Roadworks along a major route between two Stafford Borough towns have sparked concerns in Parliament and a 20-mile diversion for motorists.

The works, which include a new priority junction and additional traffic lane on the A5013 Creswell Grove, began earlier this month (May) and are expected to be complete in November.

A one-way traffic restriction has been put in place along Creswell Grove.

But concerns about lack of communication and the impact of the scheme on local businesses, schoolchildren and other road users have been raised by community leaders and the area's MP Leigh Ingham.

Traffic management measures and the lane closure were removed shortly after being installed on May 11 after several vehicles, including HGVs, ignored advance warning signage and continued to travel towards the closure point, Staffordshire County Council has said.

A review was carried out and it was decided to amend the arrangement so that the lane closure allows access along Creswell Grove towards Junction 14 of the M6, rather than from the motorway junction towards Great Bridgeford.

The amended scheme was put in place a week later, from May 18.

It means that traffic can now only travel towards Stafford along Creswell Grove, and vehicles travelling between the county town and Eccleshall are being diverted via the northbound A34 through Stone, the westbound A51 and southbound on the A519 to Eccleshall.

The roadworks were raised at Creswell Parish Council meetings in April and May, before restrictions came into place.

Parish cllr Chris Hawkridge described a "level of misery that is about to be inflicted on Creswell".

He added: "I note that the closure of the A5013, in Creswell, is scheduled for 28 weeks and that the works cover just 150 metres of road.

"That's 4,704 hours to complete a minor upgrade covering just 150 metres of road.

"I also note that the county council expect residents to travel an extra 20 miles, just to avoid that 150 metres of road.

"For someone commuting five days a week, over the 28 weeks, that's an extra 2,800 miles (and) that's around £600 extra in fuel.

"Have local businesses, such as the ones on Ladfordfields, been informed of this closure and the impact on their businesses?

"And how, for example, will Stan Robinson's lorries reach the M6 southbound and what about the huge extra time and cost on their businesses?

"What will happen to those who depend on the bus service to get into Stafford?

"Will they be expected to get taxis?

"Are the county council seriously expecting residents and businesses to use all this extra fuel in the middle of a fuel crisis?

"What about children getting to school, and what about access for those with mobility scooters, which have just enough range to get to Stafford and back?"

Speaking in Parliament, Ms Ingham said: "Before the scheme started, many of my constituents were deeply concerned about safety, disruption and delays, and they were right to be.

"We've had constituents report children late for school in exam season, we've got public transport issues, vehicles driving the wrong way down a one-way street and confusion after changes to the route were decided and then not communicated to anyone."

County and borough cllr Jeremy Pert is just one of the residents from the Eccleshall area affected by the lane closure and diversion, in a question put forward to this month's full county council meeting on Thursday (May 21), he asked: "With the one-way closure of the main trunk route between Eccleshall and Stafford, the A5013, which takes in excess of 5,000 vehicles a day, for 30 weeks from the middle of May 2026, could the cabinet member explain why there was no dialogue with elected members prior to the notification of the closure being made public, what alternatives were looked at and why these were ruled out – in favour of a 20-mile detour – which few are likely to take, what has been done to avoid leaving young people to find their own way to school, rather than the school bus taking them, (and) what is being done to help those businesses who are massively affected, both to their very own operations as well as to their staff, some of whom will see daily costs of upwards of £2,000 per day?

"Back in 2025 there was a commitment by the county council to reduce the impact of road works on local residents and road users.

Local residents and road users have had to put up with two years of works on the adjacent Beaconside roundabout and 'improvements', years of works installing a roundabout north of Redhills and other works in the vicinity one after another for much of the last five years.

"What is being done to address local residents, road users and local businesses concerns, and to speed up delivery of infrastructure, where required, so that schemes don't take years of misery for everyone else to suffer from?"

In a letter to Ms Ingham, Councillor Peter Mason, cabinet member for strategic highways, said: "Whilst I respect you representing your constituents in Parliament, I was surprised to see your comments given you received updates on the scheme, and you did not raise these concerns directly with me or the council before doing so publicly in Parliament or on social media.

"Planning permission for the Stafford Gate development was granted by Stafford Borough Council in March 2019.

As part of that consent, the developer is required to deliver highway improvements; the works are being undertaken by Alto Construct and funded by Strawsons Holding Limited under an agreement signed in 2024 under the previous administration.

"When the scheme commenced on 11 May, it quickly became clear that the traffic management arrangements were unsuitable and posed safety concerns.

The council acted immediately and asked the contractor to remove them the same day.

"A full review was then undertaken, with revised arrangements and further stakeholder and public communications issued on Friday, followed by wider media and social media updates ahead of the new arrangements commencing on Monday 18 May.

The communications also reminded people that anyone flouting the traffic order will be reported to the police.

"We recognise the impact this has had on residents and businesses, however I am proud that all parties acted together swiftly to remove and review the arrangements.

Unfortunately, a level of disruption is inevitable with major schemes like this.

"However, I can assure you that the scheme is being constantly monitored.

We are working closely with the developer and will continue to challenge them to minimise disruption and accelerate delivery where possible."

In a written response to Cllr Pert's question, Cllr Mason said: "In accordance with the Traffic and Network Management Plan recently approved by Cabinet, and as a general principal, diversion routes must be appropriate and legal for the volume of traffic which will be diverted onto them.

"This generally means that diversions are usually kept on roads of a similar type so they can safely handle the same traffic levels, reduce the risk of accidents, and avoid pushing large volumes of traffic onto smaller local roads that aren't designed for it.

"The one way inbound (towards Stafford) introduced from Monday 18 May has been amended to provide improved am peak flow arrangements.

"Engagement with businesses has included media posts and press releases, with the first being on 23rd April as is standard practice.

"As part of the Keeping Staffordshire Moving initiative, the number of active schemes at the same time on the A and B road network in Stafford has been significantly reduced to minimise the impact on traffic. The timing of the works at Creswell Grove to start after the completion of works at Redhill is part of this initiative to avoid multiple works on the A and B road at the same time.

"This is a change we have made from the original plan inherited from the previous administration which would have seen these works in start in 2025 in parallel with the Redhill works. This we did to ensure the disruption was not exacerbated by major works on multiple sites."