To: Head of Planning (FAO Peter Earl)
APPLICATION NUMBER / HW/RR/07/2474/CCApplicant: East Sussex County Council
Location: HASTINGS, Land between Bexhill and St Leonards, Hastings, East Sussex
Development: Link Road
Road Name or Number / B2093, A259 / Consultation Date / July 2007 / Use ClassNational Grid Reference / 582087112505 / Contact Officer / Lawrence Stringer
01273 482251
Summary of recommendation
I have reviewed the Environmental Statement submitted in support of the Planning Application.
I would not wish to raise a highway objection to this application subject to the following observations and appropriate conditions:
Observations on the application and supporting documents
The preliminary issues raised were dated 2 August 2007 and are listed as follows:
1. The impacts of the additional traffic on local roads within the model area;
2. The impact on junctions along The Ridge, the A259 within Hastings and other junctions in the model area, which are highlighted as having additional traffic due to the construction of the new road;
3. The design of the junctions at the southern end (Belle Hill) and the northern end (Queensway);
4. The alignment of the proposed road and associated junctions;
5. The impact of the road in respect of sustainable transport modes.
It is understood that the above issues have been addressed in additional documents submitted as ‘Addendum to the Environmental Statement’ dated August 2008. I have therefore, assessed the additional information submitted and I plan to respond to the above issues using the following paragraph headings:
· Traffic impact on Local County Roads
· Junction designs and analysis
· Link Road alignment
· Road safety over the wider network
· Sustainable transport
· Construction traffic
· Off site improvements/Complimentary measures
· Appropriate conditions
I have also highlighted the reference to the EIA Regulation 19 issues as shown in the table prepared by the Local Planning Authority.
Traffic impact on local roads - Point 66, 77 & 79 of the Reg. 19 issues (in part)
The traffic impact of the proposal has been assessed using a SATURN model (SATURN stands for Simulation and Assignment of Traffic to Urban Road Networks which is a proprietary traffic model). Traffic surveys and road side interviews were used to build the base SATURN model in September 2004 and updated in 2005. The assessment has been undertaken in accordance with the DfT’s guidance contained within the (Design Manual for Roads & Bridges) DMRB and their WebTAG guidance.
The scheme has been assessed against the base highway model on the basis of the year of opening being 2010 together with a future year assessment of 2025 (the ‘Do minimum’ network). This has been assessed against the ‘Do something’ network, which is the network with the scheme.
It is understood that the SATURN model takes into account the allocated development with the Rother District Local Plan together with predicted development within the future Local Development Frameworks (Hastings and Rother) as informed through the Regional Spatial Strategy. TEMPRO (Trip End Model Presentation Program which is a national procedure for establishing traffic growth developed by the Department of Transport) has been used to establish traffic growth through population and employment increases in the area.
The proposed scheme will provide additional capacity across the network between Hastings and Bexhill. The proposed route would lead to reductions in traffic using all the other alternative east-west routes within the model, although east-west traffic levels would increase with the scheme (0.3% in 2010 and by 3.2% in 2025).
I note the additional information provided in the addendum (paper 15.5.15). The table illustrates in a clear way the impact of the link road in terms of additional vehicle numbers on a number of different roads in the area, which has been extracted from the model. The worse affected roads in 2010 with increases of more than 10% are:
Road number/name % increase
B2092 Queensway 83%
B2093 The Ridge near Grange Road 33%
A259 Barnhorn Road 25%
B2093 The Ridge 25%
Gillsman Hill 24%
A259 Little Common Road 18%
A2100 The Ridge 17%
Napier Road 16%
A21 Seddlescombe Road (north portion) 10%
This clearly shows that roads leading to the link road both from the south, but more particularly from the north show high increases in vehicles number and percentages. It should be noted however, that a significant part of the increases on some local roads is due to the proposed development traffic that has been included within the model rather than the redistribution of traffic associated with the scheme.
In addition, there are a number of roads that show a significant reduction in traffic. Again, I have restricted this to those with a 10% or more reduction:
Road number/name % reduction
A2036 Wrestwood Road 10%
A259 Marina 12%
B2909 Crowhurst Road 12%
A259 Marine Parade 13%
A2100 Lower Lake 13%
A271 North Trade Road 13%
A2100 Hastings Road 14%
A271 Ashburnham Road 16%
A269 London Road 25%
Crowhurst Road 32%
A259 Bexhill Road 33%
B2092 Harley Shute Road 37%
Henley’s Down 41%
A259 King Offa Way/Belle Hill 43%
B2095 Powdermill Lane 45%
Watermill Lane 51%
B2095 Hooe Road 52%
This clearly shows that there are a number of roads and thus residents living along those roads, that would benefit significantly from the provision of the link road. A number of these roads are routes that are used as short cuts to avoid the congestion on the A259 and other main connecting routes in the area. A number of these alternatives are unsuitable as they are either predominantly residential in nature, or are narrow, or do not cater for pedestrians/cyclists or in many cases are a combination of all of the above.
Traffic Impact on The Ridge - Point 84 of the Reg. 19 issues
There is a significant increase in the amount of traffic that would use The Ridge. This would be in the order of 33% in the Grange Road area, west of The Conquest Hospital. There are a variety of improvements to principally ensure the free flow of traffic. These include signalization of two junctions and improvements at others. The applicants suggest that on street parking could be restricted. I have looked at this in a bit more detail and it appears that most properties fronting The Ridge have their own off-road parking. There is an issue with regard to the terrace of houses numbered 471 to 509 where the front gardens are quite short. There is a solution to this problem as the road is fairly wide at that point (approx. 11m) and thus there is scope to undertake a section of realignment by moving the road away from these properties. This would provide the opportunity to allow the on-street parking to continue without affecting the free flow of traffic. This improvement could form part of the ‘complimentary measures’ covered below. It is important that this particular element is brought forward and implemented before the Link Road is opened to traffic.
With regard to the Highways Agency and the proposed Baldslow link, I have written to Peter Minshull for his views regarding this proposal. I hope to have comments available by 19th September.
Junction Design and Analysis – Point 66, 67, 68, 75 & 76 of the Reg. 19 issues
Previously I was unable to locate the LINSIG analysis for the traffic signal controlled junctions required as a result of this proposal. The three junctions:
· A259/Link Road
· Link Road/London Road
· Link Road/Queensway
The LINSIG analysis has been provided and this has been submitted to my Traffic Signals Engineer for analysis. The results of this assessment show that the altered junction at the southern end (A259) will operate within capacity at year of opening and 15 years hence – Please note that the A259 is a trunk road in Bexhill and therefore, the HA must be satisfied with the proposed junction.
The analysis has been considered for the other two junctions (London Road and Queensway) and it has been found that further work on the LINSIG analysis is required. This work will also consider the Belle Hill A259 junction in more detail as highlighted in their letter of 2nd September 2008.
It is understood that bus priority is to be provided at all the proposed signalized junctions.
It is understood that the applicant have undertaken preliminary design of a potential junction to form access to the proposed development. This has been tested and through a stage 1 safety audit to ensure there are no fundamental issues that cannot be addressed.
With regard to junction design, it is understood that the proposed new junctions and alterations to existing junctions have been the subject of Stage 1 safety audits to establish whether there are any fundamental issues (Para 6.5.13). It is understood that there are not any issues and that all recommendations have been complied with. Indeed I have seen a copy of the ‘Designers Response to Road Safety Audit Stage 1 Report for revised scheme at December 2006’ which addresses the issues raised through the audit. I am therefore, satisfied in this respect.
Existing Junctions
As would be expected, some junctions benefit from the scheme and some become more congested as a result. The main junctions to see more congestion are:
Hastings Crowhurst Road/Queensway
Braybrooke RToad/South Terrace/Priory Avenue – (It is understood that the capacity issue at this junction can be addressed with reconfiguring the signal timings).
Bexhill A259 junctions to the west of the scheme (HA responsibility)
A269 London Road/B2182 Holliers Hill
The junctions that result in less congestion are:
Hastings A259/B2092 Harley Shute Road
A259/Filsham Road
Bexhill A259 Bexhill Road/A2036 Hastings Road at western end of Glyne Gap
Battle A2100 (north and south of Battle)
A269 Bexhill Road/B2204 at Ninfield
Overall, it is considered that the significant benefits at the 5 junctions above out weight the negative impact of additional congestion at the 4 junctions referred to above.
Link Road alignment and construction - Point 69 of the Reg. 19 issues
The link road is some 5.58km long with 1.4km standard single carriageway section in Bexhill located along the bed of a former railway with the remaining section laid out to a wide single carriageway outside of the built up area.
As before, I confirm that the proposed horizontal and vertical alignments of the new route appear to be appropriate. Once the detailed design stage has been completed, further checks should take place.
Referring to Table 3A.1 in the Environmental Statement, I note a design speed of 100km/h (62mph) has been used which is also appropriate, although one step reduction below DMRB desirable values have been used in some cases.
Departures from Standards and relaxations, of which there are several, are explained under Para 3A.4 . These relate to both the carriageway and the greenway.
Most of the new road is proposed to be national speed limit (60mph) with shorter sections of 40 and 30 mph limits. I note the response (para 6.5.14) in the Addendum to the ES states that ‘the alignment of the road (both horizontal and vertical) has been designed in accordance with appropriate design standards for a speed of 70kph’. This seems to conflict with the statement above from the original ES, which suggested 100kph. This does also have an impact of the introduction of speed restrictions. I understand from the applicants that the design speed of the road will tie up with the proposed speed restrictions for the road.
Thus, they have confirmed that the design speeds tie up with the speed limits.
30mph – 60Kph
40mph – 70Kph
60mph – 100Kph.
This seems to be a reasonable approach.
In this respect, I have previously raised concerns that the proposed road layout and character of the highway is likely to encourage excessive speeding. This is a particular issue when traveling southbound along the section of the road outside of the built up area. I understand that the applicant is aware of this particular issue and sought to address it. It is proposed to introduce additional planting to reduce forward visibility in order to discourage drivers from taking this course of action. It is a 10m wide single carriageway, with wide verges, good forward visibility, no intermediate junctions (until the development is commenced) and initially at least a very quiet and smooth running surface. At 10m wide, the carriageway is wide enough to accommodate 3 vehicles abreast, which may lead to inappropriate overtaking manoeuvres by some drivers. However, I note that a climbing lane is proposed for the uphill section to the Queensway junction which is in my opinion is essential to allow slower traffic to be safely overtaken.
In respect of the Greenway, I note that for sections of the route the gradient will be steeper than the recommended 5%, which is due to the existing topography. These variations (up to 10% 1 in 10) are not significantly greater than the maximum and the route will be principally for recreational use and are therefore, considered acceptable. I note that equestrian users would be separated from cyclists and pedestrians.
North East Bexhill development access
With regard to the future new junction required to facilitate the North East Bexhill development, it is understood that some preliminary work has been undertaken to consider the type and location of the junction. It is considered that the junction is likely to be in the form of a signal junction. This provides some comfort that this junction can be accommodated in the suggested location. This junction would come forward with the future developments and would be developer funded.