mr m woodward strawberry cottage highway impact statement...1.5 the nppf is supported by a range of...

bancroftconsulting.co.uk

Mr M Woodward

Strawberry Cottage Sapcote

Highway Impact Statement

September 2019 (Revised October 2019)

F17067 Strawberry Cottage, Sapcote - Highway Impact Statement (Final, October 2019) 1

STRAWBERRY COTTAGE, SAPCOTE

HIGHWAY IMPACT STATEMENT

SEPTEMBER 2019 (REVISED OCTOBER 2019)

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Bancroft Consulting were appointed by Mr M. Woodward to provide highways and

transportation advice in respect of proposals to develop 8 residential dwellings on

land south of the B4669 (Hinckley Road) in Sapcote, Leicestershire.

1.2 By way of background, this Highway Impact Statement (HIS) follows an initial HIS

(dated January 2019), which was produced to show that the proposed development

could be served by a new access at Hinckley Road without any detrimental impact

to the existing operation of the highway network (report contained at Appendix A).

Subsequently, Leicestershire County Council (LCC) provided their consultation

comments on the application / report (planning reference 19/0264/OUT), dated 13

June 2019.

1.3 Within the consultation comments, LCC recommended a refusal of the application as

“safe and suitable access to the site cannot be achieved for all people” (see full

response at Appendix B). However, matters such as the design of the site access,

trip generation calculations and off-site impact were not raised as a concern, hence

it should be reasonable to conclude that LCC were in agreement to these points,

simply objecting to the application on the grounds that the proposed development

would be contrary to Policy IN5 of the Leicestershire Highways Design Guide.

1.4 The objective of this HIS is to revisit details of the previous report prepared in January

2019 and to provide updated speed survey and accident data. This HIS therefore

takes into account current Government policy contained within the National Planning

Policy Framework [NPPF] (MHCLG, February 2019). In respect of highways and

transportation issues, Paragraphs 108 and 109 of the NPPF sets out the following

requirements:


“In assessing sites that may be allocated for development in plans, or specific

applications for development, it should be ensured that:

a) appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be

– or have been – taken up, given the type of development and its location;

b) safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users; and

c) any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in

terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety, can be cost

effectively mitigated to an acceptable degree.” [Paragraph 108]

“Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if

there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual

cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.” [Paragraph 109]

1.5 The NPPF is supported by a range of associated National Planning Practice

Guidance (NPPG) documentation. This includes advice on ‘Travel Plans, Transport

Assessments and Statements’ (updated March 2014), which provides guidance to

assist local planning authorities assess impact of developments. While it is

acknowledged that this guidance is aimed towards larger scale developments, it is a

useful basis to assessment. Paragraph 013 of this guidance states that:

“Local planning authorities must make a judgement as to whether a

development proposal would generate significant amounts of movement on

a case by case basis”

1.6 Furthermore, due regard is given to current best practice and highway design

guidance contained in the document ‘Manual for Streets’ [MfS] (DfT, 2007) and its

companion document ‘Manual for Streets 2 – Wider Application of the Principles’

[MfS2] (CIHT, September 2010).

1.7 Details of the local highway authority’s adopted highway layout design guidance are

provided within the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide (Leicestershire County

Council, 2018). Section IN5 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide sets out the

local highway authority’s adopted policy regarding access to the road network.

Extracts from this are summarised below in respect of their overarching principles,


and also specifically the provision of access to A and B class roads (such as the

B4669 Hinckley Road):

“Principles

1.28 To maintain safety and the free flow of traffic, policy in the past has

discouraged new accesses onto A- and B-class roads and avoided

increasing the use of existing accesses. For the future, and in line with an

integrated transport policy, we will adopt a flexible policy on new

connections to the road network. We will severely restrict access to the most

important high-standard routes. Elsewhere, particularly in urban locations,

in principle we will apply a more flexible approach. Please see paragraph

1.29 onwards for full details.

1.29 Where access is acceptable to us in principle, we will normally expect

its layout to comply with the design guidance set out in Part 3. We will

recommend refusal of any planning application that raises concerns about

road safety. Approval for the access (and any associated development) will

also depend on the planning authority where planning permission is

required.

Access to A- and B-class roads

1.30 We will normally apply restrictions on new accesses for vehicles and

the increased use of existing accesses on:

• roads with a speed limit above 40 mph (that is 50mph, 60mph or

70mph) or where measured vehicle speeds are in excess of 40mph;

• roads with a speed limit of 40mph or less which are essentially rural in

nature;

• routes where the access would affect bus-corridor or bus-priority

measures being put in place;

• roads that are at or near capacity (cannot carry more traffic); and

• roads where there is an existing problem with road safety.

1.31 Elsewhere, we will not normally restrict new accesses for vehicles, as

long as they meet the conditions of paragraph 1.28. Also, where a number


of developments are proposed along a section of road, the risk of accidents

occurring will be reduced if they are accessed from a service road with a

single point of access on the main road.”

1.8 In considering the above, it is clear that the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide

draws on the findings of the national-level MfS guidance (which in turn is compatible

with the expectations of the NPPF, advocating an evidence-led approach to

determining the appropriate design solutions). It is noted that prior to the

Leicestershire Highway Design Guide, LCC adopted the 6Cs Design Guide between

December 2007 and 2018, which also set out Policy IN5.

2.0 BACKGROUND INFORMATION

Site Visit and Speed Survey

2.1 An updated site visit was undertaken on Friday 6 September 2019, between 1400

and 1600 hours, when the weather conditions were mostly dry with some intermittent

light rain. Whilst on-site, a further manual radar speed survey was undertaken at the

proposed site access location between 1400 and 1530 hours. During the survey

there were no road works in the vicinity of the junction. Vehicle speeds were taken

approximately 100 metres from the proposed site access in each direction.

2.2 A total of 200 vehicle speeds were recorded during the survey, comprising 100

readings in each direction. The survey results are contained within Appendix C,

whilst a summary is provided below:

Mean 85%ile 85%ile wet weather* c

eastbound 43.71mph 48.01mph 45.53mph

westbound 39.97mph 44.72mph 42.25mph

*Based on dry weather conditions during the survey, 85th%ile wet weather speeds have been calculated

as per DMRB TA22/81

2.3 The results demonstrate that the 85th percentile wet-weather speeds were well

below the posted national speed limit in both directions. These results seem to reflect

the built-up frontage along this section of Hinckley Road, noting that the 30mph


speed limit change is located 190 metres east of the site. In addition, the highway

layout to the east comprises a footway, a pedestrian refuge island, street lighting,

two residential accesses serving circa 250 dwellings which creates an urbanised feel,

keeping speeds low.

2.4 Furthermore in comparing the previous results (see Appendix A), the recorded 85th

percentile wet weather speeds were 44.27mph in the eastbound and 46.40mph in

the westbound direction. These closely reflect the 2019 results, noting that bullet

point one at Paragraph 1.30 of Policy IN5 advises that restrictions should normally

be applied to “roads with a speed limit above 40 mph or where measured vehicle

speeds are in excess of 40mph”. In light of this, the observed speeds would require

a review of Hinckley Road to be undertaken to assess whether it is an important high-

standard route with a highway safety concern.

Visibility

2.5 With regard to visibility splay calculations, the previous assessment adopted

guidance within MfS2, using a 2 seconds perception reaction time and a 0.375g

maximum deceleration rate. LCC did not raise a concern with this methodology and

therefore it has been reused as part of the updated assessment with the latest speed

survey results.

2.6 In adopting the above approach, visibility splays of 99 metres to the west (for

eastbound vehicles) and 89 metres to the east (for westbound vehicles) would be

required for the proposed site access at Hinckley Road. Drawing Number

F17067/01 Revision B shows that the required visibility splays can be achieved

within land that is publicly maintained highway in both directions, from a 2.4 metres

setback distance, to a 1 metre offset into the nearside carriageway, in line with Figure

DG2a of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide.

Access

2.7 The geometry of the proposed access layout shown at Drawing Number F17067/01

Revision B has not changed from what was previously submitted as part of the


January 2019 HIS. This layout fully complies with the requirements set out in Figure

DG20 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide and is suitable to serve up to 25

dwellings. It should be noted that a 2 metres wide footway has been provided which

connects into the existing infrastructure at the northern edge of Hinckley Road with

a dropped kerb and tactile paving crossing.

Highway Safety

2.8 The PPG includes the online document ‘Travel plans, transport assessments and

statements in decision-taking’ (updated March 2014), which provides advice on the

scope of transport reports. This document states:

“an analysis of the injury accident records on the public highway in the

vicinity of the site access for the most recent 3-year period, or 5-year period

if the proposed site has been identified as within a high accident area.”

2.9 In light of the above information, an updated assessment of Personal Injury Accident

(PIA) records for the local area has been undertaken to identify whether there had

been any new existing highway safety issues that could be exacerbated by any

increase in movements associated with the proposed development. Hence, PIA

records were obtained from LCC for the most recently available 5-year period (1

January 2014 to 28 August 2019). Full details of the records provided are included

at Appendix D, which also includes a map that provides the details of where the

accidents were located.

2.10 A total of 2 accidents were recorded within the study area over a 5-year period, both

of which were at the Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction (previously 4 incidents).

An individual summary of these accidents is given below.

Accident

Number

Day/

Date

Time

(hours)

Road

Surface Severity Location

12001977 (plot no. 3)

Tuesday 01/03/2014

1320 Dry Serious Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction

12002600 (plot no. 4)

Saturday 31/12/2016

0925 Dry Slight Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction


2.11 The above information demonstrates that there has only been one accident in the

last available 3 years, which was classified as ‘Slight’. Furthermore, it shows that

there should be fewer concerns now given that no additional incidents have occurred

since requesting the data as part of the previous assessment, which reviewed data

between 1 May 2012 to 30 April 2017.

Summary

2.12 In summary of the above, the change in vehicle speeds from the updated survey

resulted in revised visibility splay distances, which could still be achieved within

publicly maintained highway. The proposed access layout has not changed from the

previous HIS given that LCC raised no concerns regarding compliance with design

guidance. The updated PIA data confirms that there have been no new incidents in

the vicinity of the site since December 2016. All other aspects are as per the January

2019 HIS (contained at Appendix A).

3.0 CONSIDERATION OF LCC PREVIOUS OBSERVATIONS

Sites Contrary to Policy IN5

3.1 Within LCC’s consultation response, it is recommended that the application is refused

as it is contrary to Policy IN5, which “normally” applies restrictions on new accesses

on “roads with a speed limit above 40 mph or where measured vehicle speeds are in

excess of 40mph”. It is acknowledged that the Hinckley Road is classified as a ‘B’

road, noting that the speed survey recorded 85th percentile wet-weather speeds of

circa 42mph to the east (westbound traffic) and 45mph to west (eastbound traffic).

3.2 Notwithstanding the above, a review of LCC’s planning database was undertaken to

establish if there were any directly comparable developments whereby LCC have

disregarded the policy set out within IN5. Details of these sites are as follows:

3 dwellings at Hollyhurst, Lutterworth Road (A426), Dunton Bassett (Harborough

District Council planning application reference: 18/00125/FUL)


• A ‘Design and Access Statement’ was prepared, dated January 2018, which

proposed a new un-adopted access driveway at the A426.

• The site located at an edge of settlement location with a footway provided at the

opposite edge of the carriageway. The A426 is a single carriageway subject to a

50mph speed limit, with measured 85th percentile speeds (taken from an ATC)

were 40.5mph in the northbound direction and 41.8mph in the southbound

direction.

• Within LCC’s consultation comments, dated May 2018, concerns were raised

regarding a new access at the A426, acknowledging that recorded 85th percentile

speeds were over 40mph. LCC requested clarification in relation to the required

visibility splays as well as additional information on parking and turning provision.

The application provided a plan showing 160 metres splays (in line with the

50mph speed limit) and confirmed a compliant area for on-site turning.

• Full planning permission was granted at the site for 3 residential dwellings in June

2018. All of the above details are enclosed at Appendix E.

2 dwellings at Wilford House, Loughborough Road (A512), Coleorton (North West

Leicestershire District Council planning application reference: 16/00311/OUT)

• A ‘Highways Technical Note’ was prepared by Bancroft Consulting, dated March

2016, which proposed a new un-adopted access driveway at the A512

Loughborough Road whilst also addressing LCC’s concerns raised.

• The site is located in a rural area with large separate property frontages at

irregular intervals along the A512, with a public house located opposite the site.

The A512 is subject to a 50mph speed limit, however measured 85th percentile

wet weather speeds (taken from a speed survey) were 46.2mph in the eastbound

direction and 49.8mph in the westbound direction.

• As mentioned above, LCC initially objected to the application in October 2015 on

the basis that the site is not within a sustainable location and the development

would result in an increase in turning traffic would be an additional source of

danger. To address LCC’ concerns, a footway, pedestrian crossing and signage

to suitably identify the properties was proposed.

• Outline planning permission was granted at the site for 2 residential dwellings in

August 2016. All of the above details are enclosed at Appendix F.


310 dwellings, food store and petrol station, community leisure / sports building,

medical centre, employment units at Land East and West of Broughton Way (B581),

Broughton Astley (Harborough District Council planning application reference:

13/01142/OUT)

• A ‘Transport Assessment’ was prepared by White Young Green Transport

Planning, dated July 2013, which proposed a new signal-controlled crossroad and

priority controlled T-junction at the B581 Broughton Way as well as footways and

pedestrian crossings to be provided along the full extent of development frontage.

• The site is located at an edge of settlement location with existing footway

infrastructure, however, would now be classed as urbanised given the

improvements to the existing infrastructure. No speed recordings were

undertaken at the site, but this section of Broughton Way is subject to a 40mph

speed limit, although it is likely vehicles would have been travelling higher than it

given the previous rural nature of the highway layout.

• LCC consultation comments, dated November 2013, recommended approval at

the site with conditions, noting that there was no condition stating that the speed

limit should be reduced but only improvements to the existing highway layout.

• Outline planning permission was granted at the site for mixed use development

in November 2014. All of the above details are enclosed at Appendix G.

84 dwellings at Land East of Leicester Road (A426), Lutterworth (Harborough District

Council planning application reference: 14/00739/OUT)

• A ‘Transport Assessment’ was prepared by BWB consulting, dated May 2014,

which proposed a new T-junction at the A426 Leicester Road.

• The is located at an edge of settlement area with an existing footpath at the

opposite edge of the carriageway. The A426 is a single carriageway subject to a

40mph speed limit, however measured 85th percentile wet weather speeds (taken

from two ATC’s survey) were 51.4mph and 43.1mph in the northbound direction

and 46.9mph and 42.7mph in the southbound direction for the northernmost and

southernmost ATC respectively.

• LCC consultation comments, dated June 2014, recommended approval at the

site, conditioning that the development must “include any associated

requirements for the pedestrian footway connection, lighting and visibility splays

along with proposed vehicle activated signs and gateway feature”.


• Outline planning permission was granted at the site for 84 residential dwellings in

October 2014. All of the above details are enclosed at Appendix H.

Assessment of Policy IN5

3.3 Within LCC consultation comments (see Appendix B), a summary was provided to

the Local Planning Authority which stated:

“The Local Highway Authority (LHA) is in receipt of an outline (with all

matters reserved) planning application for the erection of 8 dwellings at

Strawberry Cottage, Hinckley Road, Sapcote, LE9 4LG. The proposed

development is to be served by Hinckley Road which is a classified ‘B’ road

subject to national speed limit restrictions in the vicinity of the site access.

The proposal would result in an intensification of turning movements onto a

high speed classified B road. As such, it is contrary to Policy IN5 of the

LHDG which states that restrictions will normally be applied on the creation

of new accesses onto A and B roads where measured vehicle speeds are

in excess of 40 mph.

The LHA is concerned that an increase in turning movements in this location

may be detrimental to the safe, free flow of traffic along Hinckley Road. For

this reason the LHA advises refusal.”

3.4 The geometric design standards contained within the Leicestershire Highways

Design Guide are the same for a development located at a 30mph or a national speed

limit road. It is the visibility requirements that vary depending on 85th percentile

approach speeds. Hence, the principle of ‘design meeting standards’ is that if the

requirements are complied with, a “safe and suitable” should be achieved unless

local evidence suggests otherwise.

3.5 When reviewing the existing nature of Hinckley Road in the vicinity of the site, it is

clear that the southern frontage of the carriageway is becoming increasingly more

urbanised with the recently constructed ‘Limes’ development and under construction

‘Miller Homes’ development, which comprise 128 and 125 dwellings respectively.


Furthermore, Sapcote Garden Centre is currently accessed via a priority controlled

T-junction approximately 30 metres west of the proposed site access, with on-site

observations noting that the access was well-used by turning vehicles and

pedestrians. In addition, the results of the speed survey further confirm the urbanised

nature as vehicles were recorded travelling well below the national speed limit, noting

that there is an existing vehicle activated sign located approximately 45 metres west

of the proposed access.

3.6 When considering LCC’s application to Policy IN5 across the county, it confirms that

there is inconsistency in the application. For example, Planning Application

18/00125/FUL which is located at the edge of Dunton Bassett proposed a new

access serving 3 dwellings at the A426 (50mph speed limit) and recorded 85th

percentile speeds of circa 41mph. LCC acknowledged the speeds but requested

clarification on visibility splays and on-site turning in order to address their concerns.

Likewise, a larger scheme of 84 dwellings (Planning Application 14/00739/OUT)

located at the edge of Lutterworth proposed a new access at the A426 and recorded

85th percentile speeds of above 40mph in both directions. LCC considered this to be

acceptable given that a new pedestrian footway connection and vehicle activated

signs are implemented along with improvements to the existing gateway feature.

3.7 The above describes just a few sites which are in a similar location to the site, have

comparable recorded speeds and comprise a like-for-like highway layout. When

providing consultation on each application, LCC chose not to implement Policy IN5

and accepted the scheme. It is likely these officers were being pragmatic, as Policy

IN5 refers to “severely restrict access to the most important high-standard routes”,

meaning that access should be restricted on strategic high speed routes whereby

turning movements should be limited. In considering the site, there are 9 direct

accesses within 350 metres in each direction of the proposed access. These vary

between a garden centre access, private driveway accesses, large residential

accesses and farm accesses, demonstrating that there is an existing high activity of

turning traffic to and from Hinckley Road, noting that the accident data confirmed no

existing safety problem of vehicles turning.


3.8 In summary of the above, it seems clear that Policy IN5 does not reflect current

national policy contained within the NPPF and MfS, which advocates an evidence-

led approach to determining appropriate design solutions. The evidence

demonstrates that turning manoeuvres at other accesses in the vicinity of the site

take place satisfactorily, with the last recorded incident occurring in December 2016

located approximately 200 metres west of the proposed access. In addition, the

proposed site access has been designed in accordance with the Leicestershire

Highways Design Guide with required visibility splays achievable, hence, it should

meet the requirements of “safe and suitable” access. Furthermore, the inconsistency

to applying Policy IN5 should further confirm that if all design requirements are met,

LCC should not be concerned regarding the safety of a new access unless local

evidence suggests otherwise, which in this case there is not.

4.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


transportation advice in respect of proposals to construct 8 new residential dwellings

on land south of Hinckley Road in Sapcote, Leicestershire. The objective of this

report is to revisit details of the previous report prepared in January 2019 to provide

updated speed survey and accident data, whilst addressing LCC’s concerns.

4.2 LCC’s consultation comments, dated June 2019, did not contest the previous

conclusions of the HIS. The key concern was regarding conflict with Policy IN5 given

that Hinckley Road is a B classification road that is subject to the national speed limit.

4.3 Typically, Policy IN5 is enforced on strategic routes whereby turning movements

should be limited to avoid high speed conflict. In considering the site and other similar

planning applications which are contrary to Policy IN5, is it clear that LCC have

adopted a flexible approach on routes which are becoming more urbanised, even

when recorded speeds are above 40mph. Hence, it shows that some officers have

adopted a pragmatic approach, whereby the classification of the road or sign posted

speed limit did not dictate whether a safe and suitable access could be achieved.

National policy now advises that it should be based on an evidence-led approach,


whereby the compliance of design standards means that a “safe and suitable” access

is achieved, unless local evidence suggests otherwise.

4.4 The evidence provided shows that the proposed site access layout meets local

design standards and the required visibility splays can be achieved. Furthermore, the

proposed site access has been designed such that highway safety has not been

compromised by providing kerb radii and a footway. In addition, the high activity of

existing turning movements to the east and west of the site on Hinckley Road has

not resulted in a highway safety issue, noting that there have not been any new

incidents since December 2016. In light of this evidence, it is reasonable to conclude

that the scheme is compliant with Paragraphs 108 and 109 of the NPPF, and the

Highway Authority should be in a position to support the proposals.

Bancroft Consulting LtdJarodale House7 Gregory BoulevardNottinghamNG7 6LB

t 0115 9602919f 0115 9648201e [email protected]

AutoCAD SHX TextB 4669

AutoCAD SHX TextStrawberry Cottage

AutoCAD SHX Text93.5m


AutoCAD SHX TextStrawberry

AutoCAD SHX TextCottage

AutoCAD SHX TextLay-by


AutoCAD SHX Text2.4 x 99 metres visibility splay (taken 1 metre into the carriageway)


AutoCAD SHX Textextent of highway boundary (as confirmed by Leicestershire County Council)

AutoCAD SHX Textproposed site access layout

AutoCAD SHX Textsite boundary

AutoCAD SHX Textindicative existing location of Vehicle Activated Sign

AutoCAD SHX Textlocation of existing access

AutoCAD SHX Textvisibility splay to tangent



AutoCAD SHX Text10 metres kerb radii

AutoCAD SHX Text5 metres wide carriageway

AutoCAD SHX Text2 metres wide footway

AutoCAD SHX Text0.5 metres wide verge

AutoCAD SHX Textpedestrian crossing point with tactile paving

AutoCAD SHX TextSTATUS

AutoCAD SHX TextOF BANCROFT CONSULTING LTD.

AutoCAD SHX TextPREPARED OR OTHERWISE WITHOUT THE EXPRESS CONSENT

AutoCAD SHX TextCONNECTION WITH THE PROPOSED WORKS FOR WHICH IT IS

AutoCAD SHX TextNOR USED FOR THE EXECUTION OF ANY WORKS WHETHER IN

AutoCAD SHX TextCONSULTING LTD. IT MUST NOT BE REPRODUCED NOR AMENDED

AutoCAD SHX TextCOPYRIGHT IN THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF BANCROFT

AutoCAD SHX TextREV. No.

AutoCAD SHX TextDRG. No.

AutoCAD SHX TextNOTES:

AutoCAD SHX TextCHK'D

AutoCAD SHX TextDWN

AutoCAD SHX TextDESCRIPTION

AutoCAD SHX TextDATE

AutoCAD SHX TextREV.

AutoCAD SHX TextTITLE

AutoCAD SHX TextCLIENT

AutoCAD SHX TextCONTRACT

AutoCAD SHX TextREV

AutoCAD SHX TextDRG. NO.

AutoCAD SHX TextSCALE

AutoCAD SHX TextCHECKED BY

AutoCAD SHX TextNAME (PRINT)




AutoCAD SHX TextDRAWN BY

AutoCAD SHX Textc Crown copyright. All rights reserved.

AutoCAD SHX TextOS Licence number 1000444404

AutoCAD SHX TextCJB

AutoCAD SHX TextEU

AutoCAD SHX Text12.12.18

AutoCAD SHX TextA

AutoCAD SHX TextAMENDED ACCESS DRAWING

AutoCAD SHX TextB

AutoCAD SHX TextF17067/01

AutoCAD SHX TextB


AutoCAD SHX TextPRELIMINARY

AutoCAD SHX TextAS SHOWN


AutoCAD SHX TextCJB


AutoCAD SHX TextPR

AutoCAD SHX TextWITH VISIBILITY SPLAYS

AutoCAD SHX TextPROPOSED SITE ACCESS LAYOUT

AutoCAD SHX TextMR M. WOODWARD

AutoCAD SHX TextSAPCOTE

AutoCAD SHX TextSTRAWBERRY COTTAGE,

AutoCAD SHX TextGrid North

AutoCAD SHX TextW

AutoCAD SHX TextE

AutoCAD SHX TextS

AutoCAD SHX TextPROPOSED SITE ACCESS LAYOUT SCALE - 1:500@A3

AutoCAD SHX TextVISIBILITY SPLAYS SHOWN AT THE PROPOSED SITE ACCESS SCALE - 1:1000@A3

AutoCAD SHX TextCJB

AutoCAD SHX TextKH


AutoCAD SHX TextB

AutoCAD SHX TextUPDATED WITH REVISED SPEED SURVEY

APPENDIX A – BANCROFT CONSULTING HIGHWAY

IMPACT STATEMENT (JANUARY 2019)

F17067 Strawberry Cottage, Sapcote - Highway Impact Statement Revision B 1

STRAWBERRY COTTAGE, SAPCOTE HIGHWAY IMPACT STATEMENT

JUNE 2017 (Revised January 2019)

1.0 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION


transportation advice in respect of proposals to develop 8 residential dwellings on

land south of Hinckley Road (B4669) in Sapcote, Leicestershire. This Highway

Impact Statement has been prepared to support a potential planning application. The

site location is demonstrated within Figure 1.

1.2 In accordance with Paragraph 108 of the revised National Planning Policy

Framework [NPPF] (MHCLG, 2018), this Highway Impact Statement has been

produced to demonstrate that the proposed development of 8 dwellings could be

served by a suitable access at Hinckley Road and that it should not result in a

detrimental impact to the existing operation of the highway network.

1.3 Since the initial report was produced, there have been changes to national guidance

(revised NPPF) and local design guidance (Leicestershire Highway Design Guide,

2018). This revised report reflects these changes and reassesses accident data

through ‘Crashmap’ to support the previous accident assessment in which the data

was obtained from Leicestershire County Council.

1.4 A site visit was undertaken on Thursday 25 May 2017, between 1330 and 1600

hours, when the weather conditions were dry and bright. During the visit, a vehicle

speed survey was undertaken in the vicinity of the site frontage on Hinckley Road. A

summary of the results is included at Appendix A for reference.


2.0 POLICY REVIEW AND RELEVANT GUIDANCE

National Policy

2.1 The NPPF is the Government’s overriding planning guidance and places a key

emphasis on the need for sustainable development. With respect to highways and

transportation issues, Paragraph 108 of the revised NPPF sets out the following

requirements:

“In assessing sites that may be allocated for development in plans, or specific

applications for development, it should be ensured that:

a) appropriate opportunities to promote sustainable transport modes can be

– or have been – taken up, given the type of development and its location;

b) safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all users; and

c) any significant impacts from the development on the transport network (in

terms of capacity and congestion), or on highway safety, can be cost

effectively mitigated to an acceptable degree.”

2.2 Paragraph 109 of the revised NPPF states:

“Development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if

there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual

cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe.”

2.3 In addition to the above, Paragraph 11 of the revised NPPF states that a development

should be granted permission unless “any adverse impacts of doing so would

significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits”. With respect to transport, this

information suggests that a development should only be refused if there is significant

evidence that proves it would have a negative impact on the highway network.

2.4 The NPPF is supported by a range of associated National Planning Practice

Guidance (NPPG) documentation. This includes advice on ‘Travel Plans, Transport

Assessments and Statements’ (updated March 2014), which provides guidance to

assist local planning authorities assess impact of developments. While it is

acknowledged that this guidance is aimed towards larger scale developments, it is a

useful basis to assessment. Paragraph 013 of this guidance states that:


“Local planning authorities must make a judgement as to weather a

development proposal would generate significant amounts of movements

on a case by case basis”

Local Policy

2.5 Details of the local highway authority’s adopted highway layout design guidance are

provided within the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide (Leicestershire County

Council, 2018). Section IN5 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide sets out the

local highway authority’s adopted policy regarding access to the road network.

Extracts from this are summarised below in respect of their overarching principles,

and also specifically the provision of access to A and B class roads (such as the

B4669 Hinckley Road):

“Principles

1.28 To maintain safety and the free flow of traffic, policy in the past has

discouraged new accesses onto A- and B-class roads and avoided

increasing the use of existing accesses. For the future, and in line with an

integrated transport policy, we will adopt a flexible policy on new

connections to the road network. We will severely restrict access to the most

important high-standard routes. Elsewhere, particularly in urban locations,

in principle we will apply a more flexible approach. Please see paragraph

1.29 onwards for full details.

1.29 Where access is acceptable to us in principle, we will normally expect

its layout to comply with the design guidance set out in Part 3. We will

recommend refusal of any planning application that raises concerns about

road safety. Approval for the access (and any associated development) will

also depend on the planning authority where planning permission is

required.


Access to A- and B-class roads

1.30 We will normally apply restrictions on new accesses for vehicles and

the increased use of existing accesses on:

• roads with a speed limit above 40 mph (that is 50mph, 60mph or

70mph) or where measured vehicle speeds are in excess of 40mph;

• roads with a speed limit of 40mph or less which are essentially rural in

nature;

• routes where the access would affect bus-corridor or bus-priority

measures being put in place;

• roads that are at or near capacity (cannot carry more traffic); and

• roads where there is an existing problem with road safety.

1.31 Elsewhere, we will not normally restrict new accesses for vehicles, as

long as they meet the conditions of paragraph 1.28. Also, where a number

of developments are proposed along a section of road, the risk of accidents

occurring will be reduced if they are accessed from a service road with a

single point of access on the main road.”

2.6 In considering the above, it is clear that the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide

draws on the findings of the national-level MfS guidance (which in turn is compatible

with the expectations of the NPPF, advocating an evidence-led approach to

determining the appropriate design solutions). The Leicestershire Highway Design

Guide itself is somewhat less clear, with Paragraph 1.28 committing to a more flexible

policy on access via urban A or B class roads. Furthermore, Paragraph 1.30 sets

out how the local highway authority will “normally” apply restrictions on new accesses

on “roads with a speed limit above 40 mph (that is 50mph, 60mph or 70mph) or where

measured vehicle speeds are in excess of 40mph”. Clearly this does not rule out the

potential for access to be considered, subject to compliance with other general

design principles and a review of local evidence, as stipulated by Paragraph 11 and

108 of the revised NPPF.


Design Guidance

2.7 As discussed above, this Highway Impact Statement will consider the design

requirements contained within the local highway’s adopted guidance, the

Leicestershire Highway Design Guide. In addition, this Highway Impact Statement

considers current best practice advice contained in the document ‘Manual for Streets’

[MfS] (DfT, 2007), and its companion document ‘Manual for Streets 2 – Wider

Application of the Principles’ [MfS2] (CIHT, 2010). Paragraph 1.3.2 of MfS2 confirms

that “as a starting point for any scheme affecting non-trunk roads, designers should

start with MfS”.


3.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

Site Details

3.1 The site is located at the southern edge of Hinckley Road, approximately 140 metres

east of the Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane junction, as shown in Figure 1. It includes

Strawberry Cottage and garden land, with an overall area of approximately 1.31

hectares. The site is bound by Hinckley Road to the north, allotment gardens to the

east, and residential properties to the south and west. Sapcote Garden Centre is

located north of the site. Further afield, Sapcote Village Centre is located

approximately 1 kilometre to the east of the site.

Highway Layout

3.2 The site is currently served by a private driveway at Hinckley Road. The access is

located to the centre of the site and measures approximately 3.7 metres wide with

gates approximately 5 metres behind the carriageway edge. Leicestershire County

Council’s highway land boundary plan (as shown in Appendix B) highlights that the

full extent of the carriageway, footways and verges along Hinckley Road (in the

vicinity of the site) are within publicly maintained land.

3.3 Hinckley Road is a classified ‘B’ road and subject to national speed limit restrictions

in the vicinity of the site access; however, approximately 190 metres east of the

access this changes to a 30mph speed limit. At the approach to the change of speed

limit, a 30mph roundel exists on the carriageway. Approximately 15 metres west of

the site access, within the site frontage, is a Vehicle Activated Sign (VAS) which

displays a ‘Slow Down’ graphic. On-site observations noted that the VAS is activated

when a vehicle exceeds 50mph.

3.4 Hinckley Road is a single carriageway road measuring approximately 7.2 metres

wide in the vicinity of the site. On-site observations noted a vertical crest in the

carriageway, approximately 135 metres west of the current site access. An

approximately 1.2 metres wide footway extends along the northern edge of the

carriageway, with a grass verge along the southern edge.


3.5 As discussed previously, the Sapcote Garden Centre is located to the north of the

site, with the access positioned approximately 30 metres east of the current site

access. To the west, approximately 130 metres from the current site access, is the

Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane priority controlled T-Junction, providing a link to Stoney

Stanton Village Centre.

3.6 Approximately 250 metres east of the site frontage is the Hinckley Road / Lime

Avenue ghost-island T-junction, which serves ‘The Limes’ residential development.

The ghost-island arrangement includes an approximately 3.1 metres wide right-turn

lane, which comprises a pedestrian refuge crossing to the east of the junction. It was

observed on-site that there was no footway at the southern edge of the carriageway.

The existing footway provision has been widened to approximately 1.8 metres wide,

circa 335 metres east of the site.

Survey Results

3.7 A speed survey was undertaken between 1330 and 1530 hours at Hinckley Road in

the vicinity of the site frontage during the visit on Thursday 25 May 2017. During this

time the weather conditions were dry and bright. Vehicle speeds were taken

approximately 50 metres from the current site access in each direction. A total of 400

vehicle speeds were recorded during the speed survey, comprising 200 readings in

each direction. The survey results are summarised within Appendix A, which

demonstrate 85th percentile wet weather speeds of 46.4mph (74.7kph) in the

westbound direction and 44.3mph (71.2kph) in the eastbound direction.

Highway Safety

3.8 The NPPG includes the online document ‘Travel plans, transport assessments and

statements in decision-taking’ (updated March 2014), which provides advice on the

scope of transport reports. This document states that consideration should be given

to “an analysis of the injury accident records on the public highway in the vicinity of

the site access for the most recent 3-year period, or 5-year period if the proposed

site has been identified as within a high accident area.”.


3.9 In light of the above information, an assessment of Personal Injury Accident records

for the local area has been undertaken to identify any existing highway safety issues

that could be exacerbated by any increase in movements associated with the

proposed development.

3.10 As discussed above, only a review of the latest 3-year period is necessary for the

purposes of this report; unless there is a significant accident problem within that

period, then this should be extended to a 5-year period. Hence, Personal Injury

Accident records were obtained from LCC for the most recently available 5-year

period (1 May 2012 to 30 April 2017). Full details of the records provided are included

at Appendix C, which also includes a map that provides the details of where the

accidents were located.

3.11 A total of 4 accidents were recorded within the study area over a 5-year period, all of

which were at the Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction. An individual summary

of these accidents are given below.

Accident

Number

Day/

Date

Time

(hours)

Road

Surface Severity Location

11003009 (plot no. 1)

Thursday 26/07/2012 1800 Dry Slight Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction

12001843 (plot no. 2)

Saturday 06/07/2013 2149 Dry Slight Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction

12001977 (plot no. 3)

Tuesday 01/03/2014 1320 Dry Serious Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction

12002600 (plot no. 4)

Saturday 31/12/2016 0925 Dry Slight Hinckley Road / Stanton Lane T-junction

3.12 The above assessment was undertaken as part of the initial report, therefore an

updated accident assessment has been undertaken using the ‘Crashmap’ website

(www.crashmap.co.uk). This assessment confirms that in the latest 5 year period

(2013 to 2017 inclusive), there have been no additional accidents then stated above

within the study area.

3.13 The above information demonstrates that there has only 1 accident in the last

available 3 years, which was classified as ‘Slight’. This information suggests that

http://www.crashmap.co.uk/


there is not an ongoing highway safety concern in the vicinity of the site frontage. In

light of the Personal Injury Accident data available, it can be assumed that there are

no significant ongoing highway safety issues nearby that could be exacerbated by

any increase in traffic associated with the proposed development.


4.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

4.1 The proposed development would comprise 8 new residential dwellings, with the

existing Strawberry Cottage property being retained. The existing access would be

retained to serve Strawberry Cottage only and a new access would be put in place

to serve the proposed development. A copy of the latest masterplan has been

included at Appendix D.


5.0 HIGHWAY IMPACT ISSUES

5.1 Change in Traffic Conditions

5.1.1 The TRICS database was examined to identify suitable trip rates to calculate the

potential peak hour and daily traffic movements that could be generated by the

proposed residential development. The category ‘Residential – Houses Privately

Owned’ was searched, specifying a range of between 6 and 20 dwellings, excluding

sites in Greater London, Wales, Scotland, Ireland and Northern Ireland, as well as

‘Edge of Town Centre’ sites, unknown use classes and weekend surveys. This

search resulted in 10 surveys taken from 10 sites.

5.1.2 Following a review of the available data, sites with unsuitable housing comparisons

(i.e. bungalows or terraced housing) were also deselected. This resulted in 6 surveys

taken from 6 sites. Further inspection of the details for these sites did not identify a

specific site that was considered to be more comparable to the site any other. The

average trip rates were therefore calculated, given that the general search criteria

applied is considered to be representative of the proposed development. Details of

the above search can be found at Appendix E for reference, with the results

summarised in Table 1.

5.1.3 The following trip rates (per dwelling) were therefore deemed appropriate for the

proposed development:

• morning peak (0800 to 0900 hours) 0.175 arrive 0.450 depart

• evening peak (1700 to 1800 hours) 0.425 arrive 0.200 depart

• daily 2.700 arrive 2.925 depart

5.1.4 Based on the above trip rates, the proposed development (which would result in a

net increase of 8 dwellings at the site) would generate the following additional vehicle

movements:

• morning peak 1 arrive 4 depart 5 total

• evening peak 3 arrive 2 depart 5 total

• daily 22 arrive 23 depart 45 total


5.1.5 The above traffic generation calculations indicate that the proposed development

would result in a maximum increase of only 5 two-way movements during both peak

hour periods and 45 daily two-way movements. Giving due regard to Paragraph 108

of the revised NPPF and Paragraph 1.29 of the Leicestershire Highway Design

Guide, it is considered that the small increase in traffic as a result of the proposed

development should not result in any detrimental impact on highway safety or

capacity, hence the residual cumulative impact of the development would not be

severe. Therefore, no further detailed assessment of the impact of these increases

on the surrounding highway network should be necessary.

5.2 Site Access

Introduction

5.2.1 As discussed within Section 2 of this report, the advice contained within the

Leicestershire Highway Design Guide suggests that the local highway authority

would “normally apply restrictions on new accesses for vehicles…on roads with a

speed limit above 40mph (that is 50mph. 60mph or 70mph) or where measured

vehicle speeds are in excess of 40mph”. It is acknowledged that the speed limit and

the measured speeds are above 40mph. However it should be reiterated that

Paragraph 1.28 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide also suggests that the

local highway authority would “adopt a flexible policy on new connections to the road

network.”.

5.2.2 Further to the above, Paragraph 3.216 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide

states that:

“On roads with a speed limit of 40mph or higher, or where vehicle speeds

are more than 40mph:

• we will encourage a development to be served by a road with an

adoptable layout and access designed in line with the appropriate

section of the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges; or

• where we accept that there is a good reason why an adoptable layout

cannot be achieved, the private drive and site access must be purpose-

designed to a standard acceptable to us.”


5.2.3 With respect to the principle of providing access in a national speed limit, it is

important to recognise that the Sapcote Garden Centre is currently accessed via a

priority controlled T-junction approximately 30 metres east of the current site access.

On-site observations noted that the access was well-used during the visit. Section 3

of this report demonstrated that there does not appear to be any existing highway

safety concern in the vicinity of the site where the Sapcote Garden Centre currently

operates. Hence, it can be concluded that a safe and suitable access can be provided

along Hinckley Road within a national speed limit.

5.2.4 In considering the above, the following section seeks to provide details of an access

that would be acceptable to the local highway authority, ensuring that highway safety

is not compromised. Ultimately, the objective is to provide a safe and suitable access,

as per Paragraph 108 of the revised NPPF.

Geometry

5.2.5 Figure DG20 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide confirms that an

unadopted shared surface driveway should be suitable to serve up to 25 dwellings.

Drawing Number F17067/01 Revision A shows how the proposed 10 dwellings

could be served by a 5 metres wide carriageway such that refuse collection vehicles

can be accommodated. While it is advised within the guidance that a dropped kerb

would be acceptable, in considering that the site would be accessed via a road

exceeding 40mph, a 10 metres kerb radii bell mouth junction should be provided at

the access. Furthermore, while Figure DG20 states that an unadopted shared

surface driveway would be suitable for a development of this size, a 2 metres wide

footway would be provided on the eastern edge of the main access road, with a 0.5

metres wide verge on the western.

Visibility 5.2.6 In order to fully assess whether a safe and suitable access could be provided,

appropriate visibility splays from the proposed site access should be provided in line

with the existing conditions. The visibility splays have been calculated using the wet


weather 85th percentile speeds and current best practice guidance contained within

MfS2, which recommends within Paragraph 1.3.2 that ‘…as a starting point for any

scheme affecting non-trunk roads, designers should start with MfS’.

5.2.7 Paragraph 10.1.5 of MfS2 provides a detailed formula for calculating visibility splays,

taking into account the percentage of HGV movements and vehicle speeds. As the

results of the speed survey show that the 85th percentile wet weather vehicle speeds

are above 60kph in both directions, a 2 seconds perception-reaction time and a

maximum 0.375g deceleration rate has been adopted in these calculations. It should

be noted that these coefficients are based on DMRB TD 9/93. On-site observations

suggest that the carriageway is reasonably flat so no correction for gradient has been

made.

5.2.8 The tables contained within Appendix F show that by adopting this approach visibility

splays of 102 metres to the east and 95 metres to the west would be required from

the site access at Hinckley Road. Drawing Number F17067/01 Revision A shows

the proposed junction layout and demonstrates that the required visibility splays can

be achieved in both directions. In line with Figure DG2a of the Leicestershire Highway

Design Guide, visibility has been taken from a 2.4 metres setback distance to 1 metre

into the carriageway, within land that is publicly maintained highway.

5.2.9 At present, the site access has been positioned at a point such to avoid the removal

of the lay-by adjacent to the current site access. However, it should be noted that

there is scope to position the access at any point along the site frontage and still

achieve the required visibility splays. In addition, the site access has been positioned

further away from the crest in the carriageway discussed previously, and therefore

there should not be any issue with achieving visibility in the vertical alignment.

Summary

5.2.10 The information provided above shows that the proposed access layout meets local

design standards and can achieve the required visibility. Furthermore, the proposed

site access has been designed such that highway safety has not been compromised.

Hence, the proposed arrangement complies with Paragraph 108 of the revised NPPF


which requires the development to provide “safe and suitable access to the site…”,

and therefore should be acceptable to the local highway authority.

5.3 Parking and Servicing Arrangements

5.3.1 In accordance with Paragraph 3.175 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide,

residential developments of over 5 dwellings should use the document ‘Residential

Car Parking Research’ (Department for Communities and Local Government,

[DCLG] May 2007) to calculate the potential level of parking demand and the

necessary parking provision to accommodate this demand. The ‘Residential Car

Parking Research’ calculation methodology is based on the specific number of rooms

within each dwelling.

5.3.2 As no details have been provided regarding dwelling size, for the purpose of this

assessment the proposed dwellings are assumed to all be 3-bed houses. The car

parking requirements have also been calculated based on the owner-occupied

houses in a rural area category. The document suggests the following levels of

parking demand per dwelling, based on the number of allocated off-street spaces for

each dwelling:

Five room dwelling (3 bedrooms)

• No allocated bays per dwelling = demand of 1.6 vehicles per dwelling

• 1 allocated bay per dwelling = demand of 1.9 vehicles per dwelling

• 2 allocated bays per dwelling = demand of 2.1 vehicles per dwelling

Six room dwelling (4 bedrooms)




Severn room dwelling (5 bedrooms)





5.3.3 Based on the above, and assuming two allocated spaces are provided (e.g. on a

private driveway and in a garage) with additional parking provided on a communal

basis and each dwelling has 4 bedrooms, a total of 18 car parking spaces would be

required across the site.

5.3.4 If garages are to be provided and it is necessary for these to contribute towards the

provision of allocated car parking spaces, these should be constructed with minimal

internal garage dimensions (in accordance with Paragraph 3.227 of the

Leicestershire Highway Design Guide), as outlined below:

• Standard single = 6m x 3m, with minimum door width of 2.3m

• Use by disabled = 6m x 3.3m with minimum door width of 2.8m

• Double = 6m x 6m, with minimum door width of 4.2m.

5.3.4 Drawing Number F17067/02 Revision A shows how a Phoenix 2-23W refuse

collection vehicle, which is understood to be the standard vehicle type within

Leicestershire, could enter and depart the site satisfactorily in a forward gear. With

respect to the internal layout, in line with the recommendations contained in MfS, the

site layout should accommodate a refuse collection vehicle parking at the kerbside

adjacent to all dwellings, or manoeuvre to within 25 metres distance for refuse

workers of any designated collection points and 30 metres distance for residents.

The site layout should include a suitable internal turning area to accommodate the

relevant refuse collection vehicles required to service the site.

5.4 Access by Non-Car Modes

5.4.1 The key emphasis of the revised NPPF is on the need for all new developments to

be sustainable. Part of this requirement for sustainability means providing good

opportunities for travel to and from sites by non-car modes, as set out in Paragraph

108 of the revised NPPF in particular.

5.4.2 In light of the above requirements, the Census 2011 ‘Method of Travel to Work’

dataset (QS701EW) from the National Statistics website was examined to identify a

suitable modal split for the site, to help calculate the potential increase in person trips


by all modes. This shows the following modal split for the Blaby 012 Middle Super

Output Area:

• by underground, metro, light rail or tram 0.0%

• by train 0.7%

• by bus, minibus or coach 1.9%

• by taxi or minicab 0.4%

• by motorcycle / scooter / moped 1.2%

• by car / van (as driver) 84.4%

• by car / van (as passenger) 4.3%

• on bicycle 1.3%

• on foot 5.4%

• other method 0.4%

5.4.3 To calculate the hourly amount of person trips by each mode, the following approach

was adopted:

• 84.4% of car / van drivers is equal to 5 total car movements during the busiest

(morning) peak hour.

• 5 / 84.4 equals the number of person trips per percent, or 0.06.

• The morning peak hour person trips can therefore be calculated by multiplying

the modal percentage for each category by 0.06.

5.4.4 Inspection of the traffic generation calculations for the proposed development shows

that approximately 11% of all daily vehicle movements would occur during the

evening peak hour. This results in a conversion factor of 9.09 from peak hour to daily

movements [1 / 0.12].

5.4.5 Using the above process, it was possible to calculate that the proposed development

would generate the following total person trips:

peak hour daily

• by underground, metro, light rail or tram 0 0

• by train 0 0

• by bus 0 1


• by taxi or minicab 0 0

• by motorcycle / scooter / moped 0 1

• by car / van (as driver) 5 45

• by car / van (as passenger) 0 2

• on bicycle 0 1

• on foot 0 3

• other method 0 0

5.4.6 The above information demonstrates that the proposed development would only

generate 3 daily pedestrian movements (including pedestrians walking to the bus).

As shown on Drawing Number F17067/01 Revision A, a 2 metres wide footway

would be provided along the eastern edge of the site access road with tactile paving

to aid pedestrians crossing Hinckley Road. It is acknowledged that pedestrians would

be required to cross the Hinckley Road carriageway in order to utilise the footway.

However, an additional 3 daily pedestrian movements are a minimal increase and it

was noted during the site visit that there were suitable gaps in traffic such that

pedestrians could cross Hinckley Road safely.

5.4.7 As described previously, the footway at the northern edge of the carriageway

measures approximately 1.2 metres wide. Figure 6.8 of MfS demonstrates that a 0.9

metres wide footway would be able to accommodate a wheelchair user. The figure

also shows that a 1.2 metres wide footway would be suitable to accommodate a child

and an adult walking together.

5.4.8 Further to the above, Paragraph 3.26 of the Institution of Highways and

Transportation [IHT] publication ‘Guidelines for Providing Journeys on Foot’ (2000)

states that “Walking is an extremely flexible mode. Provided that a good width

standard is initially adopted, pedestrian networks (unlike road networks) can safely

and comfortably accommodate considerable fluctuations in flow levels.”.

5.4.9 In reviewing the advice contained within MfS and Guidelines for Providing Journeys

on Foot, it is considered that the minimal increases in pedestrian movements could

safely be accommodated by the existing footway infrastructure at the northern edge

of Hinckley Road.


5.4.10 With respect to cycle movements, it is considered that the general layout of the

highway network should adequately accommodate cycle journeys within the

carriageway. On-site observations noted a number of cyclists doing this already

within Hinckley Road. Therefore, the additional single daily cycle movement would

be accommodated satisfactorily.

5.4.11 The development would only generate a one daily bus passenger, based on the

above calculations. It is considered that any additional bus passenger movements

could be satisfactorily accommodated by the existing services that operate within

Sapcote.

6.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS


transportation advice in respect of proposals to construct 8 new residential dwellings

on land south of Hinckley Road in Sapcote, Leicestershire. The objective of this

report was to ensure the impact of the proposed development would not have an

adverse impact on the current operation of the local highway network and that a safe

and suitable access could be provided to serve the development.

6.2 Inspection of Personal Injury Accident data, obtained from Leicestershire County

Council, and ‘Crashmap’ data for the surrounding area has revealed that there are

no existing highway safety concerns in the vicinity of the site in the last 3 years. Thus,

it can be concluded that the proposed development traffic would not exacerbate any

existing highway safety concerns.

6.3 The proposed development would result in an increase of 5 vehicular movements in

the both peak hours and an increase of 45 daily two-way movements. This does not

represent a significant change in traffic conditions and should not warrant any further

detailed assessment of the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding

highway network.


6.4 It is acknowledged that Section IN5 of the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide

discusses that the provision of new accesses on ‘A’ classified or ‘B’ classified roads

is typically restricted. However, Paragraph 1.28 of the guidance also states that the

local highway authority will “apply a more flexible approach” when determining

whether the principle of a site access is acceptable.

6.5 In light of the above, Drawing Number F17067/01 Revision A shows the general

layout of the proposed site access, which has been designed with due regard to the

advice contained with the Leicestershire Highway Design Guide. This includes a 5

metres wide carriageway, 10 metres kerb radii, a 2 metres wide footway at the

eastern edge of the access junction and a 0.5 metres verge at the western edge of

the site access. Drawing Number F17067/01 Revision A also shows how visibility

splays of 95 metres to the west and 102 metres to the east are achievable at the

proposed access at Hinckley Road. These splays are in accordance with the

observed 85th percentile wet weather vehicle speeds and the requirements of Manual

for Streets. The proposed site access has been positioned to avoid relocating the

lay-by arrangement.

6.6 Any future site masterplan should reflect the parking requirements set out in the local

parking standards and Leicestershire Highway Design Guide for residential

developments as described in Section 5.3 of this report. The proposed development

is likely to generate an overall demand for 18 car parking spaces, assuming 2

allocated spaces for each dwelling plus appropriate communal provision.

6.7 Drawing Number F17067/02 Revision A demonstrates that a Phoenix 2-23W (with

Elite 2 6x4 chassis) can be accommodated at the proposed site access. Furthermore,

any future site masterplans should ensure that a suitable turning area is provided to

ensure a refuse vehicle can enter / egress the site in forward gear.

6.8 The proposed development is likely to generate 3 daily pedestrian movements. It is

considered that based on observations on-site that there are adequate gaps in traffic

along Hinckley Road such that pedestrians can safely cross. This report has also

demonstrated that the existing footway infrastructure provided at the northern edge

of Hinckley Road is sufficient in width, as per the recommendations contained within


Manual for Streets, to accommodate the minimal increase in pedestrian movements

and therefore no improvements should be required.

6.9 In summary, given the above it is reasonable to conclude that a “safe and suitable

access to the site can be achieved for all users”, in accordance with Paragraph 108

of the NPPF. Furthermore, this report has demonstrated that the “residual cumulative

impacts” of the proposals would not be severe. It is therefore considered that the

proposed development would comply with current planning policy and best practice

design guidance. Hence, subject to the delivery of the proposed access layout, as

shown in Drawing Number F17067/01 Revision A, the local highway authority

should be in a position to provide their ‘in principle’ support for any corresponding

planning application.

Arrive Depart Arrive Depart TotalPre 07:00

07:00-08:00 0.100 0.287 1 2 308:00-09:00 0.175 0.450 1 4 509:00-10:00 0.087 0.200 1 2 310:00-11:00 0.250 0.175 2 1 311:00-12:00 0.212 0.338 2 3 512:00-13:00 0.275 0.287 2 2 413:00-14:00 0.200 0.175 2 1 314:00-15:00 0.138 0.138 1 1 215:00-16:00 0.263 0.275 2 2 416:00-17:00 0.237 0.150 2 1 317:00-18:00 0.425 0.200 3 2 518:00-19:00 0.338 0.250 3 2 5Post 19:00

Daily 2.700 2.925 22 23 45

Time PeriodTrip Rates (per dwelling) Traffic Generation (8 dwellings)

TABLE 1: PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - DAILY TRAFFIC GENERATION PROFILE (WEEKDAY)

MR M. WOODWARD

PR

02.06.17

Do Not Scale

DATE:

DRAWN:

CLIENT:

JOB NUMBER: FIGURE:1SITE LOCATION AND LAYOUT

TITLE:

Do Not ScaleSCALE:

F17067

©Crown copyright. All rights reserved. OS Licence number 100044404

N

JOB TITLE:

STRAWBERRY COTTAGE, SAPCOTE

SITE

SITE




AutoCAD SHX TextStrawberry Cottage



AutoCAD SHX TextStrawberry

AutoCAD SHX TextCottage





AutoCAD SHX Textextent of highway boundary (as confirmed by Leicestershire County Council)

AutoCAD SHX Textproposed site access layout

AutoCAD SHX Textsite boundary

AutoCAD SHX Textindicative existing location of Vehicle Activated Sign

AutoCAD SHX Textlocation of existing access



AutoCAD SHX Text10 metres kerb radii

AutoCAD SHX Text5 metres wide carriageway

AutoCAD SHX Text2 metres wide footway

AutoCAD SHX Text0.5 metres wide verge

AutoCAD SHX Textpedestrian crossing point with tactile paving












AutoCAD SHX TextDWN







AutoCAD SHX TextREV











AutoCAD SHX TextCJB

AutoCAD SHX TextEU


AutoCAD SHX TextA

AutoCAD SHX TextAMENDED ACCESS DRAWING

AutoCAD SHX TextA


AutoCAD SHX TextA



AutoCAD SHX TextAS SHOWN


AutoCAD SHX TextCJB


AutoCAD SHX TextPR

AutoCAD SHX TextWITH VISIBILITY SPLAYS

AutoCAD SHX TextPROPOSED SITE ACCESS LAYOUT





AutoCAD SHX TextW

AutoCAD SHX TextE

AutoCAD SHX TextS

AutoCAD SHX TextPROPOSED SITE ACCESS LAYOUT SCALE - 1:500@A3

AutoCAD SHX TextVISIBILITY SPLAYS SHOWN AT THE PROPOSED SITE ACCESS SCALE - 1:1000@A3






AutoCAD SHX TextPhoenix 2-12N (with Elite 2 6x2 ML chassis)



AutoCAD SHX TextPhoenix 2-23W (with Elite 2 6x4 chassis)

AutoCAD SHX Text10.52




AutoCAD SHX TextPhoenix 2-23W (with Elite 2 6x4 chassis)

AutoCAD SHX TextOverall Length


AutoCAD SHX TextOverall Width


AutoCAD SHX TextOverall Body Height


AutoCAD SHX TextMin Body Ground Clearance


AutoCAD SHX TextTrack Width


AutoCAD SHX TextLock to Lock Time

AutoCAD SHX Text4.00 sec

AutoCAD SHX TextKerb to Kerb Turning Radius













AutoCAD SHX TextDWN







AutoCAD SHX TextREV











AutoCAD SHX TextEU


AutoCAD SHX TextA

AutoCAD SHX TextAMENDED LOGO

AutoCAD SHX TextA


AutoCAD SHX TextA



AutoCAD SHX Text1:250@A3

AutoCAD SHX TextJB

AutoCAD SHX TextCJB


AutoCAD SHX TextKH

AutoCAD SHX TextSWEPT PATH ANALYSIS





AutoCAD SHX TextW

AutoCAD SHX TextE

AutoCAD SHX TextS

observed no. of SPEED READINGS

speed readings

mph location: Hinckley Road, Sapcote

x f fx fx2

direction: Eastbound

day: Thursday

10 0 0 0 date 25.05.17

11 0 0 0 time: 1330 to 1530

12 0 0 0

13 0 0 0 SUMMARY

14 0 0 0

15 0 0 0 mean 41.60 mph 67.1 kph

16 0 0 0 85%ile 46.75 mph 75.4 kph

17 0 0 0 wet 85%ile 44.27 mph 71.4 kph

18 0 0 0

19 0 0 0

20 0 0 0

21 0 0 0

22 0 0 0

23 0 0 0

24 0 0 0

25 0 0 0

26 0 0 0

27 0 0 0

28 0 0 0

29 1 29 841

30 1 30 900

31 2 62 1922 Mean speed

32 2 64 2048

33 5 165 5445

34 1 34 1156 41.60 mph

35 5 175 6125

36 13 468 16848

37 17 629 23273

38 11 418 15884 Standard deviation

39 14 546 21294

40 18 720 28800

41 19 779 31939

42 11 462 19404 5.15 mph

43 13 559 24037

44 11 484 21296

45 7 315 14175

46 12 552 25392

47 9 423 19881

48 6 288 13824 85 percentile dry weather spot speed

49 7 343 16807

50 5 250 12500 = 46.75 mph

51 4 204 10404

52 3 156 8112

53 0 0 0 85 percentile wet weather journey speed

54 0 0 0

55 3 165 9075

56 0 0 0 - 2.478 = 44.27 mph

57 0 0 0

58 0 0 0

59 0 0 0

60 0 0 0

61 0 0 0 checks: 85%ile/mean = 1.12

62 0 0 0 should be 1.1 to 1.25

63 0 0 0

64 0 0 0 S.D./mean = 0.12

65 0 0 0 should be approx 1/6 (0.17)

66 0 0 0

67 0 0 0

68 0 0 0

69 0 0 0

70 0 0 0

71 0 0 0

72 0 0 0

73 0 0 0

74 0 0 0

75 0 0 0

76 0 0 0

77 0 0 0

78 0 0 0

79 0 0 0

80 0 0 0

Total Σ 200 8320 351382

Note: The above readings greater than 20mph have been adjusted by +1mph as a result of the latest calibration test - 23.05.16.

HINCKLEY ROAD, SAPCOTE - EASTBOUND SPEED SURVEY RESULTS

=∑∑

=f

fxx

( )=

∑∑

−∑×−∑

=f

fxfx

fSx

2

2

1

1

xSx +

xSx +

observed no. of SPEED READINGS

speed readings

mph location: Hinckley Road, Sapcote

x f fx fx2

direction: Westbound

day: Thursday

10 0 0 0 date 25.05.17

11 0 0 0 time: 1330 to 1530

12 0 0 0

13 0 0 0 SUMMARY

14 0 0 0

15 0 0 0 mean 43.00 mph 69.4 kph

16 0 0 0 85%ile 48.88 mph 78.9 kph

17 0 0 0 wet 85%ile 46.40 mph 74.9 kph

18 0 0 0

19 0 0 0

20 0 0 0

21 0 0 0

22 0 0 0

23 0 0 0

24 0 0 0

25 0 0 0

26 0 0 0

27 0 0 0

28 1 28 784

29 0 0 0

30 2 60 1800

31 2 62 1922 Mean speed

32 0 0 0

33 0 0 0

34 5 170 5780 43.00 mph

35 9 315 11025

36 8 288 10368

37 6 222 8214

38 9 342 12996 Standard deviation

39 11 429 16731

40 11 440 17600

41 21 861 35301

42 12 504 21168 5.88 mph

43 14 602 25886

44 13 572 25168

45 19 855 38475

46 9 414 19044

47 8 376 17672

48 10 480 23040 85 percentile dry weather spot speed

49 6 294 14406

50 3 150 7500 = 48.88 mph

51 8 408 20808

52 3 156 8112

53 2 106 5618 85 percentile wet weather journey speed

54 2 108 5832

55 2 110 6050

56 0 0 0 - 2.478 = 46.40 mph

57 1 57 3249

58 0 0 0

59 0 0 0

60 0 0 0

61 1 61 3721 checks: 85%ile/mean = 1.14

62 0 0 0 should be 1.1 to 1.25

63 1 63 3969

64 0 0 0 S.D./mean = 0.14

65 0 0 0 should be approx 1/6 (0.17)

66 1 66 4356

67 0 0 0

68 0 0 0

69 0 0 0

70 0 0 0

71 0 0 0

72 0 0 0

73 0 0 0

74 0 0 0

75 0 0 0

76 0 0 0

77 0 0 0

78 0 0 0

79 0 0 0

80 0 0 0

Total Σ 200 8599 376595

Note: The above readings greater than 20mph have been adjusted by +1mph as a result of the latest calibration test - 23.05.16.

HINCKLEY ROAD, SAPCOTE - WESTBOUND SPEED SURVEY RESULTS

=∑∑

=f

fxx

( )=

∑∑

−∑×−∑

=f

fxfx

fSx

2

2

1

1

xSx +

xSx +

4032

29 15

11

71

2

2

4

ESS

1

11

27

11

6

17

15

29

28

31

Strawberry Cottage

Strawberry

Oakley Stud

Cottage

18

1

22

15

12

2

8

8

37 35

47

1

2

Trac

k

Lay-by

LOVE

TT C

LOSE

STAN

TON

ELDER CLOSE

B 4669

ROOKERY CLOSE

LIME AVENUE

LANE

V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38V38

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

V34

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

U53

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

V47

This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown copyright.Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Leicestershire County Council. LA100019271. Published 2017.

NOTES

The highway records are not definitive, but are based on currently available supporting information and are given without warranty.

If roadside ditches are present, the legal presumption without evidence to the contrary is that these do not generally form part of the publicly maintainable highway.

This plan has been produced in response to the enquiry shown in the title address and should not be used for any other purpose, since its accuracy cannot be guaranteed.

This plan is based on Ordnance Survey features and thererefore only shows the general position of the boundaries: it does not show the exact line of the boundaries.

If a scale has been provided, measurements scaled from this plan may not match measurements between the same points on the ground.

Scale:

Highway Record Enquires, Environment & TransportLeicestershire County Council, County Hall

Glenfield, LE3 [email protected]:

1705155

Not to Scale

Hinckley Road, Sapcote

07/06/2017

Ref:

SELECTION RESULTS Run on: 02/06/2017

TRAFFMAP

AccsMap - Accident Analysis System

Accidents between dates 01/05/2012 and 30/04/2017 (60) months

Selection: Notes:

Selected using Pre-defined Query : ; Refined using Accidents within selected Polygons -Data request polygons ("Bancroft Consulting. Sapcote, 2nd June 2017")

Police Ref. Date Cas. Sev. Cycs Peds Ch OAPs Vis. Manv. Road Cond. Time Location

Selected Polygon:Bancroft Consulting. Sapcote, 2nd June 2017

201205620 26/07/2012 2 Slight 0 0 0 0 Light Both Dry 1800 B4669

mr m woodward strawberry cottage highway impact statement...1.5 the nppf is supported by a range of...

Documents