidates for detrunking are generally the less heavily used trunk roads, and the A696/A68 route in Northumberland comes into this category, with an AADT flow of approximately 5000 vehicles north of Ponteland.  Discussions continue with the Highways Agency over the implications for the County Council taking over the role of highway authority. In particular, the County Council has made representations over the high levels of expenditure likely to be incurred, especially in respect to winter maintenance, and wishes these factors to be fully reflected in revisions to SSA allocations, following the completion of the detrunking procedure.  The Highways Agency target date for detrunking of the road is 1 April 2003 - i.e. before the end of the LTP period.

          A further issue relating to the A696/A68 route is the decision awaited from the Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State to determine the Notice of Proposed Development by the Ministry of Defence to extend facilities at the Otterburn Training Area. A Public Local Inquiry has taken place into the proposal which will, if implemented, lead to increased levels of military traffic to and from the site; the Highways Agency has already stated at the Inquiry that improvements will be required at several locations along the A696 to accommodate military convoys, and to allow other traffic to pass or to overtake in conditions of safety. However at this stage, there remains the possibility that the Inspector will consider the proposed amelioration measures to be excessive or insufficient, or will specify other measures.       

Improvements have previously been identified for the A696/68 trunk road to address issues concerning the width and alignment of the carriageway, exits from farm roads, safety and the need to remove through traffic from settlements. The Highways Agency is currently considering a report that recommends improving the standards of junctions with farm accesses onto the trunk road.

Northumberland County Council requests that funding be made available - from the annual ring-fenced budget held by the Highways Agency - for improvements to the non-core A696/A68 trunk road in the interim period before 1 April 2003 (the target date for detrunking). The County Council wish to see these projects implemented in order to improve road safety:

A696 Heeston Bank - construction 2001/02 - current estimate £500,000.

Substandard carriageway and verge widths with a history of collisions at the bend. This proposal is to implement the recommendations of an accident study of June 1998 - carriageway and verge widenings over a length of 200 metres.

A696 Raylees Bridge - construction 2002/03 - current estimate £500,000.

At this location there is a narrow 5.8 metre carriageway over the bridge with verges just 300mm wide. Low masonry parapets offer no protection against 6 metre drop to the river below - no space to erect safety fences. The proposal is to widen the bridge to accommodate a 7.3 metre carriageway and provide safety fences in verges.

FIGURE 15 ROAD NETWORK ISSUES IN NORTHUMBERLAND

4.3.1.42 The County Road Network

          Good communications are important to the economic well-being of all communities, and following the contraction of the area’s coal mining industry this is particularly the case in south east Northumberland.  In order to benefit existing businesses and encourage the establishment of new ventures in this area, it is essential to provide good road links to and from the area.  Thus the strategy for major improvements in Northumberland in recent years has been directed to the need to improve accessibility to employment opportunities, by concentrating investment on links to areas with high levels of unemployment.

          To this end, the A189 south east Northumberland Spine Road has been improved in recent years, so that it now provides a continuous dual carriageway standard from the County boundary at the south east of Cramlington to the Woodhorn roundabout, east of Ashington.

As a general principle, the County Council sees demand management as an important tool for reducing congestion and the adverse effects of traffic upon the environment.  Before road building is accepted as the solution to a particular problem, other options need to be considered.  For instance, the implementation of traffic management measures in towns and villages could avoid the need for bypasses. In some cases the most appropriate solution will be the provision of new road capacity. 

Historically the County Council has protected several road improvement lines from development.  In recent years bids for funding have included the following schemes:

• A1 to South East Northumberland Link Road
• A697 Longframlington Bypass
• A697 Longhorsley Bypass

The task of appraising identified road improvement lines has commenced.  It is based on the New Approach to Appraisal (NATA) which has been developed to appraise and inform the prioritisation of trunk road investment proposals.  Schemes appraised first are those which have been the subject of recent bids for TSG funding.   In the case of the A1 to South East Northumberland Link Road only the western  (Morpeth Northern Bypass) and eastern  (Pegswood Bypass) sections have been re-appraised. The results of the appraisal for each of the schemes are set out in the schedules in Appendix 9 and are summarised for comparison purposes in the following tables:

ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT

ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT

On the basis of these assessments the improvement line for each of these schemes will continue to be safeguarded.

The Pegswood Bypass scheme costs in excess of £5m and is therefore a major scheme in terms of the LTP.  This scheme is not being promoted for implementation during the period of this plan.  The County Council’s major scheme priority for 2001-06 is for the reintroduction of passenger services on the Ashington, Blyth and Tyne Railway.

The other schemes each cost less than £5m and are usually referred to as  “major/minor” schemes.  They would compete for funds from the integrated transport element of the LTP.  Within the five-year period of this LTP it would be reasonable and realistic to seek funding for one of these schemes.  Taking into account the LTP objectives in paragraph 2.2.1 and the results of the appraisals it is considered that Stage One of the Morpeth Northern Bypassshould be the preferred scheme for implementation during the period of this LTP.

The programme of appraising the remaining improvement lines will be carried out over the next twelve months.  The aim is to maintain a schedule of schemes which are justified in terms of national, regional and local transport policy.  In drawing up this schedule it will be essential to carry out thorough consultation, particularly if there are cases where proposals of long standing are suggested for deletion.

In addition to the improvement lines protected by the County Council three bypass lines on the A696/68 Trunk Road; Ponteland Bypass, Belsay Bypass and Rochester Bypass, have been protected by the Highways Agency. Appraisals ofthese three schemes are currently being undertaken by the Highways Agency. This will allow consideration to be given to their inclusion in the schedule of improvement schemes at the appropriate time.

c)    Specific Objectives

nObjective RI1

          To support the following trunk road improvements:

• The provision of a grade-separated junction at Stannington on the A1;
• The dualling of the Willowburn to Denwick section of the A1 Alnwick Bypass.
• Other currently proposed schemes to dual sections of the A1
• A bypass of Haydon Bridge on the A69;
• road widening and alignment improvements on the A696/A68 route.

          In the longer term:

• Dualling of the A1 throughout Northumberland.(Policy F5 also refers)
• Dualling of the A69 within Northumberland.
• The Tyneside Area Multi-Modal Study may identify further measures to be supported in future plans.

• Objective RI2 (TARGET 44)  

To consider proposals for new county roads and road improvements against the extent to which they:

• assist economic development;
• lead to an improvement in road safety;
• reduce environmental problems;
• reduce congestion;
• reduce conflict between vehicles and pedestrians, cyclists or other non-motorised highway users;
• provide satisfactory access by public transport and or essential services.

d)    Strategy

4.3.1.43 To co-operate with the Highways Agency to identify and secure improvements to the trunk road network by means of participation in Route Management Strategies and regular liaison with HA regional staff.

4.3.1.44 Continue discussions with Highways Agency re the proposed detrunking of the A696/A68 non core trunk road.

4.3.1.45 County roads - To reappraise all protected improvement lines with a view to continuing to safeguard and promote only those that can be justified against the Government’s new appraisal criteria and form a cohesive part of the County’s transport strategy.

e)    Policies

• Policy RI1

co-operate and liaise with the Highways Agency to identify and promote improvements to the trunk roads in Northumberland.

• Policy RI2

     co-operate with Highways Agency re detrunking of the A696/A68 trunk road.

• Policy RI3

Proposals for new roads and road improvements on County Roads will be evaluated, where appropriate using the Governments New Approach to Appraisal (NATA) and will be promoted only where they have a positive assessment and meet LTP objectives.

• Policy RI4

Where new roads or road improvements on County Roads are found to have a negative assessment and do not meet LTP objectives consultation will take place with a view to removing them from the list of protected schemes.

4.3.2 STRATEGY FOR THE MOVEMENT OF FREIGHT

ROADS

a)    Policy Context

4.3.2.1. Draft Regional Planning Guidance for the North East, issued in December 1999, stresses that the ability to move freight quickly and reliably is vital for the development of the local economy. However, at paragraph 5.6.4 states:

“Freight Transport on inappropriate roads causes damage to amenity and results in safety problems. Measures to restrict use of such roads should be complemented by action to provide alternative routes or means of transport. In such cases where the use of such roads is unavoidable, for example as a result of mineral extraction, policies should ensure that improvements are made to minimise adverse effects on the environment and local communities”.

The apparent conflict between the two statements above reflects the current status and role of road transport in Northumberland. There are locations where the presence of heavy goods vehicles results in adverse environmental impacts. Equally relevant is the fact that in many areas of the County, if products are not moved by road, then they cannot be moved at all. The railway network, described in greater detail below, is relatively sparse. Some inland areas lie more than 30 miles from the nearest railway line, thus even freight for trans-shipment by rail will travel by road for a substantial part of its journey. For these reasons, the County Council seeks a balanced approach to the use of roads for the movement of freight. Where no alternatives exist, the role of roads is vital to the health of the local economy, and the LTP policies for road maintenance are designed to ensure that the infrastructure is capable of accommodating the demands placed upon it. Where alternatives to the use of roads do exist, or can be created, the County Council will actively encourage their development and use.  The County Structure Plan contains policies which seek to ensure that, where practicable, new development which generates the movement of bulky or dangerous materials is located at sites which are or are capable of being connected to the rail network.  Developments involving the movement of non-bulky freight will normally only be permitted on sites which have or which can be provided with access to the strategic road network.  Encouragement is also given in the Structure Plan to the consideration of the siting of warehousing and distribution centres in locations accessible by rail.

4.3.2.2 The North East Freight Movement and Infrastructure Study, published under the auspices of the Northern Freight Group, provides useful policy and data content which has been used in the preparation of this LTP. Published in April 2000, it pre-dates the Regional Transport Strategy and the Tyneside Area Multi-Modal Study, and emphasises the key role which freight networks will have in assisting future prosperity in a sustainable way, so long as a freight strategy is integrated with core transport strategies, as this LTP attempts to do. The need to consider the impact of traffic management and demand management measures upon freight deliveries, particularly within town centres, is stressed in the Northern Freight Group document, as is the need for the upgrading of the core trunk road network, and in particular the A1 between Morpeth and the Scottish Border. Nationally, about 80% of total freight movement is by road.        

b)      Problems and Opportunities

4.3.2.3 The demand for freight movement is complex, but essential to the working of the County's economy.  Freight can have its origin and destination in many parts of the County, the region or the rest of the country.  The majority of freight is transported by road as in many instances, this is both the cheapest and the only practicable means of transport.  The carriage of heavy goods by road can be environmentally damaging, and can result in danger and inconvenience to other road users, reducing the quality of life of residents in towns and villages.  The impact of heavy vehicles on the environment and on the amenity, safety and convenience of pedestrians and residents can be reduced by the selective introduction of weight restrictions and by the bypassing of settlements. Details of the bridge strengthening and assessment programme are at Section 4.3.1.

4.3.2.4 Some developments can generate freight movements that can only reasonably be transported by road.  In such cases the aim will be to ensure that they are located on sites which have or which can be provided with access to the primary road network, although it is acknowledged that there may be certain locations where this is impracticable.

4.3.2.5 In order to assist in the transfer of freight from road to rail and water it may be appropriate to make provision in local plans for warehouse and distribution depots.  Such facilities should wherever possible have access to ports or rail facilities, and to the local road network.  In addition, freight transfer facilities may be provided which will allow the transfer of bulk road borne freight into smaller vehicles for local distribution.  This will assist in reducing the amount of heavy traffic in congested areas.

c)    Specific Objectives

• Objective F1

promote the increase in the amount of freight carried by means other than by road.

• Objective F2

liaise with port authorities and road haulage associations to investigate ways to increase volumes of freight traffic carried by sea rather than by road.

• Objective F3

minimise the impact of road freight movements.

• Objective F4

encourage the location of warehousing and distribution centres, on both brownfield and greenfield sites so as to minimise the impact of freight movements in town centres.

• Objective F5(Objective RI1 also refers)

campaign for the upgrading of the A1 Trunk Road to dual carriageway standard throughout to promote the economy of Northumberland, and to ensure the safety of goods carried by road.

• Objective F6

balance the requirements for deliveries to premises with the needs of non-car users.

d)      Strategy

4.3.2.6 Development control powers will be used to ensure that wherever possible:

nnew development which generates the movement of bulky or dangerous materials is located on sites which are or which can be connected to the rail network;

ndevelopments involving the movement of non-bulky freight will normally only be permitted on sites which have or which can be provided with access to the strategic road network. 

4.3.2.7. Discussions will take place with port authorities to maximise the amount of freight carried by sea.

4.3.2.8. The development of warehousing and distribution depots at accessible transport nodes will be encouraged wherever possible.

4.3.2.9. The creation of formal or informal Freight Quality Partnerships will be investigated in conjunction with the Freight Transport Association and others, to implement best practice, and to act as a forum for the discussion and resolution of conflicts arising from the transportation of freight in the County. See Policy TR10 at 4.2.2.14 for lorry parking policy.

e)    Policies

• Policy F1

     the development of distribution centres at strategic locations at the edge of built up areas will be encouraged;

• Policy F2

make use of the development control process and Local Plan process. 

• Policy F3

investigate the potential for the creation of formal or informal Freight Quality Partnerships. 

RAIL

a)    Policy context

4.3.2.10 The County Council Structure Plan seeks to ensure that as much freight as possible travels by rail. Policy T7 states:

          “New development which generates the movement of bulky or dangerous materials will only normally be permitted on sites which are or can be connected to the rail network. In such cases, conditions will be imposed to minimise the volume of goods transported by road…”

4.3.2.11 Similar policies are contained within district council Local Plans, and both County and district councils are liaising with Railtrack and with railfreight operating companies to protect existing facilities and to encourage new rail freight opportunities wherever possible. Potential rail freight customers contacting the County Council will be given all possible assistance to establish freight flows.  

b)    Problems and Opportunities

4.3.2.12 The number of rail freight facilities within Northumberland is limited, as is the volume of traffic with origins or destinations within the County.  This is for two main reasons, the low concentration of industries outside of the south east of the County, and the dominance of the East Coast Main Line (ECML) by high-speed passenger trains leaving few paths for freight services to operate. The ECML is an important artery for ‘transit’ freight traffic. Freight operators such as EWS Railways in response to consultation explained the need for sufficient capacity to be made available in order to meet their reasonable growth requirements.  However, the route between Morpeth, Ashington, Blyth and Tyneside, which is presently used solely by freight trains, does have spare capacity, and is a useful alternative to the ECML between Morpeth and Tyneside. The result of such constraints is that the potential for rail to effect a significant modal shift away from road-based freight within Northumberland may be limited in its extent, given that most flows of bulk materials capable of being transported by rail already do so.

Schedule of Rail Freight Facilities

Source: North East Freight Study: Northern Freight Group

4.3.2.13 East Coast Main Line

        The freight facilities at Tweedmouth, Belford, Widdrington and Morpeth, referred to above, represent the sum total at present. However, trains on the Blyth and Tyne line use the ECML to gain access to south east Northumberland where the majority of freight facilities are located. There is likely to be an increase in freight flows on the route in the future, and Railtrack in its 2000 Network Management Statement has identified as an option the provision of passing loops at Stannington, south of Morpeth, by 2005.

4.3.2.14 Newcastle to Carlisle Line

          The line carries regular freight flows, most of which have origins and destinations outside of Northumberland.  The freight facility at Hexham is currently used for the carriage of forest products, which are brought from the Border Forests by road and transferred to rail wagons for onward transport. The ballast sidings are currently disused.  Flows of opencast coal have recently ceased at Plenmeller near Haltwhistle, due to the mine being exhausted, and the loading facility has been decommissioned. The sidings are currently intact, but an alternative use has not yet materialised.  

4.3.2.15 Blyth and Tyne Lines

          This is the generic term used to describe a network of freight lines which cover an area of the County to the east and south of Morpeth.  At one time, most of the routes also carried passengers, and reference is made to the proposal to re-open the route between Ashington, Blyth and Tyneside to passenger trains as part of an integrated transport corridor, elsewhere in this LTP.  There are a number of freight flows which currently make use of these lines, including the following:

• alumina transported from North Blyth, where it arrives by sea, to Fort William, Lynemouth and Newport;
• coal to the Alcan power plant at Lynemouth;
• coal to Blyth Power Station at Cambois;
• flows of coal to and from Blyth staithes, and
• coal from Butterwell not routed via the ECML.

Rail access to ports can make rail competitive with road haulage.

4.3.2.16 Opportunities for railfreight development

        The County Council is keen to publicise the current availability of facilities, and has provided input into the Railtrack ‘Guide to Freight Connections’; this is seen a useful starting point for companies wishing to assess the initial feasibility of modal shift from road to rail.  The County Council is also included on the list of organisations who are happy to provide information on sites where new terminal facilities might be created on non-Railtrack land.  In particular, a site at Tweedmouth has been identified by Berwick-upon-Tweed Borough Council and the County Council as having good potential as a loading and unloading point for goods over a wide catchment area of north Northumberland and the Scottish Borders.  A feasibility study has been carried out by a rail consultancy indicating that there may be a market for the carriage of goods by rail to and from the Berwick area, although at the time of the study, direct costs were skewed in favour of road haulage; in the light of recent fuel duty increases, it may be that rail transport is more competitive, and the site appears to be worthy of further investigation.  An influencing factor, here as elsewhere, is the availability of paths for freight trains; the aspirations of passenger train operators for renewed franchises for the majority of services in Northumberland could place further capacity pressure on the Newcastle-Edinburgh and Newcastle-Carlisle routes. The Strategic Rail Authority will need to ensure that the potential for the development of railfreight is not eclipsed by the demands for passenger train paths.

4.3.2.17 The Blyth and Tyne Network is well placed to accommodate new freight flows arising from the regeneration of south east Northumberland.  The connection with deep-water wharves on either side of the River Blyth will prove valuable if there is an upsurge in rail-borne freight. The proposed re-introduction of passenger train services will need to take account of the requirement for an adequate number of paths for freight trains. There are several large sites with potential for industrial use in the Blyth and Wansbeck areas adjacent to the rail network; it is the County Council’s policy to protect and promote potential connections with the railway, which are likely to assume an increasing strategic importance over time.

4.3.2.18 The County Council has had discussions with Borders Transport Futures, a private enterprise which aims to re-open sections of a former railway line between Carlisle, Hawick and Edinburgh.  The northern section, from Edinburgh to Galashiels, is primarily intended for passenger use, and has received Scottish Office funding for further feasibility work.  Unfortunately, a feasibility study into the viability of re-opening the section of line between Longtown in Cumbria and Kielder for the transport of forest products from Kielder Forest has concluded that, under prevailing circumstances, the operation is not viable.  The terminus of the line was planned to be in Northumberland, near Kielder village, adjacent to the vast Kielder Forest, much of which is now nearing maturity, and the products of which would otherwise have to be transported by lorry over an unsuitable rural road network. It was hoped that the railway operation would substantially reduce the amount of timber products transported by road. The County Council remains in favour of the principle of the scheme, and it is hoped that the proposal will be re-visited at some time in the future. In the meantime, the line of the scheme is protected in the Tynedale Local Plan.    

c)    Specific Objectives

• Objective F7

increase the proportion of freight carried by rail in Northumberland.

• Objective F8

work with Railtrack, District Councils and through the planning process to protect existing facilities and to introduce new facilities.

• Objective F9

ensure that the needs of railfreight services are given due weight during the re-franchising process for passenger services.

d)    Strategy

4.3.2.20 The presumption in favour of freight being carried by rail wherever possible, contained in the County Structure Plan and Local Plans, will be retained.

4.3.2.21 The location of industrial activity in locations accessible by rail will be encouraged, and the County Council will liaise between prospective rail freight customers, Railtrack and train operating companies where possible to make greater use of existing and future facilities.

e)    Policies

• Policy F4

protect existing freight facilities and freight flows.

• Policy F5

encourage Railtrack and train operating companies to make train paths and services available for freight flows by rail.

• Policy F6

strengthen policies to locate development where connections to the rail network are possible, and to offer assistance to ensure that such connections are used to their fullest extent.  

PORTS

a)      Policy Context

4.3.2.22 Regional Planning Guidance states that the ability to move freight quickly and reliably is vital for the development of the North East’s economy, and in particular for ports.  The County Structure Plan states:

          “The maintenance of viable ports at Blyth and Berwick-upon-Tweed and their further development for port and related purposes will be encouraged”.

b)      Problems and Opportunities

4.3.2.23 Ports in Northumberland play an important part in the overall transport network, and make a positive contribution to the local economy.  Blyth is the principal port and serves mainly the local coal, aluminium, timber and agricultural industries.  Within the boundaries of the designated Port of Blyth certain classes of development can be carried out under permitted development rights.  However, most of the Northumberland Coast has been designated as a Special Protection Area (SPA) and PPG9 on Nature Conservation advises that development affecting an SPA, which normally benefits from permitted development rights, will require planning permission if it is not directly connected or necessary to the management of the nature conservation value of the site, and would adversely affect the integrity of the site.  The River Blyth Estuary Management Plan is being prepared to provide a framework for the resolution of conflict between human uses and conservation.

4.3.2.24 The port of Berwick-upon-Tweed plays an important role in the economy of north Northumberland through the transportation of grain, timber and stone.  Strategic policy supports the development of both Blyth and Berwick-upon-Tweed, while recognising the need to maintain the landscape, leisure and conservation value of the Northumberland coast and the potential impact of such development on the commercial and housing interests of the surrounding areas.  A number of smaller ports are used mainly for fishing.

c)    Specific Objectives

nObjective F10

work with Port Authorities to maximise the amount of freight carried by sea.

d)    Strategy

4.3.2.25 Discussions will be held with port authorities with the intention of identifying measures that could be implemented to the mutual benefit of both the Highway Authority and the ports. This will include ensuring good access to dockside areas and adequate signing from the principal road network, and supporting any proposals through the lifetime of the LTP which involve transfer of goods direct from rail to ship and vice versa.  

e)    Policies

• Policy F7

Improve the County's primary road, rail, port and airport facilities and services where this will assist economic development.

• Policy F8

maximise the throughput of freight at the ports of Blyth and Berwick-upon-Tweed.

4.3.3 A STRATEGY FOR AIRPORT SURFACE ACCESS

a)    Policy Context

4.3.3.1 The air transport needs of Northumberland are met primarily by Newcastle Airport. The majority of the airport is located within the City of Newcastle. It is the ninth largest in the UK and handled just under 3 million passengers in 1998.  Over 12% of these have an origin or destination in Northumberland.  Total passenger throughput is forecast to rise to between 4 and 5 million passengers per year by 2006, most of this growth will be accommodated in an extension to the existing terminal, opened in January 2000.  The Airport is pursuing a number of schemes aimed at improving public transport links, including a Rail Transportation Study which has investigated options for linking the main centres in the County to the Airport with direct ‘heavy rail’ services, and a proposed public transport interchange incorporating an enlarged Metro terminus and a bus and coach station. Development of the freight village, located within the boundaries of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, is also taking place in response to increasing demand for airfreight services.

4.3.3.2 The primary road access is via the A696 Trunk Road, which provides direct access to the Airport's internal road system. The majority of public transport trips begin or end with a journey on the Tyne and Wear Metro which terminates at the Airport, and connects it with much of Tyneside, and from January 2002, with Sunderland.

4.3.3.3 The expansion of the airport is in accordance with the presumption in favour of the growth of regional airports, described in the Transport White Paper and UK airports policy.  The expectation is that regional airports will maximise the contribution which they make to local and regional economies, and will relieve pressure on congested airports in the south east of England.

b)    Problems and Opportunities

4.3.3.4 Of relevance to the County Council is the future detrunking of the A696 road north of the airport. The route northwards to the Scottish Border will become the responsibility of the County Council when detrunking is complete, although the section directly serving the Airport Terminal will remain a trunk road.  Surface access to the Airport from the north will therefore become increasingly relevant to the transport policies of the County Council.

4.3.3.5 The Airport Company is in the process of an ambitious programme of expansion, to accommodate a predicted increase in the number of passengers, and to capture a larger market share of the total flight market in southern Scotland and northern England, which is in accordance with the statement in ‘A New Deal for Transport’ that regional airports away from south east England should be allowed to reach their full potential, easing pressure on congested London terminals.  The existence of a surface access strategy which aims to increase the number of airport users using means of transport other than the private car is welcomed; the Airport company has been pro-active in introducing a Travel Plan aimed at employees, and in participating in the Northumberland Local Agenda 21 Transport Working Group.  The Airport Company has also demonstrated its commitment to public transport by facilitating a bus service between the Airport, Cramlington and Blyth, and by agreeing to provide a large part of the capital costs of an escalator between the Metro station concourse and the platform level at Newcastle Central station.  There are plans for increases in car parking charges to help pay for improvements in public transport facilities and services, including the new bus and coach interchange.The Airport Company is currently reviewing the Airport Land Use Masterplan. The Airport Surface Access Strategy will aim to reduce the proportion of journeys made by single occupancy cars to the Airport. However by 2016 the operations are forecast to have trebled in numbers, and the Airport Company considered that even a substantial shift away from the car will not preclude the need for a range of significant road improvements. Adjacent to Northumberland this is likely to result in improvements to the access to and from the A696 Trunk road, within the City of Newcastle.

c)    Specific Objectives

• Objective A1

work with the Airport Company to increase the share of journeys made to and from Newcastle Airport by public transport.

• Objective A2

co-ordinate transport policies in adjacent areas of Northumberland to secure maximum benefits from the proposed public transport interchange at Newcastle Airport. 

d)    Strategy

4.3.3.6 The Surface Access Strategy sets out the Airport’s proposals to improve road access to the site, chiefly from the south: 92.3% of trips to and from the Airport have been shown to originate from this direction. In 1997 the modal split of airport visitors was as follows:

n68% private car             n 4% hire car                   n19% taxi

n7% Metro                       n2% bus/coach.

4.3.3.7 The Airport Company wishes to increase the proportion of passengers arriving by public transport, in line with the requirements of Planning Policy Guidance Note 13.  The Airport Public Transport Action Plan makes the following recommendations:

• Metro   

Extended operating hours, improved services, extension to a second terminal.

• Bus  

Extended operating hours, improved facilities and services.

• Heavy Rail 

A longer term aspiration of reopening a heavy rail link to the Airport, via the Metro system, the East Coast Main Line and the Benton curve.  This would allow trains to operate direct to and from many local and regional destinations. This element of the strategy would not be commercially viable until towards the end of the Masterplan period, well beyond the period of the LTP.

• Park and Ride

Promotion of a remote car park and check-in facility.

4.3.3.8 The Airport Company aims to achieve a modal share for public transport of 20% by 2005, and 25% by 2020. This will be an important target to attain, in the light of the projected increase in passenger numbers described above. The County Council welcomes the emphasis upon interchange facilities described in the Surface Access Strategy.

4.3.3.9 To cope with this increase, the surface access study also makes provision for an improved junction with the A696 road; a variety of possible layouts have been produced, and the scheme eventually adopted is likely to depend not only on the availability of finance and the recorded growth in passenger numbers, but also on the success of public transport measures.  To boost the patronage of public transport, a £20m transport interchange is planned. It will fully integrate the Metro service with the airport terminal, and will provide a high standard of facilities for buses and other forms of public transport.      

e)    Policies

• Policy A1

support the airport expansion plans of Newcastle Airport within the context of the Airports Policy document, with potential development land to be safeguarded for uses requiring an airport location.

• Policy A2

     support the public transport developments taking place at Newcastle Airport, and will co-ordinate services in adjacent areas of Northumberland to maximise the benefits of the new facilities.

• Policy A3

              continue to work closely with the Airport Company to foster more sustainable travel patterns between the Airport and Northumberland in respect of journeys made by employees and passengers.