Memorandum by the North Staffs Rail Promotion
Group (RP 20)
M6: GIVING MOTORISTS A CHOICE
Alistair Darling states in his introduction
to the consultation that "traffic levels are on the rise,
leading to increased congestion." This is at a time when:
— £6 billion is being spent on
the West Coast Main Line upgrade.
— The Prime Minister is personally
leading a campaign to reduce the nation's CO2 emissions to which
traffic levels make a significant contribution.
— There are signs that fuel prices
will increase, in real terms, in the time span of the proposed
expressway construction as not only the UK's oil reserves but
those in other parts of the world become scarcer and demand for
oil from newly developing countries such as China increases.
In this context the Government should be providing
leadership in encouraging both industry and private individuals
to keep road travel distances (as well as internal flights-another
fuel hungry transport mode) moderated. This can only be done by:
— Ensuring rail continues to receive
financial support such that it can provide travel at a cost comparable
to that of road and air.
— Accepting that the relative cost
of motoring (and flying) should increase to reflect more realistically
the environmental damage that vehicle (and jet) emissions cause
and the high level of natural resources consumed.
— Learning from the history of road
building that traffic volumes always grow to fill the road space
available and accepting that if traffic levels are to be constrained,
so must road space be also.
The land take of the proposed M6 expressway
is massive given that the boundary between it and the existing
motorway will need to be around 10 metres. This may have to increase
to 100 metres "where level difference, mound is required,
or facilities such as drainage are required". (Consultation
proposal page 4). "In some place the separation will need
to be more than 100 metres where significant obstacles are to
be avoided eg schools, housing or motorways service areas."
Consider both the air pollution and the noise pollution suffered
by all those who have to live or work within 100 metres of a motorway,
made even worse by a motorway stream on either side.
With a 10 metre separation between carriageways,
the land take width will be 120 metres. By comparison, the land
take width for a four track railway with earth works such as embankments
would be around 25 metres.
On the section of the West Coast mainline through
the North Midlands there has now been serious disruption for 18
months. There will continue to be disruption on the route, we
are told, until at least 2007. In this context many people choose
(the writer included) to take the road option rather than the
railway, to avoid delays over which they have no control. The
West Coast Main Line project should be completed and assessed
before considering substantial road building within a few miles
(in some places within a few metres) of its route.
Toll roads do not fit with a labour philosophy
as they are a mechanism for buying privilege in a transport setting.
The widening of the M6, with rapid development
of the technology to price the road for all users to a level that
constrains traffic volumes to the capacity of the constructed
road, is the way that this process should proceed and should be
an essential element in a national integrated transport policy.
September 2004
| 
