A45 Frequently Asked Questions

As the physical highway widening works are substantial, there’s a requirement to divert, protect or alter numerous statutory utilities located within the widening corridor before major construction activities can begin. 

These works are undertaken by the utility companies themselves and are subject to their own:

• programming constraints
• design approvals
• procurement processes
• national resource availability

Many of those have statuary process times that the council do not control.

The scheme requires diversions by the following utility providers:

• Openreach
• Severn Trent Water
• Cadent Gas
• Fulcrum Gas Networks
• Vodafone
• Virgin Media
• National Grid

Typical lead-in periods for utility diversions can range from several months to well over a year depending on:

• the complexity of the asset
• the need for diversion design
• service outages
• regulatory approvals
• availability of specialist resources

Utility works sometimes take many months to complete before highway construction can begin.

Additionally, due to space constraints, the construction of various civil works, resource and safety risks, all utility diversions cannot be carried out at the same time.

As a result, the development of the construction programme has considered both the utility diversion requirements, and the highway civil works sequence. This will help to ensure that activities can be delivered safely and as efficiently as possible.

The A45 is a major heavily trafficked strategic corridor serving:

• Birmingham Airport
• Birmingham International Station
• the NEC
• Jaguar Land Rover (JLR)
• local businesses and communities

Maintaining access for these destinations throughout construction, with minimal possible disruption, has significantly influenced the programme duration.

Important factors include:

• extensive utility diversions and protection works
• construction next to live traffic on one of the busiest routes in the borough
• maintaining traffic flow and access throughout construction
• phased construction to minimise network disruption
• environmental constraints and permitting requirements
• coordination with stakeholders and major regional events

Rather than undertaking large-scale closures which could reduce construction duration but cause severe network disruption, a balanced approach has been adopted. This will maintain network operation while completing the works safely.

We considered several options during the development of the scheme, including:

• extended working hours
• night shifts
• concurrent working in several areas with full closures 

However, each option presents practical limitations. 

Extended or night-time working:

• introduces extra health and safety risks
• causes increased noise that affects nearby residents
• often still requires lane closures throughout the daytime due to excavation activities, utility works, plant movements and workforce safety requirements

The programme has therefore been optimised to achieve an appropriate balance between delivery efficiency, public safety and minimising disruption to businesses, residents and strategic transport users.

Yes, however, the ability to undertake many phases at the same time is is limited by:

• traffic management requirements
• utility diversion dependencies
• limited working space within the highway corridor
• maintaining access to adjacent businesses and properties
• safety considerations for both road users and the workforce

We're coordinating activities where possible to save time and improve efficiency.

The contract includes programme management arrangements requiring:

• regular monitoring of progress
• early identification of risks
• implementation of mitigation measures where required

The project team closely monitors programme performance, utility delivery and construction progress on monthly basis. 

If we identity potential delays, recovery measures are considered to minimise the affect on the overall completion date.

Minimising disruption has been a fundamental consideration throughout the scheme's development.

Following various consultations with stakeholders, we split the construction works into nine separate phases.

This phasing strategy:

• enables traffic capacity to be retained wherever reasonably possible
• maintains access to important destinations
• allows construction activities to be completed in manageable sections, rather than across the entire corridor 

Furthermore, temporary traffic management arrangements are continuously monitored at our central control and reviewed by CCTV.

This allows us to:

• identify opportunities for improvement
• adjust traffic signal timings to improve traffic flows

We’re also assessing existing assets, such as the existing drainage manholes and pipe network, to make best use of existing assets where possible to minimise the works and disruption.

Yes, the scheme underwent detailed traffic modelling and transport assessment during design development. 

Our focus has been to assess future traffic demands. We gave particular consideration to the future HS2 hub and other development to assess the highway capacity needed to cope with the future demands.

We realised that the junction will not be able to handle the future demands when the HS2 hub and other developments in the vicinity of A45 DP junction are complete. This will cause significant additional traffic in future. We also considered the future effects of events at the NEC and airport traffic.

We also completed a temporary traffic management assessment. Our current phasing and traffic management arrangements are the outcome of this assessment work and stakeholder engagement.

Traffic management arrangements are subject to ongoing review throughout the project. We’re using the latest technology at the temporary traffic signal that’s linked to our central control unit. Our traffic experts monitor the traffic through CCTVs and other technology showing queues. Our team then adjust the signal timings accordingly to improve the flow of traffic. 

We continually monitors traffic conditions and works to identify any practical improvements that can be implemented safely without adversely affecting construction progress or introducing additional risks.

However, there are limited opportunities for significant changes due to the:

• constrained nature of the corridor
• need to maintain safe working areas 

We want to maintain as much traffic capacity as possible, while providing safe working areas.

Any reduction in workspace could:

• negatively affect productivity
• extend the programme
• cause a safety risk

We’ll continue to review operational arrangements. Improvements will be put in place when they are practical, safe and deliver genuine network benefits.

Currently, Damson Parkway south of the junction operates as a single carriageway with one traffic lane in each direction.

The proposed scheme will provide two lanes in each direction. This will increase the road capacity and reduce the existing bottleneck. 

The two lanes will:

• help improve traffic flow
• reduce queuing
• enhance journey time - especially during JLR shift changes and other high-demand traffic conditions

As part of the junction improvement scheme, extra carriageway space will be created through road widening and the introduction of new traffic lanes. These changes will create additional surface water runoff.

The existing drainage infrastructure was not designed to accommodate the revised highway layout and does not meet the current standards required for a highway of this nature.

Improvements to the drainage network will ensure it:

• meets with the latest minimum design standards
• can effectively manage surface water from the enlarged carriageway

The scheme includes the provision of an extra eastbound bus lane to help more efficient bus movements through the junction.

This supports the objectives of the:

• wider Transport for West Midlands (TfWM) Sprint programme
• City Region Sustainable Transport Settlement (CRSTS) 

The location of the existing footbridge foundations conflicted with the proposed highway layout and bus priority infrastructure. This made retention of the structure impractical.

Given the close proximity of the bridge structure and its supporting foundations to the carriageway, retaining the footbridge was not a viable option while delivering the junction improvements necessary to achieve the scheme objectives.

The existing footbridge was not inclusive for all users. 

Retaining the structure would not have delivered the level of accessibility required for people such as 

• wheelchair users
• people with mobility impairments
• cyclists
• people with pushchairs

New signal-controlled toucan crossings will provide a more accessible and inclusive experience. 

The crossings will be across three arms of the junction and:

• accommodate both pedestrians and cyclists
• improve access to existing and future Sprint bus stops
• provide a safer and more convenient route for a wider range of users