Newbury By-pass (Hansard, 5 July 1995)

§ The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Transport (Viscount Goschen)

Last December my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport announced that, before construction work began on the A.34 Newbury by-pass, further consideration would be given to the proposed route. We had no doubt that the current situation on the A.34 was intolerable and that there was strong economic justification for a by-pass. But we wanted to he sure of the environmental balance between the principal route alternatives and to confirm that the route proposed was the best solution to the problems of congestion in Newbury.

Congestion has got much worse since the public inquiry in 1988. Then there were about 40,000 vehicles a day on the A.34 through Newbury. Recent counts show an increase of 25 per cent. in the overall traffic levels. Forecasts suggest that traffic flows will reach between 65,000 and 78,000 vehicles per day by the year 2010. The inquiry heard evidence of peak hour delays of up to 30 minutes. Longer delays are not unusual now.

A team of Highways Agency staff not previously associated with the scheme undertook this further consideration and has reported to me. We have placed a copy of its report in the Library.

As the report makes clear, the team examined both the background to the scheme and the changes in appraisal techniques, local circumstances and traffic and economic data that have occurred since the inquiry and the subsequent decisions of the Secretaries of State.

Amongst these matters, the team gave attention to:

the closure of Greenham Common Air Base, which opens up the possibility of a new eastern route;

the expected designation of new Sites of Special Scientific Interest in the valleys of the Rivers Kennet and Lambourn;

protected species on the line of the announced route;

new archaeological data and the heritage value of the site of the 1643 Battle of Newbury;

the scope for induced traffic as a result of the by-pass;

all central route options through the built-up area of Newbury, despite the fact that the inspector at the public inquiry had unequivocally rejected a central route;

lower levels of improvement of the existing road.

We have carefully considered all the changes and other factors addressed in the team's report, the scope for alternative options to those examined at the public inquiry, and the balance between all the options. We have also taken into account all the advice we have been 79WA given and representations we have received since this study was inaugurated.

We agree with the team's assessments, and with its overall conclusion that the western by-pass, for which statutory orders have been made and confirmed, is the most effective solution for Newbury. We now intend to move ahead speedily with the proposed scheme to bring much needed relief to the town and its residents. On the basis of the team's report and the work leading up to the earlier decision, we can see no justification for further investigation or delay.