150116 Transport Assessment Final Issue...Office Address: Lakeside House, Blackbrook Business Park,,...

On behalf of Lidl UK

Project Ref: 30024/003 | Rev: A- | Date: January 2015

Office Address: Lakeside House, Blackbrook Business Park,, Blackbrook Park Avenue, Taunton TA1 2PX T: +44 (0)1823 445 150 E: [email protected]

Lidl Minehead Transport Assessment

Transport Assessment Lidl Minehead

J:\30024 Lidl Minehead\5503_Transport Assessment_TTR\Reports\Transport Assessment\Issue\150116_Transport Assessment_Final Issue.docx

iii

Contents

1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Project Brief ................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Report Structure ............................................................................................................ 1

2 Existing Conditions..................................................................................................................... 2

2.1 Site Location .................................................................................................................. 2

2.2 Pedestrian and Cycle Conditions .................................................................................. 2

2.3 Public Transport Conditions .......................................................................................... 2

2.4 Highway Network Conditions ........................................................................................ 3

2.5 Traffic Surveys ............................................................................................................... 3

2.6 Highway Safety Conditions ........................................................................................... 4

2.7 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 5

3 Development Proposals ............................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 6

3.2 Proposed Development ................................................................................................. 6

3.3 Access Strategy ............................................................................................................. 6

3.4 Internal Layout ............................................................................................................... 6

3.5 Road Safety Audit.......................................................................................................... 7

3.6 Travel Plan .................................................................................................................... 7

3.7 Conclusion ..................................................................................................................... 7

4 Transport Policy and Guidance Review ................................................................................... 8

4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 8

4.2 National Policy ............................................................................................................... 8

4.3 Local Policy ................................................................................................................. 10

4.4 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 12

5 Multi Modal Trip Analysis ......................................................................................................... 13

5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 13

5.2 Multi Modal Trip Generation ........................................................................................ 13

5.3 Trip Reductions ........................................................................................................... 15

5.4 Assessment of Development Impact ........................................................................... 16

5.5 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 16

6 Traffic Impact ............................................................................................................................. 17

6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 17

6.2 Study Area ................................................................................................................... 17

6.3 Existing Traffic Flows................................................................................................... 17

6.4 Forecast Year Traffic Flows ........................................................................................ 17

6.5 Traffic Distribution ........................................................................................................ 18

6.6 Traffic Scenarios .......................................................................................................... 18

6.7 Junction Capacity Assessment ................................................................................... 18



iv

6.8 Additional Capacity Assessment ................................................................................. 23

6.9 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 24

7 Summary and Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 25

7.1 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 25

7.2 Conclusion ................................................................................................................... 25

Figures

Figure 2-1 Site Location Plan Figure 6-1 Distribution of Development Traffic Figure 6-2 Development Traffic Flows - Friday PM Peak Figure 6-3 Development Traffic Flows - Saturday Lunchtime Peak Figure 6-4 2014 Surveyed Traffic Flows – Friday PM Peak Figure 6-5 2014 Surveyed Traffic Flows – Saturday Lunchtime Peak Figure 6-6 2016 ‘Do Nothing’ Traffic Flows - Friday PM Peak Figure 6-7 2016 ‘Do Nothing’ Traffic Flows – Saturday Lunchtime Peak Figure 6-8 2016 ‘Do Something’ Traffic Flows – Friday PM Peak Figure 6-9 2016 Do Something’ Traffic Flows – Saturday Lunchtime Peak Figure 6-10 2021 ‘Do Nothing’ Traffic Flows - Friday PM Peak Figure 6-11 2021 ‘Do Nothing’ Traffic Flows - Saturday Lunchtime Peak Figure 6-12 2021 ‘Do Something’ Traffic Flows – Friday PM Peak Figure 6-13 2021 ‘Do Something’ Traffic Flows –Saturday Lunchtime Peak

Tables

Table 2-1 Bus service and frequency from the nearby Tesco bus stop. ............................................. 3 Table 5-1 Proposed multi-modal trip rates ........................................................................................ 14 Table 5-2 Proposed multi-modal trip generation ............................................................................... 14 Table 5-3 Modal Split ........................................................................................................................ 14 Table 5-4 Multi Modal Trip Analysis Summary ................................................................................. 15 Table 5-5 Vehicle Trip Generation Summary – With and Without Linked Trip Allowance ................ 15 Table 6-1 Local Adjusted Traffic Growth for Minehead Area ............................................................ 18 Table 6-2 Picady Summary Results – Site Access junction ............................................................. 19 Table 6-3 Arcady Summary Results – Vulcan Road / Seaward Way junction – Weekday PM ........ 19 Table 6-3 Arcady Summary Results – Vulcan Road / Seaward Way junction – Saturday ......... Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 6-3 Arcady Summary Results – Warren Road / Seaward Way junction – Weekday PM ....... 20 Table 6-4 Arcady Summary Results – Warren Road / Seaward Way junction – Saturday .............. 21 Table 6-5 Picady Summary Results – Stephenson Road / Seaward Way junction – Weekday PM 21 Table 6-6 Picady Summary Results – Stephenson Road / Seaward Way junction - Saturday ........ 22 Table 6-7 Arcady Summary Results – A39 Bircham Road junction – Weekday PM Error! Bookmark not defined. Table 6-8 Arcady Summary Results – A39 Bircham Road junction – Saturday Error! Bookmark not defined.



v

Appendices

Appendix A PIA Data

Appendix B Illustrative Site Layout Plan

Appendix C Site Access Proposals

Appendix D Tracked Site Access Junction

Appendix E Stage 1 Road Safety Audit Report

Appendix F Stage 1 RSA Designer’s Response

Appendix G TRICS Outputs

Appendix H Site Access Junction

Appendix I Vulcan Rd / Seaward Way Jct

Appendix J Warren Rd / Seaward Way Jct

Appendix K Stephenson Rd / Seaward Way Jct

Appendix L A39 / Seaward Way Jct

Appendix M Hopcott Rd / Townsend Rd Jct



1

1 Introduction

1.1 Project Brief

1.1.1 Peter Brett Associates LLP (PBA) has been commissioned by Lidl UK to prepare a Transport Assessment (TA) in support of a proposed discount foodstore development on a site in Minehead, West Somerset. The TA is written in accordance with the Department for Transport’s (DfT) Planning Practice Guidance and as a result, it will examine the sustainable modes of walking, cycling and public transport and then consider the impact of the residual vehicular traffic.

1.1.2 The transport strategy outlined in this TA has been developed around a balanced and integrated package of measures. These seek to prioritise the use of alternative modes of travel to the private car and therefore improve the sustainable nature of the development. The assessment will seek to determine whether the surrounding transport network is suitable to accommodate the person trips associated with the proposed development in order to ensure that the site is accessible whilst also protecting its setting and the surrounding environment.

1.1.3 A Travel Plan (TP) has also been prepared in accordance with the Somerset County Council (SCC) Travel Planning Guidance in support of the proposed retail development and should be read in conjunction with this TA.

1.2 Report Structure

1.2.1 This report is prepared to support the planning application for the development. In this respect the TA is structured as follows:

Chapter 2:- Reviews the existing conditions around the site including the local highway network and existing pedestrian, cycling and public transport facilities.

Chapter 3:- Outlines the scope and scale of the proposed development.

Chapter 4:- Sets the proposed development in relation to local and national policy context.

Chapter 5:- Assesses the predicted trip generation of the proposed development by all modes of transport.

Chapter 6:- Assesses the predicted impact of the development traffic on the local road network.

Chapter 7:- Provides conclusions to the report.



2

2 Existing Conditions

2.1 Site Location

2.1.1 The proposed development site is located on the eastern edge of Minehead, West Somerset. The site lies to the west of Seaward Way, adjacent to the three arm roundabout connecting Seaward Road and Vulcan Road. The proposed development is located between Morrison’s and Tesco’s supermarkets to the north and south respectively.

2.1.2 To the east of the site is open land, whereas to the west of the site is a business park and industrial estate.

2.1.3 The location of the site is shown in Figure 2-1.

2.2 Pedestrian and Cycle Conditions

2.2.1 Seaward Way incorporates a shared footway / cycleway next to the western edge of the carriageway that runs directly along the frontage of the site. This route is provided to a good standard and offers a safe, off-carriageway and therefore traffic-free pedestrian and cycle connection to the seafront and town centre.

2.2.2 The cycleway also provides direct access to the Regional Cycle Route 51 to the west of the Warren Road / Seaward Way junction. Route 51 starts in Ilfracombe and heads east to Lynton via Combe Martin, then onto Porlock before finishing at the train station in Minehead.

2.2.3 In the opposite direction, the cycleway provides an off road route, adjacent to the A39, as far as Dunster and Carhampton to the south east.

2.2.4 The extensive footway network present in the vicinity of the site means that the proposed foodstore will be easily accessible on foot from the majority of the town. This includes the large residential area of Alcombe to the south of the site as there is a public footpath connecting Marshfield Road to Seaward Way that runs through an area of open space directly to the west of the hospital.

2.2.5 The Morrison’s and Tesco supermarkets and Butlins Holiday Park are located close to the proposed site and can also easily be reached via the existing footway network, making multi-destination trips possible by sustainable modes of transport.

2.2.6 It is therefore considered that the site benefits from good quality access and pedestrian/cycle infrastructure to the local residential areas and other local facilities which are within walking and cycling distance of the site and provides a viable alternative to the private car.

2.3 Public Transport Conditions

2.3.1 The nearest bus stop to the proposed development is located approximately 300m to the south of the site on Stephenson Road, outside the Tesco supermarket. The bus stop incorporates good passenger waiting facilities that are provided in the form of a shelter set back behind the adjacent footway, two bus flags and timetabling information.

2.3.2 Table 2-1 provides a summary of the various bus services that are currently available from the Stephenson Road bus stop. No services currently operate on a Sunday.



3

Route Service Number Monday-Saturday Frequency

Porlock, Porlock Weir 10 Six per day, every two hours. First service at 0848 and last service at 1758.

Blue Anchor, Watchet, Doniford, Nether Stowey & Bridgwater 16 Approx. hourly. First service at 0633

and last service at 1738.

Watchet, Williton, Taunton 18 Approx. half hourly. First service at 0610 and last service at 1840.

Minehead Town Service 101 Approx. half hourly. First service at 0805 and last service at 1705.

Table 2-1 Bus service and frequency from the nearby Tesco bus stop.

2.3.3 The analysis demonstrates that there is a bus stop within walking distance of the proposed site that provides access to a number of local services that run regularly throughout the day between Monday-Saturday.

2.3.4 Although Minehead has a railway station, it is part of a private run heritage line and not part of the national network. Therefore its presence is not guaranteed and it cannot be considered as an option for travel to this site.

2.3.5 Based on the proximity of the bus stops to the site, the destinations served and the frequency of the existing services, it is considered that there is reasonable accessibility to the site by public transport and therefore potential for both staff and customers to travel to and from the proposed store by this mode.

2.4 Highway Network Conditions

2.4.1 Access to the site is proposed to be gained from Seaward Way, which is classified as a distributor road and forms the main access route to the Seafront from the eastern side of Minehead. This road is restricted to a 40mph speed limit to the south of the site, although to the north the speed limit is reduced to 30mph as the road enters the town.

2.4.2 Seaward Way intersects with Warren Road in the north at a three arm roundabout as it meets the sea front, and also provides access to the Butlins Holiday camp. To the south of the site, Seaward Way connects to the A39 via a four arm roundabout. The A39 is the primary access route into Minehead town centre from the east.

2.4.3 Vulcan Road is located to the north of the proposed site and provides access to Brunel Way, Hawkesworth Road and Mart Road, which are all primarily industrial in character. These roads are all subject to a 30mph speed limit and benefit from street lighting and footways.

2.5 Traffic Surveys

2.5.1 PBA commissioned an independent traffic survey company to undertake manual classified turning counts and queue length surveys at a total of four junctions specified below:

Seaward Way / Vulcan Road

Seaward Way / Stephenson Road



4

Seaward Way / Warren Road

A39 Bircham Road / Seaward Way / Ellicombe Lane

2.5.2 These surveys were completed on Friday 8th November 2014 during the evening peak period between 16:00-19:00 and Saturday 9th November 2014 between 11:00-14:00 to capture the busiest times of the day.

2.5.3 The highway network peak hours on a weekday evening and on a Saturday have been identified as occurring between 16:00-17:00 and 11:00-12:00 respectively.

2.5.4 The raw traffic survey data can be provided via email upon request.

2.6 Highway Safety Conditions

2.6.1 Personal Injury Accident (PIA) data was obtained from SCC for the five year period from the 1st November 2009 to 30th September 2014. The study area extends along Seaward Way from the junction with the A39 in the south and Warren Road in the north. It also extends to the east of the Warren Road roundabout past the Butlins Holiday Village and to the west of the junction as far as the Esplanade.

2.6.2 The study area also includes Vulcan Road, Brereton Road, Brunel Way, and Hawksworth Road as all of these roads provide a route onto Mart Road which in turn connects to the town centre.

2.6.3 A total of 20 incidents were recorded during the study period, of which 19 were deemed ‘slight’ and one ‘serious’ in terms of severity. On average there were four incidents a year.

2.6.4 The most common location within the study area for incidents was along Seaward Way, where a total of 9 were recorded. Three of these were caused when a vehicle collided with the rear of the vehicle in front. Four of the incidents occurred at the junction between Seaward Way and Stephenson Road, all of which were caused by the driver pulling out of Stephenson Road into an oncoming vehicle travelling along Seaward Way.

2.6.5 The one serious accident occurred at the roundabout junction between Seaward Way and the A39. A cyclist negotiating the roundabout was hit by a car entering the roundabout from the adjacent arm. The driver failed to give way to the cyclist causing a collision. In addition, a further incident was recorded at this roundabout, when a car lost control negotiating the roundabout in wet conditions.

2.6.6 The last accident recorded along Seaward Way occurred at the junction with Mallard Road, where a vehicle turning right off Seaward Way was hit in the rear by a vehicle failing to stop.

2.6.7 A further location where a large number of incidents occurred was along Glenmore Road, where four incidents were recorded. One incident involved a motorcycle, one a pedestrian and one a cyclist. The incidents involving the motorcycle and Bicycle were both caused by a car pulling out in front of the oncoming motorbike or cyclist. The third incident occurred after a vehicle collided with a passing pedestrian, whilst the fourth occurred after a car clipped the back of a goods vehicle causing the rear door to strike the driver. However these occurred some distance from the site.

2.6.8 Three incidents occurred along Warren Road. The first was caused by a child running into a road, whilst an elderly driver lost control of a vehicle in a second incident, colliding with a stationary vehicle. The final incident was caused by a vehicle overtaking vehicles in front and colliding with an oncoming vehicle travelling in the opposite direction.



5

2.6.9 Finally, four other incidents occurred across the study area in isolated locations. The first was caused when an intoxicated pedestrian fell into the path of an oncoming vehicle along Bircham Road.

2.6.10 The second was a further shunt, recorded at the entrance to McDonald’s restaurant on Vulcan Road. A third was caused after a cyclist was hit by a car pulling out into the path. The final incident occurred after a reversing vehicle collided with a passing pedestrian at low speed.

2.6.11 All the incidents described are considered to be as a result of driver or rider error or adverse weather conditions. Furthermore, considering the size of the study area and the volume of traffic, the level of incidents occurring is not considered to represent a significant issue and would normally be expected for this type of road network.

2.6.12 The PIA data is provided in full in Appendix A.

2.7 Conclusion

2.7.1 This chapter has reviewed the existing conditions of the site. It concludes that the proposed site has good potential to be accessed via walking, cycling and public transport from local centres and provides realistic options for those wishing to use a non-car mode of transport.

2.7.2 It is also concluded that there are no major incident black spots in the vicinity of the site which will give rise to concerns associated with the impact of this development.



6

3 Development Proposals

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 This section will outline the scope of the proposed development and the access strategy to be implemented in order to manage and mitigate the impact of the development on the local highway network. The access strategy will also seek to improve the accessibility of the development by sustainable modes and minimise the usage of the private car for trips to and from the site.

3.2 Proposed Development

3.2.1 The proposed layout of the store and the car park is included in Appendix B.

3.2.2 The development is proposed to incorporate a discount foodstore and associated car park, with access into the site achieved from Seaward Way.

3.2.3 The proposed store equates to a Gross Internal Area of 2,264 sqm and includes a Retail Floor Area totalling 1,407 sqm.

3.3 Access Strategy

3.3.1 Access to the site is proposed to be gained from Seaward Way via a new priority T junction located approximately 100m to the south of the Vulcan Road roundabout. The junction incorporates a right turn lane to cater for southbound traffic entering the site. The junction also includes an uncontrolled crossing point for pedestrians comprising dropped kerbs and tactile blister paving.

3.3.2 The proposed site access junction has been designed to full standards found within DMRB TD 42/95 and includes an appropriately designed right turn lane which is capable of accordingly the level of demand which is anticipated from the development.

3.3.3 Pedestrians and cyclists visiting the store will be able to use the access junction, however signage will also be introduced to direct them to a separate dedicated pedestrian access that is located just to the north of the main junction.

3.3.4 The site access proposals are shown in the drawing included in Appendix C.

3.4 Internal Layout

3.4.1 The proposed car park will consist of 100 car spaces, including 6 spaces for blue badge holders and 4 parent and child spaces. It is evident that the total number of car spaces to be provided on the site is slightly lower than the amount calculated as being required by the SCC Parking Strategy using Zone B optimum standards. This however reflects the fact that the store is well positioned for access by non-car travel modes including its ability for users to walk between the three retail stores located along Seaward Way.

3.4.2 In addition, cycling will also be a viable option for travelling to and from the store, particularly for employees as Sheffield stands will be provided which can accommodate 18 bikes. These will be located in a prominent position in order to provide natural surveillance from a security perspective and encourage access by this mode of transport.

3.4.3 The internal site layout has been tracked to demonstrate that servicing vehicles can enter and exit the site safely in a forward gear. The analysis also demonstrates that once inside the site, the servicing vehicle can reverse into the delivery bay located at the southern end of the



7

building without encroaching any of the parking bays. This assessment is shown in drawing 30024/5501/007 included in Appendix D.

3.4.4 Mindful of the need to minimise disturbance to any neighbouring landowners each Lidl store typically has relatively few deliveries a day. Total unloading at this time is generally around 45 minutes, and vehicle noise is minimised due to a recessed loading bay, and a manual bridging plate and a dock shelter.

3.5 Road Safety Audit

3.5.1 Road Safety Audit Ltd were commissioned by PBA to undertake a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA) on the proposed access junction on Seaward Way described previously.

3.5.2 The independent Audit Team visited the site on 4th June 2014 and the audit was carried out generally under the terms and conditions of HD 19/03. The Stage 1 RSA report dated 5th June 2014 is included in full in Appendix E.

3.5.3 The audit report identified two potential issues in connection with the highway proposals. A Designer’s Response report is also included in Appendix F and presents the issues identified by the Audit Team along with their recommendations, and the Designer’s Response to these to clarify how they have been addressed.

3.6 Travel Plan

3.6.1 A TP has been produced as a separate document to determine the potential for sustainable travel in the base situation and to ensure that the development is planned in such a way to improve upon this baseline situation and encourage improved usage of sustainable travel amongst staff and customers.

3.6.2 The TP has been prepared in accordance with the SCC Travel Planning Guidance (November 2011), and as such includes a Site Audit, Action Plan, Monitoring Strategy and Annual Modal Split Targets. The TP will also be registered onto the iOnTRAVEL database prior to commencement of the development to enable SCC to monitor the ongoing performance of the plan.

3.7 Conclusion

3.7.1 The access strategy presented in this chapter is considered to provide a safe and efficient means of access to the site for all modes of transport.



8

4 Transport Policy and Guidance Review

4.1 Introduction

4.1.1 PBA appreciates that the transportation element of the work needs to be undertaken in a consistent manner in order to take account of the development proposals, policy background and previous studies that have focused on the strategy for development within Somerset. It is important that the development accords with all appropriate national and local policy which is outlined within this chapter.

4.2 National Policy

Localism Act, 2011

4.2.1 The Localism Act gained Royal assent in November 2011 although many of the measures it included did not come into force until April 2012. It essentially abolished planning at regional level with the intention of enabling more decisions to be taken by local authorities. The Act does not say that there is no need for spatial strategies of functional areas or city regions, but effectively leaves it up to groups of local authorities to recreate strategies for these areas and to implement them through their own individual plans.

National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

4.2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012) sets out the Government’s economic, environmental and social planning policies for England and replaces previous policy statements issued by the Government, including PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development and PPG13 Transport. The NPPF articulates the Government’s vision of sustainable development, which should be interpreted and applied locally to meet local aspirations.

4.2.3 The NPPF sets out the Government’s commitment to ensuring that the planning system helps to achieve sustainable development. A positive planning system is essential because, without growth, a sustainable future cannot be achieved. Planning must operate to encourage growth and not act as an impediment. Therefore, the NPPF stipulates that ‘significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system’ (Paragraph 19). Furthermore, Local planning authorities should approach decision-taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development. The relationship between decision-taking and plan-making should be seamless, translating plans into high quality development on the ground.

4.2.4 The NPPF sets out 12 Core Planning Principles at Paragraph 17. With regards to the principles that authorities should consider in determining planning applications (rather than those which specifically relate to plan making), the system should:

‘Proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing, business and other development needs of an area, and respond positively to wider opportunities for growth.’

and

‘actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable;’.



9

4.2.5 Paragraph 187 of the NPPF continues to detail the new approach to planning, stating that:

‘Local planning authorities should look for solutions rather than problems, and decision-takers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible. Local planning authorities should work proactively with applicants to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.’

4.2.6 The Transport section of the NPPF notes the importance transport policies have in facilitating development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives. Section 4 of the NPPF states that Transport policies should ‘have an important role to play in facilitating sustainable development but also in contributing to wider sustainability and health objectives.’

4.2.7 It also states, in paragraph 30, that:

‘Encouragement should be given to solutions which support reductions in greenhouse gas emissions and reduce congestion. In preparing Local Plans, local planning authorities should therefore support a pattern of development which, where reasonable to do so, facilitates the use of sustainable modes of transport.’

4.2.8 The NPPF identifies that planning policies should protect and enhance public rights of way and access. Local authorities should seek opportunities to provide better facilities for users, for example by adding links to existing rights of way networks including National Trails.

4.2.9 The NPPF also states, in Paragraph 32, that:

‘All developments that generate significant amounts of movement should be supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment. Plans and decisions should take account of whether:

The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure;

Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and

Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limit the significant impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.’

4.2.10 The NPPF identifies that a key tool to facilitate these objectives is a Travel Plan, with all developments which generate significant amounts of movement being required to produce a Travel Plan.

Planning Practice Guidance

4.2.11 The Government launched its Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) on 6th March 2014. The associated website brings together many areas of English planning guidance into a new format, linked to the NPPF. The PPG includes a ‘Travel plans, transport assessments and statements in decision-taking’ section which is designed to assist in the screening and scoping of TA’s, as well as detail the potential to positively contribute to the encouragement of sustainable travel.

4.2.12 In connection with Paragraph 32 of the NPPF which sets out that all developments that generate significant amounts of transport movement should be supported by a transport statement or TA, Local Planning Authorities must make a judgement as to whether the development proposal would generate significant amounts of movement on a case by case basis. This significance may be a lower threshold where road capacity is already stretched or a higher threshold for a development in an area of high public transport accessibility.



10

4.2.13 The PPG confirms that the scope and level of detail for TA’s will also vary from site to site. In general it confirms that, assessments should be based on normal traffic flow and usage conditions, but consideration should be given for local forecasts and committed developments and potential growth within the study area.

4.3 Local Policy

Somerset's Future Transport Plan 2011-2026

4.3.1 Somerset's Future Transport Plan sets their transport policy for the next 15 years. It describes the challenges faced and the policies and investments put forward to tackle these challenges. It covers the period between 2011 and 2026 and replaces Somerset's Second Local Transport Plan, which finished in March 2011.

4.3.2 Key relevant policies within this document include:

SUS 3 Smarter Choices - SCC will help people make smarter travel choices. SCC will provide high quality transport information and encourage organisations to develop ‘Travel Plans’.

SUS 2 Bus and Community Transport Services - SCC will try to maintain essential services in the early years of this plan and work to improve the way services work together and provide better bus information during its later years.

SUS 4 Cycling - SCC will encourage people to cycle more by helping them to make smarter travel choices and get better cycling skills. SCC will support the provision of appropriate and well connected cycling facilities.

SUS 5 Walking - SCC will help people make more trips on foot and help people see the benefits of walking.

ECN 1 Car and Taxi - SCC will work to better manage the traffic on the roads and improve the most congested junctions and routes. SCC will work with developers to try and make sure new developments do not make conditions worse.

ECN 2 Sustainable Development - SCC will work with developers to ensure they take into account the way people travel, and how people travel, to access services.

ECN 3 Parking - SCC will help improve parking facilities to encourage more sustainable means of travel. SCC will work to improve the management of parking and help plan new developments appropriately.

4.3.3 Somerset's Future Transport Plan confirms that all new development is required to address its own transport implications and those which are likely to have significant transport implications, are required to prepare Transport Assessments, which determine whether the impact of the development on transport is acceptable.

Bridgwater, Taunton and Wellington Future Transport Strategy 2011-2026

4.3.4 The Strategy’s key objectives are stated as follows:

Supporting the Economy - reduce use of the strategic network for local trips; reduce car use for short distance journeys; increase flood resilience; reduce rate of growth in journey times; and improve journey time reliability;



11

Strengthening Communities - improve accessibility to public transport and walking and cycling opportunities; prioritise access to/from deprived wards; improve levels of physical fitness; and maintain self-containment;

Protecting the Environment - reduce rate of growth of greenhouse gas emissions; reduce rate of growth of noise; reduce levels of NOX and particulates; increase species and habitat diversity; protect archaeological and historic heritage; and improve visual appearance of streetscapes;

Making Travel Safer - reduce total number of casualties; reduce child casualties; reduce cycling, pedestrian, motorcycle and public transport casualties; and reduce crime and fear of crime on public transport and in urban spaces.

4.3.5 The overall approach to tackling these issues in Taunton will focus on managing the demand for travel in and around the town. SCC will look to use technology, such as variable message signs and real time bus information, to allow informed travel choices to be made. They will also improve public transport routes and give them priority on the main routes into the town, to make the bus a more attractive alternative to the car.

4.3.6 In conjunction with key new infrastructure projects such as the Third Way, SCC will also seek to pedestrianise more of the streets in the heart of the town and make it easier for people to walk and cycle. They will also look to ensure that new developments, providing houses and jobs for the growth of the town, are designed to minimise future traffic growth and brought forward in a way that increases the long term sustainability of these sites and reduces the reliance on the car.

The West Somerset Local Plan to 2032 – Revised Preferred Strategy

4.3.7 The West Somerset Local Plan to 2032 is the latest draft of the emerging plan, which is currently being prepared for formal Publication. From the 29th July to the 23rd September 2013 the Council consulted on a revised Preferred Strategy for the Local Plan with proposed changes responding to the new requirements of the NPPF.

4.3.8 The Local Plan for West Somerset aims to help make West Somerset a better place to live in, go to school in, do business in, retire in and also where people can enjoy life. The Local Plan’s policies, created with the involvement of the area’s communities, will help to guide the sustainable development of the parts of West Somerset District outside the Exmoor National Park.

4.3.9 New Policy SC2 concerning housing provision states that the Plan will deliver approximately 2,900 dwellings, of which a minimum of 1,450 will be allocated on key strategic sites at Minehead, Alcombe, Watchet and Williton. This represents considerable growth in housing in Minehead and is likely to warrant a corresponding increase in retail development.

4.3.10 Amended Policy TR1 requires that development must address the requirement to enhance the use of sustainable modes of transport. It further states that provision may include:

The improvement of public transport services

Making walking and cycling more attractive and safer as means of transport

Road improvements

Green transport plan



12

4.4 Conclusion

4.4.1 The policy review has shown that the proposed development complies with both national and local policies, and provides ample opportunity for access via sustainable modes of transport.

4.4.2 The traffic impact of the development needs to be proven not to be severe in line with the NPPF.



13

5 Multi Modal Trip Analysis

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 In order to accurately estimate the multi-modal trip generation of the development, the proposals have been assessed using the first principles of people trips. This means that the movements of individuals have been calculated rather than just vehicles. This approach allows a more detailed analysis of the total trip generation of the development and consideration of each potential mode of transport, rather than simply focusing on the vehicular impact of the proposals.

5.2 Multi Modal Trip Generation

5.2.1 The trip generation of the proposed development is based on person trip data contained within the TRICS Version 7.1.2 database. Multi modal surveys that have been undertaken at comparative locations have been used to calculate average trip rates per 100 sqm of retail floor area. These trip rates are then used to derive the total forecast person trip generation of the proposed discount foodstore over a 24 hour period both on a weekday and Saturday.

5.2.2 Of the multi modal discount foodstore surveys contained within the TRICS database, the following sites were selected due to their comparable location to the proposed development:

MS-01-C-02 – Aldi, Liverpool

MS-01-C-03 – Aldi, Liverpool

NR-01-C-01 – Aldi, Corby

SH-01-C-01 – Lidl, Telford

5.2.3 Unfortunately, the multi modal TRICS data for these sites only relates to trips made on weekdays. In order to overcome this, consideration was given to factoring the weekday data to represent the Saturday person trip generation which could reasonably generate a higher level of trips and an alternative daily trip profile.

5.2.4 Due to insufficient sites from the discount foodstore category in TRICS being available to undertake a comparison of weekday and Saturday trip rates, the comparative exercise has been carried out using vehicle trip rates from the food superstore category. The following sites were selected:

CP-01-A-01 – Sainsbury’s, Caerphilly

NR-01-A-03 – Sainsbury’s, Northamptonshire

SL-01-A-05 – Sainsbury’s, East Kilbride

WN-01-A-01 – Sainsbury’s, Slough

5.2.5 Although these surveys consider vehicle trips rather than person trips by all modes, they show that on average, the daily total number of trips to a foodstore is around 1.9% higher on a Saturday than on a weekday. Therefore, a 1.019 factor has been applied to the weekday person trip data referred in paragraph 5.2.2 in order to estimate the likely number of multi-modal trips made to and from the site over the course of an average Saturday. With regards to the Saturday peak hour, the comparison data suggests that trips to a foodstore are around 32% higher on a Saturday than a weekday, and therefore a 1.32 factor has been applied.



14

5.2.6 In order to spread the calculated person trip totals throughout the day, an average Saturday hourly trip profile was obtained from the vehicle surveys extracted from the TRICS database. This was used to determine the percentage of the total movements likely to occur during each hour throughout the day and was applied to the forecast number of person trips being made to and from the discount foodstore on a Saturday.

5.2.7 The weekday person trip rate outputs are included in Appendix G.

5.2.8 Table 5-1 provides a summary of the proposed multi-modal trip rates (per 100 sqm RFA) for the discount foodstore:

Weekday Daily Saturday Daily

In Out In Out

98.573 98.264 100.428 100.113

Table 5-1 Proposed multi-modal trip rates

5.2.9 Table 5-2 demonstrates the forecast number of multi-modal trips that are likely to be generated by the 1,407 sqm RFA discount foodstore proposed.

Weekday Daily Saturday Daily

In Out In Out

1,387 1,383 1,413 1,409

Table 5-2 Proposed multi-modal trip generation

5.2.10 The following modal split data shown in Table 5-3 has been calculated using the TRICS database and specifically the discount foodstore land use category.

Mode of Transport %

Pedestrian 25.4

Cycle 0.7

Public Transport 2.4

Car/Van Passenger 20.4

Car/Van Driver 51.1

Table 5-3 Modal Split

5.2.11 The calculated person trip generation of the proposed development is also summarised in Table 5-4.



15

Mode Weekday PM Weekday Daily Saturday Peak Saturday Daily

In Out In Out In Out In Out

Pedestrian 38 37 352 351 38 34 359 358

Cycle 1 1 10 10 1 1 10 10

Public Transport

4 3 33 33 4 3 34 34

Car Passenger 30 29 283 282 30 27 288 287

Car Driver 76 74 709 706 76 68 722 720

Total 149 144 1,387 1,383 149 133 1,413 1,409

Table 5-4 Multi Modal Trip Analysis Summary

5.3 Trip Reductions

5.3.1 Due to the close proximity of the Lidl to the existing Morrison’s and Tesco’s stores on Vulcan Road and Stephenson Road respectively, it is likely that there will be a significant amount of cross visitation between them.

5.3.2 In order to provide a robust assessment of the likely potential for linked trips between the proposed foodstore and two existing retail stores, reference has been made to a survey that was undertaken at a Lidl store on Transit Way in Plymouth in January 2007. The survey sought to determine the level of linked trips between the Lidl store and the adjacent Tesco and found that 54% of Lidl shoppers also visited the Tesco store as part of the same trip.

5.3.3 The 54% figure obtained from the 2007 survey is based on linked trips between a Lidl and one existing Tesco foodstore. On the basis that the proposed Lidl is positioned between two existing stores, it is possible that the linked trip figure in this case could actually be greater than 54%.

5.3.4 Despite the survey result and a greater linked trip potential for the proposed site due to its location, in order to undertake a robust assessment, a 40% linked trips allowance has been applied. It is therefore assumed that these trips will already be accounted for within the Morrison’s and Tesco’s trip generations.

5.3.5 A 40% allowance for linked trips has the following effect on the vehicle trip generation for the proposed Lidl foodstore (see Table 5-5).

Weekday PM Weekday Daily Saturday Peak Saturday Daily

Scenario In Out In Out In Out In Out

Non Linked 76 74 709 706 76 68 722 720

Linked 45 44 425 424 45 41 433 432

Table 5-5 Vehicle Trip Generation Summary – Linked Trip Allowance



16

5.4 Assessment of Development Impact

Pedestrian / Cycle Impact

5.4.1 The person trip generation forecasts that there will be around 703 pedestrian movements during a typical weekday with 75 of the trips occurring during the evening peak hour. On a typical Saturday it is forecast that there will be around 717 pedestrian movements, with 72 of the trips occurring during the peak hour.

5.4.2 It also forecasts that there will be around 20 cycle movements during a typical weekday and Saturday with 2 of the trips occurring during the evening peak hour and Saturday peak hour.

5.4.3 The requirements of pedestrians have been fully considered within the design of the proposed development from the outset. As a result, it is considered that the existing and proposed infrastructure will be well suited to accommodate the forecast pedestrian and cycle movements under base conditions and with the promotion of commuting by foot as part of the TP, it is envisaged this could increase over time.

Public Transport Impact

5.4.4 It is forecast that there will be around 66 public transport movements during a typical weekday with 7 of the trips occurring during the evening peak hour. On a typical Saturday it is forecast that there will be around 68 public transport movements, with 7 of the trips occurring during the peak hour.

5.4.5 It is envisaged that the existing public transport services within Minehead that can be accessed easily from the site will have capacity to accommodate the public transport trips forecast to be associated with the development as well as encouraging a modal shift from the private car wherever possible.

Traffic Impact

5.4.6 The impact of the vehicle trips forecast to be generated by the proposed development on the surrounding highway network is subject to detailed analysis within the following chapter.

5.5 Conclusion

5.5.1 This chapter has identified the anticipated multi-modal trip generation impacts of the proposed development and has been based on person trip rates generated using the TRICS database.



17

6 Traffic Impact

6.1 Introduction

6.1.1 This chapter looks specifically at the traffic impact of the development on the local highway network and determines whether the existing network is suitable to accommodate the trips associated with the proposed development.

6.2 Study Area

6.2.1 The assumed study area of the proposed development comprises the following junctions:

Proposed Site Access / Seaward Way

Vulcan Road / Seaward Way

Warren Road / Seaward Way

Stephenson Road / Seaward Way


6.2.2 Capacity analysis will be undertaken for all of these junctions under future year scenarios to determine how they operate with and without the development traffic. This will allow the impact of the traffic associated with the proposed development to be quantified.

6.3 Base Traffic Flows

6.3.1 In order to determine the base traffic within the study area, manual classified turning count and queue length traffic surveys were commissioned by PBA and undertaken by an independent company on Friday 8th and Saturday 9th November which is considered to be a neutral month.

6.3.2 The traffic flow data collected yielded the existing traffic movements for the junctions within the agreed study area for the weekday PM (16:00-17:00) peak and Saturday (11:00-12:00) peak periods.

6.4 Forecast Year Traffic Flows

6.4.1 Generally the impact of new development on the highway network needs to be considered beyond its opening year and surveyed traffic flows are adjusted to represent future conditions in forecast years. These flows are generally presumed to have increased in order to account for background growth in traffic flows caused by developments allocated within local planning policy and other demographic changes.

6.4.1 The planning application for the proposed development is to be submitted in 2014 with an opening year of 2016. As well as consideration of the opening year, the impact on the local highway network will require assessment 5 years post opening. On this basis, the forecast year included within the traffic analysis is 2021.

6.4.2 In order to take account of traffic growth from 2014 to 2016 and 2021, the Department for Transport approved software package of TEMPRO has been used. The 6.2 dataset has been used to derive the locally National Traffic Model adjusted growth factors (using the NTM AF09 dataset) for the Minehead area. Table 6-1 shows the traffic growth factors applied to the surveyed traffic flows:



18

Growth Period Weekday PM Saturday

2014-2016 1.015 1.016

2014-2021 1.089 1.093

Table 6-1 Local Adjusted Traffic Growth for Minehead Area

6.5 Traffic Distribution

6.5.1 The distribution of the development traffic has been based on the findings of the retail assessment referred to in the TA prepared by ADL Traffic for the foodstore on Vulcan Way that is currently occupied by Morrison’s.

6.5.2 The retail assessment suggested that the majority of traffic visiting the foodstore would be from Minehead, primarily the residential areas to the west and south of the site. About 20% was expected to be associated with tourism and half of this tourist traffic would be from the Butlins holiday village located to the north-east of the site.

6.5.3 The distribution used is therefore as follows:

Mart Road / Glenmore Road – 20%

Seaward Way / Warren Road/Town Centre - 15%

Seaward Way / Butlins – 10%

Seaward Way / A39(W) – 45%

Dunster / Marsh Street – 10%

6.5.4 The resulting distribution of the proposed development traffic flows is shown in Figures 6-1 to 6-3.

6.6 Traffic Scenarios

6.6.1 The junctions comprising the study area are assessed in capacity terms in the weekday PM and Saturday peak hours for the following traffic scenarios:

1. 2014 Surveyed (see Figures 6-4 and 6-5)

2. 2016 Do Nothing (including growth) (see Figures 6-6 and 6-7)

3. 2016 Do Something (as per scenario 2 plus proposed development) (see Figures 6-8 and 6-9)

4. 2021 Do Nothing (including growth) (see Figures 6-10 and 6-11)

5. 2021 Do Something (as per scenario 4 plus proposed development) (see Figures 6-12 and 6-13)

6.7 Junction Capacity Assessment

6.7.1 The operational capacity of the junctions within the study area has been assessed using the software programme of Junctions 8 (Versions 8 of ARCADY and PICADY). ARCADY and PICADY are used for the analysis of roundabout and priority junctions respectively.



19

6.7.2 A summary of the results of the analysis undertaken for each junction are set out below in terms of the maximum ratio of flow to capacity (RFC) and the max queue (in Passenger Car Units – PCU’s) for each junction. For reference it is generally considered that where the RFC is less than 0.85 the junction is operating within capacity and operating at capacity between 0.9 and 1.0. All values above 1.0 mean that a junction is operating above capacity and vehicle queues will begin to accumulate.

Proposed Site Access / Seaward Way

Table 6-2 Picady Summary Results – Site Access junction

6.7.3 The capacity analysis indicates that the proposed site access junction is expected to operate well within capacity in all scenarios considered, with no queuing forecast to occur.

6.7.4 The relevant PICADY output reports are included in Appendix H.

Vulcan Road / Seaward Way

Table 6-3 ARCADY Summary Results – Vulcan Road / Seaward Way junction – Weekday PM

Scenario Site Access Seaward Way

Max RFC Max Q (pcu) Max RFC Max Q (pcu)

2021 Do Something – Weekday PM 0.070 0 0.040 0

2021 Do Something - Saturday 0.030 0 0.030 0

Scenario

Seaward Way South Vulcan Road Seaward Way North

Max RFC Max Q (pcu) Max RFC Max Q

(pcu) Max RFC Max Q (pcu)

2014 Surveyed 0.270 0 0.210 0 0.160 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.280 0 0.210 0 0.160 0

2016 Do Something 0.290 0 0.220 0 0.170 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.300 0 0.230 0 0.180 0

2021 Do Something 0.310 0 0.240 0 0.180 0



20

Table 6-4 ARCADY Summary Results – Vulcan Road / Seaward Way junction – Saturday

6.7.5 The capacity analysis indicates that the junction is expected to operate well within capacity in all scenarios considered, with no queuing forecast to occur.

6.7.6 The relevant ARCADY output reports are included in Appendix I.

Warren Road / Seaward Way

Table 6-5 ARCADY Summary Results – Warren Road / Seaward Way junction – Weekday PM

Scenario

Seaward Way South Vulcan Road Seaward Way North



2014 Surveyed 0.240 0 0.200 0 0.160 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.240 0 0.200 0 0.160 0

2016 Do Something 0.250 0 0.210 0 0.170 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.260 0 0.220 0 0.170 0

2021 Do Something 0.270 0 0.220 0 0.180 0

Scenario

Warren Road East Seaward Way Warren Road West



2014 Surveyed 0.100 0 0.230 0 0.140 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.100 0 0.240 0 0.140 0

2016 Do Something 0.100 0 0.240 0 0.150 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.110 0 0.260 0 0.150 0

2021 Do Something 0.110 0 0.260 0 0.160 0



21

Table 6-6 ARCADY Summary Results – Warren Road / Seaward Way junction – Saturday

6.7.7 The capacity analysis indicates that the junction is expected to operate well within capacity in all scenarios considered, with no queuing forecast to occur.

6.7.8 The relevant ARCADY output reports are included in Appendix J.

Stephenson Road / Seaward Way

Table 6-7 PICADY Summary Results – Stephenson Road / Seaward Way junction – Weekday PM

Scenario

Warren Road East Seaward Way Warren Road West



2014 Surveyed 0.050 0 0.200 0 0.200 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.050 0 0.200 0 0.210 0

2016 Do Something 0.050 0 0.210 0 0.210 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.050 0 0.220 0 0.220 0

2021 Do Something 0.060 0 0.220 0 0.230 0

Scenario Stephenson Road Seaward Way


2014 Surveyed 0.600 1 0.130 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.610 2 0.130 0

2016 Do Something 0.630 2 0.130 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.680 2 0.140 0

2021 Do Something 0.690 2 0.140 0



22

Table 6-8 PICADY Summary Results – Stephenson Road / Seaward Way junction - Saturday

6.7.9 The capacity analysis indicates that the junction is expected to operate well within capacity in the weekday evening peak in all scenarios considered, with little queuing forecast to occur. The junction operates within capacity during the Saturday peak as well, however it is shown to approach capacity on the Stephenson Road approach in the 2021 traffic scenarios.

6.7.10 The relevant ARCADY output reports are included in Appendix K.


Table 6-9 ARCADY Summary Results – A39 / Seaward Way / Ellicombe Lane junction – Weekday PM

Scenario Stephenson Road Seaward Way


2014 Surveyed 0.720 2 0.150 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.740 3 0.150 0

2016 Do Something 0.760 3 0.150 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.820 4 0.170 0

2021 Do Something 0.840 4 0.170 0

Scenario

A39 East Ellicombe Lane A39 West Seaward Way

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

2014 Surveyed 0.670 2 0.030 0 0.510 1 0.330 1

2016 Do Nothing 0.680 2 0.030 0 0.520 1 0.340 1

2016 Do Something 0.690 2 0.030 0 0.540 1 0.360 1

2021 Do Nothing 0.730 3 0.030 0 0.560 1 0.370 1

2021 Do Something 0.740 3 0.040 0 0.580 1 0.390 1



23

Table 6-10 ARCADY Summary Results – A39 / Seaward Way / Ellicombe Lane junction – Saturday

6.7.11 The capacity analysis indicates that the junction is expected to operate within capacity in all scenarios considered, with no queuing forecast to occur.

6.7.12 The relevant ARCADY output reports are included in Appendix L.

6.8 Additional Capacity Assessment

Hopcott Road / Alcombe Road / Townsend Road

6.8.1 SCC requested that this junction be assessed in capacity terms after the baseline traffic surveys were undertaken. Rather than undertake a further traffic count, reference has been made to the TA produced for application 3/21/13/120, an approved residential development for up to 71 dwellings on land off Hopcott Road.

6.8.2 The Hopcott Road TA demonstrates that the junction will operate comfortably within capacity and without queuing in the peak hours, in all traffic scenarios modelled. The maximum RFC demonstrated is 0.520 in the PM peak in the ‘2020 base plus development’ traffic scenario. Furthermore, the queue on any approach is shown to not exceed one vehicle.

6.8.3 To provide SCC with comfort that the junction will continue to operate satisfactorily with the proposed development traffic on the network as well, further ARCADY modelling has been undertaken. This has only been possible for the weekday PM peak as the Hopcott Road TA did not assess a Saturday peak.

6.8.4 The proposed development traffic shown on the traffic diagrams as travelling along Hopcott Road has been assumed to pass through the junction in full. This is unlikely to occur in reality as some of the development traffic using this road will be generated from the existing residential development in Alcombe, located on the southern side of Hopcott Road, and to the east of the junction.

6.8.5 The proposed development traffic has been added to the ‘2020 base plus development’ traffic flow scenario from the Hopcott Road TA. The ARCADY results are shown in Table 6-11 below.

Scenario

A39 East Ellicombe Lane A39 West Seaward Way

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

2014 Surveyed 0.360 1 0.030 0 0.360 1 0.290 0

2016 Do Nothing 0.370 1 0.030 0 0.360 1 0.300 0

2016 Do Something 0.380 1 0.030 0 0.380 1 0.310 0

2021 Do Nothing 0.400 1 0.030 0 0.400 1 0.330 0

2021 Do Something

0.410 1 0.030 0 0.410 1 0.340 1



24

Table 6-11 ARCADY Summary Results – Hopcott Rd / Alcombe Rd / Townsend Rd junction – Weekday PM

6.8.6 The analysis presented demonstrates that the junction will continue to operate within capacity and without excessive queues. It also shows that the proposed development will have a negligible impact on the junction.

6.8.7 The relevant ARCADY output reports are included in Appendix M.

6.9 Conclusion

6.9.1 All of the junctions modelled are forecast to perform within capacity in all traffic scenarios considered, with minimal queuing predicted to occur. The Stephenson Road approach is likely to operate close to capacity in 2021 on the basis of results for traffic scenarios with and without the proposed development traffic included.

6.9.2 On the basis that the proposed development traffic has been shown to have a minimal impact, it is concluded that the traffic can be suitably accommodated by the existing road network.

Scenario

Alcombe Rd Hopcott Rd Townsend Rd


(pcu) Max RFC

Max Q (pcu)

2020 base + Hopcott Road development 0.330 0 0.520 1 0.490 1

2020 base + Hopcott Road development +

proposed development 0.340 1 0.540 1 0.500 1



25

7 Summary and Conclusion

7.1 Summary

7.1.1 The findings of the Transport Assessment are summarised below:

The development is proposed to incorporate a discount foodstore and associated car park, with access into the site achieved from Seaward Way. The proposed store equates to a Gross Internal Area of 2,264 sqm and includes a Retail Floor Area totalling 1,407 sqm.

Based on the existing conditions on the surrounding highway network and a review of the accident history within the area, it is forecast that the proposed development will not bring about an adverse impact on highway safety.

The development is compliant with all transport related policies at a national and local level.

A Stage 1 Road Safety Audit has been undertaken on the proposed site access junction and did not identify any significant safety issues.

The multi-modal trip generation was determined with reference to the TRICS database and the 2011 Census data for the Minehead area, and included an allowance for linked trips.

The proposed development is forecast to generate 293 and 282 two-way person trips in the weekday PM and Saturday peak hours respectively.

Based on the multi-modal analysis, the applied Census modal split and the linked trip allowance, the proposed development is forecast to generate 89 two-way vehicle trips in the weekday PM peak and 86 in the Saturday peak.

The distribution of the development traffic has been based on the findings of the retail assessment referred to in the TA prepared by ADL Traffic for the foodstore on Vulcan Way that is currently occupied by Morrison’s.

The traffic impact of the proposed development was assessed for the weekday PM and Saturday peak hours. With the development traffic distributed across the network, it is clear that the actual impact of the development traffic on the network as specified within the study will be minimal.

The addition of the vehicle trips associated with the proposed development to the surrounding highway network will have an immaterial impact on the operation of the junctions within the study area.

7.2 Conclusion

7.2.1 Taking into account the findings of the TA outlined above, the site has been shown to be sustainable and the traffic impact is forecast not to be severe in line with the NPPF. Therefore, it is concluded that there are no reasons to refuse the application on transport grounds.



26



Figures

-Date

Scale

Drawn by

Checked by

Mark Revision ChkdDateDrawn

-

J:\File Location\????????\???????????\???????\???????????.cdr

AS

GN

A3 NTS

04/11/2014

FIGURE 2-1

Lidl Minehead, Site Location Plan

LIDLE UK

KEY:

OBJECT 1

OBJECT 2

OBJECT 3

OBJECT 4

OBJECT 5

OBJECT 6

OBJECT 7

OBJECT 8

OBJECT 9

OBJECT 10

OBJECT 11

OBJECT 12

Offices throughout the UK and Europe

www.peterbrett.com

© Peter Brett Associates LLP

Client

Morrisons

Tesco Superstore

Site Location

Seaw

ard

Way

A39 Bircham Road

Townsend Road

Warren Road

N

Image © 2014 Getmapping plc

Aerial photo images reproducedfrom a licensed copy of

Google Earth Pro.

15%

15% 10% 10%

20% 25%

20% 25%

45%

55% 45%

55%

55%

45% 55% 45% 0% 10%

10%

0%

Client: Figure Title:

Job Title:

Date: Figure:Scale:Drawn:Checked:

Based on traffic distribution for

Morrison's foodstore on

Vulcan Road (TA by ADL dated

March 2009)

Development Traffic Distribution

Lidl UKLidl Minehead

Jan-15NTS

Figure 6-1Lakside House, Blackbrook Park Avenue, Taunton, TA1 2PX © Peter Brett Associates LLP CM

Telephone: (01823) 445150 Email [email protected] Internet: www.peterbrett.com AS

Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

6.8

6.6 4.4 4.5

9.1 11

8.8 11

20

24 20

45 Arrival

44 Departure

25

24

20 25 20 0 4.4

4.5

0


Job Title:


Proposed Development Traffic - Weekday PM


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

6.1

5.8 3.9 4.1

8.2 10

7.7 9.7

17

21 18

41 Arrival

39 Departure

22

21

18 22 17 0 3.9

4.1

0


Job Title:


Proposed Development Traffic - Saturday


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

86

139

55

199 187 110

80

171 63 191

146 303

106 69 291

123

138 108 341 126 4 333

416

3

388

510 Flows expressed in PCU

6 6 2 2


Job Title:


2014 Surveyed - Weekday PM (16:00-17:00)


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

95

252

40

273 53 40

106

143 72 180

184 207

115 83 244

166

137 152 271 165 2 270

276

4

273


7 6 6 4


Job Title:


2014 Surveyed - Saturday (11:00-12:00)


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

87.2

141

55.8

202 190 112

81.2

173 63.9 194

148 307

108 70 295

125

140 110 346 128 4 338

422

3.04

394


6 6 2.03 2.03


Job Title:


2016 Base - Weekday PM


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

96.5

256

40.6

277 53.8 40.6

108

145 73.1 183

187 210

117 84.3 248

169

139 154 275 168 2.03 274

280

4

277


7 6 6 4


Job Title:


2016 Base - Saturday


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

87.2

148

55.8

209 194 116

81.2

183 63.9 205

157 318

19.9

24.3 20.4 0

24.9 0

108 70 319

125

160 110 371 148 4 342

422

3.04

398


6 6 2.03 2.03


Job Title:


2016 Base plus Development - Weekday PM


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

96.5

262

40.6

283 57.7 44.7

108

153 73.1 193

195 220

17.4

21.3 18.4 0

22.4 0

117 84.3 269

169

157 154 298 185 2.03 278

280

4

281


7 6 6 4


Job Title:


2016 Base plus Development - Saturday


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

93.7

151

59.9

217 204 120

87.1

186 68.6 208

159 330

394

487

115 75.1 317

134

150 118 371 137 4 363

453

3

423


7 7 2 2


Job Title:


2021 Base - Weekday PM


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

104

276

43.7

298 57.9 43.7

116

156 78.7 197

201 226

353

422

126 90.7 267

181

150 166 296 180 2 295

302

4

298


8 7 7 4


Job Title:


2021 Base - Saturday


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

94

158

59.9

223 208 124

87

195 68.6 219

168 341

20

24.3 20.4 394

24.9 487

115 75.1 341

134

171 118 396 157 4 367

453

3

427


7 7 2 2


Job Title:


2021 Base plus Development - Weekday PM


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road

104

282

43.7

304 61.8 47.8

116

165 78.7 207

209 236

17

21 18.4 353

22.4 422

126 90.7 288

181

168 166 319 198 2 299

302

4

303


8 7 7 4


Job Title:


2021 Base plus Development - Saturday


Jan-15NTS



Sea

war

d W

ay

Site

Stephenson Road

Tesco

A39A39

Site Access

Morrisons

Vulcan Road

Warren Road



Appendices



Appendix A PIA Data

TRAFFMAP INTERPRETED LISTING Run on: 12/11/2014 AccsMap - Accident Analysis System

(60) months Notes: Seaward Way, Minehead

Selection: and Accidents between dates 30/06/2014 01/07/2009

090906798 25/07/2009 Time 1530 1 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Fine without high winds Dry Daylight: street lights present

None Single carriageway V1 WAS TRAVELLING ALONG THE AVENUE WHEN IT TURNED RIGHT ONTO GLENMORE ROAD AND HIT A PED. DRIVER ADMITTED HAVING NO INSURANCE BUT DENIED HITTING THE PED

Road surface Special Conditions Road Type

Saturday

Occurred on GLENMORE ROAD AT JCT WITH THE AVENUE, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Car Turning right No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction W S to

1

20 Not in restricted lane

Not foreign registered vehicle FRV 6 Journey

Casualty Reference: Age: Pedestrian Slight Severity: Female Pedestrian Direction: SW

1


None Single carriageway V1 TRAVELLING ALONG WARREN ROAD TOWARDS MINEHEAD TOWN CENTRE. CHILD JUMPED OUT OF PUSHCHAIR AND RAN INTO PATH OF V1.


Monday

Occurred on WARREN ROAD, MINEHEAD.

Vehicle Reference Car Going ahead No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction E W to

1



Casualty Reference: Age: Pedestrian Slight Severity: Male 9

1 3

1Registered to: Somerset Road Safety





None Single carriageway V1 AT JCT WITH STEPHENSON ROAD, WAITING TO DRIVE INTO SEAWARD WAY. V2 TRAVELLING ALONG SEAWARD WAY TOWARDS JCT OF STEPHENSON ROAD. V1 ENTERED SEAWARD WAY INTO PATH OF V2 AND COLLIDED WITH V2.


Tuesday

Occurred on SEAWARD WAY AT JCT WITH STEPHENSON ROAD, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Car Moving off No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction SW NE to

1



Casualty Reference: Age: Driver/rider Slight Severity: Male 2 25


First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction NW SE to

2



Casualty Reference: Age: Driver/rider Slight Severity: Female 1 51

Casualty Reference: Age: Passenger Slight Severity: Male 3 12


None Single carriageway V1 STOPPED AT T JCT INTENDING TO TURN RIGHT. V2 DRIVING ALONG SEAWARD WAY. V1 BELIEVING THAT V2 WAS INDICATING TO TURN LEFT AT JCT PULLED OUT ONTO SEAWARD WAY. V2 DID NOT TURN AND COLLIDED WITH V1.


Thursday

Occurred on SEAWARD WAY AT JCT WITH STEPHENSON ROAD, MINEHEAD.


First point of impact Offside Age of Driver Vehicle direction W SE to



Casualty Reference: Age: Driver/rider Slight Severity: Female 1


First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction SE NW to







090910671 24/11/2009 Time 1130 2 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Unknown Wet/Damp Daylight: street lights present

None One way street DRIVER OF V1 WAS UNLOADING GOODS FROM REAR OF FIRM’S VAN, V2 COLLIDED WITH REAR BUMPER OF V1 CAUSING VAN DOOR TO CLOSE AND STRIKE DRIVER OF V1. V2 KEPT DRIVING - INDEPENDENT WITNESS SAW INCIDENT AND CAUGHT UP WITH DRIVER OF V2 WHO RETURNED TO THE SCENE


Tuesday

Occurred on GLENMORE ROAD, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Goods <= 3.5 tonnes mgw Parked No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction Park Parked to

1


Not foreign registered vehicle FRV Journey as part of work Journey

Casualty Reference: Age: Pedestrian Slight Severity: Male Pedestrian Direction: 0

1 49


First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction N S to

2




None Single carriageway ALL VEHS TRAVELLING IN SAME DIRECTION TOWARDS DUNSTER. V1 SUFFERED FAULT TO VEH WHEREBY IT STOPPED SUDDENLY IN ROAD V2 TRAV BEHING V1 BRAKED AND STOPPED. V3 (BEHIND V2) FAILED TO NOTICE AND COLLIDED WITH REAR OF V2 PUSHING V2 INTO V1


Sunday

Occurred on SEAWARD WAY, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Car Slowing or Stopping No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction NW SE to

1




First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction NW SE to

2





3








101005042 15/06/2010 Time 2205 1 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Fine without high winds Dry Darkness: street lights present and lit

None Single carriageway INTOXICATED PED STAGGERED INTO THE PATH OF V1 WHICH WAS DESPERATELY TRYING TO AVOID PED


Tuesday

Occurred on A39 BIRCHAM ROAD, MINEHEAD


First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction W E to

1



Casualty Reference: Age: Pedestrian Slight Severity: Male Pedestrian Direction: N

1 22


None Single carriageway V1 TURNING RIGHT, FROM VETERINARY SURGERY (WITH VISION OBSCURED BY PARKED VEHS), ONTO GLENMORE ROAD WHERE IT COLLIDED WITH V2 WHICH WAS TRAVELLING ALONG GLENMORE ROAD. V2 THEN SLID INTO V3 PARKED AND UNATTENDED IN GLENMORE ROAD


Friday

Occurred on GLENMORE ROAD AT JCT WITH ENTRANCE TO VET SURGERY CAR PARK, MINEHEAD


First point of impact Nearside Age of Driver Vehicle direction W SE to

1



Vehicle Reference Motorcycle over 500cc Going ahead No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Nearside Age of Driver Vehicle direction N S to

2




Vehicle Reference Car Parked No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction Park Parked to

3







111101276 11/02/2011 Time 1709 2 2Vehicles Casualties Slight Raining without high winds Wet/Damp Daylight: street lights present

None Single carriageway V1 TRAVELLING ALONG SEAWARD WAY, TOWARDS BUTLINS. V2 EXITING STEPHENSON ROAD ON TO SEAWARD WAY. WHEN VEHS COLLIDED.


Friday


Vehicle Reference Bus or coach Going ahead No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning


1



Casualty Reference: Age: Passenger Slight Severity: Female 1 23



First point of impact Offside Age of Driver Vehicle direction W SE to

2



111102126 13/04/2011 Time 1330 2 2Vehicles Casualties Slight Raining without high winds Wet/Damp Daylight: street lights present

None Single carriageway V1 WAS STATIONARY, WAITING TO TURN RIGHT, V2 PLOUGHED INTO THE BACK OF V1


Wednesday

Occurred on VULCAN ROAD AT ENTRANCE TO MACDONALDS, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Car Turning left No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction NW NE to

1





Vehicle Reference Car Going ahead Skidded


2







111105188 17/08/2011 Time 1150 2 2Vehicles Casualties Slight Fine without high winds Dry Daylight: street lighting unknown

None Single carriageway V1 AND V2 TRAVELLING IN SAME DIRECTION. V2 WAS STATIONARY WHEN IT WAS HIT IN REAR BY V1


Wednesday

Occurred on SEAWARD WAY, MINEHEAD


First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction S N to



Vehicle Reference Car Waiting to go ahead but held up No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction S N to



Casualty Reference: Age: Driver/rider Slight Severity: Female 1



None Single carriageway V1 TRAVELLING TOWARDS BUTLINS, V2 TRAVELLING IN OPPOSITE DIRECTION. V1 OVERTOOK SEVERAL VEHS AHEAD AND, IN DOING SO, HIT V2.


Tuesday

Occurred on WARREN ROAD, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Goods <= 3.5 tonnes mgw Overtaking moving vehicle on its offside No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning


1





2








111108077 17/12/2011 Time 0934 2 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Fine without high winds Wet/Damp Daylight: street lights present

None Single carriageway V1 TURNING RIGHT, FROM STEPHENSON ROAD, ONTO SEAWARD WAY. V2, TRAVELLING ALONG SEAWARD WAY, INDICATED TO TURN RIGHT INTO STEPHENSON WAY AND ENTERED RIGHT TURN FILTER LANE. V1 PULLED OUT AND HIT V2


Saturday



First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction SW SE to

1




First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction NW SW to

2




121203682 05/06/2012 Time 1310 2 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Fine without high winds Wet/Damp Daylight: street lights present

None Single carriageway V1 ON BRUNEL WAY APPROACHING JCT WITH VULCAN ROAD. V1 STOPPED AT JCT THEN EMERGED ONTO VULCAN ROAD INTO THE PATH OF V2 TRAVELLING WEST ALONG VULCAN ROAD. VEHS COLLIDED


Tuesday

Occurred on BRUNEL WAY AT JCT WITH VULCAN ROAD, MINEHEAD.


First point of impact Offside Age of Driver Vehicle direction S SE to

1



Vehicle Reference Pedal cycle Going ahead No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning


2








121204709 30/06/2012 Time 0336 1 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Raining without high winds Wet/Damp Darkness: street lights present and lit

None Roundabout V1, TRAVELLING TOWARDS DUNSTER, ENTERED RAB FROM SEAWARD WAY. DRIVER LOST CONTROL ON WET ROAD SURFACE, LEFT CARRIAGEWAY TO OFFSIDE AND HIT A LAMP POST AND ROAD SIGN


Saturday

Occurred on A39 AT JCT WITH SEAWARD WAY, ALCOMBE, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Car Turning left Skidded

First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction N E to

1



Casualty Reference: Age: Passenger Slight Severity: Male 1 22

131308560 17/11/2013 Time 1235 2 1Vehicles Casualties Serious Fine without high winds Wet/Damp Daylight: street lights present

None Roundabout V2 ENTERED RAB FROM SEAWARD WAY, INTENDING TO EXIT INTO ELLICOMBE. V1 ENTERED RAB ON A39 FROM DUNSTER AND FAILED TO GIVE WAY TO V2 WHICH WAS ALREADY NEGOTIATING RAB. COLLISION OCCURRED


Sunday

Occurred on A39 AT JCT WITH SEAWARD WAY, ELLICOMBE RAB, MINEHEAD


First point of impact Offside Age of Driver Vehicle direction E W to

1





2



Casualty Reference: Age: Driver/rider Serious Severity: Male 1 70





141402726 25/04/2014 Time 1630 2 1Vehicles Casualties Slight Unknown Dry Daylight: street lights present

None Single carriageway V1 TRAVELLING DOWN THE AVENUE, TURNED RIGHT INTO GLENMORE ROAD IN FRONT OF CYCLIST (V2) AND COLLISION OCCURRED


Friday

Occurred on THE AVENUE AT JCT WITH GLENMORE ROAD. MINEHEAD


First point of impact Front Age of Driver Vehicle direction W S to

1





2





None Single carriageway V1 DROVE INTO A CUL DE SAC AND TURNED AROUND IN THE TURNING AREA. V1 DROVE BACK UP THE ROAD AND STOPPED TO LET SOMEONE OUT OF VEH. AS V1 DROVE AWAY IT WAS IN REVERSE AND HIT A PED WHO WAS WALKING BEHIND V1.


Monday

Occurred on PUFFIN CLOSE, MINEHEAD

Vehicle Reference Car U turn No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Did not impact Age of Driver Vehicle direction E W to

1



Casualty Reference: Age: Pedestrian Slight Severity: Female Pedestrian Direction: N

1 7






None Single carriageway V1 AND V2 TRAVELLING ALONG SEAWARD WAY. V2 SLOWED DUE TO TRAFFIC AHEAD AND WAS HIT IN THE REAR BY V1


Wednesday

Occurred on SEAWARD WAY AT JCT WITH MALLARD ROAD, MINEHEAD



1





First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction N S to

2




None Roundabout V1 WAS TRAVELLING TOWARDS BUTLINS. AS V1 APPROACHED RAB, DRIVER WENT THE WRONG WAY AROUND IT, HIT A CONCRETE TRAFFIC ISLAND, CONTINUED ACROSS CARRIAGEWAY AND COLLIDED WITH V2 WHICH WAS STATIONARY.


Sunday

Occurred on WARREN ROAD AT JCT WITH SEAWARD WAY, MINEHEAD



1




Vehicle Reference Car Waiting to go ahead but held up No skidding, jack-knifing or overturning

First point of impact Back Age of Driver Vehicle direction E W to

2








Accidents involving:

Motor vehicles only (excluding 2-wheels) 2-wheeled motor vehicles

Pedal cycles

Total

Fatal Serious Slight Total

Casualties:

Vehicle driver

Passenger

Motorcycle rider

Cyclist

Pedestrian

Total

Fatal Serious Slight Total

20

16 0 0 16

1 1 0 0

0 1 2 3

0 1 19

0 0 7 7

0 0 10 10

0 0 1 1

0 1 2 3

0 0 5 5

26 25 0 1

Horses & other

Other

0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0


090910371

090907757

111108077

111101276 101002260

090906843090906798

141402726

141403918111105242

101005042

101006602

090910671 111102126

121203682

111105188

141403499

141403565

121204709

131308560

090910371

090907757

111108077

111101276 101002260

090906843090906798

141402726

141403918111105242

101005042

101006602

090910671 111102126

121203682

111105188

141403499

141403565

121204709

131308560

DRAWING No.

DRAWN BY

Her Majesty's Office (c) Crown Copyright Licence No. OS100038382 (Year document is published)

DATE

SCALE

SOMERSETCOUNTYCOUNCIL










Colour coding by SEVERITY

Fatal (0)Serious (1)Slight (19)Other (0)

Accidents between 01/07/2009 and 30/06/2014

Seaward Way,Minehead 12/11/2014

1 : 10000

© Crown copyright. All rights reserved Somerset County Council Licence No. 100038382 2014 0109/2014

M.P.DJ.PCHECKED BY



Appendix B Illustrative Site Layout Plan



Appendix C Site Access Proposals

150116 Transport Assessment Final Issue...Office Address: Lakeside House, Blackbrook Business Park,,...

Documents

Transcript of 150116 Transport Assessment Final Issue...Office Address: Lakeside House, Blackbrook Business Park,,...