1. Working in collaboration with Hinkley Point C Nuclear New Build Project Strategic Options Appraisal of Transport Proposals in Bridgwater Community Scrutiny Committee 27 th February 2012

2. Working in collaboration with Welcome Health & Safety Overview of Community Scrutiny Process Why We Are Here?... Chairman’s Introduction – Cllr Julian Taylor

3. Working in collaboration with Meeting on 10 th August 2011 debated the latest transport impacts and transport mitigation proposals. CSC resolved that further work was required and if not forthcoming by EDF Energy, should be funded and carried out by Councils. Executive Committee meeting on 24 th August 2011 set out the requirements for a Study and approved funding. A detailed brief was prepared and agreed on 14 th September 2011. Councils instructed Arup and JMP to undertake technical work. On the 31 October 2011, subsequent to the commissioning of the Study, EDF Energy submitted their Hinkley Point C Development Consent Order Application (HPC DCO Application) to the IPC. Why Are We Here?

4. Working in collaboration with a) Background and Re-cap of the Project Brief – Doug Bamsey b) Introduction to the Study and Study Team – Peter Hulson Options Considered & Details – Gary Davies Traffic Modelling – Alyn Jones Traffic Capacity Assessment – Steve Hall Economic Implications for Bridgwater – Christopher Tunnell Transport Options Appraisal – Steve Hall c) Next Steps & Way Forward – SDC / SCC d) Question and Answer Session – Plenary e) Summary and Committee Resolution – Chairman Overview

5. Working in collaboration with Part of attempt to shape the Development Consent Order for HPC. Exasperation at lack of willingness to provide full and comprehensive transport options assessment. Dissatisfaction with rigour of EDF Energy’s previous ‘Bypass Study’. Lack of understanding for how proposals fit with existing plans and strategies. Pro-growth area but seeking to deliver transformational change. Utilise growth and investment to realise tangible local benefits. Not just about highways infrastructure. Sustainable, integrated approach required. Generate evidence to inform Local Impact Report. Background

6. Working in collaboration with Strategic Options Appraisal and comparative analysis. Comparison of options for Bridgwater Northern Bypass and EDF Energy’s proposals for highway/junction improvements. Assessment in accordance with NATA / WebTAG guidance. Has socio-economic assessment at the core, and also focus on: Deliverability; Safety; Transport economics and wider socio-economic impacts; Impacts on key towns and meeting wider objectives e.g. Bridgwater Vision (place shaping); Impacts on economic performance – incl. Businesses (congestion / delay); and Environmental and quality of life factors. Project Brief

7. Working in collaboration with Complex study requiring multiple inputs and assessment High level comparative analysis of the benefits / disbenefits associated with a Bridgwater Northern Bypass as against the on-line improvements proposed by EDF Overview of team involved HPC Inquiry (1989) EDF’s proposals through from Stage 1 to Stage 2b Councils’ Consultation Responses Community Consultation Responses JMP Interim Assessment – June 2011 Existing national, county and local policy Introduction to the Study

8. Working in collaboration with Assumptions underpinning study: relates to EDF’s ‘pre-DCO’ highways mitigation proposals; utilises traffic model from August 2011; desk-based analysis, utilising existing data; informed by traffic assessments carried out by SCC; outlines assessment of impacts at 2016, and 2021; provides high level design for a bypass; provides high level cost estimates for bypass and online schemes; and does not include flood risk assessment. Introduction to the Study

9. Working in collaboration with Options Considered & Details Gary Davies

10. Working in collaboration with Options Considered EDF’s Online Mitigation Proposals Bridgwater Northern Bypass

11. Working in collaboration with EDF’s Online Mitigation Proposals

12. Working in collaboration with EDF’s Online Mitigation Proposals Pre-DCO submission proposals 9 separate measures, including: New Cannington Bypass Capacity enhancements at 8 individual junctions

13. Working in collaboration with EDF’s HGV Routes HGV Route 1 HGV Route 2

14. Working in collaboration with EDF’s Online Mitigation Proposals

15. Working in collaboration with EDF’s Online Mitigation Proposals – Construction Issues Package of distinct measures Small-scale, minimal time to authorise and construct Measures could be ‘phased’ to suit the HPC varying traffic demands. Likely to cause some disruption to Bridgwater during the works: Increased congestion Potential impact upon businesses

16. Working in collaboration with Bridgwater Northern Bypass

17. Working in collaboration with Bridgwater Northern Bypass Review of previous studies undertaken

18. Working in collaboration with Constraints & obstacles - water

19. Working in collaboration with Constraints & obstacles – environmental

20. Working in collaboration with Constraints & obstacles – other

21. Working in collaboration with Bridgwater Northern Bypass Routes Considered Dunball Rdbt connection rejected: Dunball Wharf Major cost penalty North of Cannington connection rejected: Severn Estuary SPA, SAC, SSSI and Ramsar site. More environmentally damaging.

22. Working in collaboration with Bridgwater Northern Bypass 5.3 km long 35-40m wide 4 - 6m high

23. Working in collaboration with Northern Bridgwater Bypass – Construction Issues 900,000 m 3 of imported fill 47 weeks of HGV traffic to deliver fill material (if HGV movements restricted to 290 per day – consistent with Site Prep works).

24. Working in collaboration with Northern Bridgwater Bypass – Construction Issues 4½ - 5 year scheme delivery phase. Earliest opening date of 2017 – this is beyond the HPC construction traffic peak (2016). No HPC construction traffic mitigation. Construction would be in parallel with HPC – further adding to the construction traffic problems Massive increases on traffic congestion Potential significant impact upon businesses, tourism, etc

25. Working in collaboration with Traffic Modelling Alyn Jones

26. Working in collaboration with Traffic Modelling August 2011 Paramics model taken as the basis for modelling. Model year 2016 (pre bypass construction year) and 2021 (first operational year used in the assessment) Model scenarios: The traffic models used for this appraisal include: 2016 baseline (no HPC development) 2016 baseline + HPC + 2016 Travel Plan (P & R, Buses, freight management) + online mitigation (EDF proposals)+ Cannington Bypass 2016 baseline + HPC + Travel Plan + Bridgwater Bypass + Cannington Bypass 2021 baseline (no HPC development) 2021 baseline + HPC + 2021 Travel Plan + online mitigation (EDF proposals) + Cannington Bypass 2021 baseline + HPC + 2021 Travel Plan + Bridgwater Bypass + Cannington Bypass. The baseline models include the committed developments. The models are for 11hours each day (four hours morning and seven hours afternoon).

27. Working in collaboration with Traffic Capacity Assessment Steve Hall

28. Working in collaboration with Traffic Capacity Assessment Link 1: A38 Bristol Road Link 2: A39 Bath Road Link 3: The Clink Link 5: A39 Cannington Link 4: A39 Quantock Road

29. Working in collaboration with Traffic Capacity Assessment

30. Working in collaboration with Traffic Capacity Assessment

31. Working in collaboration with Economic Implications for Bridgwater Christopher Tunnell

32. Working in collaboration with Implications of Congestion Most arterial routes will be heavily congested Longer ‘rush hours’ Existing journeys into the town will be suppressed, (particularly those where it is possible to go elsewhere, e.g. for shopping) Existing firms reliant on logistics and distribution will face delays New job creating inward investment and other developments will be deterred Loss of revenue to the Council (or revenue foregone)

33. Working in collaboration with Town Centre Impacts Bridgwater’s Town Centre and Shops serve a wide catchment Viability depends on the wider catchment Potential diversion of catchment elsewhere could be on scale to threaten the existing provision Loss of revenue to the Council if shops close

34. Working in collaboration with Mitigation Options Local partner options (reduced parking charges) but cost penalty Improved online scheme Multi modal approach, public transport, walking and cycling provision Investment in the town centre environment Investment in leisure and community facilities Community safety and outreach

35. Working in collaboration with Transport Options Appraisal Steve Hall

36. Working in collaboration with Appraisal Summary - Methodology Department for Transport’s WebTAG methodology Appraisal uses the Government’s five key objectives for transport: Environment Safety Economy Integration Accessibility

37. Working in collaboration with Appraisal Summary - Environment ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass SafetyAccidents xx ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass EnvironmentNoise -- Local Air Quality - Greenhouse Gases -£1.6M-£0.8M Landscape xxx Townscape xx Heritage of Historic Resources xxx Biodiversity xxx Water Environment xx Physical Fitness Journey Ambience x

38. ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass EnvironmentNoise -- Local Air Quality -- Greenhouse Gases -£1.6M-£0.8M Landscape xxx Townscape xx Heritage of Historic Resources xxx Biodiversity xxx Water Environment xx Physical Fitness Journey Ambience x Working in collaboration with Appraisal Summary - Environment

39. Working in collaboration with Appraisal Summary - Safety ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass SafetyAccidents xx

40. Working in collaboration with Appraisal Summary - Safety ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass SafetyAccidents xx

41. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass EconomyPublic Accounts (2011Q4)£4.5M£90.5M Transport Economic Efficiency Reliability/ Network Resilience xx Wider Economic Impacts xxxNeutral

42. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass EconomyPublic Accounts (2011Q4)£4.5M£90.5M Transport Economic Efficiency Reliability/ Network Resilience xx Wider Economic Impacts xxxNeutral

43. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass AccessibilityOption Values Neutral Severance xNeutral Access to Public Transport Neutral

44. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass AccessibilityOption Values Neutral Severance xNeutral Access to Public Transport Neutral

45. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass IntegrationTransport Interchange x Land Use Policy xxNeutral Other Government Policies xNeutral

46. ObjectiveSub-ObjectiveOn-lineBypass IntegrationTransport Interchange x Land Use Policy xxNeutral Other Government Policies xNeutral Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary

47. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveOn-lineBypass Environment Safety Economy Accessibility Integration

48. Working in collaboration with Options Appraisal Summary ObjectiveOn-lineBypass Environment Safety Economy Accessibility Integration

49. Working in collaboration with Conclusions of the Study Steve Hall

50. Working in collaboration with Conclusions of the Study BYPASSHIGHWAY/JUNCTION IMPROVEMENTS (ONLINE) 4.5 – 5 years to deliver (2017)Phased delivery could work in tandem with HPC construction timeframe Would therefore not mitigate peak year of impacts (2016) Would provide some mitigation of traffic impacts Construction of bypass would in itself generate considerable impacts Construction of online would add to traffic congestion Would deliver benefits of reduced traffic in Bridgwater Against baseline there would be considerable increase in congestion in Bridgwater £90.5million£4.5million Achieves some transport user benefits compared to baseline Decline in transport user benefits compared to baseline Considerable detrimental environmental impactsSlight adverse environmental impacts

51. Working in collaboration with Conclusions of the Study Two mitigation options considered. Bridgwater Northern Bypass and EDF’s ‘Pre-DCO’ highway and junction improvements. Significant environmental, construction, programme and cost issues associated with delivery of bypass But, ‘Pre-DCO’ online measures are not sufficient to mitigate for increased traffic resulting from HPC. Clear that neither proposal represents an optimal solution to mitigate the impacts of the HPC project. Data and analysis to feed into Local Impact Report and Detailed Representations. Recommended that an alternative model of mitigation setting out comprehensive, integrated transport package for Bridgwater is put forward.

52. Working in collaboration with An alternative model of mitigation setting out comprehensive, integrated transport package for Bridgwater is put forward. Two options to be pursued… Next Steps & Way Forward

53. Working in collaboration with Question and Answer Session