Support

Representation ID: 8041

Received: 24/09/2021

Respondent: North Northamptonshire Council

It is noted that since the publication of the Issues and Options consultation in August 2020, Bedford Borough Council have developed the Bedford Borough Transport Model (BBTM) (a multi-modal transport model), to test the proposed Local Plan development scenarios for forecasts in 2030, 2040 and 2050. The results of this scenario testing has been used to inform the preferred options presented.

We welcome that the transport model built includes the highway network in North Northamptonshire Council, to enable us to understand the distribution of forecast traffic flows from each of the development options tested and any impact on the highway network within North Northamptonshire.

The preferred options presented (Option 2a, Option 2b, Option 2c, Option 2d) all have an urban focus, with growth concentrated around the A421, railway based growth with various options around new settlements.

We note that the transport modelling shows that the preferred options result in an increase of forecast flows concentrated in the vicinity of Bedford with the least impact on the highway network relative to the other options tested. Moreover, the transport modelling concludes that mitigation should be achievable to mitigate the forecast flows to an acceptable level in highways terms but that there will be some congestion and delay.

We note that the transport modelling concluded that the Colworth and Twinwood new settlements resulted in significant congestion and delay on the A6 approach to Bedford from the north and that additional mitigation has not been identified to address this delay.

We also note that page 29 of the Development Strategy Topic Paper states that in ‘the absence of currently deliverable railway stations at either location which might make an impact, the capacity issues here are too great to allow further development on the A6 (north) corridor such as the new settlements proposed at Twinwoods and / or Colworth.’

Following careful consideration of the Bedford Borough Transport Model New Settlements and the A6 report we also note the following:
• A higher proportion of traffic from Colworth is forecast to travel north to Rushden than south to Bedford (to access the A14)
• Despite the increase in traffic flows, the transport modelling seems to suggest relatively minor impacts on the A6 junctions around Rushden compared to the 2030 reference case. Our transport modelling suggests that the A6 particularly south of Rushden is becoming constrained. A new settlement at Colworth would compound this.
• There is forecast to be some rat-running to use the A509 (and presumably on to Milton Keynes)
• We note that the trip rates used are average trips rates and may not represent the most robust worst case
• We note that the new station at Colworth has been included as a mitigation measure in the transport modelling for the A6 settlements, however the Development Strategy Topic Paper notes that this railway station is undeliverable. This therefore suggests that the traffic modelling may be underestimating the forecast flows on the A6 if the railway station is not a deliverable mitigation and as a result, the impact on the highway network.
• We note that a super cycle highway is proposed from Colworth to Bedford. The distance from Sharnbrook to centre of Bedford is around 9 miles, so this would be around a 45-minute cycle for the average person cycling, less with an e-bike. Further details on how many trips are expected to use this, the proposed route and its deliverability would be welcomed.

In light of the above, it is clear that the transport modelling has identified some unacceptable highway impacts of the new settlements proposed on the A6 corridor. We therefore support alternative development scenarios being taken forward that are able to be mitigated in highway terms.