What is the proposed scheme?

    The M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport scheme would provide a new M5 Junction 9a south of Tewkesbury and re-route a section of the A46 between the M5 and Teddington Hands roundabout. The existing M5 Junction 9 would be kept open to maintain access to the M5 from Tewkesbury and Ashchurch, but long-distance A46 traffic would largely use the re-routed A46. The existing A46 through Ashchurch would cater for mainly local traffic.   

    The scheme would provide benefits to Tewkesbury and Ashchurch residents and businesses by improving journey times and reliability on the local highway network to M5 Junction 9. Diverting long-distance traffic - including heavy goods vehicles - from the A46 through Ashchurch onto a new road will provide capacity for housing and employment opportunities, and crucially provide benefits to the existing communities, offering a more pleasant environment for residents and greater opportunities for walking, cycling and sustainable travel along the existing road. 

    The scheme will rely on securing funding from Government to deliver it. At this early stage, no commitment can therefore be given to funding being secured for the scheme delivery. 

    Why is the scheme needed?

    The case for improvements to the M5 Junction 9 and A46 through Ashchurch has become more compelling in recent years. Improvements would address the following issues:  

    • Congestion on this section of the A46 and at M5 Junction 9 means that both local and long-distance journeys are unreliable and take longer than they should   

    • At peak times queuing from M5 Junction 9 can reach back to the M5 motorway, with queuing vehicles on the hard shoulder creating a safety hazard 

    • Developments which already have planning permission are increasing traffic in this location 

    • Provision for walking and cycling at M5 Junction 9 and along the A46 does not meet current design standards. Along with the level of traffic on the A46 (including HGVs), this makes the road difficult to cross and discourages travel by bike or on foo 

    • Further significant development in the Ashchurch area cannot be delivered without additional capacity on the road network  

    Upon opening, the scheme would also provide environmental improvements, including noise level reductions and improved air quality along the A46. This would benefit the existing communities along the A46, as well as those travelling through it on foot or by bicycle.

    Have you considered encouraging other methods of travelling (e.g. buses/rail/cycling/walking) instead of building a new road?

    Yes, other options have been considered. However, the issues identified above (under ‘Why is the scheme needed?’) cannot be addressed through improvements to walking, cycling and public transport infrastructure alone. Traffic surveys carried out in 2022 showed that a significant portion of the traffic on the A46 was through traffic, meaning it was not headed for local destinations in Tewkesbury or Ashchurch. Specifically, 65% of the westbound traffic and 47% of the eastbound traffic between M5 Junction 9 and Aston Cross was through traffic. 

    By diverting long-distance traffic away from the existing A46 to the new road, opportunities would be created to encourage greater use of sustainable transport. This would support the achievement of the UK’s target to make all sectors of the economy carbon neutral by 2050 and encourage greater use of sustainable transport. 

    What are the potential route options and where would they be located?

    We are seeking views on three potential route options for the western section of the scheme (Options 1, 2 and 3) and two potential route options for the eastern section (Options A and B)This provides a total of 6 no. individual potential route options, i.e., 1A, 1B, 2A, 2B, 3A and 3B.  

    The potential route options are as follows: 

    • Western section (Options 1, 2 and 3connects the M5 to B4079. 

    • Eastern section (Options A and B) connects B4079 / Seven Bends junction to Teddington Hands roundabout. 

    They are presented in the map below.  


    Western section (M5 to B4079 / Seven Bends) 

    Option 1 comprises an additional M5 Junction 9a that provides slip roads to and from the M5 south only, located to the west of Fiddington village / east of Wheatpieces. The new A46 link road would pass north of Fiddington and Claydon to connect with the eastern section of the A46 link road in the Seven Bends area. The eastern end of the route would vary between Options 1A and 1B to connect into the proposals for the eastern section. 

    Option 2 comprises an additional M5 Junction 9a with a roundabout that allows movement both north and south to and from the M5, located to the south of Sherdons Golf Centre and Bozard Lane. The new A46 link road would cross Bozard Lane then run roughly eastwards between Bozard Lane and Claydon Solar Farm before turning north to connect with the eastern section of the A46 link road in the Seven Bends area. 

    Option 3 comprises an additional M5 Junction 9a with a roundabout that allows movement in both north and south to and from the M5, located to the south of Sherdons Golf Centre and Bozard Lane. The new A46 link road would run roughly eastwards. It would then turn north to connect with the eastern section of the A46 link road in the Seven Bends area, crossing Bozard Lane to the east of Bozard Farm.  

    Eastern section (B4079 / Seven Bends junction to Teddington Hands roundabout) 

    Option A comprises a new roundabout junction with the A435 / B4079 in the Seven Bends area; the new A46 would follow the route of the A435 until just south of Teddington Hands roundabout. This section of the A435 would be upgraded to trunk road standards, with accesses to properties and Teddington village maintained. The new A46 would bypass the existing Teddington Hands roundabout and businesses to the east, with a second roundabout junction to the east of the existing Teddington Hands roundabout. The new A46 would tie into the existing A46 south of Elm Farm. 

    Option B comprises a new roundabout junction with the B4079 in the Seven Bends area (to the north of the existing A435 / B4079 junction); the new A46 would take an offline route across the fields to the west of the A435. It would cross the Tirle Brook flood zone on an embankment before connecting to the existing A46 at a new roundabout junction to the west of Teddington Hands roundabout. The section of the A46 between the two roundabouts would be upgraded to dual carriageway and Teddington Hands roundabout would be upgraded. 

    Option 2 and 3  An all-movements junction with roundabout would be proposed for these options as shown below.  

    How do the western section route options connect to the M5 at Junction 9a?

    Option 1 – slip roads to and from M5 south would be proposed at M5 Junction 9a as shown below. 

    Option 2 and 3  An all-movements junction with roundabout would be proposed for these options as shown below.   

    Why doesn’t Option 1 have a full movement Junction 9a with the M5?

    The distance between the proposed Junction 9a and the existing Junction 9 is too short to safely accommodate a full movement junction for Option 1Close proximity of the on and off ramps would result in high risk of vehicle collisions between these junctions. 

    The proposed restricted movement junction layout for Junction 9a would permit the following: 

    • Journeys between the M5 south of Junction 9 and A46 north of Teddington Hands would use the new M5 Junction 9a and A46 link, bypassing the Ashchurch area (this is expected to include most of the long-distance traffic including Heavy Goods Vehicles that currently pass through Ashchurch 

    • Journeys starting or ending in the Tewkesbury and Ashchurch area would still be able to use the existing M5 Junction 9 to travel between the M5 (in both directions), A438 and existing A46  

    • Local journeys between Ashchurch and Tewkesbury would also continue to use the existing M5 Junction 9 as at present  

    • Journeys between the M5 north of Junction 9 and A46 north of Teddington Hands would not be able to use the new M5 Junction 9a and A46 link, so would travel via the existing route through Ashchurch  

    • Journeys between Tewkesbury and A46 north of Teddington Hands would also continue to travel via the existing route through Ashchurch. 

    Traffic surveys done in September 2022 showed that 65% of all traffic travelling westbound on the A46 east of Aston Cross joined the M5 motorway via M5 Junction 9 rather than travelling to more local destinations in either Tewkesbury or Ashchurch. Most of this traffic is headed southbound on the M5 towards the southwest. A similar pattern was observed in the reverse direction, with 47% of traffic travelling to the A46 east of Aston Cross originating from the M5 south of Junction 9. This junction arrangement would reroute this traffic from M5 Junction 9 and Ashchurch thereby meeting scheme objectives 

    Would the new road be dual or single carriageway?

    Potential route options for the western section of the scheme would be a dual carriageway to cope with forecast growth in long-distance and local traffic using the link road between the M5 and B4079 / A435Potential route options for the eastern section of the scheme would be a single carriageway. Traffic flows are forecast to be lower in this section (similar to the traffic flows on the A46 north of Teddington Hands which is also a single carriageway road). 

    Have you considered other options?

    To date, over fifty different options have been considered, including: 

    • Sustainable transport options 

    Sustainable travel measures (such as the provision of better facilities for walking and cycling, or improvements to public transport) would improve travel options for the local community. Our assessment concluded however, that in isolation they would not address the issues caused by the volume of local and long-distance traffic passing through M5 Junction 9 and the A46 and expected housing and employment growth. Sustainable travel measures would be included as part of the overall scheme. 

    • A46 ‘online’ (along the existing A46) improvement options  

    Upgrading the existing M5 Junction 9 and the A46 through Ashchurch would address some of the known congestion and safety issues; however, our assessment concluded that it would not prove an effective overall solution. This is because there are businesses and homes close to the road that would be adversely impacted by the widening of the road and increased traffic, including Heavy Goods Vehicles passing through Ashchurch. It would also impact the ability to deliver future development in the area, vital to achieve its longer-term vision for growth. 

    • ‘Offline’ (away from the existing A46) highway options 

    Re-routing the A46 away from Ashchurch (with a new M5 Junction 9a) would address all of the issues identified, including reducing congestion at the existing M5 Junction 9 and the A46 through Ashchurch and supporting future development of the area. It would also provide a quicker and more reliable route for long-distance traffic, whilst providing opportunities to improve sustainable travel options, too. 

    Over 40 offline highway options have been considered to date. They have all been assessed against the scheme objectives and a range of transport planning, economic, engineering, and environmental appraisal criteria. Various options were discounted due to one or more of the following reasons: 

    • Not being closely enough aligned with the scheme objectives 

    • Significant environmental (including flood risk) or engineering constraints 

    • Construction risks 

    • Negative impacts on future development proposals 

    • Providing poor value for money 

    For more information on the option selection process, see the option generation and sifting report which is available on Have Your Say (M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport Scheme- Potential Route Options Engagement | Have Your Say Gloucestershire (engagementhq.com)). 

    Why would the new link to the M5 be to the south of Ashchurch? Have routes to the north of Ashchurch been considered?

    We have considered a range of options to the north and south of Ashchurch. Due to the short distance between M5 Junction 9 and M5 Junction 8, a new junction to the north of M5 Junction 9 would require the closure of M5 Junction 9 in order to comply with design standards (a minimum distance of 2km is required between junctions)Traffic modelling has demonstrated that relocating M5 Junction 9 would re-route local traffic through Tewkesbury and cause significant disruption on the local road network, and therefore potential route options include a new link to the south of Ashchurch.  

    More northerly options such as re-routing the A46 from Evesham to M5 Junction 8 (M50 junction) were not formally considered since this would involve a much longer length of new road passing through environmentally sensitive areas including the River Avon floodplain and Cotswolds National Landscape area around Bredon Hill. The current options presented in the public engagement would involve construction of up to 5 miles of new road to form the re-routed A46. In contrast, to connect the A46 south of Evesham to M5 Junction 8 would require at least 8 miles of new road to route to the north of Bredon Hill, or 9 miles if starting north of Evesham. At least one major crossing of the River Avon floodplain would be required and with other environmental mitigations and upgrades needed to M5 Junction 8, the cost of such options would be around double that of the current options being presented. Furthermore, upgrading the A46 between Teddington Hands and Evesham is beyond the scope of this scheme which seeks to address the issues identified in the Ashchurch area as mentioned in the Why is the scheme needed?’ section.  

    For more information on the option selection process, see the option generation and sifting report which is available on Have Your Say (M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport Scheme- Potential Route Options Engagement | Have Your Say Gloucestershire (engagementhq.com)). 

    Why not just improve the existing A46 through Ashchurch?

    Upgrading the existing M5 Junction 9 and the A46 through Ashchurch would address some of the known congestion and safety issues; however, our assessment concluded that it would not prove an effective overall solution. This is because there are businesses and homes close to the road that would be adversely impacted by the widening of the road and increased traffic, including heavy goods vehicles passing through Ashchurch. It would also impact the ability to deliver future development in the area

    What would happen to the existing A46 as part of the scheme?

    The existing A46 would be downgraded to cater for mainly local traffic offering a wealth of benefits to the existing communities in the area, as well as those travelling through it on foot or by bicycle. This would include providing a more pleasant environment for residents and greater opportunities for walking, cycling and sustainable travel along the existing road. Other changes could be considered to reinforce its role as a local traffic route.

    How much would the scheme cost?

    The scheme is estimated to cost between £740m and £930m to construct. This cost estimate includes provision for risk, uncertainty and inflation and are based on the scheme being constructed in the early 2030s.  

    Further information is provided in the Analysis of Shortlisted Options report. 

    Who is funding the scheme?

    The scheme will rely on securing funding from Government to deliver the scheme. At this early stage, no commitment can therefore be given to funding being secured for the scheme delivery. 

    In 2019 Gloucestershire County Council (GCC) identified the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Large Local Majors (LLM) fund as an opportunity to develop a scheme of improvements at M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch).  

    GCC have funded options identification and Strategic Outline (Business) Case (SOC) development, which has now been submitted to DfT for approval.  Funding was also provided by the Department of Levelling Up Housing and Communities (DLUHC) (now the Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government) through Homes England during this stage.   

    Subject to successful SOC approval, funding would be provided by DfT and GCC for Outline Business Case (OBC) development and the identification of a preferred route.  

    It is currently proposed that, subject to an approved OBC and funding from the Department for Transport being in place, National Highways will take the scheme on to complete the Preferred Route Announcement and be responsible for detailed design and construction of the scheme. 

    Would developers be expected to contribute to the scheme?

    Planning law requires developers to contribute to transport schemes when the proposed developments impact local infrastructure. This can be through 

    • Section 106 (under the Town and Country Planning Act 1990) agreements between developers and local authorities can be used to provide funding for measures to reduce the negative impact of new developments. For example, building a new road to increase capacity for additional traffic from the new development.  

    • Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) is a levy that local authorities can charge on new developments to fund strategic and local infrastructure needs including transport schemes. 

    Why can’t these funds be spent on repairing the existing roads in the county?

    The government-produced eligibility criteria for the Large Local Majors (LLM) fund. This specifies the type of schemes which can receive fundingRepairing potholes is not included in this list. Please see the following website for more information: www.gov.uk/government/publications/major-road-network-and-large-local-majors-programmes-investment-planning/major-road-network-and-large-local-majors-programmes-investment-planning-guidance.  

    The revenue spent by Gloucestershire County Council to develop business cases for schemes helps to secure millions of pounds of investment for infrastructure (such as the M5 J9 and A46 Transport Scheme) which GCC would otherwise not have the ability to fund. 

    Why is GCC spending money on this instead of schools, social services etc.?

    GCC are promoting and investing in Stage 1 (options identification and strategic outline business case) and Stage 2 (option selection and outline business case) of the schemeIn addition to date, funding of £3m has been provided by the Department of Levelling Up Housing and Communities (now Ministry for Housing Communities and Local Government) through Homes England to support Stage 1. Subject to successful completion of Stage 1 and the Strategic Outline Business Case approval, GCC and the Department for Transport (DfT) would fund Stage 2.  Subject to Stage 2 approval, the scheme would be handed over to National Highways, at the end of Stage 2, and funded by DfT during the planning, design and construction stages.  

    The unlocking of funding from the government for this scheme would reduce the overall costs incurred by GCC while providing direct benefits to the community in terms of reduced traffic congestion along M5 Junction 9 and A46 resulting in improved noise and air qualityThe reduction in traffic congestion would also be beneficial in unlocking housing and employment opportunities in the area  

    Why are you seeking our views now?

    A wide variety of route options have been considered and technically assessed for suitability. The council now plans to share these options with stakeholders, businesses, local communities and the public during the engagement exercise. This is the first stage of public engagement, with feedback being used to inform further options refinement and shortlisting. A preferred route option would only be identified following future public consultations. 

    Your feedback is really important as it will help us identify and refine the potential route options to take forward for further consideration, should the scheme be progressed.

    When does the engagement exercise start and end?

    The engagement exercise launches on Monday 7th October and ends on Monday 2nd December 2024. 

    How can I take part and share my opinion?

    You can provide feedback to us in a number of ways: 

    • By completing the online feedback survey via www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/J9. 

    • Attending one of our face-to-face engagement events, where there will be the opportunity to complete a paper copy of our feedback survey. 

    • Request a paper copy of the feedback survey free of charge by contacting M5Junction9@atkinsrealis.com. Completed paper copies can either be given to project team members at our face-to-face engagement events or returned by pre-paid envelope. 

    We are holding face to face engagement events where you can meet the project team, ask questions and provide feedback on the potential route options. The event details are as follows: 


    Watson Hall,   

    65 Barton Street, Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, GL20 5PX  

    Saturday 19 October 2024  

    Opens: 10:00hrs Closes: 17:00hrs  

     

    Northway Community Hub (Main Hall), 

    Lee Walk, Northway, Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire, GL20 8QG 

    Wednesday 23 October 2024 

    Opens: 11:00hrs Closes: 16:00hrs 

    How are you promoting the public engagement?

    We want to ensure that as many people as possible are able to take part in the public engagement, should they wish to. We are therefore using a range of methods to promote the public engagement, including: 

    • Public engagement events 

    • Council briefings 

    • Press releases to the media 

    • Social media 

    • Leaflets  

    • Surveys 

    • Posters in public places  

    • E-newsletter 

    • Letters and emails to stakeholders and affected landowners 

    What will happen to the engagement responses?

    Feedback received during the public engagement will be recorded and analysed. The content of feedback received will be categorised and broken down by sentiment, themes and respondent profile – helping us understand your comments and why you have made them. Should the scheme be progressed, we will use your feedback to further refine potential route options to ensure that any scheme would meet the needs and wants of as many people as possible.  

    A summary of feedback received during the public engagement will be made publicly available in a formal report.

    What measures would be taken to limit the impact of the scheme on the environment?

    Studies are ongoing to fully assess the impacts of the options on the key environmental receptors. The results of initial environmental assessments completed to date are summarised in the Analysis of options report. 

    As each option has limited design detail at this stage, it is difficult to outline specific proposed mitigation for each option. However, where environmental impacts have been identified, a mitigation hierarchy would be adopted to avoid impacts, then mitigate unavoidable impacts, and, as a last resort, compensate for unavoidable residual impacts which remain after avoidance and mitigation measures. Best practice design measure would also be adopted to mitigate any potential environmental impacts. 

    Given that we are in a Climate Emergency, is the proposed new road necessary?

    GCC recognises the climate emergency and is committed to encouraging greater active travel and public transport use as affirmed in Gloucestershire’s Local Transport Plan 2020-2041. However, as driving is likely to remain a prominent mode of transport for the foreseeable future, the council also has a responsibility to ensure that the local road network is futureproofed. Gloucestershire is facing rapidly growing housing and employment needs, and the correct transport infrastructure must be provided to support this future growth. This scheme would be brought forward to ensure that the local network can cope with future traffic levels and best serve Gloucestershire’s growing population. 

    The scheme would reroute long-distance traffic away from the existing A46 through Ashchurch on to the new road, the new route would become a strategic route operated and maintained by National Highways. This would enable delivery of an improved street environment through Ashchurch and support a shift to active and sustainable modes. By alleviating the existing A46 the scheme would also support sustainable local growth plans in Gloucestershire, with the old route passing through the Tewkesbury Garden Communities areas. 

    Would the scheme increase greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions?

    Carbon emissions for each progressed option have been calculated In all cases, the impact of the Scheme on the UK Carbon Budgets is negligible. It is considered that the magnitude of emissions from the Scheme would not materially impact the Government’s ability to meet its Carbon Budgets and is unlikely to have a significant effect on climate. 

    For more information on the carbon emissions by option, see the supporting information available on Have Your Say (M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport Scheme- Potential Route Options Engagement | Have Your Say Gloucestershire (engagementhq.com)). 

    What environmental / ecological surveys would be undertaken as a result of the proposals?

    For information on the environmental and ecological surveys undertaken to date, see the supporting information available on Have Your Say (M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport Scheme- Potential Route Options Engagement | Have Your Say Gloucestershire (engagementhq.com)). Further surveys would be required in future should the scheme be progressed.

    How have you considered the environmental impacts?

    Studies are ongoing to fully assess the impacts of the options on the key environmental receptors. The results of initial environmental assessments completed to date are summarised in the Analysis of options supporting information available on Have Your Say (M5 Junction 9 and A46 (Ashchurch) Transport Scheme- Potential Route Options Engagement | Have Your Say Gloucestershire (engagementhq.com)).

    How would the scheme impact noise levels in the area?

    Potential impacts of the proposed options on noise and vibration have been considered. For all options, construction activity would result in localised increases in noise. Mitigation measures would be considered to minimise impacts on individual receptors.

    Once completed, the scheme is expected to result in reduced noise levels along the A46 through Ashchurch due to diversion of a significant proportion of long-distance traffic including Heavy Goods Vehicles onto the new route. Noise levels would increase along the new route but for all options the route passes through mainly open farmland rather than the urban residential route of the existing A46. Mitigation measures would be considered to minimise impacts on individual receptors.

    How would the scheme impact air quality in the area?

    Potential impacts of the proposed options on air quality have been considered. The initial air quality assessment has identified that no significant adverse effects are identified with regards to air quality.

    The reduction in long-distance traffic, including Heavy Goods Vehicles along the A46 through Ashchurch, is expected to improve air quality for local residents and travellers (including walkers and cyclists), including for children that use the route to travel to school at Ashchurch Primary School and Tewkesbury Academy.

    How would the scheme impact on protected animal species?

    Potential impacts of the proposed options on protected animal species have been considered as part of a preliminary biodiversity impact assessment. This has concluded that:

    • All options may lead to the temporary and reversible damage to protected species and their habitats, which through mitigation is considered to be negligible

    • All options may lead to the permanent loss of bat roosts and or important foraging / commuting habitats (impacting the Forest of Dean Bat Sites SAC) or the permanent loss of habitats used by an Annex II species (violet click beetle) that form functionally linked land of the Bredon Hill SAC and/or Dixton Wood SAC

    • This would be determined by the results of further, detailed survey work. However, through following general and species-specific mitigation measures, impacts would not affect the integrity of these species.

    Mitigation measures would be developed in both the construction and design of the scheme to ensure that species remain protected, and biodiversity is preserved. There is a legal requirement for the scheme to provide Biodiversity Net Gain to make sure that habitats for wildlife are left in a measurably better state than they were before the development.