Roads Policy Division
Department for Transport
Zone 3/01
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London SW1P 4DR / Stockport
Cheshire
16 July 2004
Dear Mr Berry,
I am writing to comment on the government’s proposals for a new toll motorway parallel to the M6 between Cannock and Mid-Cheshire.
I am a regular user of this stretch of the M6 and fully support the view that an expansion of capacity is needed on this route. However, in my experience, the section between Junction 11A and Junction 19 flows reasonably freely most of the time, and in view of this I feel that there are other road plans – in particular the A556(M) scheme – that should be given a higher priority.
I am strongly opposed in principle to the construction of new toll roads. When road users contribute vastly more to the Exchequer than is spent on all forms of transport, it is wholly unacceptable to expect them to pay yet again for the provision of infrastructure that should be funded from general taxation and be free at the point of use. Tolling specific roads also distorts road users’ decision making process and leads to sub-optimal use of the network. This is underlined by the almost total absence of heavy goods vehicles from the current M6 Toll and the negligible use of that road during off-peak periods. If that was a free road it would fully achieve its objectives; as things stand at present, it only partially does.
As someone who drives a substantial mileage on motorways, I feel that three lanes is the optimum width for roads of this type. Many of the potential benefits of widening to four lanes are eroded by poor lane discipline. Therefore I support the concept of building a new road on a different alignment rather than widening the existing M6. This would also, as the consultation document states, reduce costs and minimise disruption to the existing road.
However, I believe it would be a mistake to build this road on an alignment very close to the existing M6. One of the best ways of reducing congestion is to diffuse traffic flow, which this would not do. It would put increased pressure on existing link roads, many of which would also need to be upgraded. A better option would be to seek to improve routes that run roughly parallel to the M6, but some distance away. A very good example of this occurred when the M40 was completed between Oxford and Birmingham in the early 1990s, providing a parallel route from London to the West Midlands about 20 miles west of the existing M1.
Under such a strategy, the very first priority, as stated above, should be the construction of the A556(M) link road. The current A556 route is completely inadequate for the volume of traffic carried and is subject to chronic congestion. It also cannot be right in the 21st century that the route from London to a major city such as Manchester should include such a sub-standard road.
Following this, I believe that the Highways Agency should consider expanding capacity on the M54/A5/A483 corridor between the West Midlands and Chester, with the objective of transferring most of the traffic for North Wales and Liverpool that currently uses the M6. Most of this route is already on new alignments away from towns, and it could be upgraded to a fully dualled and grade-separated road for a relatively modest cost in comparison with the construction of an entirely new road parallel to the M6.
In the longer term, you should then investigate increasing capacity on the A51/A34 corridor between Lichfield, Stoke-on-Trent and Manchester, to provide an alternative high standard route between Birmingham and Manchester running about 10 miles to the east of the current M6.
Yours sincerely,
Peter Edwardson
- 1 -