proposed change of land use cuckfield road, hurstpierpointproposed change of land use, cuckfield...

Proposed Change of Land Use

Cuckfield Road, Hurstpierpoint

Transport Statement

for

Edburton Contractors

Proposed Change of Land Use Cuckfield Road, Hurstpierpoint

Transport Statement

for

Edburton Contractors

project number: 81209 prepared by: DM position: ATP checked by: Phil Bell issue date: 7th May 2009 status: Final

232 High Street

Guildford

Surrey

GU1 3JF

T 01483 531300

F 01483 531333

E [email protected] W www.motion-uk.co.uk

Contents

Section 1 Introduction page 1

Section 2 Policy Context page 3

Section 3 Existing Conditions page 4

Section 4 Improvement Works Page 13

Section 5 Summary and Conclusions page 14

Drawings

81209-02 Visibility Splays

81209-03 Improvement Works at Site Access

Appendices

Appendix A Accident Statistics

Appendix B Stage 1 Road Safety Audit

Appendix C Highway Boundary Plan

Appendix D Method Statement

Appendix E Risk Assessment

Appendix F Designer’s Response to Road Safety Audit

Appendix G Traffic Survey Data

Appendix H Geofence Report

Proposed Change of Land Use, Cuckfield Road, Hurstpierpoint Transport Statement page 1

1.0 Introduction

1.1 Edburton Contractors has appointed Motion Transport Planning to investigate the

highways and transportation issues associated with the change of use of land adjacent

to Cuckfield Road, Hurstpierpoint, West Sussex.

1.2 The site is located to the west of Cuckfield Road, 1.75 kilometres to the north of the

centre of Hurstpierpoint, and is the site of a former sewage treatment works that

ceased operation over 20 years ago. The development proposals involve the use of

the site for the importing and processing of inert waste, the distribution of recycled

materials, and reuse of the area for forestry purposes.

1.3 Advice has been sought with West Sussex County Council, where the following

highways related issues were identified:

► Whether the site access road is of adequate width to cater for site traffic; and

► Whether visibility to the south, at the junction of the site access with Cuckfield

Road is adequate.

1.4 It is understood that the issue related to the width of the site access road has been

addressed by information relating to vehicle movements associated with the proposed

development. As such, the previous planning application was refused permission on

2nd December 2008 by West Sussex County Council for a single reason, as follows:

“The development proposed is contrary to Policy DEV4 of the West Sussex Structure

Plan 2001-2016 because due to inadequate sightlines south of the junction of the

access road with Cuckfield Road it fails to ensure safe access to the highway network.”

1.5 It is noteworthy that the Highway Authority stated within a planning committee report

in December 2008 that it may be possible to overcome the highway objection if the

hedge to the south of the access road was altered so as not to restrict visibility.

Furthermore, the Highway Authority accepted a case for a reduction in the length of

the sight lines within the committee report, provided this was justified by traffic survey

information regarding the volume and speed of traffic travelling on Cuckfield Road.

1.6 A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit was previously carried out by Owen Williams in October

2007. Road safety issues highlighted by the audit are commented upon in detail, and

resolved, within this report.


1.7 The applicant has also provided a risk assessment and method statement specific to

the site, which detail measures and safe systems of work for employees in order to

reduce the likelihood of any hazards occurring.

1.8 It is an important part of the applicants’ case that the current application differs

significantly from that determined last December. This is because the application has

the full support of a qualified highway engineer and is supported by:

► A complete record and appraisal of all accident statistics held by the police from

November 2000 to October 2008;

► A topographical survey of the area including of the access, visibility splays and

land within county council control;

► Detailed information and analysis of speed of vehicles along Cuckfield Road;

► Detailed information of traffic flows along Cuckfield Road, including an accurate

analysis of the minimal increase to the flows as a result of the current use of the

site;

► An analysis of safe stopping distance from the speed survey;

► An electronic record of traffic movement to and from the application site

enabling confirmation that it is extremely unlikely that more than one vehicle

will be on the access road at any one time;

► The submission of the applicants’ risk assessment and method statement

relating to site operations; and

► Improvement works are included within the planning application.

1.9 The remainder of this report is divided into 4 Sections. Section 2 sets out the relevant

national, regional and local policies associated with the change of use while Section 3

considers the existing situation including road safety and traffic attraction. Section 4

sets out details of improvement works associated with the proposals while Section 5

sets out our Summary and Conclusions.


2.0 Policy Context

2.1 Relevant policy guidance is contained within the West Sussex Structure Plan 2001-

2016, adopted February 2005.

2.2 Policy DEV4, regarding travel needs and choices, states that:

“Development should not be permitted unless: the travel needs it generates are met;

where possible, it reduces the need to travel; it achieves safe and convenient access

by a choice of means of travel; it encourages and enables an increase in walking,

cycling and the use of passenger transport; and the number and impact of motorised

journeys is minimised.

Local plans will include policies to ensure that development caters safely, conveniently

and adequately for all travel needs by:

► Integrating with existing and proposed provision for pedestrians and cyclists and

maintaining or improving existing patterns of movement on foot or by cycle;

► Ensuring safe and adequate access to the highway network; and

► Minimising the impact of motorised journeys.”

2.3 Section 3 of this report considers the existing access junction with Cuckfield Road and

its ability to ensure safe and adequate access to the highway network to accommodate

traffic generated by the proposed change of use.


3.0 Existing Conditions

Introduction

3.1 This section of the report sets out details of the existing site and surrounding area,

including analysis of existing road safety issues and layout of the site access junction

with Cuckfield Road.

Site Context

3.2 The site is accessed via Cuckfield Road which runs on a north-south axis to the east of

the site. Cuckfield Road provides direct access to Hurstpierpoint the centre of which is

located 1.75 kilometres to the south of the site and is a relatively lightly trafficked

road. To the north, Cuckfield Road intersects with the A2300 providing connections

with the A23 to the west and Burgess Hill to the east. To the south, Cuckfield Road

intersects with the B2216, which provides connections to Hassocks. The site in

relation to the regional road network is illustrated at Figure 3.1 below.

Figure 3.1 – Site in Relation to the Regional Road Network


3.3 The development site generates a maximum of 10 vehicle movements per day Monday

to Friday and 4 on Saturday relating to the current use of the site. These are

understood to be predominantly heavy goods vehicles. The applicant is prepared to

accept a condition restricting the number of vehicle movements into and out of the site

therefore not increasing vehicle movements above those which are currently

experienced.

Road Safety Study

3.4 Accident statistics have been obtained from Sussex Police for the period from

November 2000 to October 2008 for the stretch of Cuckfield Road in the vicinity of the

site access. This represents all available data that Sussex Police keep on record.

Results are included as Appendix A. Analysis of the accident reports highlights only

one accident to have occurred at the Danworth Farm access road opposite that of the

site access with Cuckfield Road. No further accidents were recorded as occurring

within 300 metres of the access road during the entire 8 year period.

3.5 The accident that occurred at the Danworth Farm access road was classified as slight

in severity and took place in daylight and under dry road conditions. The accident

involved a rear shunt between two vehicles and was deemed as being caused by a

vehicle failing to stop and making contact with a second vehicle that was waiting to

turn right into Danworth Farm. It is understood that the vehicle that was hit had been

waiting for a third vehicle to enter Danworth Farm, which was travelling in a

southbound direction on Cuckfield Road. As part of the planning application, an anti-

skid surface is proposed on Cuckfield Road adjacent to the site. It is noteworthy that

should the anti-skid surfacing have been in place when this accident occurred, the

accident may well have been avoided.

3.6 Four accidents were reported as having occurred at the junctions of Cuckfield Road

with Gatehouse Lane and Mill Lane. All were deemed as slight in nature and involved

collisions between vehicles attempting to enter Cuckfield Road.

3.7 We do not consider there to be an existing road safety issue associated with the site

access. It is noteworthy that the existing site access has been in use since November

2006 accommodating heavy goods vehicles associated with the current use of the site

with no related accidents. The one accident that took place at the Danworth Farm

access road was not caused or influenced by the site access. Furthermore, those

accidents which did take place at junctions in the vicinity of the site are considered to

have taken place at junctions that carry a larger number of vehicles compared to that

which the proposed development will generate.


Road Safety Audit

3.8 A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit was carried out by Owen Williams in October 2007 to

consider the road safety implications of the proposals at the site access junction with

Cuckfield Road. A copy of this report is attached as Appendix B. The report raised

two issues which are considered below.

3.9 Problem 2.1.1 – Access Junction with Cuckfield Road:

“Restricted visibility splays would increase potential for turning conflicts. Hedgerow

located on the west side of Cuckfield Road to the north and south of the access road

restricts inter-visibility distances between approaching traffic and vehicles

entering/egressing the junction. Sight distances south of the access are further

restricted by a change in horizontal alignment and presence of a left hand curve.

Restricted visibility would increase the potential for driver error/frustration when

emerging from the access and risk collisions involving vehicles approaching the

junction.”

3.10 It is common for rural roads to be bounded by hedgerows restricting visibility.

Furthermore, the majority of vehicles utilising the access road would be goods

vehicles, allowing for a higher view out of the vehicle. Appendix C contains the

highway plan relating to a stretch of Cuckfield Road within the vicinity of the site,

which has been provided by the County Council. Based on the information contained

within the highway plan and a topographical survey which was carried out on the

stretch of Cuckfield Road adjacent to the site access, it is acknowledged that the

hedgerow to the south of the site access is partly situated within the public highway,

with the remainder of the hedge on private land. However, it is significant that the

great majority of the hedge is within the highway boundary where it is close to and

south of the site access. On this basis, the Highway Authority has powers to ensure

that the hedgerow situated within the public highway is maintained so as not to

restrict visibility. Measures to highlight the presence of the access and anticipated

volumes of site traffic are considered in more detail within Section 4 of this report.

3.11 It should be noted that although the safety audit considers the available visibility at

the site access in both a northern and southern direction, the refusal from West

Sussex County Council only considers visibility to be of a concern in a southern

direction, and therefore it has been assumed that the Council only has concerns over

the visibility to the south.


3.12 Problem 2.1.2 – Access Road Junction:

“Inadequate swept path clearance available for two way vehicle movements would risk

side-swipe accidents in the vicinity of the access. The access junction appears narrow

and adequate to accommodate one large vehicle undertaking an in/out bound

movement at anytime. ECL reports that there will be approximately 10 heavy

commercial vehicle trips to/from the site on a daily basis. There is a slight possibility,

following the arrival of two vehicles within the extents of the access junction

simultaneously, that an obstruction on the highway may take place increasing the risk

of shunt/side-swipe accidents.”

3.13 Due to the low number of vehicles that will require access to the site, it is unlikely that

two vehicles will meet on the access road. However the safety audit noted that there

is a slight possibility of this occurring. It is understood from information supplied by

the applicant that vehicles requiring access to the site are currently booked in so as to

eliminate any possibility of vehicles requiring access simultaneously. Drivers are also

instructed to wait within the confines of the site until instructed to leave, as detailed

within the accompanying Method statement. The method statement provides a set of

control measures and safe systems of work for employees in order to reduce the

likelihood of any hazards occurring. This includes a detailed checklist of how each

driver should operate both within the site and on the access road itself; including the

need for drivers to reverse back into the site should they meet an opposing vehicle on

the access road. The method statement also dictates that no driver may travel

through Hurstpierpoint, instead approaching the site from the north, while drivers

leaving the site must turn left towards Goddards Green. A copy of the method

statement is included as Appendix D.

3.14 Edburton Contractors (the applicant) has provided a risk assessment to accompany the

planning application. The risk assessment notes the site to operate within a low risk

category due to the likelihood of danger to employees and the public being low. A

copy of the risk assessment is attached as Appendix E. A designer’s response setting

out comments raised by the safety Audit is contained as Appendix F.


Visibility

3.15 The site access is located within a rural area of West Sussex, with hedgerows bounding

Cuckfield Road on both sides. This results in the site access being partly concealed for

vehicles approaching along Cuckfield Road. Concealed entrances are commonplace in

rural locations, and are particularly typical of lightly trafficked roads such as Cuckfield

Road. The Highway Authority stated within a planning committee report in December

2008 that it may be possible to overcome this issue of restricted visibility, with the

following comment:

“The Highway Authority state that it may be possible to overcome the highway

objection if the hedge to the south of the access road, at the junction with Cuckfield

Road, was set back behind a sight line of 215 metres long or maintained in place, but

reduced in height and maintained at the reduced height (750mm) over the same

distance. The effect (a partial and momentary loss of observation of objects within the

sight lines) of the first group of trees obscuring the view to the south within the

visibility splay could be accepted if either of the above hedge modifications was made.”

3.16 Three trees located to the south of the site access with Cuckfield Road partially restrict

visibility to the south. We do not consider this an issue as the visibility splay is only

restricted for a small distance, and it is noted above that the Highway Authority will

accept trees within the visibility splay if the hedge is modified. Furthermore, this

report demonstrates that a 215 metre visibility splay is not required based on existing

traffic speeds highlighted within the automatic traffic count. These points are

considered in detail within this section of the report.

3.17 Cuckfield Road is lightly trafficked and caters mainly for local traffic and it is therefore

reasonable to assume that drivers will be aware of local highway deficiencies, not just

at the site access, but at many other accesses along this stretch of Cuckfield Road.

The sub-standard geometry of the highway in general, with numerous concealed

accesses, is characteristic of this type of road and the result of this is that drivers are

likely to exercise a degree of caution when using this section of road.

3.18 It is acknowledged that the majority of vehicles accessing the site will be HGV’s, and

the position of the driver would therefore allow visibility over the hedgerow.

Furthermore, as noted previously, a significant proportion of the hedgerow to the

south of the site access is located within the public highway boundary and the Highway

Authority therefore has powers to ensure that it is maintained so as not to restrict

visibility.


3.19 The access road leading to the development site is located on a high point in the

landscape, which results in vehicles navigating Cuckfield Road being visible above the

hedgerow. This also applies to vehicles navigating the access road, which are visible

above the hedgerow to those vehicles approaching in a northern direction on Cuckfield

Road. The site access junction is shown in the photograph below.

3.20 In order to understand the speed of vehicles along Cuckfield Road, and in accordance

with comments made by the Highway Authority, Motion instructed an independent

traffic survey company to carry out a 7-day automatic traffic speed survey

immediately to the south of the existing access road during the period of Tuesday 13th

January to Wednesday 21st January. This included a record of both vehicle numbers

and vehicle speeds in both directions. The results are included as Appendix G.


3.21 From the speed survey results, the average 85th percentile speed can be obtained.

This allows for a robust assessment, as the 85th highest speed out of 100 is utilised.

This generates an average daily 85th percentile wet weather northbound speed of 50.3

mph. It should be noted that as the traffic surveys took place under dry conditions, an

adjustment has been made to account for wet weather speeds. Manual for Streets

(MfS) provides a formula for calculating stopping sight distances (SSD) using vehicle

speed, driver perception-reaction time and the average vehicle deceleration rate.

Stopping sight distance refers to the distance required for a vehicle to come to a

complete stop, which is dependant upon the speed of the vehicle when approaching a

junction. This measurement refers to the same distance needed when referring to the

visibility requirement at an access junction. The basic formula for calculating SSD (in

metres) is:

SSD = vt + v²/2d

Where:

v = speed (m/s)

t = driver perception-reaction time (seconds)

d = deceleration (m/s²)

3.22 Manual for Streets uses a driver perception-reaction time of 1.5 seconds and a

deceleration rate of 4.41m/s². An additional 2.4 metres should be added to the SSD to

take account of the position of the driver and that of the front of the vehicle due to the

SSD figure relating to the position of the driver. Applying the average 85th percentile

speed of 50.3 mph to the formula contained above calculates a visibility requirement of

93.4 metres for northbound traffic.

3.23 A sight line of 2.4 x 113 metres can be achieved in a southbound direction within the

public highway, with a partial loss of visibility caused by the trees to the south of the

access road, and is shown within drawing 81209-02. Visibility to the south of the site

access is therefore above the 2.4 x 93.4 metres required distance based upon the

survey results, provided the hedge located within the highway boundary is modified.

Nevertheless, Section 4 of this report considers several improvements within the

vicinity of the site to improve visibility and reduce vehicle speeds further.

3.24 It should be noted that sight lines of approximately 2 x 70 metres can be achieved

without any interference to visibility caused by the trees to the south of the access

road, with only a minimal amount of trimming to the hedge required.


Traffic Impact

3.25 It is understood through information supplied by the applicant that vehicle trips will be

limited to 10 two-way movements per day. This will relate to the use of heavy goods

vehicles and will be controlled in order that this figure does not alter on a daily basis.

As a result, it is considered this does not constitute a significant increase in vehicle

movements on the road network. Appendix H contains a Geofence Report for the

site, which recorded the time during which vehicles entered and exited the existing site

during the period of 5th January 2009 and 12th March 2009. Geofence involves a

tracker being fitted to each vehicle, not only keeping track of vehicle locations at all

times, but also the time spent within the confines of the site. This information

demonstrates that the site operates within the limit of 10 two-way vehicle movements

per day. Furthermore, it shows that on only two occasions two goods vehicles were on

site at the same time. The records of the times of vehicle movements show that on

those two days only one vehicle would have been on the access track at any one time.

3.26 All goods vehicles accessing the site are fitted with a tracking system, allowing the

operator to know where each vehicle is located when they are approaching or

departing the site. This will not only allow the operator to know where vehicles are on

the road network to avoid conflicts, but also alleviate the possibility of vehicles

reversing onto Cuckfield Road. The previously mentioned method statement has been

designed to instruct employees and should be used in situations such as this,

illustrating how safe operation on site should be upheld.

3.27 It is noted that the site has been in operation for the importing and processing of inert

waste and the distribution of recycled materials since November 2006, and therefore

although this application seeks to increase vehicle movements on the road network,

traffic movements will effectively not alter as a result of the proposals over the

existing situation.

3.28 As part of the 7-day automatic traffic count carried out in association with the

development proposals, vehicle counts along Cuckfield Road in both directions were

recorded. Table 3.1 below provides a comparison between existing traffic flows and

that of the development, assessing the percentage increase in vehicle numbers. This

has been based on a 12 hour period of 0700-1900 when it is likely the site will be in

operation.


Peak Period

Existing Traffic

Flows On

Cuckfield Road

Development

Traffic

Percentage

Increase

Daily Peak

(0700-1900)

3,454

(Northbound and

Southbound)

10movements

(5 two-way) 0.29%

Table 3.1 – Comparison Between Existing Traffic Flows and Development Flows

3.29 Table 3.1 highlights a traffic increase of 0.29% on the adjacent road network as a

result of the development proposals. As noted previously, traffic movements will

effectively not alter as a result of the proposals over the existing situation due to the

site being in operation since November 2006 in its current state. It is noted, based on

the traffic flow data provided above, that Cuckfield Road is generally lightly trafficked.


4.0 Improvement Works

4.1 This section of the report details improvement works which are proposed adjacent to

the site access.

Anti-Skid Surface

4.2 It is the intention of the developer to provide an anti-skid surface treatment covering

100 metres either side of the site access. This has the added benefit of alerting

drivers to the need to approach the junction with caution as a result of the red

surfacing used. A research report carried out by the Transport Research Laboratory in

1997 demonstrated that well maintained anti-skid surfaces can cut wet weather

accidents by 57% and reduce the overall number of accidents on roads by 5.5%. The

proposed layout can be seen within drawing 81209-03.

HGV Signage

4.4 It is also the intention of the developer to provide a warning sign for vehicles

approaching the site access, highlighting that a heavy goods vehicle might be

manoeuvring at the junction. These will be provided both north of the site and south

at a distance of 180 metres from the site access. These can also be seen on drawing

81209-03.

4.5 The signs will be in accordance with guidance contained within ‘The Traffic Signs

Regulations and General Directions 2002’. The crossroads ahead sign to be provided

to diagram 504.1. Signage text to be provided to diagram 511, with the permitted

variant text of ‘Heavy Plant Crossing’.

4.6 By providing these improvements to the adjacent road network, not only will vehicle

speeds be reduced and the presence of the junction highlighted, but general road

safety should improve. This is considered not just a significant improvement to

Cuckfield Road in the immediate proximity to the site, but also on a wider scale.


5.0 Summary and Conclusions

5.1 Edburton Contractors have appointed Motion Transport Planning to investigate the

highways and transportation issues associated with the redevelopment of land

adjacent to Cuckfield Road, Hurstpierpoint.

5.2 The development site is located to the west of Cuckfield Road, 1.75 kilometres to the

north of Hurstpierpoint. The development proposals involve the use of a former

sewerage treatment works for the importing and processing of inert waste, the

distribution of recycled materials, and reuse of the area for forestry purposes.

5.3 A previous planning application was refused permission on 2nd December 2008 by

West Sussex County Council for the following reason:

“The development proposed is contrary to Policy DEV4 of the West Sussex Structure

Plan 2001-2016 because due to inadequate sightlines south of the junction of the

access road with Cuckfield Road it fails to ensure safe access to the highway network.”

5.4 This report considers the road safety issues associated with the development

proposals, commenting on advice previously given by West Sussex County Council. In

summary, it demonstrates the following:

► The development proposals are in accordance with relevant policy guidance;

► There are no existing road safety concerns in the vicinity of the site;

► A Road Safety Audit has been carried out to address road safety concerns in the

vicinity of the site, with measures to resolve these issues proposed;

► A risk assessment and method statement specific to the site, detailing measures

and safe systems of work for employees whilst on site, will reduce the likelihood

of any hazards occurring;

► The hedgerow to the south of the site access is partly located within the highway

boundary and must therefore be maintained so as not to restrict visibility;

► A speed survey has been carried out in order to ascertain vehicle speeds on

Cuckfield Road in the immediate vicinity of the site;

► Visibility splays are above the required distance based on the survey results;

► A geofence tracking system allowing the operator to know when vehicles are

accessing the site and the period within which they remain on site will reduce

the likelihood of conflicts;

► A booking system controlling vehicle movements into and out of the site will

eliminate the risk of vehicles meeting on the access road;

► The site access road is of an adequate width to cater for site traffic;


► The applicant is prepared to accept a condition restricting the number of vehicle

movements into and out of the site; and

► Measures to improve the road safety in the vicinity of the site access including

anti-ski surfacing and appropriate signage are proposed.

5.5 In conclusion, this report demonstrates that the development proposals would not

result in demonstrable harm in terms of highway or traffic impact on the road network.

proposed change of land use cuckfield road, hurstpierpointproposed change of land use, cuckfield...

Documents