![[FOE Logo]](../images/foe.gif)
West Midlands Transport Group
|
Midlands Friends of the Earth West Midlands Transport Group |
This briefing sets out why Friends of the Earth believe the Government should withdraw the Motorway Widening Programme from London to Manchester, which includes the M1 widenings (Jns 6a-10 and 10-14) the M6 widenings (Jn 11a-16 and 16-19) the M42 widening (Jns 3-7) and the A556 (M) improvement from the M6 to the M56, and which would cost œ1.2 billion of taxpayer's money.
In 1988 the Government had a clear policy on roads. Under a 'Predict and Provide' philosophy the Department of Transport would predict the growth in traffic and would then provide new road space on that basis. œ23 Billion was earmarked for road building. Now, in 1997 that policy has been thoroughly discredited. Environmental protest and concerns about the countryside have been one cause of the change, the huge costs involved another, but perhaps, most importantly, it has become clear that no amount of road building and widening could keep pace with the growth in traffic, and that in urban areas, where the problem is worst, road building is not an option. New roads may actually make the problem worse by encouraging longer journeys and undermining local facilities.
This welcome change of attitude has been reflected in previous reviews of the road programme. Only œ6 billion worth of road projects remain, with a growing emphasis on local bypass schemes rather than grand inter-urban projects. However, this change has not been reflected in the London to Manchester corridor which, including rings roads round Manchester, accounts for œ1.7 billion of projected trunk road funding, or 29% of the total. A cursory glance at the maps in the current road review shows that 'Predict and Provide' policies are still being pursued in this corridor.
The current roads programme includes seven major widening projects from London to Manchester adding up to œ1.2 billion, and turning all those sections of motorway into dual four lanes. A further œ0.5 million of road work is included around Manchester itself. The only section of widening in the corridor dropped since the 1980s is the widening of the M6 between Coventry and Birmingham.
Despite assurances over many years that the Birmingham Northern Relief Road, one of the central planks of the corridor, would not be built, Friends of the Earth was disappointed when the private motorway was given the go ahead in July 1997. This has made us more sceptical about the Government's environmental intentions along the whole of this corridor.
Friends of the Earth oppose the widening programme because
1. It would damage huge amounts of countryside.
The total length of motorway widening proposed is over 150 kilometres. This excludes the 40 kilometres of green belt destroyed by the Birmingham Northern Relief Road. In all cases the motorways would be widened to dual four lane under symmetrical widening schemes. This would mean pulling up all the trees on both verges. Additionally there would be damage to a number of nationally important nature sites (Sites of Special Scientific Interest) and other natural sites and to one even more important RAMSAR site, Rostherne Mere, a wetland on the route of the A556 (M). SSSIs include Blythe Valley, Tabley Mere and Doxley Marshes.
The BNRR already 'seriously' damages an SSSI at Chasewater Heath as well as destroying 40 kilometres of Green Belt. The A556 (M) also goes through Manchester's Green Belt Historically roads in the Green Belt, such as the M42, have encouraged development within the protected corridor, and encouraged city dwellers to move into the countryside and commute, increasing car dependency and, thus, overall traffic growth.
2. It would generate extra traffic
The Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment advised the Government on the generation of traffic by new roads in 1994. They concluded that roads can and do generate more traffic by encouraging longer trips and car dependent development. A key element in this process is changes in the relative costs of travel and availability of alternatives.
Any newly generated traffic in this corridor would impact on the M25 and on Birmingham and Manchester where congestion is already endemic.
The construction of a four lane superhighway would not resolve the central problem of traffic growth. Even excluding significant new traffic being generated the main effect of widening motorways is to move problems around, swapping one traffic jam for another.
For example, detailed traffic modelling from the BNRR Inquiry showed that the net effect of this hugely expensive new motorway on the M6 through the West Midlands was negligible, and that following construction traffic jams increased on all motorways accessing BNRR including the M42 and M6.
The Government's prediction is for huge congestion stress on all the motorways in the London to Manchester corridor by 2025, as well as round the M25. This might seem to favour new road construction. However, our own research showed that congestion would be endemic on the M6 (Jn 14-15) even with twelve lanes and the M1 (Jn 9-10) with eighteen lanes. Widening the M6 would mean chronic congestion was still reached by 2001. Increasing capacity is not, therefore a sustainable solution. It will very quickly fail and is extremely expensive.
3. It would undermine the possibility of revitalising public transport, particularly the neglected West Coast Mainline railway.
Friends of the Earth has been calling for reinvestment in the railways and other public transport in this corridor for a long time. The huge disparity between East Coast and West Coast Mainlines is almost a national joke. New investment by Virgin Rail and Railtrack could dramatically improve long distance services. However, further investment will be needed to accommodate both long distance and long services satisfactorily.
The motorway widening programme would impact on that in two ways. Firstly, it would take a huge amount of public expenditure out of the system, restricting Government's ability to help fund local rail, bus, cycle and pedestrian improvements.
Secondly, it would further tip the balance in favour of road travel both for cars and freight. The Freight Industry in particular justifies use of road by saying it is uneconomic to send goods by rail under 200 miles. That disparity of costs will not be reduced if wider roads are provided for freight movements.
4. The huge costs would be better invested in alternative transport modes or in directly revitalising the town and cities on the route.
The justification put forward for the motorway widening programme is the economic regeneration of the North West and the West Midlands. However, the economy benefits of motorway widening is far from clear once a basic motorway network is in place.
As long ago as the 1970s the Leitch Commission reported to the Government that the impact of new roads on locational policies and regional development was limited to time savings motorways on new roads. Widespread congestion has largely removed even that factor.
More recent research has confirmed this. Research into the M25 showed that overall freight costs have risen as a result of the congestion and extra journey lengths caused by accessing the M25 Research by academics in Scotland has shown that average transport costs for businesses in that region aren't higher than in other parts of the UK, reflecting among other things more local sourcing of materials. Notably, Scotland has been the most successful UK region at attracting inward investment in recent years.
The effect of new roads is mainly local. Road improvements aimed at encouraging urban regeneration such as the new Black Country Roads do encourage investment in urban areas rather than on the edge of a conurbation. But equally new motorways tend to encourage business to move out of urban areas to green field sites.
The key to inward investment, urban regeneration and regional economic success is availability and cost of labour, along with the availability of regional grant aid.
One wider impact of the intensification of the motorway network has been that company's distribution has often centralised, for example the massive Cadbury's warehouse in Minworth near the M42. This has had a negative impact on jobs and has increased freight miles.
5. It would further disadvantage those who live near to the motorways.
Many of the people living along the route already face disruption from traffic, poor air quality and noise. The widening of the motorways would increase their problems.
Residents on the M6 through the West Midlands, the most densely urban area, would face perhaps the worse degradation. It should be remembered that the majority of long distance drivers, particularly freight, would not use the Birmingham Northern Relief Road because of the toll, so any increase in traffic from London to Manchester would impact heavily on the M6 in the West Midlands.
London To Manchester Motorway Widening '£1.2 Billion Down The Drain'
This paper has set out why we believe the London to Manchester widening programme should not go ahead, why it would not regional economies, ease traffic problems or benefit the environment. We believe those who argue otherwise rely on outdated and simplistic arguments, underestimating the potential for new traffic generation region and overestimating the impacts of roads on inward investment.
Friends of the Earth groups all along the route are calling for the Government to cancel all the motorway widening proposals in the London to Manchester corridor and to invest in public transport corridors and in directly revitalising the urban fabric of the West Midlands and Manchester to reduce traffic growth.
In our view the only way to reduce congestion in the corridor and on the trunk road network is to reduce overall traffic levels in line with emerging Government Policy, as expressed in the Road Traffic Reduction Act which was promoted by Friends of the Earth nationally.
This would need three major policy initiatives: increased investment in Rail, public transport, walking and cycling, fiscal measures to control car use and strong land use policies aimed at reducing the need to travel.
A Case Study in Self-Defeating Motorway Construction
No London To Manchester Superhighway
M1 Junctions 6a-10 and 10-14
M6 Junctions 11a-16 and 16-19
M42 Junctions 3-7
A556 (M) M6-M56
Compiled by Gerald Kells on behalf of Friends of the Groups from London to Manchester.
For further details contact : 01922 636601 [Phone/FAX]