itp 135-1 ta rev 2

e g i s t e r e d i n E n g l a n d 5 2 6 5 8 6 3

Hodson's Mill Robertsbridge East Sussex

Transport Assessment

www.inspiretransport.co.uk

tel: 01737 457170

email: [email protected]

Inspire Transport Planning, Abbey House, 25 Clarendon Rd, Redhill, Surrey, RH1 1QZ Tel. 01737 457170, email: [email protected]

Hodsons Mill Robertsbridge East Sussex Transport Assessment

Tel: 01737 457170 www.inspiretransport.co.uk Job Ref: AS/ITP 135-1 Date: January 2017

DOCUMENT REF: ITP 135-1 TA REV. NO. DESCRIPTION: AUTHOR DATE: 1 Draft to client team AS 27.01.17 2 Client team comments AS 08.02.17 3 4

HODSON’S MILL TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT JANUARY 2017 ITP 135-1 TA REV 2

CONTENTS PAGE Page Number 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3 3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORT POLICY 16 4.0 TRIP GENERATION 22 5.0 OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL 33 6.0 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT 36 7.0 ASSESSMENT YEAR AND BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 38 8.0 HIGHWAY IMPACT 40 9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 43 DRAWINGS – ITP 135 – 1 – 01 – P1 vehicle swept paths and junction visibility

TABLES

Table 1 Travel modal share existing development

Table 2 Existing mill two-way person trip generation

Table 3 Existing Oast House two-way person trip generation

Table 4 Summary of bus services

Table 5 Proposed B1 employment two-way person trip generation

Table 6 Travel modal share proposed residential development

Table 7 Proposed residential development two-way person trip generation

Table 8 Proposed residential flats two-way person trip generation

Table 9 Proposed retirement flats two-way person trip generation

Table 10 Proposed A3 café/restaurant units two-way person trip generation

Table 11 Total gross two-way person trip generation

Table 12 Total net two-way person trip generation

Table 13 Total increase in trip generation resulting from development

Table 14 Summary of PICADY results – site access/Northbridge Street

Table 15 Summary of ARCADY results – Northbridge Street/A21


FIGURES

Figure 1 General site location

Figure 2 Detailed site location

Figure 3 2016 morning peak hour surveyed traffic

Figure 4 2016 evening peak hour surveyed traffic

Figure 5 Pedestrian walking catchment area

Figure 6 Cyclist catchment area

Figure 7 Local cycle routes

Figure 8 Local bus routes

Figure 9 Trip distribution

Figure 10 Morning peak hour ‘permitted’ development traffic

Figure 11 Evening peak hour ‘permitted’ development traffic

Figure 12 Morning peak hour ‘proposed’ development traffic

Figure 13 Evening peak hour ‘proposed’ development traffic

Figure 14 Morning peak hour 2018 base traffic

Figure 15 Evening peak hour 2018 base traffic

Figure 16 Morning peak hour 2028 base traffic

Figure 17 Evening peak hour 2028 base traffic

Figure 18 Morning peak hour 2018 base plus ‘permitted’ traffic

Figure 19 Evening peak hour 2018 base plus ‘permitted’ traffic

Figure 20 Morning peak hour 2028 base plus ‘permitted’ traffic

Figure 21 Evening peak hour 2028 base plus ‘permitted’ traffic

Figure 22 Morning peak hour 2018 total traffic

Figure 23 Evening peak hour 2018 total traffic

Figure 24 Morning peak hour 2028 total traffic

Figure 25 Evening peak hour 2028 total traffic

APPENDICES

Appendix A TRICS data and trip generation calculations

Appendix B 2011 Census data

Appendix C Congestion Reference Flow calculations

Appendix D Parking surveys

Appendix E Personal Injury Accident (PIA) data


Appendix F Architects Masterplan

Appendix G Residential parking calculations

Appendix H Trip distribution calculations

Appendix I Traffic growth factor calculations Appendix J Junction capacity analysis


1

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Inspire Transport Planning was commissioned by Hodson’s Mill Ltd to provide

transport and highways advice on a proposed mixed use development on a site at

Hodson’s Mill, Northbridge Street, Robertsbridge, East Sussex.

1.2 The development would consist of change of use of existing mill and Oast House

buildings to retirement flats and commercial uses plus the erection of a mixed use

residential and commercial development. The site is accessed from Northbridge

Street. This report is submitted alongside the planning application for the

development.

1.3 This Transport Assessment (TA) examines, and where appropriate provides further

detail on, the following:

the existing use of the site

opportunities to travel to and from the site by sustainable modes of transport

the proposed development

the access proposals

the transport modal share

the trip generation of the proposed development by all modes

the impact of the proposed development on the surrounding highway network.

1.4 This TA takes account of paragraph 32 of The National Planning Policy Framework

(NPPF) by Dept. for Communities and Local Government (DfCLG) and has been

produced according to ‘Guidance on Transport Assessment’ (GTA) published in

March 2007 by DfCLG and the Department for Transport (DfT). It examines the

transport implications of the proposed development based on the following

objectives:

to take opportunities for sustainable modes of travel and reduce the need for

major transport infrastructure

to achieve safe and suitable site access for all

to provide improvements to the transport network, where necessary, to

effectively limit any significant impacts of the development.

1.5 Transport Assessment scoping discussions were carried out with East Sussex

County Council (ESCC) in January and February 2016 prior to completion of this TA.


2

As a result of these discussions the methodology contained within this report for

formulation of the trip generation, trip distribution and assignment and traffic growth

calculations were agreed with ESCC. A 10% reduction applied by ITP for linked and

pass-by trips is discussed further within Section 6.0 and 8.0 of this report.


3

2.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS

2.1 Site location

2.1.1 The site is located at Northbridge Street, Robertsbridge, East Sussex. The general

site location is shown on Figure 1.

2.1.2 The proposed development proposes the change of use of an existing mill building

and Oast House of approximate floor areas 1190 and 308 square metres

respectively to retirement flats and commercial uses. The previous use of the site

will therefore be taken into account when assessing the trip generation of the

development. The site is bounded to the north by open land, to the east by

residential dwellings and Northbridge Street, and to the south and west by the River

Rother. The detailed site location is shown in Figure 2.

2.2 Permitted use

2.2.1 As detailed above, the proposals are for the change of use of existing mill and Oast

House buildings to retirement flats and commercial uses. As such, the trips that

would be generated by the existing permitted use of the site can be taken into

account. The existing mill and Oast House buildings have not been in use since

November 2004, but in such circumstances the permitted use of the buildings can

be taken into account when assessing trip generation.

2.2.2 To determine the number of trips by all modes associated with the permitted use the

site the TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) Database version 7.2.3

was examined. For the mill building, vehicle trip generation sites within the

‘employment – industrial unit’ category of the database were examined. Sites within

England excluding central London were selected. Sites with weekend surveys were

de-selected.

2.2.3 In view of the small sample size of industrial developments in edge of centre

locations, no area type category was selected. Instead, sites with population more

than 15,000 people within 1 mile were de-selected to reflect the nature of the site

location.


4

2.2.4 In order to ensure a robust trip rate selection in accordance with TRICS guidance,

sites around the 85th percentile trip rate ranking for vehicle trip rates were

considered. On this basis, TRICS site reference TW-02-C-01 was selected and is

an office located in Jarrow, Tyne and Wear. This site was the most comparable of

all sites near to the 85%ile ranking within TRICS for both AM and PM peak periods.

It was ranked as follows among the 15 sites:

vehicular trip generation

morning peak hour second of 11 sites evening peak hour second of 11 sites

2.2.5 The site is therefore an appropriate selection, and has been used to calculate the

vehicular and person trip generation for the mill. Full details of the TRICS site

selection and TRICS trip generation by mode are provided within Appendix A.

2.2.6 To determine the modal share percentages for the mill the travel modal splits

calculated from travel to work data (workplace population) from the 2011 Census for

Robertsbridge has been utilised. The Census data and the calculated 2011 Census

modal share percentages are included in Appendix B and summarised below.

mode of travel 2011 Census

pedestrian 6.9%

cyclist 0.5%

public transport 5.1%

vehicle occupants (vehicle driver) 87.5% (82.3%)

total 100%

Table 1 – travel modal share - permitted development

2.2.7 The Census modal share percentages have been use to calculate the trips by mode.

This has been calculated as follows. The number of vehicular trips was first

established using the TRICS trip rate and the development quanta. The numbers of

person trips were then established by dividing the vehicular trips by the vehicle

driver modal share percentage. The numbers of trips by mode were then established

by applying the various Census modal share percentages for each mode to the total

person trips. The resulting person trip generation for the mill is shown on Table 2.


5

2.2.8 The trip calculations by mode for the morning and evening peak periods for the mill

are provided in full in Appendix A and two-way trip numbers are summarised in

Table 2 below:

mode of travel morning peak hour (0800 –

0900 hrs)

evening peak hour (1700 –

1800 hrs)

pedestrian 1 1

cyclist 0 0

public transport 1 1

vehicle passengers 1 1

vehicle drivers 13 19

Total person trips 16 23

Utilised vehicular trip rate/100 sqm

1.052 1.579

Table 2 – permitted use of mill building two-way person trip generation

2.2.9 The existing Oast House has a floor area of under 500 square metres and under the

General Permitted Development Order would have permitted change from industrial

use to offices. Therefore, to determine the number of trips by all modes associated

with the permitted use of the Oast House, the TRICS (Trip Rate Information

Computer System) ‘employment – offices’ category of the database was examined.

Sites within England excluding central London were selected. Sites with weekend

surveys were de-selected.

2.2.10 In view of the good access of the site to Robertsbridge centre and train station, edge

of centre sites were selected. Sites with greater than 15,000 population within 1

mile were de-selected to reflect the site location.



considered. On this basis, TRICS site reference ES-02-A-10 was selected and is a

office located in Hailsham, East Sussex. This site was the most comparable of all

sites near to the 85%ile ranking within TRICS for both AM and PM peak periods. It

was ranked as follows among the 3 sites:


6


morning peak hour first of 3 sites evening peak hour first of 3 sites

2.2.12 The vehicular trip rate for the above site was therefore utilised for the trips

associated with the permitted use of the Oast House. The trips by mode were

established using the same methodology as for the permitted use of the mill. The trip

calculations by mode for the morning and evening peak periods for the permitted

use of the Oast House are provided in full in Appendix A and two-way trip numbers

are summarised in Table 3 below:


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 1 0

cyclist 0 0



vehicle drivers 7 5



2.391 1.758

Table 3 – permitted use of Oast House building two-way person trip generation

2.2.13 Based on the TRICS assessment and the established vehicular modal share, the

total permitted development could lead to the following vehicular trip numbers:

arrivals departures two-way

morning peak hour 17 3 20 (0800-0900 hrs)

evening peak hour 4 20 24 (1700-1800 hrs)


7

2.3 Local highway network 2.3.1 The site is accessed by an existing major/minor junction connecting to Northbridge

Street. At the junction with Northbridge Street the access is of variable width and

measures between 11.3 and 12.3 metres wide. The adjacent carriageway on

Northbridge Street measures approximately 7.6 metres in width at the site access

point.

2.3.2 Adjacent to the site, on the western side of Northbridge Street, footways exist of

approximate width of 1.4 metres and 1.5 metres to the north and south of the site

respectively. Northbridge Street is a single carriageway, lit and subject to a 30 miles

per hour urban speed limit. No waiting restrictions exist on Northbridge Street in the

vicinity of the site.

2.3.3 Visibility splays of 2.4 x 43 metres, commensurate with requirements within the

Manual for Streets (Dept for Transprt/Dept. for Communities and Local Government)

for 30 mph streets are achievable at the site access point.

2.3.4 The site is located approximately 400 metres to the north of Robertsbridge centre

and the site access road joins Northbridge Street approximately 300 metres to the

southwest of the Northbridge Street/A21 Robertsbridge Bypass/Church Lane

Roundabout. The A21 provides the key route between Robertsbridge and Hastings

to the south and Tunbridge Wells to the north. These towns lie approximately 18 and

28 kilometres from the site respectively.

2.3.5 Between the site access and the A21 junction a section of carriageway exists of

approximate width 6.1 metres. Some car parking associated with adjacent

residential properties is sometimes present on this section of carriageway.

2.3.6 To the south of the site, Northbridge Street joins with High Street (via The Clappers)

which forms the key route through Robertsbridge centre. To the south of

Robertsbridge, High Street joins Station Road at a major/minor junction located

approximately 500 metres from the site. Station road serves Robertsbridge Station

which is located approximately 400 metres to the west of this junction.


8

2.3.7 To the south of the High Street/Station Road junction, High Street continues into

George Hill which meets the A21 at a major/minor priority junction located

approximately 600 metres further to the south.

2.3.8 Traffic flows for the local highway network were established by reference to

commissioned traffic surveys. Peak hour turning count traffic surveys were carried

out by independent specialist traffic survey data supplier Road Data Services Ltd on

27th January 2016 at the following junctions:

Northbridge St/A21/Church Lane Station Road/High Street/George Hill

2.3.9 The results of the traffic surveys are shown on Figures 3 and 4 for the morning

(0800 – 0900 hrs) and evening (1700 – 1800 hrs) peak periods. The full survey

details can be provided on request of relevant authorities.

2.3.10 Existing traffic flows on Northbridge Street between the site and the junction with the

A21 to the east can be summarised as follows:

AM peak eastbound 146 (7%) westbound 89 (8%)

PM peak eastbound 111 (3%) westbound 96 (3%)

Figures shown as number of vehicles, with percentage heavy vehicles (including

buses) in brackets.

2.3.11 Congestion Reference Flows (CRF’s) have can be calculated for Northbridge Street

as stated within TA46/97 Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) DfT. The

CRF is defined as the Annual Average Daily Traffic Flow (AADT) at which the

carriageway is likely to be congested in the peak periods on an average day. The

calculations are provided in full within Appendix C and the summarised below:

Eastbound 16,623 vehicles (based on 6.1 metre total road width)

Westbound 23,294 vehicles (based on 6.1 metre total road width)

2.3.12 The above CRF’s have been compared with the actual AADT’s that could be

expected on Northbridge Street, when calculated from the peak hour surveyed flows

using the same peak hour to AADT ratio as used in the CRF calculations. The

calculations are provided in full within Appendix C and the calculated existing AADT

flows are shown below:

Eastbound 1,402 vehicles

Westbound 922 vehicles


9

2.3.13 The above demonstrates that the existing AADT traffic flows on Northbridge Street

are significantly below theoretical CRF’s, being approximately 8.4% and 4.0% of

CRF’s for eastbound and westbound carriageway respectively.

2.3.14 It is noted that the above calculations will not take into account local factors such as

on street car parking and therefore additional calculations are provided in Appendix C showing the effect on capacity of a restricted road width on Northbridge Street of

4.1 metres, assuming car parking on one side or the other. Whilst the formulae are

not strictly applicable to road widths under 5.5 metres the results do give some

indication of the effects of on street car parking. Based on a 4.1 metre road width the

existing AADT’s on Northbridge Street are still indicated to be only 14.8% and 7% of

the CRF’s for eastbound and westbound carriageway respectively.

2.3.15 Figures 1 and 2 also demonstrate that there are much greater two-way traffic flows

on Station Road than on Northbridge Street. On Station Road a chicane exists near

to the railway line effectively restricting traffic flows to a single direction at any one

time. Station Road currently carries maximum two-way peak hour traffic flows of 348

vehicles compared with a maximum of 236 vehicles on Northbridge Street.

2.3.16 In addition to the traffic surveys, parking surveys were undertaken during extended

morning and evening peak periods (0700 – 1000 hrs and 1600 hrs to 1900 hrs) on

the narrowest sections of carriageway on Northbridge Street and High Street in 15

minute intervals. The results of the surveys are provided in Appendix D, the yellow

markings show parked vehicles and the red markings show illegally parked vehicles.

2.3.17 The parking surveys demonstrate that on the 240 metre narrowest section of

Northbridge Street connecting to the A21, throughout the peak periods surveyed, at

least three locations existed where two vehicles would consistently be able to pass.

Since there is good inter-visibility between vehicles in this location, and considering

that traffic flows are well under theoretical capacities, the existing on street car

parking patterns are not shown to cause significant adverse effect on traffic on

Northbridge Street.

2.3.18 On High Street, the parking surveys show similar consistent opportunities to pass as

those set out above. However, some illegal car parking does occur adjacent to one

of the local shops in the centre of the survey area, restricting one of the passing


10

opportunities at times. However, in both survey locations the enumerators noted no

significant queuing or delays for any prolonged periods.

2.3.19 The above paragraphs demonstrate that the existing links within the highway

network have a good degree of residual capacity. Albeit there would be additional

benefit from a reduction in illegal car parking on one section of High Street. Further

analysis of the site access and A21/Northbridge Street junction capacities is

provided within the Traffic Impact section of this report.

2.4 Pedestrian travel

2.4.1 Walking is the most important mode of travel at the local level and offers the

greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly those under 2 kilometres.

The Institute of Highways and Transportation (IHT) document ‘Guidelines for

Providing for Journeys on Foot’ (2000) describes acceptable walking distances for

pedestrians without mobility impairment. IHT suggest that, for commuting, up to 500

metres is the desirable walking distance, up to 1000 metres is an acceptable walking

distance and 2000 metres is the preferred maximum walking distance.

2.4.2 The site lies to the north of Robertsbridge, approximately 400 metres to the north of

Robertsbridge centre. Adjacent to the site on the western side of Northbridge Street

footways exist of approximate width of 1.4 metres and 1.5 metres to the north and

south of the site respectively. These footways continue into Robertsbridge centre

with variable width. As such, there is good pedestrian connectivity between the site

and local facilities in Robertsbridge centre.

2.4.3 There are numerous local facilities available on High Street in the centre of

Robertsbridge. These facilities include a range of retail, employment, leisure and

community facilities. The above facilities are located between approximately 300

and 500 metres walk of the site.

2.4.4 In addition, a local public footpath routes through the site largely following the route

of the existing Mill Race and connecting to Northbridge Street. This route would be

retained and enhanced as part of the development proposals.


11

2.4.5 Figure 5 shows a two kilometres indicative pedestrian walking catchment area from

the centre of the site. The plan demonstrates that all of Robertsbridge and Salehurst

are within walking distance of the site.

2.4.6 The above demonstrates that the site is easily accessible to pedestrians. There are

good opportunities for pedestrians to walk to a range of local facilities in the

surrounding area.

2.5 Cycle based travel

2.5.1 Cycling has potential to substitute for short car trips, particularly those under 5km,

and to form part of a longer journey by public transport. Figure 6 shows a five

kilometres cycling catchment, based on approximate straight line distance from the

centre of the site. Based on this, all of Robertsbridge, Hurst Green, Stapleton and

Etchingham are within easy cycling distance of the site.

2.5.2 Figure 7 identifies the cycle routes available in the vicinity of the site. The site is

located midway between National cycle routes 2 and 18. Route 2 connects along the

southcoast between Brighton and Folkestone to the south of the site. Route 18

connects between Tunbridge Wells and Ashfield to the north of the site.

2.5.3 In addition to the above routes ESCC promotes the use of local bridleways for

cycling use. Route maps can be obtained at the following web address:

http://www.eastsussex.gov.uk/leisureandtourism/countryside/rightsofway/rightsofway

map/map.aspx. Local routes connect between Robertsbridge and Staplecross.

2.5.4 Local roads connecting between the site and Robertsbridge centre are relatively

lightly trafficked and therefore appropriate for cycling.

2.5.5 As a result of the above, it is concluded that reasonable cycle infrastructure is

available to accommodate cycle movements between the site and the surrounding

areas.


12

2.6 Bus based public transport

2.6.1 The closest bus stops to the site are located on Northbridge Street to the northwest

of the junction with the site access. These stops are located approximately 200

metres walking distance from the site. Figure 8 shows locations of local bus routes.

2.6.2 The above bus stops are served by the numbers 304 and 305 bus services. The 304

and 305 services operate between Hastings, St Leonards, Battle, Robertsbridge and

Hawkhurst with an approximate combined hourly frequency throughout the day

Monday to Saturday.

2.6.3 The timetables of these services are summarised on Table 4 and can be obtained

from the Traveline website at www.travelinesoutheast.org.uk .

No. Details Duration (hrs) Frequency

304/305 Hastings-Robertsbridge-Hawkhurst 07:37 – 19:23 Hourly Mon-Sat

Table 4 – Summary of bus services

2.6.4 In summary, the site is located within a short walking distance of regular bus

services which provide a link between the site and the surrounding areas. In

particular, the site is well connected to Hastings, St Leonards and Battle where a

range of services and facilities and additional public transport opportunities are

available.

2.7 Rail Based Public Transport

2.7.1 Robertsbridge rail station is located approximately 900 metres to the southwest of

the site. Services at Robertsbridge connect between Hastings and London Charing

Cross or Cannon Street calling at Robertsbridge, Tunbridge Wells and Sevenoaks

amongst other stations. Services operate with an hourly frequency in each direction

in off peak periods and frequencies of 20 to 30 minutes in peak periods.

2.7.2 As such, Robertsbridge Station provides regular trains to a variety of destinations for

commuter, shopping, employment and leisure activities. Robertsbridge Station lies

within easy walking and cycling distance of the site.


13

2.8 Personal Injury Accident Analysis

2.8.1 Full details of personal injury accident (PIA) data and a plan showing PIA locations

was obtained from Sussex Safer Roads partnership for five year period of data

between 1st January 2011 and 31st December 2015. The data and plan is included

within Appendix E. The area over which the data was provided is indicated on the

plan within Appendix E but includes the area from the junction of Northbridge

Street/A21 to A21/George Hill, via Northbridge Street, The Clappers, High Street

and George Hill.

2.8.2 A total of twelve accidents occurred in the study area within the period of last five

years of available data. Of the twelve accidents, four were classed as ‘serious’ and

eight were classed as ‘slight’.

A21/Northbridge Street junction 2.8.3 Only one PIA occurred at this junction within the study period. The accident was

classified as serious and involved a vehicle on the A21 travelling southbound

crossing the carriageway and striking a lighting column.

2.8.4 There is no pattern of accidents at this junction that could be identified as needing to

be addressed as a result of the development and the number of accidents occurring

is well below that which would normally be expected for a junction of this type.

Northbridge Street, The Clappers and High Street 2.8.5 No PIA’s occurred on Northbridge Street within the study period and there were no

PIA’s within approximately 180 metres of the site access point.

2.8.6 One PIA, classified as ‘slight’, occurred on The Clappers involving a vehicle

reversing out of a driveway colliding with an elderly person.

2.8.7 Two PIA’s occurred on High Street within the study period. One accident, classified

as ‘slight’, involved a northbound adult cyclist with defective brakes colliding with a

southbound car. The second PIA also classed as ‘slight’ involved an eleven year old

northbound cyclist colliding with a parked vehicle.

2.8.8 The number of accidents occurring on the above sections of carriageway is low and

all were of ‘slight severity’. Whilst two of the PIA’s did involve cyclists there is not


14

sufficient evidence or data to show that there is a recurring pattern of accidents that

needs to be addressed in this location as a result of the development.

High Street/Station Road junction

2.8.9 Only one PIA occurred at this junction within the study period. The accident was

classified as serious and involved a 15 year old cyclist turning left from George Hill

into Station Road colliding with a bus turning right out of Station Road. This accident

appears to have been the result of drivers/riders misjudging the tightness of the

corner radii on the south side of the junction.

2.8.10 The number of accidents that occurred at the junction within the study period is well

below that which would normally be expected for a junction of this type. There is no

significant pattern of accidents at this junction that could be identified as needing to

be addressed. Whilst the one accident that occurred also involved a cyclist, this

occurred for different reasons to the cycle accidents on High Street. The tight corner

radii on the south side of the junction played some part in the PIA that occurred,

such tight radii could typically be expected to reduce overall vehicular speeds and

assist pedestrians when crossing Station Road at the junction.

Station Road

2.8.11 One PIA classified as ‘slight’ occurred on Station Road within the study area/period.

The PIA involved a 15 year old cyclist travelling eastbound hitting a pothole in the

carriageway and falling from the bicycle.

2.8.12 The number of accidents that occurred on Station Road within the study period is

very low. There is no significant pattern of accidents that could be identified as

needing to be addressed. Whilst the one accident that occurred also involved a

cyclist, this occurred for different reasons to the cycle accidents on High Street and

at the High Street/Station Road junction and could be attributed in part to poor road

maintenance.

George Hill/A21 junction

2.8.13 Six PIA’s occurred at this junction within the study period, four of which were slight

and two of which were serious.


15

2.8.14 Of the above six PIA’s, three accidents occurred that involved vehicles turning right

out of George Hill into the path of southbound vehicles on the A21. No other pattern

of accidents could be established from the data. Reasonable visibility of southbound

A21 vehicles exists for drivers exiting George Hill onto the A21 and ‘ghost island’

right turn carriageway markings are provided to de-lineate the junction.

2.8.15 The number and pattern of accidents occurring are considered to be fairly typical of

a junction of this nature. Subsequent sections of this report will demonstrate that the

proposals will not significantly intensify the traffic movements at this junction. There

is therefore no significant pattern of accidents that have occurred that should be

addressed as a result of the development proposals.

2.9 Summary

2.9.1 The site is easily accessible to pedestrians and cyclists, and there are opportunities

for travel by these modes to access the facilities in the local area. Regular bus

services are also available connecting to the wider area and regular rail services are

available from nearby Robertsbridge Station, serving a variety of destinations. As

such the site is accessible by a variety of sustainable forms of transport. No

significant pattern of (PIA’s) has been identified that that should be addressed as a

result of the development proposals


16

3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND TRANSPORT POLICY 3.1 Introduction and transport planning policy

3.1.1 The proposed development would comprise of the following:

520 sqm B1 office accommodation – Unit 1

135 sqm A3 cafe (or similar) – Unit 2


400 sqm B1 office accommodation – Oast House –Unit 4

62 residential houses

8 residential flats

28 retirement flats

Plus, associated road and drainage infrastructure, open space, strategic

landscaping, and other green infrastructure (including SuDs and areas for nature

conservation).

3.1.2 A masterplan for the development is included at Appendix F. The following

paragraphs set out relevant transport and planning policy.

3.1.3 There is not yet a formally adopted Neighbourhood Plan for Robertsbridge, although

there is a designated area for the proposed plan which will be drawn up by Salehurst

and Robertsbridge Parish Council following a review of resident’s questionnaires.

The current information on the web site states the following in relation to ‘Roads and

Rail’:

“The principal issue identified for consideration is the problem with parking

and the adverse impact this has on the quality of life for residents and the

ability of local businesses and public services to deliver appropriate benefits.

We will therefore look at potential solutions in terms of residents' parking

schemes, more yellow / white lines, traffic calming, car parking space

availability, warden patrols. Another issue is the quality of road and

pavements in the village. Station Road is an obvious example of a road that

has been allowed to deteriorate to the point where it is dangerous for

cyclists.”


17

3.1.4 The East Sussex Local Transport Plan 3 2011-2026 states no specific advice for

Robertsbridge but states the following in relation to rural villages and settlements in

the Battle, Rye and Rural Rother area.

“Predominantly rural settlements –with some larger towns to the south of the

district. The key challenge in this district to is to support the viability of rural

villages and support the local economy, along with improving access to key

local services through appropriate transport solutions.”

“Strategic road network – includes the A21 corridor, A259, A265, A268, A28.

These are key routes in the district, and the challenge is to reduce

congestion, tackle any issues relating to freight transport and support the

delivery of more sustainable travel options for shorter journeys.”

“High road casualty record – with 428 road casualties out of 2,187 county

wide (2008) and a predominantly rural road network, the challenge is to

continue to deliver targeted measures and programmes of road safety

education to reduce these figures.”

3.1.5 Rother District Core Strategy adopted September 2014 states the following:

“The Rural Settlements Study (RSS) contains more detailed investigations of

the role, function and needs of some fifty rural villages across the district. As

part of this exercise, the RSS also defined ‘key service centres’.” Figure 9

identifies Robertsbridge as a ‘key service centre’.

The Rural Settlements Study contains further evidence on the relative need

for employment within individual villages based upon a number of factors

including unemployment, economic activity rate, ratio of in:out commuting,

economic base and broadband speeds. Villages that appear to have a

particular need for employment include the following: Robertsbridge.

Policy RA1 Villages

“(v) In order to meet housing needs and ensure the continued vitality of

villages, the provision of 1,670 additional dwellings (comprising existing

commitments, new allocations and windfalls) in villages over the Plan period

2011 to 2028. This will be located in accordance with Figure 12, subject to


18

refinement in the light of further investigation via the Development and Site

Allocations DPD and/or Neighbourhood Plans; “ Figure 12 identifies 155 new

residential dwellings to be provided in the period 2011-2028.

(vi) Improved access to basic day-to-day services, particularly by public

transport, walking and cycling. In order to facilitate this, new development will

be sited in close proximity to key facilities and in locations accessible via a

range of transport options.”

Policy TR3: Access and New Development

New development should minimise the need to travel and support good

access to employment, services and communities facilities, as well as ensure

adequate, safe access arrangements. Development will be permitted where

mitigation against transport impacts which may arise from that development

or cumulatively with other proposals is provided. This will be achieved

through the submission of a transport assessment, transport statement or

travel plan, and where it is appropriate through:

(i) Ensuring that new developments in their design and layout prioritise the

needs of pedestrians, cyclists and minimise the distance to local public

transport nodes;

(ii) Working with the relevant agencies to seek funding for contributions for

improvements to local infrastructure needed to facilitate highway capacity

and safety and/or public transport accessibility and capacity, where this is

necessary to serve the new development; and

(iii) Provision of electric vehicles charging infrastructure.

3.1.6 Section 2 reviews the existing site location and infrastructure in respect of the above

policies with regard to transport and highways issues. Sections 3 to 8 review the

impact of the proposed development in respect of the above policies with regard to

transport and highways issues.


19

3.2 Proposed access for sustainable modes

3.2.1 As described in further detail below, vehicle access to the proposed development

will be achieved via the improvement of the existing access onto Northbridge Street.

As part of the revisions to the junction arrangements two footways of approximate

width 2.0 metres would be provided around the new kerb radii to connect between

the footways within the site and the existing footways on Northbridge Street.

3.2.2 Within the site, traffic volumes and speeds will be low and the proposed site layout

has been designed, as far as possible, as a low speed pedestrian and cycle friendly

design with footway provision throughout. The site layout is shown on the architects

Masterplan within Appendix F.

3.2.3 In addition, a local public footpath routes through the site largely following the route

of the existing Mill Race and connecting to Northbridge Street. This route would be

retained and enhanced as part of the development proposals.

3.2.4 Section 2.0 demonstrates that vehicular flows on Northbridge Street are very low

and the street is therefore suitable for cycling to and from the site to connect with

local cycle routes identified within section 2.5.

3.2.5 In addition, the architects Masterplan has been designed to maximise the potential

for additional pedestrian and cycle connections to adjoining land to the north and

west, such that it is possible for future routes to link through the site. The

connections shown on the masterplan are indicative at this stage and will be

finalised at detailed design stage.

3.3 Vehicle access

3.3.1 Vehicular access to the site will remain in the same location as the existing access

onto Northbridge Street. However, the existing very wide access point will be revised

to reduce the carriageway width to approximately 6 metres and to provide more

appropriate kerb radii of approximately 9 metres. This would keep vehicular speeds

low, allow safe, easy crossings for pedestrians and cyclists, whilst permitting ease of

turning for service vehicles.


20

3.3.2 Recommended visibility requirements within The Manual for Streets (Department for

Transport/Dept for Communities and Local Government 2007) for major road

speeds of 30 miles per hour of 2.4 x 43 metres (to tangent) are available at the

access point. The above visibility splays are shown on drawing number ITP 135 – 1 – 01 – P1.

3.4 Parking 3.4.1 ESCC residential car parking demand calculation tool has been used to assist in

determining the required number of residential car parking spaces. The calculations

are provided within Appendix G. Based on the current proposed mix of dwellings

(excluding retirement apartments), a total of approximately 147 allocated and 25

unallocated car parking spaces is indicated. No ESCC car parking guideline is

available for retirement apartments and a figure of 1 space per unit has been

adopted by the designer. This is considered reasonable provision, increasing the

allocated requirement to 175, which would be provided as indicated on the architects

Masterplan. A number of unallocated parking spaces for residential and non-

residential use are proposed and the total numbers are discussed below.

3.4.2 In addition to the above, ESCC non-residential car parking guidelines would indicate

the following approximate car parking provision for the non-residential units:

Unit 1 – 520 sqm B1 - @ 1 space/30 sqm = 18 spaces Unit 2 – @ 1 space/5 sqm public space + 1 space/2 staff = 16 spaces Unit 3 – @ 1 space/5 sqm public space + 1 space/2 staff = 16 spaces Unit 4 – 400 sqm B1 - @ 1 space/30 sqm = 15 spaces Total non-residential requirement = 65 spaces

3.4.3 The Masterplan shows that 18 spaces and 16 spaces are provided directly adjacent

to units 1 and 4 respectively, providing for the above guidelines. Plus, approximately

54 additional unallocated car parking spaces are proposed, located throughout the

site. The requirements for units 2 and 3 plus those for unallocated residential

parking equate to a requirement for a total of 57 car parking spaces. Therefore, the

proposed car parking falls only just short of recommended guideline figures. Given

that there are good opportunities for sharing of car parking spaces between

residential and commercial uses, with peak demands at differing times, the car

parking provision is demonstrated to be adequate.


21

3.4.4 The Neighbourhood Plan identifies residents views regarding car parking issues and

this was reiterated at the public consultation event for the development. The above

demonstrates that every effort has been made to ensure that car parking facilities at

the site are adequate yet appropriate within the constraints of this historic site.

3.4.5 The site Masterplan within Appendix F shows the currently proposed site layout and

car parking provision.

3.4.6 Cycle parking in accordance with ESCC guidelines will be provided with the

following being shown on the full Architects drawings submitted with the planning

application:

All residential houses would have a minimum provision of 2 secure, covered

cycle spaces, typically located internally within garages.

All residential flats would have minimum provision of 1.5 secure, covered

cycle spaces per flat, located adjacent to or within communal car parking

areas.

Retirement flats within the Mill would have a minimum provision of 1 secure,

covered cycle space per dwelling located communally but internally within the

building.

Unit 1 (Wealden Hall House) would have a minimum provision of 5 secure,

covered cycle spaces, located adjacent to or within communal car parking

areas.

Units 2, 3 and 4 would have provision of 16 covered and 16 non-covered

cycle parking spaces located immediately east and west of the Mill building

3.4.7 Additionally, the developer is committed to providing a Residential Travel Plan that

accompanies this Transport Statement and will identify further measures to

encourage the use of sustainable forms of transport at the site.

3.5 Turning facilities

3.5.1 A review of access and turning facilities for refuse vehicles at the site has been

undertaken and is shown on drawing number ITP 135 – 1 – 01 – P1. The vehicle

swept path analysis utilises the largest type of refuse vehicle that is utilised on

British Roads (Phoenix 2 Duo). It can be seen that the access arrangements allow

easy access for refuse vehicles and that the site turning heads are sufficient to

accommodate turning of refuse vehicles within the site.


22

4.0 TRIP GENERATION

4.1 Proposed use person trip generation

4.1.1 The NPPF requires developers and local planning authorities to place greater

emphasis on travel by sustainable modes of transport, and therefore the use of

modes such as walking, cycling and public transport should be promoted in priority to

car use.

4.1.2 The DfT’s ‘Guidance on Transport Assessment - 2007’ suggests that to quantify the

impact of a proposed development on the local transport system, the number of

person trips for all modes of transport that are likely to be generated by the

development should be calculated.

4.1.3 To determine the number of trips by all modes associated with the proposed

development the TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) Database version

7.2.3 was examined for all proposed site uses.

Proposed B1 employment use – Riverside Park and proposed use of Oast House

4.1.4 The following provides the trip generation calculations for the proposed planning use

class B1 employment use at Wealden Hall (Unit 1) and the proposed use of the Oast

House (Unit 4). The total floor area of both developments would be approximately

920 sqm.

4.1.5 For the proposed employment development, vehicle trip generation sites within the

‘employment – offices’ category of the database were examined. Sites within

England excluding central London were selected. Sites with weekend surveys were

de-selected.


of centre sites were selected. Sites with greater than 15,000 population within 1 mile

were de-selected to reflect the site location.



considered. On this basis, TRICS site reference ES-02-A-10 was selected and is a


23

office located in Hailsham, East Sussex. This site was the most comparable of all

sites near to the 85%ile ranking within TRICS for both AM and PM peak periods. It

was ranked as follows among the 3 sites:


morning peak hour first of 3 sites evening peak hour first of 3 sites

4.1.8 The vehicular trip rate for the above site was therefore utilised for the trips associated

with the proposed B1 employment use at Riverside Park and the proposed use of the

Oast House. The trips by mode were established using the same methodology as for

the existing development. The trip calculations by mode for the morning and evening

peak periods are provided in full in Appendix A and two-way trip numbers are

summarised in Table 5 below:


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 2 1

cyclist 0 0






2.391 1.758

Table 5 – proposed Unit 1 and 4, B1 employment two-way person trip generation

Proposed residential houses

4.1.9 The following provides the trip generation calculations for the proposed residential

houses. The total number of residential houses would be 62.

4.1.10 For the proposed residential dwellings vehicle trip generation, sites within the

‘residential – houses privately owned’ category of the database were examined.

Sites within England excluding central London were selected. Sites with weekend

surveys were de-selected.


24


of centre sites were selected. In view of the small number of survey sites it was not

possible to limit the total population within 1 mile and 4 selected sites remained.

However, the ultimately selected site had a population of 5,000 to 10,000 within 1

mile.



considered. On this basis, TRICS site reference LC-03-A-30 was selected and is a

residential development of 24 dwellings in Lancashire. This site was the most

comparable of all sites near to the 85%ile ranking within TRICS for both AM and PM

peak periods. It was ranked as follows among the 4 sites:


morning peak hour first of 4 sites evening peak hour second of 4 sites

4.1.13 The site is therefore an appropriate selection, and has been used to calculate the

vehicular and person trip generation for the proposed development. Full details of

the TRICS site selection and TRICS trip generation by mode are provided within

Appendix A.

4.1.14 To determine the modal share percentages for the proposed residential development

the modal splits calculated from travel to work data (resident population) from the

2011 Census for Robertsbridge has been utilised. The Census data and the

calculated 2011 Census modal share percentages are included in Appendix B and

summarised below.

mode of travel 2011 Census

pedestrian 7.5%

cyclist 0.5%

public transport 13.8

vehicle occupants (vehicle driver) 78.2% (73.6%)

total 100%

Table 6 – travel modal share proposed residential development


25

4.1.15 The above Census modal share percentages have been use to calculate the trips by

mode. This has been calculated as follows. The number of vehicular trips was first

established using the TRICS trip rate and the development quanta. The numbers of

person trips were then established by dividing the vehicular trips by the vehicle driver

modal share percentage. The numbers of trips by mode were then established by

applying the various Census modal share percentages for each mode to the total

person trips. The resulting person trip generation for the proposed houses is shown

on Table 7.


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 4 4

cyclist 0 0





Utilised vehicular trip rate/dwelling

0.625 0.625

Table 7 – proposed residential dwellings two-way person trip generation

Proposed residential flats

4.1.16 The following provides the trip generation calculations for the proposed residential

flats. The total number of residential flats would be 8.

4.1.17 For the proposed residential flats vehicle trip generation, sites within the ‘residential –

flats privately owned’ category of the database were examined. Sites within England

excluding central London were selected. Sites with weekend surveys were de-

selected.





26


mile.



considered. On this basis, TRICS site reference CH-03-C-01 was selected and is a

residential development of 60 residential flats in Cheshire. This site was the most




morning peak hour second of 8 sites evening peak hour second of 8 sites


with the proposed flats. The trips by mode were established using the same

methodology as for the proposed residential houses. The trip calculations by mode

for the morning and evening peak periods are provided in full in Appendix A and

two-way trip numbers are summarised in Table 8 below:


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 0 0

cyclist 0 0



vehicle drivers 3 3


Utilised vehicular trip rate/flat

0.367 0.384

4.1.21 Table 8 – proposed residential flats two-way person trip generation

Proposed retirement flats

4.1.22 The following provides the trip generation calculations for the proposed retirement

flats. The total number of flats would be 28.


27

4.1.23 For the proposed elderly persons retirement flats vehicle trip generation, sites within

the ‘residential – retirement flats’ category of the database were examined. Sites

within England excluding central London were selected. Sites with weekend surveys

were de-selected.





mile.



considered. On this basis, TRICS site reference CA-03-N-01 was selected and is a

development of 50 retirement flats in Cambridgeshire. This site was the most




morning peak hour third of 5 sites evening peak hour second of 5 sites


with the proposed retirement flats. The trips by mode were established using the

same methodology as for the proposed residential houses. The trip calculations by

mode for the morning and evening peak periods are provided in full in Appendix A

and two-way trip numbers are summarised in Table 9 below:


28


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 0 0

cyclist 0 0



vehicle drivers 2 4


Utilised vehicular trip rate/flat

0.080 0.140

4.1.27 Table 9 – proposed retirement flats two-way person trip generation

Proposed use of commercial Units 2 and 3

4.1.28 The above two units have proposed floor areas of 135 sqm and 145 sqm

respectively. The exact uses of these two units have yet to be determined at this

stage but it is expected that for planning purposes, the most likely use would be for

planning use class A3 cafés or restaurants.

Proposed use – Units 2 and 3 (A3 café/restaurant)

4.1.29 The following provides the trip generation calculations for the proposed A3 units.

The total floor area of both units would be 280 sqm.

4.1.30 There is no category within TRICS for cafés, therefore, for the proposed A3 vehicle

trip generation, sites within the ‘hotels, food and drink – restaurants’ category of the

database were examined. Sites within England excluding central London were

selected. Sites with weekend surveys were de-selected.




4.1.32 It was noted that there was wide variation in the data between the highest and lowest

trip rates and therefore utilisation of 85%ile trip rates would not provide accuracy.

Therefore, in this case average trip rates were utilised.


29

4.1.33 The average vehicular trip rate for the selected sites was therefore utilised for the

trips associated with the proposed restaurant. The trips by mode were established

using the same methodology as for the existing development. The trip calculations by

mode for the morning and evening peak periods are provided in full in Appendix A

and two-way trip numbers are summarised in Table 10 below:


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 0 1

cyclist 0 0



vehicle drivers 0 9



0.00 3.35

Table 10 – proposed A3 café/restaurant units two-way person trip generation

Total gross trip Generation – proposed development 4.1.34 The total gross trip generation of the development was established by adding

together the trips for all development elements within tables 5,7,8,9,10 and 11. The

gross trip generation for the development is shown on Table 11 below.


30


0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 6 5

cyclist 0 0





Table 11 – total gross two-way person trip generation

4.1.40 Based on the TRICS assessment and the established vehicular modal share, the

total development would lead to the following gross vehicular trip numbers:




4.2 Net trip generation

4.2.1 It could be expected that with a wide variety of development types proposed within

the development that some of the trips would be linked with other development on

the site or would be trips by local people already passing the site and therefore not

making a special trip. To take some account of this, the gross trip numbers have

been reduced by 10% to provide a net trip generation. This would typically be

considered a conservative estimate and therefore is a robust assumption. The

resulting net trip generation for the development is provided below.


31

mode of travel morning peak

hour (0800 – 0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 3 3

cyclist 0 0





Table 12 – total net two-way person trip generation

4.2.2 Based on the above, the development would lead to the following net vehicular trips:




Proposed development total net vehicular trips

4.2.3 However, the above takes no account of the trips that would have been generated by

the existing permitted use of the site if it were to be brought back into use. Therefore

to establish the potential increase in trips over and above the existing permitted use

of the site the total existing trips by mode established within Section 2 have been

subtracted from the trips within Table 12. The resulting increase in trips as a result of

the development is shown in Table 13 below:


32

mode of travel morning peak

hour (0800 – 0900 hrs)


1800 hrs)

pedestrian 3 4

cyclist 0 0





Table 13 – total increase in two-way person trip generation resulting from development

Based on the above, the development would lead to the following increases in

vehicular trips as a result of the development:




Proposed development increase in vehicular trips

4.2.4 The above table demonstrates that the development proposals would result in

modest increases in vehicular trips in both the morning and evening peak periods,

compared to the existing permitted use. The maximum increase in two-way vehicular

trips would be 41 vehicles or well under 1 vehicle per minute in the evening peak

period. Further consideration of the traffic impact of the development is provided in

Section 8.0.


33

5 OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUSTAINABLE TRAVEL 5.1 Introduction 5.1.1 The NPPF requires developers and local planning authorities to place greater

emphasis on travel by sustainable modes of transport. This means that unnecessary

use of the private car should be discouraged, and the use of other modes such as

walking, cycling and public transport should be promoted to a greater degree.

5.1.2 Section 2 of this report details the existing opportunities for accessing the site by

walking, cycling and public transport and identifies the existing infrastructure that

would support the proposed development.

5.1.3 Section 4 of this report determined the person trip demand that would be generated

by the proposed development.

5.1.4 It was demonstrated in Section 2.0 that the site is accessible to pedestrians and

cyclists, and there are opportunities for travel by these modes to access a range of

facilities in the local area. Regular bus services are also available connecting to the

wider area and regular rail services are available from nearby Robertsbridge Station,

serving a variety of destinations. As such, the site is accessible by a variety of

sustainable forms of transport, in accordance with Rother District Core Strategy

(RDCS) RA1 and TR3 policy.

5.1.5 The development would provide local employment opportunities, as recommended

for Robertsbridge within (RDCS). As such, this would further reduce the need to

travel by car and offer the opportunity for linked trips with residential and other

development within the site and local area.

5.2 Opportunities for pedestrian based journeys 5.2.1 Table 13 indicates that the proposed development would result in maximum

increases of three pedestrian journeys during a single peak hour.

5.2.2 Section 2.0 of this report details the existing opportunities to travel to and from the

site on foot and concludes that the site is accessible to pedestrians and that there are

good opportunities for residents to walk to Robertsbridge, nearby residential areas


34

and local facilities. There are existing pedestrian footways on Northbridge Street that

would link to those within the site.

5.2.3 The small numbers of pedestrian movements predicted as a result of the

development would have no significant adverse impact on the existing infrastructure.

5.2.4 Within the site, traffic volumes and speeds will be low and the proposed site layout

has been designed as a low speed pedestrian and cycle friendly design with footway

provision throughout. Two footways of approximate width 2.0 metres would be

provided around the new kerb radii to connect between the footways within the site

and the existing footways on Northbridge Street

5.3 Opportunities for cycle based journeys

5.3.1 Table 13 indicates that the proposed development would generate no additional

cycle trips during a typical peak hour period. Section 2 of this report details the

existing opportunities to travel to and from the site by cycle and concludes that

reasonable cycle infrastructure is available to accommodate cycle movements

between the site and the surrounding areas.

5.3.2 In order to further encourage cycling, cycle parking would be provided within the site

in accordance with ESCC guidelines, as set out within Section 3.0

5.3.3 As well as the provision of cycle parking, the internal layout of the proposed

development has been designed with a low speed environment with good cycle

connectivity. This would encourage cyclist movements throughout the site and hence

onto the surrounding highway network. In addition, the architects Masterplan has

been designed to maximise the potential for additional pedestrian and cycle

connections to adjoining land to the north and west, such that it is possible for future

routes to link through the site. The connections shown on the Masterplan are

indicative at this stage.

5.3.4 However, the number of cyclist movements associated with the development would

be satisfactorily accommodated within the existing cycle and highway infrastructure.

Hence, no off-site improvements should be required.


35

5.4 Opportunities for public transport based journeys

5.4.1 Table 13 indicates that the proposed development would generate a maximum

increase of six two-way public transport trips during a single peak hour period. As

described in Section 2, the site is located within short walking distance of, regular bus

services on Northbridge Street which connect to the wider area.

5.4.2 As also described in Section 2, the site is located approximately 900 metres from

Robertsbridge train station which provide numerous rail services connecting to the

wider area and in particular London, Tunbridge Wells and Sevenoaks. There are

therefore good opportunities for rail based trips.

5.4.3 The above paragraphs demonstrate that the number of additional public transport

trips generated by the proposed development would therefore be satisfactorily

accommodated by the existing public transport infrastructure.


36

6.0 TRIP DISTRIBUTION & ASSIGNMENT 6.1 Traffic distribution

6.1.1 To establish the distribution of the ‘permitted’ and proposed vehicular development

traffic, reference was made to 2011 Census travel to work origin and destination

statistics for the Robertsbridge ward. All vehicular travel between Robertsbridge and

locations within the southeast region including London was analysed. The results of

analysis of the Census data are provided within Appendix H.

6.1.2 The final columns of the table in Appendix H show the distribution of Census trips

between the main vehicular routes connecting to Robertsbridge. The distribution is

based on the fastest route predicted by google maps for travel commencing at 8.00

am. Where two alternative routes are specified the distribution has been split 50/50

between the routes. The resulting trip distribution is shown on Figure 9.

6.2 Permitted use vehicle traffic assignment

6.2.1 The permitted use traffic assignment has been established by applying the traffic

distribution identified in Figure 9 to the traffic generation for the existing

development detailed in Section 2.2. The resulting traffic flows assigned to the local

highway network, are shown on Figures 10 and 11 for the morning and evening

peak periods respectively.

6.3 Proposed use vehicle traffic assignment

6.3.1 The proposed use traffic assignment has been established by applying the traffic

distribution identified in Figure 9 to the gross traffic generation for the proposed

development detailed in Section 4. The resulting traffic flows assigned to the local

highway network, are shown on Figures 12 and 13 for the morning and evening

peak periods respectively.

6.3.2 During TA scoping discussions with ESCC, the trip generation reductions applied in

Section 4.0 to allow for linked and pass-by trips were not accepted by ESCC.

Therefore, for robustness the gross development trips have been utilised for the

proposed development traffic assignment. The gross development trips also take no


37

account of reductions in traffic that are likely as a result of the provision of the site

wide Travel Plan Framework that is submitted alongside this TA which would further

reduce the trip numbers.

6.3.3 It is still maintained that the assumptions for linked and pass-by trips stated in

Section 4.0 are reasonable. Therefore, since no account is taken of linked and

pass-by trips or reductions as a result of the Travel Plan Framework in the proposed

development trip assignment, the actual trip numbers are expected to be in the

region of 20% lower than those shown on Figures 12 and 13. The traffic

assessment will therefore provide a very high level of robustness.


38

7.0 ASSESSMENT YEAR AND BACKGROUND TRAFFIC 7.1 Assessment year and background traffic

7.1.1 The ‘Guidance on Transport Assessment’ [DfT, 2007] states that the assessment

year should be five years after the registration of the planning application. However,

some development traffic will join the A21 Trunk Road which lies to the east of the

site which falls under control of Highways England. Advice within Highways England

document ‘The Strategic Road Network – Planning for the Future 2015’ provides

guidance for future year traffic assessments. The guidance states, future year traffic

assessments at year of opening plus either ten years post year of opening or end of

local plan period are required.

7.1.2 The Local Plan Core Strategy (2014) for Rother District assessment period is until

2028. The likely year of opening of the development is 2018 and therefore traffic

flows figures have been calculated for both 2018 and 2028. To establish 2018 and

2028 base traffic flows traffic growth factors have been established from the

Government TEMPRO (Trip End Model Presentation Program) version 6.2 including

NTM (National Transport Model) growth factors. Details of the analysis are provided

in Appendix I, however, the following traffic growth factors have been applied to

2016 surveyed traffic flows to establish future year base traffic flows:

2016 to 2018 traffic growth factor 1.028

2016 to 2028 traffic growth factor 1.172

The resulting base flows for the 2018 and 2028 morning and evening peak periods

are shown on Figures 14 to 17.

7.1.3 The base traffic flows do not include the traffic that would be generated if the site

was brought back into use as permitted and set out within Section 2. Therefore,

‘base plus permitted development’ traffic flows have been calculated for 2018 and

2028 assessment years. The ‘permitted development’ traffic flows shown on

Figures 10 and 11, have been added to the base traffic flows on Figures 14 to 17 to

provide the ‘base plus permitted traffic flows on Figures 18 to 21 for the 2018 and

2028 morning and evening peak periods.


39

7.1.4 Furthermore, the ‘proposed development’ traffic flows shown on Figures 12 and 13,

have been added to the base traffic flows on Figures 14 to 17 to provide the ‘total

traffic’ flows on Figures 22 to 25 for the 2016 and 2028 morning and evening peak

periods. These represent the most robust traffic assessment flows, without any

reductions for linked, pass-by or sustainable trips resulting from the Travel Plan

Framework. (See Section 6.0).


40

8 HIGHWAY IMPACT 8.1 Introduction

8.1.1 Highway impact analysis has been carried out at the following junctions on the

highway network in the vicinity of the site:

Proposed site access/Northbridge Street junction

Northbridge Street/A21 junction/Church Lane junction

8.1.2 No capacity assessment was carried out at Station Road/The Clappers/George Hill

or A21/George Hill junctions since the traffic assignment showed extremely low

numbers of additional trips at these junctions and therefore further assessment is not

warranted.

8.1.3 Both junctions assessed were predicted to operate well within capacity using 2028

‘total’ traffic flows and there was no need, therefore, to assess alternative scenarios

which all have less traffic movements.

8.1.4 The capacity analysis was undertaken with industry standard Transport Research

Laboratory (TRL) junction capacity analysis software. This included PICADY for the

site access/Northbridge Street and ARCADY for Northbridge Street/A21 junctions.

Site access/Northbridge Street

8.1.5 The proposed site access/Northbridge Street junction would be a priority controlled

ghost island T-junction, as shown on drawing number ITP 135-1-01-P1.

Consequently, the computer program PICADY9.0 was used to analyse the junction.

A review of the various traffic flow figures showed that the highest traffic flows at the

junction would occur using the 2028 ‘total traffic’ scenarios, consequently only this

analysis was undertaken. Table 14 shows a summary of the results. Full PICADY

results along with PICADY inputs for all modelled scenarios are provided in

Appendix J.


41

8.1.6 PICADY predicts that the junction should operate well within capacity during both the

morning and evening peak hours for the 2028 ‘total traffic’ scenario. The movement

with the least spare capacity would be the left and right turn from the site access

during the 2028 evening peak hour. This would operate with a ratio of flow to

capacity (RFC) of 0.1 (i.e 10% of capacity), with a maximum queue of less than one

vehicle and an average maximum delay of 6 seconds per vehicle. The junction is

predicted to operate with a network residual capacity of a minimum of 439%. Hence,

it is considered that the proposed junction would adequately serve the proposed

development.

Northbridge Street/A21/Church Lane junction

8.1.7 The Harrow Lane/Little Ridge Avenue junction is a roundabout junction.

Consequently, the computer program ARCADY9.0 was used to analyse the junction.

The model was first assessed using 2016 surveyed traffic flows to establish any

problems with the model. No problems were encountered.

8.1.8 A review of the various traffic flow figures showed that the highest traffic flows at the

junction would occur using the 2028 total traffic scenario, consequently this analysis

was undertaken. Table 15 shows a summary of the ARCADY results. Full ARCADY

results for all modelled scenarios, along with ARCADY inputs, are provided in

Appendix J. .

RFC 0.06 0.05AM peak max queue (veh) 0.10 0.10

av delay (secs/veh) 6.04 5.94 RFC 0.07 0.05PM peak max queue (veh) 0.1 0.1

av delay (secs/veh) 5.99 5.78

2028 total traffic

TABLE 14 SITE ACCESS/NORTHBRIDGE ST - SUMMARY OF PICADY RESULTS

439.0%

487.0%

network residual capacity

scenario period parameter site access left and right

Northbridge St right turn


42

8.1.9 ARCADY predicts that the junction should operate well within capacity during both

the morning and evening peak hours for 2016 surveyed and 2028 total traffic

scenarios. The arm with the least spare capacity would be A21 North with the 2028

evening peak hour ‘total traffic’ scenario. This would operate with a ratio of flow to

capacity (RFC) of 0.63 (i.e 63% of capacity), with a maximum queue of less than two

vehicles and an average maximum delay of 6 seconds per vehicle. The junction is

predicted to operate with a network residual capacity of 48%. Hence, it is considered

that the junction would operate satisfactorily.

RFC 0.05 0.42 0.15 0.36AM peak max queue (veh) 0.10 0.70 0.20 0.60

av delay (secs/veh) 2.95 3.74 4.15 3.39 RFC 0.04 0.29 0.09 0.52PM peak max queue (veh) 0.0 0.4 0.1 1.1

av delay (secs/veh) 3.48 3.01 3.25 4.18 RFC 0.06 0.50 0.22 0.43AM peak max queue (veh) 0.10 1.00 0.30 0.80

av delay (secs/veh) 3.24 4.44 4.86 3.89 RFC 0.06 0.35 0.14 0.63PM peak max queue (veh) 0.1 0.5 0.2 1.7

av delay (secs/veh) 4.02 3.33 3.59 5.44

TABLE 15 NORTHBRIDGE ST/A21/CHURCH LANE - SUMMARY OF ARCADY RESULTS

Northbridge St

network residual capacity

2016 surveyed

traffic

116.0%

78.0%

2028 total traffic

80.0%

48.0%

scenario period parameter Church Lane A21 S A21 N


43

9 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

9.1 Inspire Transport Planning was commissioned by Hodson’s Mill Ltd to provide

transport and highways advice on a proposed mixed use development at Hodson’s

Mill, Northbridge Street, Robertsbridge. The proposed development would provide

the following:

520 sqm B1 office accommodation – Unit 1



400 sqm B1 office accommodation – Oast House –Unit 4

62 residential houses

8 residential flats

28 retirement flats

Plus, associated road and drainage infrastructure, open space, strategic

landscaping, and other green infrastructure (including SuDs and areas for nature

conservation).

9.2 The site will bring back into use existing unused historic buildings, will provide local

employment and residential development whilst, due to the location and mix of uses,

minimising the need to travel by car. As such, it has been demonstrated that the

proposed development complies with current transport and planning policy.

9.3 The site is easily accessible to pedestrians and cyclists, and there are good

opportunities for travel by these modes to access the facilities in the local area.

Regular bus services are also available connecting to the wider area and regular rail

services are available from nearby Robertsbridge Station, serving a variety of

destinations.

9.4 Analysis of Personal Injury Accidents (PIA’s) on the local highway network was

undertaken for the last five years of available data. There was no pattern or

predominance of accidents on the surrounding highway network that should be

addressed as a result of the development proposals.

9.5 The TA demonstrates that adequate car and cycle parking facilities are proposed

when assessed against ESCC guidelines and accounting for the mixed use nature of

the scheme.


44

9.6 The demand for journeys by each mode of transport as a result of the proposed

development was assessed and compared with the existing infrastructure. It is

concluded that the existing sustainable transport infrastructure and public transport

services are sufficient to accommodate the sustainable trips that would be created by

the development.

9.7 After accounting for the permitted use of the site, the development would result in

increases in traffic of a maximum of forty one two-way vehicular trips in the evening

peak period which would only have a minor impact on the local area.

9.8 The proposed Northbridge St/site access junction would operate well within capacity

during both the morning and evening peak hours for all modelled scenarios. Hence, it

is considered that the proposed junction would adequately serve the proposed

development.

9.9 The A21/Northbridge Street/Chuch Lane junction would also operate well within

capacity during both the morning and evening peak hours for all modelled scenarios.

The junction is predicted to operate with a minimum network residual capacity of

48%. Hence, it is considered that the junction would operate satisfactorily.

9.10 It is proposed that the development would provide the following:

Revised access arrangements to keep vehicular speeds low, allow safe and

easy crossing for pedestrians and cyclists and permitting ease of turning for

service vehicles.

As part of the access design, two footways of width 2 metres to connect

between the site and the existing footways on Northbridge Street.

A low speed environment within the site and access roads designed with

separate footways.

Good pedestrian and cycle connections from the site to public footpaths and

potentially to land to the north and west of the site.

9.11 The above provision is shown to be satisfactory to provide for safe access to the

development and to mitigate for the potential effect of the development on local

infrastructure, in accordance with the NPPF. As a result, it is concluded that the


45

proposed development should be acceptable to the relevant local authorities in

highways and transportation terms.

Drawings

Figures

General site location

Project name:

Title:

Drawn:

Auth’d:

Checked:

Date:

Scale:

Drg. No:

AS 13-01-2015

AJS

AJS

FIGURE 1

Project No:

SEE ABOVE

HODSON’S MILL, ROBERTSBRIDGE ITP135-1

N

site

Detailed site location

Project name:

Title:

Drawn:

Auth’d:

Checked:

Date:

Scale:

Drg. No:

AS 27-01-2017

AS

CM

FIGURE 2

Project No:

SEE ABOVE


N

site

0

0533

696

87 5 63 469 117 1 7 60 0

146 11 38 3

146 146 142 3989 89 89 56

13 122 0

89 7 4 596 21 21 00 48 0

52890

621146

93 7 53 376 2

64 8

157191

138 539 4

101

1910 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0

Checked: AJS Drg No: FIGURE 3

HODSON'S MILL, ROBERTSBRIDGE Project No: ITP 135-1

Title: 2016 survey traffic - morning peak hour

Drawn: AS Date: 11.02.16

two-way 0

Project Name:

total vehicles 0 0 0

heavy vehs 0

0 0

time period 0800 - 0900

0 0

292

95

236

1149

348

1229

235 235 231

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd

Ladypool Road (south)

Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

0

0864

460

37 1 78 772 1417 0 3 19 1

111 3 45 0

111 111 99 5496 96 96 40

14 111 0

96 3 7 409 23 15 00 25 0

832114

439111

68 1 73 412 1

83 2

151136

63 430 2

124

1060 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2016 survey traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

230

94

225

1271

287

1324

207 207 195

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

Indicative walking catchment area

Project name:

Title:

Drawn:

Auth’d:

Checked:

Date:

Scale:

Drg. No:

AS 13-01-2015

AJS

AJS

FIGURE 5

Project No:

SEE ABOVE


N

2 kilometres Pedestrian catchment

site

Indicative cyclist catchment area

Project name:

Title:

Drawn:

Auth’d:

Checked:

Date:

Scale:

Drg. No:

AS 13-01-2015

AS

CM

FIGURE 6

Project No:

SEE ABOVE

`` site


N

5 kilometres cycle

catchment

Local cycle routes and facilities

Project name:

Title:

Drawn:

Auth’d:

Checked:

Date:

Scale:

Drg. No:

AS 13-01-2015

AJS

AJS

FIGURE 7

Project No:

SEE ABOVE

site


N

Key Cycle lane Signed only Recommended route Easy off road route

Local bus routes

Project name:

Title:

Drawn:

Auth’d:

Checked:

Date:

Scale:

Drg. No:

AS 13-01-2015

AS

CM

FIGURE 8

Project No:

NTS

site


100%

100%56%

56%26% 74%26% 74%

56% 56% 56% 0% 0%26% 26% 4% 4% 56% 0% 0%0% 0% 14% 14%

26% 74% 74% 4%26% 74% 74% 4%

0% 0%74% 74% 4% 4%0% 0% 14% 0% 0% 0% 0%

14% 0% 0%

14%26%

14%26%

12% 12% 12% 14%0% 0%

0% 0%

12%12%

0% 14%0% 14%

14%

14%0 14%

0 14%

0% 0% 0% 14%0% 14%

14% 14%

0 14%0 14%

14% 14%14% 14%

0 28%

0 28%


HODSONS MILL, ROBERTSBRIDGE Project No: ITP 135-1

Title: TRIP DISTRIBUTION

Drawn: AS Date: 22/01/2016

two-way 0

Project Name:

total vehicles 0 0

heavy vehs 0

0

time period

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

3

1710

21 2

2 10 0 04 00 0

4 2 2 01 13 13 1

013 10 2 0 0 0

01

24

2 0 0

0

20

0 2

0

20 0

0 0

0 0 0

0

0 00 2

2 0

0 1

0 2


HODSON'S MILL, ROBERTSBRIDGE Project No: ITP135

Title: AM PEAK ASSIGNED 'PERMITTED' DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

Drawn: AS Date: 22/01/2016

two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 3


0 0

3

1

5

3

2

11

5 15 15

20

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

20

42

115 15

11 2 0 01 10 3

1 15 15 15 3 3 0

03 00 1 0 0 0

35

11

0 2 3

0

02

0 1

3

10 3

0 0

0 0 3

3

0 30 1

1 0

0 6

0 1



Title: PM PEAK ASSIGNED 'PERMITTED' DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

AS Date: 22/01/2016

two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 3


0 3

3

1

6

3

3

14

6 18 18

24

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

32

3520

188 24

18 20 0 09 10 5

9 24 24 18 26 26 1

026 10 5 0 0 0

58

59

4 4 5

0

44

0 5

5

50 5

0 0

0 0 5

5

0 50 5

5 0

0 9

0 5



Title: AM PEAK ASSIGNED PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 9


0 5

9

2

17

10

8

38

17 50 50

67

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

38

3419

2110 28

21 19 0 09 10 5

9 28 28 110 25 25 1

025 10 5 0 0 0

510

59

4 4 5

0

44

0 5

5

50 5

0 0

0 0 5

5

0 50 5

5 0

0 11

0 5



Title: PM PEAK ASSIGNED PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

AS Date: 17/01/2017

two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 10


0 5

10

3

19

10

8

41

19 53 53

72

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

0

0548

715

89 5 65 482 117 1 7 62 0

150 11 39 3

150 150 146 4091 91 91 58

13 123 0

91 7 4 612 22 22 00 49 0

54392

638150

96 7 54 386 2

66 8

161196

142 549 4

104

1960 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2018 base traffic - morning peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

300

98

243

1181

358

1263

241 241 237

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

0

0888

473

38 1 80 793 1417 0 3 20 1

114 3 46 0

114 114 102 5599 99 99 41

14 111 0

99 3 7 420 24 15 00 26 0

855117

45170

70 1 75 422 1

85 2

155140

65 440 2

127

1090 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2018 base traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Npme:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

236

97

187

1306

295

1361

213 213 200

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

0

0625

816

102 6 74 550 120 1 8 70 0

171 13 45 4

171 171 166 46104 104 104 66

15 126 0

104 8 5 698 25 25 00 56 0

619105

728171

109 8 62 437 2

75 9

184224

162 6211 5

118

2240 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2028 base traffic - morning peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

342

111

277

1346

408

1440

275 275 271

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

0

01012

539

43 1 91 905 1620 0 4 22 1

130 4 53 0

130 130 116 63112 112 112 47

16 113 0

112 4 8 479 27 18 00 29 0

975134

51480

80 1 86 482 1

97 2

177159

74 500 2

145

1240 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2028 base traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Npme:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

270

110

213

1489

336

1551

243 243 228

0

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

3

17557

7171 20 0

91 5 74 482 14 0 18 1 7 62 0

150 11 39 3

154 152 148 4092 104 104 58

13 113 0 23 091 7 7 612 22 22 0

0 49 0

54393

641154

98 7 55 386 2

66 8

163197

142 579 4

104

1990 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2018 base plus permitted traffic - morning peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

303

98

248

1184

360

1274

247 256 252

20

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

20

4890

4845 150 0

49 1 82 793 141 0 18 0 3 20 1

114 3 49 0

115 129 117 56104 102 102 41

14 13 0 11 0

99 3 8 420 24 15 00 26 0

858122

45270

70 1 77 452 1

85 2

156142

65 450 2

130

1090 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2018 base plus permitted traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Npme:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

240

97

193

1310

298

1374

219 231 218

24

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

3

17634

8171 20 0

104 6 83 550 14 0 20 1 8 70 0

171 13 45 4

175 173 169 46105 117 117 66

15 113 0 26 0

104 8 7 698 25 25 00 56 0

619106

730175

111 8 62 440 0 7 2

75 9

186224

162 6411 5

119

2260 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2028 base plus permitted traffic - morning peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

345

112

282

1349

410

1451

281 290 286

20

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

20

41015

5505 150 0

55 1 94 905 161 0 21 0 4 22 1

130 4 56 0

131 145 131 64118 115 115 47

16 13 0 13 0

112 4 9 479 27 18 00 29 0

978139

51580

80 1 88 512 1

97 2

177162

74 510 2

148

1250 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2028 base plus permitted traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Npme:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

273

111

219

1493

339

1565

249 260 246

24

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

32

35567

7338 240 0

107 5 84 482 19 0 19 1 7 62 0

150 11 44 3

159 174 170 41100 117 117 59

13 126 0 24 091 7 9 612 22 22 0

0 49 0

547101

643159

100 7 58 436 2

66 8

165200

142 599 4

108

2010 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2018 total traffic - morning peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

310

100

260

1190

365

1301

259 291 287

67

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

38

34907

49410 280 0

59 1 99 793 149 0 19 0 3 20 1

114 3 52 0

123 142 130 57108 124 124 42

14 125 0 13 099 3 12 420 24 15 0

0 26 0

860127

45674

74 1 79 472 1

85 2

159144

65 490 2

133

1140 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2018 total traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Npme:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

246

99

201

1316

303

1401

231 266 254

72

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

32

35644

8348 240 0

120 6 94 550 19 0 21 1 8 70 0

171 13 49 4

180 195 190 47113 130 130 67

15 126 0 27 0

104 8 10 698 25 25 00 56 0

623114

733180

113 8 66 480 0 7 2

75 9

188228

162 6711 5

123

2290 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2028 total traffic - morning peak hour


two-way 0

Project Name:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

352

114

294

1356

416

1478

293 325 320

67

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

38

341032

56010 280 0

65 1 111 905 169 0 21 0 4 22 1

130 4 58 0

139 158 144 65122 138 138 48

16 125 0 14 0

112 4 13 479 27 18 00 29 0

980143

51984

84 1 90 532 1

97 2

181164

74 550 2

151

1290 0

0 0

0 00 0

0 0

0 0



Title: 2028 total traffic - evening peak hour


two-way 0

Project Npme:


heavy vehs 0

0 0


0 0

280

113

227

1500

345

1592

261 296 282

72

N

George Hill

A21 N

A21 S

Station Rd


Church Ln

Northbridge St

A21 S

Northbridge St

Site access

The Clappers

George Hill

www.inspiretransport.co.uk

tel: 01737 457170

email: [email protected]

itp 135-1 ta rev 2

Documents