Nutfield Road, Redhill - Reigate and Banstead · transport services and policies”. This will include “ improving the reliability, quality and safety of inter-regional rail links

GALLAGHER ESTATES FORMER COPYHOLD WORKS A25 NUTFIELD ROAD, REDHILL TRANSPORT TECHNICAL REPORT JANUARY 2018

GALLAGHER ESTATES FORMER COPYHOLD WORKS A25 NUTFIELD ROAD, REDHILL TRANSPORT TECHNICAL REPORT JANUARY 2018

Project Code: X/GENutfieldRd2.1

Prepared by: HI

Approved by: JL

Issue Date: January 2018

Status: Version 05

Mayer Brown Limited, ZELLIG 313, The Custard Factory, Birmingham B9 4AU Telephone 0121 224 7630 [email protected] www.mayerbrown.co.uk

Gallagher Estates Former Copyhold Works

A25 Nutfield Road, Redhill Transport Technical Report

List of Contents

Sections 1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1

2 Planning policy .................................................................................................. 2

3 Traffic data ........................................................................................................ 5

4 Site accessibility ................................................................................................ 7

5 Development proposals ..................................................................................... 9

6 Trip generation, distribution & impact .............................................................. 11

7 Summary and conclusions .............................................................................. 15

Figures

Figure 4.1: Plan showing local facilities ...................................................................... 7

Tables Table 3.1: Traffic flows (9th January 2018) .................................................................. 5

Table 3.2: Speed survey results on A25 Nutfield Road – western entrance ................ 5

Table 3.3: Speed survey results on A25 Nutfield Road – eastern entrance ................ 5

Table 4.1: Bus services on A25 Nutfield Road ............................................................ 8

Table 6.1: Trip generation for residential development of 300 dwellings ................... 11

Table 6.2: Trip generation for 210 residential units ................................................... 12

Table 6.3: Trip generation for two-form entry primary school .................................... 12

Table 6.4: Trip generation for 210 dwellings and two-form entry primary school ....... 13

Appendices APPENDIX A: Preliminary access plans

APPENDIX B: TRICS data

APPENDIX C: Census Travel to Work data

Gallagher Estates Former Copyhold Works, A25 Nutfield Road, Redhill Transport Technical Report

Page 1

1 Introduction

1.1 Mayer Brown has been appointed by Gallagher Estates to provide a review of transport

matters in relation to the proposed residential development at the Former Copyhold

Works, located to the north of A25 Nutfield Road and east of Redhill.

1.2 The land is proposed to be allocated by Reigate and Banstead Borough Council in it's

Development Management Plan (DMP). Details of the relevant policy are set out in

Chapter 2 of this report.

1.3 The site is identified as ERM2/ERM3, with capacity for new housing development

comprising approximately 210 residential units and may include a new two-form entry

primary school for children from this development and other surrounding areas and new

housing schemes. Vehicular access would be taken directly from the A25 Nutfield Road.

1.4 Without the inclusion of a primary school, the site is being promoted on the basis of

accommodating approximately 300 dwellings.

1.1 An area of land located to the south of the A25 Nutfield Road and site is also proposed

to be allocated in the DMP; this site is identified as ERM1 “Land at Hillsbrow, Redhill”.

The estimated capacity of the site is 113-226 dwellings.

1.2 An indicative site layout plan included within The Urban Extensions Technical Report

(June 2016) for ERM1 indicates a western access opposite the existing western entrance

to the Former Copyhold site, and an eastern access a short distance from the existing

eastern junction to the Copyhold land.

1.3 This report sets out a summary of the key transport elements in relation to the site

(ERM2/ERM3), including accessibility, as well as a preliminary assessment of potential

traffic generation and distribution. Initial traffic surveys have been undertaken near the

site entrances and these have been used to inform the design of access junctions.


Page 2

2 Planning policy

2.1 The development land forms part of site references ERM2 “Land west of Copyhold

Works” and ERM3 “Former Copyhold Works” within Reigate and Banstead Borough

Council’s Development Management Plan Regulation 19 Evidence Base, with the two

sites combined into one (ERM2/ERM3) within the Development Management Plan.

DMP: Sustainable Urban Extensions (Stage 2) Site Specific Technical Report

2.2 Within Annex 3 of the Sustainable Urban Extensions Technical Report (June 2016),

various points are noted in relation to the site:

• Change in levels – approximately 1:12 to 1:14 fall across the site from south to north;

• Public footpath along western edge of parcel, giving access to The Moors at the

north – will need to be safeguarded;

• Excellent proximity and accessibility to Redhill town centre;

• Improvements required to footway and bus infrastructure on Nutfield Road;

• Need to manage and/or minimise traffic effects on rural and minor roads such as

Cormongers Lane; and

• Coordinate access onto A25 with other sites in the locality.

DMP: Sustainability Appraisal Report

2.3 The Sustainability Appraisal Report (October 2017) includes a review of the site.

2.4 Objective 2 in relation to improved health and wellbeing receives a ‘+’ rating, indicating

that “this is expected to have a positive impact on achieving the sustainability objective”,

due to the site being within walking distance of the town centre and railway station, as

well as other open spaces.

2.5 It is agreed that the location of the site, in relation to the town centre, rail station and

leisure opportunities, would result in a high proportion of residents using these local

facilities and accessing them by walking and cycling.

2.6 Objective 4 refers to reducing the need to travel and encouraging sustainable transport

and also receives a ‘+’ rating. The report notes that the two sites are between 1km and

1.2km from the town centre and train station, with a number of bus routes running along

the southern boundary via the A25. The site is described as being “in a fairly sustainable

location and will be unlikely to significantly increase traffic or reduce accessibility”. The

report notes that the pedestrian facilities on the A25 would need to be improved and that

pedestrian and cycle linkages should be incorporated.


Page 3

2.7 It is agreed that the site is located in close proximity to Redhill town centre and train

station. Furthermore, an existing access located within the northwest area of the site

puts the site within approximately 450m and 600m walking/cycling distance of Redhill

station and the town centre respectively. The site is also within reasonable walk and

cycle distances of various key local amenities, including retail, education and healthcare

opportunities. With the implementation of measures to assist and encourage the use of

non-car modes of transport, the development will present an overall positive impact on

achieving the sustainability objective. Therefore, an overall score of ‘+’ is appropriate.

DMP: Strategic Highway Assessment Report

2.8 The Strategic Highway Assessment Report (SHAR) sets out a summary of Surrey

County Council’s area-wide modelling, using their strategic traffic model called

SINTRAM, to test the impact of proposed development across the highway network.

Sites ERM1, ERM2 and ERM3 have been included as a new zone within this model to

assess their impacts, as well as other developments across the borough, which have

also formed the basis of new zones.

2.9 The modelling indicates ‘hotspots’ (i.e. sections of highway and junctions which would

experience delay), which may require mitigation to facilitate development. However, it

is identified that the cumulative impact is not substantial and therefore it is likely that any

local improvements could be addressed through a combination of hard and soft

measures identified through the planning process.

2.10 Whilst a proportion of traffic associated with the development of ERM2/ERM3 may route

through the identified ‘hotspots’, in consideration of the scale of development and the

sustainable attributes of the site, vehicle trip generation will be relatively low (as

demonstrated in Chapter 6 of this report). Therefore, the impact on ‘hotspots’ will

inevitably be low.

DMP: Infrastructure Delivery Plan

2.11 The Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP), in respect of transport, is based on the findings

of the SHAR.

2.12 The IDP does not identify any improvement schemes along the local highway network in

Redhill, despite the SHAR identifying ‘hotspots’, and repeats the findings and

recommendations of the SHAR (i.e. local improvements could be addressed through a

combination of hard and soft measures identified through the planning process).


Page 4

2.13 Furthermore, an emphasis is placed on ensuring development is situated in accessible

locations and measures are incorporated to assist and encourage the use of non-car

modes.

2.14 Annex 1 of the IDP identifies a scheme (BT5), which comprises Extension to the bus

service and new bus infrastructure / passenger facilities on Nutfield Road, Redhill as

requirement to support development of the land at Hillsbrow site, Redhill (Site Allocation

Policy ERM1), and Land west of Copyhold Works and Former Copyhold Works (Site

Allocation Policy ERM2 / ERM3). The cost of the scheme is estimated at £25,000 and to

be funded by developers and it is identified that the scheme is to be delivered in advance

of development occupation.

2.15 The Transport Assessment produced to accompany a future planning application in

respect of development at the site would consider the need for an extension of a bus

service and new bus infrastructure. However, the improvement of local public transport

services and infrastructure will inevitably encourage future residents to use public

transport.

London Plan

2.16 The London Plan’s Policy 6.4 focuses on enhancing London’s transport connectivity, by

working with strategic partners in neighbouring regions to “ensure effective transport

policy and projects to support the sustainable development of the London city region and

the wider south east of England” and “develop efficient and effective cross-boundary

transport services and policies”. This will include “improving the reliability, quality and

safety of inter-regional rail links including domestic services for commuters”. This may

include the route towards Redhill, from where up to 25% of local commuters travel by rail

(calculated using method of travel to work census data for the output area within which

the site is located).


Page 5

3 Traffic data

3.1 A Department for Transport traffic survey point is located around 1km to the east of the

site, to the east of Cormongers Lane. This indicates that annual average daily traffic

(AADT) in 2016 was 12,048 vehicles.

3.2 An initial traffic survey was undertaken by Mayer Brown at the site entrance on Tuesday

9th January 2018 to determine peak hour levels of traffic and HGV proportions for the

hours of 08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00. A summary of total vehicle flows and HGV

percentages is shown in Table 3.1.

Time Westbound Eastbound Two-way AM Peak (08:00-09:00) 775 (6.1%) 457 (6.5%) 1,232 (6.1%) PM Peak (17:00-18:00) 461 (4.6%) 697 (2%) 1,158 (3%)

Table 3.1: Traffic flows (9th January 2018)

3.3 Additionally, speed surveys were undertaken using a speed gun on the same day, from

the two existing site access points. A total of 100 measurements were taken in each

direction at each location. The speed limit at this location is 30mph, and around 30% of

traffic exceeded this at the eastern entrance and around 50% at the western entrance,

although only one driver was measured as exceeding 40mph.

3.4 The recorded 85th percentile speeds from the speed survey are summarised in Tables 3.2 and 3.3, along with required visibility splays for these speeds, based on Manual for

Streets 2 standards.

Direction 85th percentile observed speed Visibility requirement

Eastbound 34mph 51m (towards west) Westbound 33mph 49m (towards east)

Table 3.2: Speed survey results on A25 Nutfield Road – western entrance

Direction 85th percentile observed speed Visibility requirement

Eastbound 33mph 49m (towards west) Westbound 33mph 49m (towards east)

Table 3.3: Speed survey results on A25 Nutfield Road – eastern entrance

3.5 It is recommended that in due course, full weeklong speed and volume automatic traffic

count (ATC) surveys are undertaken.

Highway safety

3.6 A preliminary review of highway accident mapping, using crashmap.co.uk, indicates that

in the most recent five years for which data is available (2012-2016), four accidents, one


Page 6

serious and three slight, occurred along the section of A25 adjacent to the site. One of

these resulted in serious injuries but only involved one vehicle, which was a motorcycle.

Another slight accident occurred involving a motorcyclist and three other vehicles.

3.7 There were no accidents involving pedestrians, cyclists or children in the vicinity of the

site entrances.


Page 7

4 Site accessibility

4.1 Facilities local to the site are shown in Figure 4.1 and demonstrate the site’s proximity

to the town centre and rail station.

Figure 4.1: Plan showing local facilities

4.2 Footpath FP102 runs along the western boundary of the site, linking from Nutfield Road

in the south to a bridge over the railway in the northwest corner of the site which in turn

leads to Cavendish Road, and northwards linking to FP104 which also forms a greenway

which can be used by cyclists.

4.3 This route provides the shortest way to the town centre and it is suggested that the

development must include a link to this to enable residents to more easily access the

town centre and railway station. There are a mixture of quiet roads and shared cycleways

that can be used to access the station.

4.4 There is a short section of shared footway/cycleway along the northern side of the A25

Nutfield Road, which starts at Redstone Hill and ends near the public right of way on the

western edge of the proposed development site.

4.5 The greenway from the northwest corner of the site leads north for approximately

1.25km, running alongside the railway to Holmethorpe.

SITE

Railway station

Pedestrian link over railway

Bus stops

Secondary school

Bus station

Leisure centre

Town centre including

supermarket and library


Page 8

4.6 Redhill station is located approximately 450m from the northwest corner of the site, via

the railway bridge. It is on the junction of the Brighton Mainline (between London,

Gatwick and Brighton), the North Down Line (which runs to Guildford and Reading) and

the Redhill to Tonbridge Line and receives between one and two services per hour on

each line, with four services per hour to London.

4.7 Travel to work data from the 2011 Census for the Reigate and Banstead 011E Lower

Level Super Output Area in which the site is located indicates that 25% of people who

commute to work (excluding people who work from home or do not work) do so by train,

which may reflect the area’s close proximity to the station as well as the easy access via

rail into London.

4.8 Three bus services travel along Nutfield Road: 315, 400 and 410. The nearest stops to

the site are located approximately 60m east of the western access junction, with laybys

and timetable information provided on both sides of the carriageway. A summary of

services is shown in Table 4.1.

4.9 A wider range of services stop at Redhill bus station, which is located on Princess Way,

around 600m from the northwest corner of the site via the railway bridge.

Service Route Weekday Daytime

Frequency

Weekday Evening

Frequency

Weekend

315

Dormansland, Lingfield, Blindley Heath, Smallfield,

Outwood, Redhill and East Surrey Hospital

Irregular No service

No service

400 Caterham, Godstone Green, Redhill, East

Surrey Hospital Hourly No service

Hourly- Saturday Four buses -

Sunday

410

Redhill, Nutfield, Bletchingley,

Godstone, Oxted, Hurst Green, Snow

Hill

Every 30 minutes

Services end approximately

20:00

Every 30 minutes - Saturday

Four buses - Sunday

Table 4.1: Bus services on A25 Nutfield Road

4.10 Comprehensive residential and school Travel Plans can be developed to minimise the

traffic impact of the development. Given the accessibility of the site, it is considered that

Travel Planning will be effective.


Page 9

5 Development proposals

5.1 The site is being promoted on the basis of accommodating approximately 300 dwellings.

5.2 As previously identified, the land is proposed to be allocated by Reigate and Banstead

Borough Council in it's Development Management Plan (DMP). The site, which is

referred to as ERM2/ERM3, is identified as providing capacity for approximately 210

residential units and a new two-form entry primary school.

Access strategy

5.3 Proposed access arrangements are shown in drawings 01 and 02 in Appendix A. These

show two vehicular entrances to the site, making use of the existing accesses, which

offers the best solution in terms of horizontal and vertical visibility. Carriageways of 6.5m

are shown, with kerb radii of 6m or 8m, with kerb alignments adjusted to allow for the

swept path of an 11.3m refuse vehicle. This ensures that these vehicles do not swing

over the opposing land of the A25 as they turn in or out.

5.4 Visibility splays have been shown commensurate with the observed vehicle speeds

shown in Tables 3.2 and 3.3.

5.5 Preliminary PICADY tests using observed traffic flows have been run to analyse the

proposed entrance in terms of capacity. To provide for a robust assessment, all site traffic

has been assumed to travel through one junction, and the results indicate RFCs of below

0.5, showing the accesses will operate within capacity.

5.6 These access arrangements are based on the scheme being developed in isolation. The

DMP policy however suggests that access should be coordinated with other sites on the

A25, i.e. site ERM1 at Hillbrow which is located on the opposite side of the A25. The

ERM1 access is on the inside of a bend which means that, although that site has a longer

site frontage, to provide a priority junction would require significant earthworks along their

frontage to provide safe visibility splays. Additionally, for safety reasons, new crossroads

tend to be avoided on main roads.

5.7 However, there is scope for a compact roundabout or signals to be provided to serve

both sites together, which will require both parties to cooperate in the design / release of

land. A signalised junction would also be beneficial in providing safe pedestrian routes

from the Hillsbrow site to the possible primary school and towards the town

centre/station.


Page 10

5.8 Pedestrian accesses will be provided alongside the vehicular entrance. The public

footpath from the A25 will be retained and may be upgraded, and an additional

pedestrian entrance will be provided in the central section of land where it adjoins the

A25. This may also be used as an emergency entrance.

5.9 Pedestrian and cycle links will be provided to the existing public right of way network in

the northwest corner of the site, to enable residents to quickly and directly access the

town centre and railway station.

Site masterplan

5.10 It is recommended that the site’s “spine” roads should be at least 5.5m in width, plus

widening on bends. This is sufficient width to enable two large vehicles to pass each

other, or for a car and large vehicle to pass without difficulty. If on-street parking is to be

provided, or is expected to occur, the road width might be widened further to 6.5m in

places to allow this, or dedicated parking bays outside the main carriageway could be

provided.

5.11 On the secondary and tertiary roads, widths can be reduced to 4.8m or even 4.1m in

places, with footway provision of 2m on at least one side of the carriageway.

Consideration may also be given to shared surfaces for some sections of the site where

this is appropriate. Swept path analysis will need to be undertaken as the site design

develops to ensure that the site can be safely served by refuse vehicles and fire tenders.


Page 11

6 Trip generation, distribution & impact

Trip generation

6.1 In order to determine the level of traffic which will be generated by the residential

development of 300 dwellings, the TRICS database has been interrogated. The following

classifications have been used:

• “Mixed private / affordable housing” land use class – as the mix of properties is not

currently known;

• Sites in suburban and neighbourhood centres;

• Car ownership of 1.0 or above, to reflect Reigate and Banstead 001E ownership of

1.54 vehicles per household.

• Sites within 1.5km of a train station, with consideration given to locations that would

be “commuter belt” for a larger city – as this area of Redhill has 25% commuting by

rail; this has resulted in sites surrounding London having been chosen.

6.2 The TRICS output is included in Appendix B.

Residential Development – 300 dwellings

6.3 Table 6.1 presents the trip rates and corresponding vehicle trip generation for the

residential development of 300 dwellings.

Time Period

Vehicular trip Rate (Per Dwelling)

Traffic Generations (300 Dwellings)

In Out Total In Out Total

Weekday AM Peak (08.00-09.00) 0.110 0.285 0.395 33 86 119

Weekday PM Peak (17.00-18.00) 0.240 0.141 0.381 72 42 114

Weekday (12 Hours) (07.00-19.00) 2.071 2.093 4.164 621 628 1249

Table 6.1: Trip generation for residential development of 300 dwellings

Residential and School Development – 210 dwellings and two-form entry school

6.4 The following presents vehicle trip generations associated with 210 residential dwellings

and a two-form entry primary school.

6.5 Table 6.2 presents the trip rates and corresponding vehicle trip generation for the

residential development of 210 dwellings.


Page 12

Time Period

Vehicular trip Rate (Per Dwelling)

Traffic Generations (210 Dwellings)


Weekday AM Peak (08.00-09.00) 0.110 0.285 0.395 23 60 83

Weekday PM Peak (17.00-18.00) 0.240 0.141 0.381 50 30 80

Weekday (12 Hours) (07.00-19.00) 2.071 2.093 4.164 435 440 874

Table 6.2: Trip generation for 210 residential units

6.6 The primary school would serve residents of the new development but also those living

in existing communities and other proposed housing schemes. A two-form entry school

would accommodate approximately 420 pupils.

6.7 The Education Needs Technical Paper (June 2016) which supported the Development

Management Plan indicated in Table 4 that there would be between 202 and 277 children

of primary school age (5-11) per 1,000 households. For the proposed development,

based on an average of 240 pupils per 1,000 households, this would equate to 50 pupils,

all of whom could be assumed to walk, cycle or scoot to school. It has therefore been

assumed that there will be 370 pupils travelling to the school from off-site, and this figure

has been used in the traffic calculations.

6.8 Table 6.3 presents the vehicle trip generation associated with the two-form entry primary

school.

Time Period

Vehicular trip Rate (Per Pupil)

Traffic Generations (370 Pupils)


Weekday AM Peak (08.00-09.00) 0.265 0.176 0.441 98 65 163

Weekday PM Peak (17.00-18.00) 0.016 0.018 0.034 6 7 13

Weekday (12 Hours) (07.00-19.00) 0.703 0.681 1.384 260 252 512

Table 6.3: Trip generation for two-form entry primary school

6.9 Table 6.4 identifies the vehicle trip generation associated with 210 residential dwellings

and a two-form entry primary school.


Page 13

Time Period Traffic Generations

(210 dwellings & 370 Pupils)


Weekday AM Peak (08.00-09.00) - - - 121 125 246

Weekday PM Peak (17.00-18.00) - - - 56 37 93

Weekday (12 Hours) (07.00-19.00) - - - 695 692 1,386

Table 6.4: Trip generation for 210 dwellings and two-form entry primary school

6.10 The vehicle trip generation forecasts undertaken identify that the development of 300

dwellings would generate fewer vehicle trips during the weekday am peak hour period

and the 12-hour daily period than 210 dwellings and a two-form entry primary school.

The 300 residential development is forecast to generate a higher number of vehicle trips

during the weekday pm peak hour period as the school pm peak trip generation would

occur around school finishing time.

Traffic distribution

6.11 An assessment of trip distribution has been undertaken using 2011 Census travel to work

data for residents of the Reigate and Banstead 011 middle level super output area in

which the site is based. This indicates that 72% of traffic would be expected to travel

to/from the west and the remaining 28% from the east. A copy of the data is included in

Appendix C.

Traffic impact

6.12 As identified within Chapter 5, a preliminary PICADY assessment has been undertaken

in respect of capacity at the proposed site access junction. The capacity assessment

has been undertaken on the basis of all traffic using one site access junction; this

providing for a robust analysis.

6.13 The capacity assessment output show RFCs of below 0.5 for all scenarios (i.e. am and

pm peak periods and a development of 300 dwellings and 210 dwellings with a two-form

entry primary school).

6.14 On the basis of the initial capacity assessment results, it is not anticipated that a ghost

right turn lane will be required at either proposed site vehicle access junction.

6.15 Further capacity assessments will need to be undertaken as part of a more detailed

transport assessment, which will incorporate background traffic growth. However, the

initial capacity assessments undertaken provide a useful indication.


Page 14

6.16 Further to the above, traffic flows on the A25 Nutfield Road were observed to be relatively

low for a main route into Redhill, which is likely to due to the area east of the town and

site being relatively rural and with limited through traffic due to the proximity of the M25.

6.17 The junction modelling has used existing traffic flows for the peak hour, which will include

any vehicles currently accessing the Biffa site via Redhill and the A25. This indicates that

there should be no conflict with the Biffa site in terms of traffic as there will be only

minimal impact upon capacity of the A25 locally. Additionally, the Biffa traffic is spread

through the day with conditions in place to limit hours of operation and the volumes of

site traffic that the landfill can generate.

6.18 Beyond the site, traffic will distribute further afield, for example at the A23 / A25 Station

Roundabout junction within the town centre. The impact will be further assessed through

a future transport assessment. This could use new traffic surveys or outputs from the

SCC SINTRAM model which indicated that the combined impact from strategic

development areas across the borough might result in capacity difficulties at points

nearer the town centre, although the trip generation per household from the Copyhold

Works site is predicted to be relatively low due to the accessibility of the site by non-car

modes.


Page 15

7 Summary and conclusions

7.1 Mayer Brown has been appointed by Gallagher Estates to provide a review of transport

matters in relation to the proposed residential development at the Former Copyhold

Works, located to the north of A25 Nutfield Road to the east of Redhill.

7.2 The land is proposed to be allocated by Reigate and Banstead Borough Council in it's

Development Management Plan (DMP). Details of the relevant policy are set out in

Chapter 2 of this report.

7.3 The site is identified as ERM2/ERM3, with capacity for new housing development

comprising approximately 210 residential units and may include a new two-form entry

primary school for children from this development and other surrounding areas and new

housing schemes. Vehicular access would be taken directly from the A25 Nutfield Road.

7.4 Without the inclusion of a primary school, the site is being promoted on the basis of

accommodating approximately 300 dwellings.

Conclusions

7.5 Emerging planning policy for the site has been reviewed, this identifies that the site is

well located in terms of proximity to Redhill town centre, transport links, including the rail

station, and further key local amenities.

7.6 Given the sustainable location of the site, a high proportion of trips will inevitably be

undertaken by walking and cycling. Furthermore, given the high proportion of commuters

in the local area currently travelling by rail, and the close proximity of the site to the rail

station (approximately 450m using the access located within the northwest area of the

site), it is likely that a high proportion of future residents would choose to reside in this

location on the basis of the proximity to the rail station.

7.7 Initial traffic surveys have been undertaken at the site entrance to determine existing

traffic flows; these included any Biffa traffic using the road during peak hours. A review

of accident records indicates that there are no existing highway safety concerns in the

immediate vicinity of the site.

7.8 Access can be achieved for the site in the form of simple priority junctions and initial

modelling undertaken demonstrates that the junctions will operate within capacity for all

scenarios tested.


Page 16

7.9 In line with the emerging DMP, there is potential for a joint access to be provided to also

serve land to the south of the A25, which could be in the form of a compact roundabout

or signal controlled junction.

7.10 An assessment of predicted development traffic has been undertaken which estimates

relatively low vehicle trip generation. Further assessment of traffic impact will need to be

undertaken as part of a Transport Assessment when the site moves forward to a planning

application. At that point, scoping with the local highway authority would be undertaken.

APPENDIX A: Preliminary access plans

APPENDIX B: TRICS data

TRICS 7.4.4 221217 B18.14 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Wednesday 10/01/18

Page 1

Mayer Brown Temple Gate Bristol Licence No: 807403

Calculation Reference: AUDIT-807403-180110-0148

TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:

Land Use : 03 - RESIDENTIAL

Category : M - MIXED PRIVATE/AFFORDABLE HOUSING

VEHICLES

Secondary Filtering selection:

Parameter: Number of dwellings

Actual Range: 52 to 261 (units: )

Range Selected by User: 50 to 400 (units: )

Public Transport Provision:

Selection by: Include all surveys

Date Range: 01/01/09 to 28/09/17

Selected survey days:

Monday 1 days

Tuesday 1 days

Thursday 2 days

Selected survey types:

Manual count 4 days

Directional ATC Count 0 days

Selected Locations:

Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 3

Edge of Town 1

Selected Location Sub Categories:

Residential Zone 4


Use Class:

C 3 4 days

Population within 1 mile:

5,001 to 10,000 1 days

20,001 to 25,000 1 days

25,001 to 50,000 2 days

Population within 5 miles:

125,001 to 250,000 2 days

500,001 or More 2 days

Car ownership within 5 miles:

1.1 to 1.5 4 days

Travel Plan:

Yes 4 days

PTAL Rating:

No PTAL Present 2 days

1b Very poor 2 days


Page 2


LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters

1 BN-03-M-01 TERRACED & BLOCKS OF FLATS BARNET

MAYS LANE

BARNET

Edge of Town

Residential Zone

Total Number of dwellings: 1 0 5

Survey date: THURSDAY 09/03/17 Survey Type: MANUAL

2 HD-03-M-05 TERRACED & FLATS HILLINGDON

JUDGE HEATH LANE

HAYES

Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre)

Residential Zone


Survey date: TUESDAY 27/06/17 Survey Type: MANUAL

3 SC-03-M-05 HOUSES & FLATS SURREY

HOLYWELL WAY

STANWELL

STAINES


Residential Zone

Total Number of dwellings: 5 2

Survey date: MONDAY 19/11/12 Survey Type: MANUAL

4 SC-03-M-07 HOUSES/FLATS SURREY

EPSOM ROAD

GUILDFORD


Residential Zone



MANUALLY DESELECTED SITES

Site Ref Reason for Deselection

DV-03-M-01 No rail station / low rail commuting

ES-03-M-07 No rail station / low rail commuting

ES-03-M-08 No rail station / low rail commuting

HC-03-M-05 No rail station / low rail commuting



HI-03-M-05 No rail station / low rail commuting

KD-03-M-01 Can't check rail commuting

WS-03-M-04 No rail station / low rail commuting







Page 3


TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/M - MIXED PRIVATE/AFFORDABLE HOUSING

VEHICLES

Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS

BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period

ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS

No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip

Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate

00:00 - 01:00

01:00 - 02:00

02:00 - 03:00

03:00 - 04:00

04:00 - 05:00

05:00 - 06:00

06:00 - 07:00

4 154 0.083 4 154 0.199 4 154 0.28207:00 - 08:00

4 154 0.110 4 154 0.285 4 154 0.39508:00 - 09:00

4 154 0.113 4 154 0.198 4 154 0.31109:00 - 10:00

4 154 0.079 4 154 0.112 4 154 0.19110:00 - 11:00

4 154 0.104 4 154 0.115 4 154 0.21911:00 - 12:00

4 154 0.099 4 154 0.122 4 154 0.22112:00 - 13:00

4 154 0.136 4 154 0.123 4 154 0.25913:00 - 14:00

4 154 0.078 4 154 0.099 4 154 0.17714:00 - 15:00

4 154 0.162 4 154 0.136 4 154 0.29815:00 - 16:00

4 154 0.182 4 154 0.125 4 154 0.30716:00 - 17:00

4 154 0.240 4 154 0.141 4 154 0.38117:00 - 18:00

4 154 0.251 4 154 0.160 4 154 0.41118:00 - 19:00

2 183 0.235 2 183 0.191 2 183 0.42619:00 - 20:00

2 183 0.199 2 183 0.087 2 183 0.28620:00 - 21:00

21:00 - 22:00

22:00 - 23:00

23:00 - 24:00

Total Rates: 2.071 2.093 4.164


Page 4


Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 52 - 261 (units: )

Survey date date range: 01/01/09 - 28/09/17

Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 4

Number of Saturdays: 0

Number of Sundays: 0

Surveys automatically removed from selection: 7

Surveys manually removed from selection: 14


Page 1


Calculation Reference: AUDIT-807403-180110-0145

TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:

Land Use : 04 - EDUCATION

Category : A - PRIMARY

VEHICLES


Parameter: Number of pupils

Actual Range: 400 to 472 (units: )

Range Selected by User: 400 to 500 (units: )

Public Transport Provision:

Selection by: Include all surveys

Date Range: 01/01/09 to 28/09/16

Selected survey days:

Monday 1 days

Tuesday 2 days

Wednesday 1 days

Thursday 2 days

Selected survey types:

Manual count 6 days

Directional ATC Count 0 days

Selected Locations:

Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 3

Edge of Town 1

Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) 2

Selected Location Sub Categories:

Residential Zone 4

Village 1

No Sub Category 1


Use Class:

D 1 6 days

Population within 1 mile:

5,001 to 10,000 2 days

10,001 to 15,000 1 days

25,001 to 50,000 2 days

50,001 to 100,000 1 days

Population within 5 miles:

75,001 to 100,000 1 days

125,001 to 250,000 2 days

250,001 to 500,000 3 days

Car ownership within 5 miles:

0.6 to 1.0 4 days

1.1 to 1.5 2 days

Travel Plan:

Yes 1 days

No 5 days

PTAL Rating:

No PTAL Present 6 days


Page 2


LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters

1 DU-04-A-01 PRIMARY SCHOOL DUNDEE CITY

FALKLAND CRESCENT

BROUGHTY FERRY

DUNDEE


Residential Zone

Total Number of pupils: 4 1 2

Survey date: MONDAY 21/05/12 Survey Type: MANUAL

2 GM-04-A-01 PRIMARY SCHOOL GREATER MANCHESTER

ROCH MILLS CRESCENT

ROCHDALE

Edge of Town

Residential Zone



3 LC-04-A-05 PRIMARY SCHOOL LANCASHIRE

NEWTON STREET

BLACKBURN


No Sub Category


Survey date: WEDNESDAY 28/09/16 Survey Type: MANUAL

4 LC-04-A-06 PRIMARY SCHOOL LANCASHIRE

SEVERN ROAD

SOUTH SHORE

BLACKPOOL

Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre)

Residential Zone



5 NR-04-A-03 PRIMARY SCHOOL NORTHAMPTONSHIRE

BOOTH LANE NORTH

NORTHAMPTON


Residential Zone



6 SC-04-A-01 PRIMARY SCHOOL SURREY

SCHOOL LANE

PIRBRIGHT

NEAR WOKING

Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre)

Village




Page 3


TRIP RATE for Land Use 04 - EDUCATION/A - PRIMARY

VEHICLES

Calculation factor: 1 PUPILS

BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period

ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS

No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip

Time Range Days PUPILS Rate Days PUPILS Rate Days PUPILS Rate

00:00 - 01:00

01:00 - 02:00

02:00 - 03:00

03:00 - 04:00

04:00 - 05:00

05:00 - 06:00

06:00 - 07:00

6 434 0.061 6 434 0.023 6 434 0.08407:00 - 08:00

6 434 0.265 6 434 0.176 6 434 0.44108:00 - 09:00

6 434 0.036 6 434 0.045 6 434 0.08109:00 - 10:00

6 434 0.013 6 434 0.012 6 434 0.02510:00 - 11:00

6 434 0.014 6 434 0.009 6 434 0.02311:00 - 12:00

6 434 0.020 6 434 0.020 6 434 0.04012:00 - 13:00

6 434 0.013 6 434 0.025 6 434 0.03813:00 - 14:00

6 434 0.043 6 434 0.015 6 434 0.05814:00 - 15:00

6 434 0.144 6 434 0.217 6 434 0.36115:00 - 16:00

6 434 0.050 6 434 0.101 6 434 0.15116:00 - 17:00

6 434 0.016 6 434 0.018 6 434 0.03417:00 - 18:00

6 434 0.028 6 434 0.020 6 434 0.04818:00 - 19:00

19:00 - 20:00

20:00 - 21:00

21:00 - 22:00

22:00 - 23:00

23:00 - 24:00

Total Rates: 0.703 0.681 1.384


Page 4


Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 400 - 472 (units: )

Survey date date range: 01/01/09 - 28/09/16

Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 6

Number of Saturdays: 0

Number of Sundays: 0

Surveys automatically removed from selection: 0

Surveys manually removed from selection: 0

APPENDIX C: Census Travel to Work data

WF01BEW - Location of usual residence and place of work (OA level)ONS Crown Copyright Reserved [from Nomis on 15 January 2018]

population All usual residents ages 16 and over in employment the week before the censusunits Personsdate 2011

place of workE02006385 : Reigate and

Banstead 011 Percentage Route from site

Crawley 294 9% WestElmbridge 34 1% West

Epsom and Ewell 75 2% West Travel to/from: Rounded:Guildford 64 2% West West 69% 72%Horsham 36 1% West East 27% 28%Mid Sussex 45 1% WestMole Valley 260 8% WestRunnymede 16 0% WestSevenoaks 21 1% East

Spelthorne 10 0% WestTandridge 276 8% EastWaverley 12 0% WestWealden 2 0%Barking and Dagenham 1 0%Barnet 4 0%Bexley 3 0%

Brent 6 0%

Bromley 31 1% East

Camden 78 Rail ExcludedCroydon 201 6% EastEaling 11 0% WestEnfield 4 0%

Greenwich 10 0% East

Hackney 12 Rail ExcludedHammersmith and Fulham 38 Rail ExcludedHaringey 0 0%Harrow 0 0%Havering 4 0%Hillingdon 33 1% West

Hounslow 29 1% West

Islington 53 Rail Excluded

Kensington and Chelsea 35 Rail ExcludedKingston upon Thames 51 2% WestLambeth 50 Rail ExcludedLewisham 10 Rail ExcludedMerton 42 1% WestNewham 0 0%

Redbridge 0 0%

Richmond upon Thames 12 0% West

Southwark 110 Rail ExcludedSutton 78 2% EastTower Hamlets 112 Rail ExcludedWaltham Forest 0 0%

Wandsworth 58 Rail ExcludedWestminster,City of London 503 Rail ExcludedE02006375 : Reigate and Banstead 001 6 0%E02006376 : Reigate and Banstead 002 20 1% WestE02006377 : Reigate and Banstead 003 11 0% WestE02006378 : Reigate and Banstead 004 3 0%

E02006379 : Reigate and Banstead 005 3 0%

E02006380 : Reigate and Banstead 006 43 1% West

E02006381 : Reigate and Banstead 007 68 2% West

E02006382 : Reigate and Banstead 008 42 1% EastE02006383 : Reigate and Banstead 009 149 4% West

E02006384 : Reigate and Banstead 010 489 15% WestE02006385 : Reigate and Banstead 011 438 Walk / work from home ExcludedE02006386 : Reigate and Banstead 012 390 12% West

E02006387 : Reigate and Banstead 013 53 2% WestE02006388 : Reigate and Banstead 014 253 8% EastE02006389 : Reigate and Banstead 015 65 2% westE02006390 : Reigate and Banstead 016 7 0%

E02006391 : Reigate and Banstead 017 9 0%E02006392 : Reigate and Banstead 018 52

3,328

In order to protect against disclosure of personal information, records have been swapped between different geographic areas. Some counts will be affected, particularly small counts at the

currently residing in

Documents

Nutfield Road, Redhill - Reigate and Banstead · transport services and policies”. This will include “ improving the reliability, quality and safety of inter-regional rail links