Feature
Better information for your journey
The National Traffic Control Centre collects real-time information on road conditions.
Quick Links
How We Manage Our Roads
In this section you can find out more about how we manage and maintain these roads and plan for the future
The Project Control Framework
On 1st April 2008 we launched the Project Control Framework. The Framework sets out how we, together with the Department for Transport, manage and deliver major improvement projects.
Traffic news on your desktop
Helpful ways to access the latest traffic information when you need it.
Disconnected Pages
M3 London to Southampton Route Management Strategy
5 Route Problems and Issues
The HA gives priority to maintenance whilst minimising whole life costs. In developing its role asnetwork operator, the HA would like to deal with problems and issues along the route in a manner thatgives the greatest beneficial impact to users and communities along the route as well as to the fiveinvestment criteria of safety, environment, economy, accessibility and integration.
5.1 Derivation
During the course of the initial consultation, comments on problem areas, sometimes with suggestionsfor improvement, were made by the stakeholders approached.
A draft Route Performance Framework was developed during the early stages of this RMS study togive a broad indication of where problem areas and potential issues lie. The Route PerformanceFramework, which has not been updated, is included in Appendix F.
Further Route Problems and Issues have been raised through consultation with key stakeholders,including the Highways Agency, the Managing Agent for Area 3 (Mott MacDonald), the Hampshireand Sussex Police Forces and internal consultations within the RMS consultant (Mott MacDonald).
The Public Consultation and Stakeholder Seminar presented a further opportunity to identify furtherRoute Problems and Issues and discuss the development of the previously identified problems andissues.
5.2 Problems and Issues
Problems and issues are considered to be obstacles to the effective fulfilment of the Route Functions.Problems and issues are also identified as situations that affect the Policy Objectives.
The following tables give a clear indication as to how problems and issues along the route affectparticular Functions and Policy Objectives of the M3. The tables are split, by the nature of theproblems and/or issues, into the five investment criteria, as listed above.
5.2.1 Route Safety Problems and Issues
| Problem/Issue | Cause/Source | Function | Objective |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accident Clusters: High occurrence of accidents between Junction 2 and 4. | High volumes of traffic and congestion in peak times, increasing the likelihood of accidents. | SF2, SF3, SF6, RF3, RF4, RF5, LF2, LF4 | S1, S3, S4 |
| Projectiles: Occurrences of stones being thrown from over-bridges between Fleet MSA and Junction 3. | Poor protection of structures that are over the motorway | SF2, SF3, SF6, RF3, RF4, RF5, LF1, LF2, LF4 | S1, S2, S3, S4, S5 |
| Motorway Onslips: Traffic has difficulty merging, creating congestion at the following locations, westbound at Junction 9, Junction 10 and Junction 11 and eastbound at Junctions 13 and 14. | Short onslips at gradient inhibit smooth merging manoeuvres. | SF4, SF5, RF1, RF6, LF1, LF2, LF4 | S1, S3, S4, Ec1, Ec5 |
| Traffic Weaving: Vehicle manoeuvres and weaving increases likelihood of an accident or incident at Junctions 7 and 8. | The junctions are too close to one-another and the A303(T) diverges at Junction 8. | SF3, SF6, RF5, RF7 | S1, S3, S4, Ec1, Ec5 |
| Traffic Weaving: Westbound vehicles are weaving between lanes attempting to exit the motorway whilst avoiding vehicles entering the motorway between Junctions 12 and 14. | Close proximity of junctions, high volumes of traffic. | SF4, SF5, RF1, RF6, LF1, LF2, LF4 | S1, S3, S4, Ec1, Ec5 |
| Traffic Weaving: Eastbound traffic merging and weaving between the M27 link roads and Junction 13. | High volumes of traffic merging from six lanes into three lanes with the addition of another junction. | SF1, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF6, LF1, LF2, LF4 | S1, S3, S4, Ec1, Ec5 |
| Twyford Cutting Gradient: Congestion caused during peak times, resulting in traffic "shockwaves" effect. | Steep gradient through Twyford Down, larger and heavier vehicles needing to slow before gradient climb and merging traffic from Junctions 13 and 10. | SF1, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF6, LF1, LF2, LF4 | S1, S3, Ec1, Ec5 |
| Incidents During Maintenance: Increased incidents during maintenance works. | Lack of advance warning and speed of vehicles through works areas. | SF1, SF2, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF5, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | S1, S2, S3, S4, S5 Ec1, Ec5 |
5.2.2 Route Environment Problems and Issues
| Problem/Issue | Cause/Source | Function | Objective |
|---|---|---|---|
| Environmentally Sensitive Sites: Encouraging tourism to and economic activity in the proposed South Downs National Park and the Metropolitan Green Belt without compromising the environmental well being of the area. | Environmental status and sensitivity of the South Downs and the Green Belt. | SF2, SF3, RF4, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3 | En2, En3, En4, In4 |
| Noise Fencing: The noise fencing has a "tunnel effect" look. | Noise barriers are dull and uninteresting for drivers; it also blocks the landscape views from the motorway. | SF2, SF3, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF5, LF1, LF2, LF4 | En1, En3, En4, In4 |
| Litter: On the M3 in Surrey | Close proximity of a landfill site, the climatic conditions cause rubbish and litter to be blown onto the motorway. | RF1, RF3, RF5, RF7, LF3 | En3, En4 |
| Lighting: Some sections of the motorway remain unlit. | Lighting installation has been restricted due to environmental sensitivity; however additional lighting may help alleviate the accident clusters. | SF2, SF3, SF5, SF6, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6,RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | En2, En3, S1, S3, S4, In4 |
| Crossing of watercourses: Issues of water quality. | Road run-off and drainage from the road surface as well as chemical and substance spillages. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3 | En2, En3, En4, In4 |
| Air Quality: The M3 is part of Air Quality Management Areas that have been declared in Spelthorne, Rushmoor and Surrey Heath Boroughs. | Readings of Nitrogen-dioxide (NO2) and Particulate Matter (PM10) have been recorded that are above the standard limits. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3 | En1, En3, En4, In4 |
| Noise: Close proximity of houses next to M3 suffering from noise pollution. | Increased growth of traffic along the whole of the M3. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3 | En1, En3, En4, In4 |
5.2.3 Route Economy Problems and Issues
| Problem/Issue | Cause/Source | Function | Objective |
|---|---|---|---|
| Congestion: Eastbound congestion and queues occurring regularly during peak times at the Junction 2 with the M25. | High volumes of traffic and the morning rush hour. Maintenance and road works also cause increased occurrences of congestion in the proximity of Junction 2. | SF2, SF3, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF5, RF7, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5 |
| Congestion: Localised congestion between junctions in the Surrey/Blackwater Valley area, Junctions 4a to Junction 3 | Some local traffic using the motorway to bypass more congested local roads. | SF2, SF3, SF6, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec3, Ec4, Ec5, A2, In3, In4 |
| Congestion - Junctions: Junction 3 causes "exit blocking" onto the M3 during peak periods, especially in the morning. | Junction is operating near to capacity in the morning peak and the traffic signals may need adjusting to increase traffic movement at the junction. | SF2, SF3, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF7, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5, A2, A3, S1, S3, S4 |
| Congestion - Junctions: Likelihood of increased traffic movements at Junctions 5 and/or 4a. | Major new housing development at Elvetham Heath, adjacent to the M3 near Fleet MSA. | SF2, SF3, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF3, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec2, Ec3, Ec4, Ec5, A2, In1, In3, In2, In4 |
| Congestion - Junctions: Junction 6 is operating at capacity and "exit blocking" is occurring more often in the morning peak period. There is the likelihood of increased traffic movements at this junction too. | Continuing development in and around Basingstoke. | SF2, SF3, RF1, RF2, RF3, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec2, Ec3, Ec4, Ec5, A2, In1, In3, In2, In4 |
| Congestion - Junctions: Opportunity to use Junction 7 and 6 in combination for access to Basingstoke. | Junction 6 is operating at capacity and causing "exit blocking" back onto the M3 motorway. | SF2, SF3, RF1, RF2, RF3, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5, A1, A2, In3, In4 |
| Congestion - Junctions: Junction 9 is operating at capacity and queues form on the A34 and M3 westbound. Junction 9 is also a signalised junction. | High volumes of traffic wanting to access the A34 northbound and the M3 | SF1, SF2, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5, In2, In4 |
| Impact of Routine and Emergency Maintenance Works on Traffic Flows: Congestion and tailbacks. | There is a profound effect of incidents and accidents on the M3 especially during peak periods. The impact of such incidents also affects local roads near or adjacent to the motorway causing wide spread congestion. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF4, SF5, SF6, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5, In1, In2, In4 |
| Lack of Information concerning Origin/Destination of Trunk Road Traffic: Unable to differentiate between users on basis of function | Roadside interview data not available. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5, A2, In1, In3, In4 |
| Advanced Warning Signs: Road user information is not always available or accurate. EMS, VMS and further advanced warning systems do nt operate effectively to prevent further incidents. | Lack of variable message signs in north Hampshire and Surrey, although some have been erected, they are infrequently used to warn of journey time incidents and to slow approaching traffic speed. Currently controlled by the respective Police forces. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF4 | Ec1, Ec5, A2, In1, In3, In4 |
| Economic Vitality: In Surrey and north Hampshire economic vitality continues to grow as does travel demand and car dependency too. | Surrey and north Hampshire are within the prominent commuter belt of south west London. | SF2, SF3, SF5, SF6, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF4 | Ec1, Ec2, Ec3, Ec4, Ec5, A1, A2, A3, In1, In2, In3, In4 |
| Economic Vitality: South Hampshire relies on having the strategic transport corridors and inter-regional links to promote economic activity. These communities are trying to attract new businesses and commerce to the area to help regenerate their local economies. | The regeneration status given to the south Hampshire towns and the growth of travel demand and car dependency. | SF1, SF2, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec2, Ec3, Ec4, Ec5, A1, A2, A3, In1, In2, In3, In4 |
| Regeneration There is a proven need for economic regeneration in Southampton, Portsmouth and southern Hampshire. The towns and cities are classified as a Priority Area for Economic Regeneration (PAER). Maintaining the existing strategic transport corridors will assist in the economic regeneration of the Solent area. | Local deprivation and a need for economic investment in southern Hampshire. | SF1, SF2, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF2, LF3, LF4 | Ec1, Ec2, Ec3, Ec4, Ec5, A1, A2, A3, In1, In2, In3, In4 |
5.2.4 Route Accessibility Problems and Issues
| Problem/Issue | Cause/Source | Function | Objective |
|---|---|---|---|
| Severance in Communities: M3 motorway divides the town of Camberley | Junction proximity and congestion experienced at and between Junctions 4a and 3 increases traffic. NMUs have to use busy local roads to cross underneath or over the motorway; this includes access to school, shops and other services. | SF2, SF3, SF5, RF1, RF3, RF3, RF5, LF2, LF3, LF4 | A1, A3, In4 |
| Severance in Communities:The M3 divides the towns of Eastleigh and Chandlers Ford. | Junction proximity and congestion experienced at and between Junctions 12 and 14 increases traffic. NMUs have to use busy local roads to cross underneath or over the motorway, this includes access to school, shops and other services. | SF1, SF2, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF6, LF2, LF4 | A1, A3, In4 |
| Public Transport:Poor interchange with rail through the transport corridor between Southampton and Winchester - as an alternative to using the private car. | Railway Stations not generally signed from the M3. Railway line does not serve the many smaller communities adjacent to the M3 in southern Hampshire. | SF1, SF4, SF5, RF1, RF2, RF4, RF6, LF1, LF2, LF4 | A2, In1, In3, In4 |
| Access to Basingstoke: Lack of sustainable transport services, over used Junction 6 as sole access to Basingstoke. Opportunity to use Junction 7 as an alternative to Junction 6. | Attractiveness of the road access over the rail services. Poor bus service frequency. Lack of sustainable transport alternatives and interchanges, i.e. park and ride in Basingstoke.. | SF2, SF3, RF1, RF2, RF3, LF1, LF2, LF4 | A1, A2, A3, In3, In4 |
| Non-Motorised User facilities:the safeguarding of footpaths, cycle routes and bridle ways, which are near to or cross the M3 | NMU facilities could be damaged and become inaccessible during the maintenance, improvement or operation of the route. | RF1, RF2, LF1, LF2, LF3 | A1, A3 |
5.2.5 Route Integration Problems and Issues
| Problem/Issue | Cause/Source | Function | Objective |
|---|---|---|---|
| Land Use and Transport Planning:The HA, Hampshire County Council and Basingstoke and Dean Borough Council are communicating on strategies to alleviate the congestion and transport problems in and around Basingstoke. | Continuing economic and residential development along the M3 corridor, continuing growth in traffic movements and increasing travel demand is placing increasing pressure on the strategic infrastructure. | SF1, SF2, SF3, SF4, SF5, SF6, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF1, LF2, LF3, LF4 | In4, In3, Ec1, Ec2, Ec5, A1, A2 |
| Park and Ride facilities for Basingstoke:Lack of transport and access alternatives into Basingstoke town centre | Basingstoke is predominantly signed from Junction 6 of the M3 motorway. Junction 6 is also operating at capacity. | RF1, RF2, LF1, LF2, LF4 | In3, In1, In4, A1, A3 |
| Sustainable Transport Alternative:The lack ofpublic transport alternatives to the private car. Increased opportunitiesfor possible Park and Ride Facilities for Long Distance Rail Commuters | Railway infrastructure constraints are hinderingpossible increased frequency during busy periods to give a more attractivealternative to the private car. Cost effectiveness and conveniencecontinues to place the private car ahead of public transport. | SF1, SF3, SF4, SF5, SF6, RF1, RF2, RF3, RF4, RF5, RF6, RF7, LF4 | In1, In3, In4, A2, A1, Ec1, Ec5 |
The Route Problem and Issue tables were summarised under the following Key Route Issue headings:
- Accident cluster locations
- Merging traffic at junctions
- Traffic weaving
- Twyford cutting gradient
- Congestion between junctions
- Congestion at junctions
- Impact of accidents and incidents
- Advanced warning signs
- Severance in communities
- Public transport
- Non-motorised user facilities
- Supporting park and ride initiatives
