County Council HGV Management Study

1 Introduction

1.1 Background Following concerns raised by several Somerset Levels and Moors Parish Councils relating to the movement of Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) traffic, Atkins was appointed by (SCC) to complete a study of HGV movements in the area.

The purpose of the study is to investigate the impact of HGV movements on the unique environment of the Levels and Moors and the impact on the communities who live in the area. The main focus of the study is on the traffic generated by the local peat and quarry industries. This is because these two industries are perceived to produce the largest volume of HGV movements across the Levels and Moors. The study also looks at all other HGV movements within the study area.

The study is being produced for SCC as a tool to assist with future planning policies in the area. The report will inform both Council and District Council as part of the process of developing their Local Development Framework. The Local Development Framework is used by the District Councils to decide what type of development (if any) is appropriate on the Levels and Moors.

The commission comprises of one discrete study area, namely the Somerset Levels and Moors in the area bounded by but excluding the A39, A371 and A38. This is shown in Figure 1.1.

Aggregate Industries Key

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 1 3 7 4 8 135 32 3 B3 B Peat Production A Cheddar Zone (PPZ) Reservoir Cheddar

B3140 A 3 71 B3135 1 Berrow 5 1 3 Draycott B B3 13 8 5 3 A

B3140 9 Burnham- 3 22 Westbury- A on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark B3139 Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Bason Bridge No 3139 Ri rth D B East ver Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 5

8 1 3 3 A B H unts pill R iver Westhay B3141

R iv e STUDY r Godwins P a 9 r 3 re 23 tt A A 39 Cossington AREA R ive Chilton r B ru B3 e Polden 15 Edington Vapogro 1 9 3 Vapogro 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick

A Durstons

Bridgwater 39 A

Ki ng’s Se dge mo or D Street rain

Figure 1.1 – Somerset Levels and Moors Study Area

1-1

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 1)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

1.2 The Peat Industry The Peat industry is primarily based to the south east of the Somerset Levels and Moors around the Peat Production Zones (PPZs) created as part of Somerset County Council’s structure plan. The PPZs are shown in Figure 1.1. Peat extraction on the Somerset Levels usually takes place during the summer within the PPZ area. The extracted peat is stored to dry before being taken to local factories for processing, blending and bagging. The majority of this transportation between extraction site, storage and the processing plant is by tractor and trailer, some over relatively long distances on and off the public highway. Following SCC’s correspondence with Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA) it has been highlighted that the peat industry is seasonal in nature. The seasonality of the industry is outlined in Table 1.1.

Month(s) Level of HGV/Tractor Movements LOW SEASON January Steadily increasing number of HGV movements and tractor February movements, as industry prepares for spring season. March

HIGH SEASON April Tractor movements from storage to processing plants. May Increase in HGV movements due to export of processed June peat.

LOW SEASON July Low season for HGV movements. Peat Extraction takes August place. Tractor movements still take place.

HIGH SEASON September Autumn peak. Processed peat exported. Peat and other October mixing products imported before the winter.

November LOW SEASON December Few HGV and tractor movements during this period.

Table 1.1 – Seasonality of the Peat Industry (Information supplied by SPPA)

The peak season for HGV movements associated with the peat industry is between April and June. Tractor movements vary, as the peat is extracted in the summer months before being stored over the winter. This product is then moved by tractor in the spring of the following year for processing.

The Somerset Levels peat industry is shrinking and some rationalisation of factories has taken place. This has resulted in some former factories being used for alternative development and industrial uses. Those factories still in operation are increasingly processing imported peat and other materials; it is suggested by some that this practice does not actually need to take place on the Levels and Moors and is generating an increasing number of HGV movements in the area.

1.3 The Cheddar Quarry Industry The Cheddar quarry industry, shown in Figure 1.1, has two operating quarries located to the north of Cheddar: Aggregate Industries; and Hanson Aggregates. There are currently two active pits where quarrying takes place all year round.

The industry’s vehicles are perceived to cause problems for the local communities that live on the Levels and Moors. Both Mark Parish Council and Wedmore Parish Council have made representations to SCC on the subject, as their parishes can be used as a cut through to the M5. Vehicles heading to the south and the east can

1-2

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 1)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

pass through Wedmore to Wells via Wookey, to Glastonbury via Westhay and Meare, and to destinations south of the A39 via westhay and Shapwick.

1.4 Other HGV Movements Both the Peat Industry and Quarry Industry create a large number of HGV movements periodically throughout the year, but there are also other businesses and industries on the Levels and Moors that create HGV movements. These include:

• Agriculture, including milk collection; • Local Public Houses; • Local Shops; • Farm units used to produce and/or store products; • Other industries on the Levels and Moors (including Somerlap Fencing and Pallets).

Other HGV movements on the Levels and Moors include drivers who use the route as a cut through to reduce their mileage, journey time or to avoid heavily trafficked primary routes. It is suggested that this problem may be exacerbated by the use of Satellite Navigation Systems (Satnav) by some HGV drivers. Satnav systems can be set to take drivers on the most direct route, and also help drivers avoid traffic congestion, leading drivers along routes that they would not have previously considered. Some of these routes may be inappropriate for their type of vehicle. There have been several incidents nationwide of vehicles being sent down unsuitable routes by Satnav systems. This could be a problem in the Levels and Moors, as HGVs drivers may not be aware that they may not be able to negotiate some of the roads in this area due to the size of the vehicles and the width, geometry and surface quality of the roads.

1.5 Study Approach The aim of the study is to compare the stakeholders’ views to actual HGV movements within the study area with. The results have been achieved by the following methods:

Consultation with Local Parish Councils

Initial consultation took place via letter in March 2006. This outlined the aim of the study and asked the councils to respond with their views and experiences of HGV movements within the Levels and Moors. The responses highlighted sites where HGVs are seen to be a problem, as well as raising more qualitative issues relating to HGV movements.

Consultation with the Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA)

A meeting was conducted with Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA) in March 2006. The SPPA outlined: the history of the industry; seasonality; routes used; and government policy in relation to the industry. The SPPA also discussed the local Parish Council’s observations in relation to the number of HGV movements.

The aim of these two methods of consultation was to gain a detailed picture of the workings of the local peat industry and its impact on the local community, and to gain an understanding of the Levels of Movements and vehicle types currently traversing the roads of the Levels and Moors traffic data has been analysed.

Assess HGV movements on the Levels and Moors and surrounding road network

Historic traffic movements were analysed to identify traffic volumes and proportions of HGVs, and any patterns to HGV movements in the study area.

1-3

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 1)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

2006 Traffic Counts

To supplement the existing data, SCC conducted 11 new traffic counts within the study area in April 2006. The counts were conducted on the main routes into and out of the study area including the B3151, B3139, B3141, Burtle Road and Shapwick Road.

The aim of this approach is to provide quantifiable evidence of the volume of HGV traffic within the past five years compared to 2006. This evidence will also show the number of HGV movements in the study area during the peak peat production season.

Many Parish Councils believe HGV traffic has increased significantly over the last 18 months due to changes in the peat industry, whilst the SPPA believes there has been little change in movements. By conducting new traffic counts in the peak season this reduces the opportunity for dispute, as the study is analysing the Levels and Moors traffic during the period of the highest volume of HGV movements.

Manual Classified Count (MCC)

To supplement the traffic data, a cordon count was conducted at eight of the count sites during April 2006. The aim of the cordon was, where possible, to map the movements of HGVs into and out of the study area during the course of 12 hours. This data has also been used to validate the count data, to ensure that the volume of HGVs has been counted correctly.

The aim of the MCC count is to gain an idea of the movements of HGVs in the area and the types of businesses driving through the Levels and Moors. This data was used to analyse the HGV movements of both the peat industry and quarry industry along with other HGV movements.

HGV Route Audit

Following the evidence supplied by the Parish Councils and the SPPA, an HGV route audit was conducted in the study area. An SCC-owned HGV was driven along the several routes to give an understanding of the problems faced by an HGV driver traversing the roads of the Levels and Moors.

The aim of the audit was to gain experience of the problems faced by an HGV navigating its way around the study area. The route was recorded on video, to enable a review of the road network and specific problems. Many sites were highlighted and reviewed for HGV access.

Accident Data Review

Analysis of accident data for the study area was conducted to highlight any significant points within the study area where accidents involving HGVs and agricultural vehicles had occurred over the last five years.

The aim of the accident review was to highlight any quantifiable risk of accident within the Levels and Moors. Any areas with a significant volume of accidents, have been be analysed to see how the problem can be mitigated.

1-4

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 1)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Desk Top Study

The various traffic analysis and survey data collection has been brought together with a policy review to underline the political, social and environmental impacts of HGV movements in the Levels and Moors. The objective is to provide an objective assessment of the impacts HGVs are on the study area.

Interim Report

This interim report will outline the key facts and figures relating to HGV movements in the Levels and Moors and will form the basis of information taken to the Parish Councils and the SPPA as part of a secondary consultation stage.

Secondary Consultation

The aim of the secondary consultation will be to inform the stakeholders of the findings of the report and to make any amendments following discussion of the issues raised. Any amendments will then be included within the final report.

Final Report

Following the conclusion of the secondary consultation a final report will be drafted and submitted to SCC outlining HGV movements within the Somerset Levels and Moors.

1-5

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 1)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

2 Consultation

2.1 Introduction Parish Councils and the Local Peat Industry were asked to supply information relating to the movement of HGVs across the Somerset Levels and Moors as part of Work Package 1 of the Somerset HGV Management Study. The purpose of the consultation was to gain detailed background information on issues and perceptions relating to HGV movements in the area. Section 1.2 outlines the information supplied by the local Parish Councils and Section 1.3 the views of the Somerset Peat Producers Association.

2.2 Information from Parish Councils Thirty-one Parish Councils in and adjacent to the study area were contacted by letter to assess their views on HGV movements within the Levels and Moors. Sedgemoor District Council, Axbridge, Burnham & Highbridge, Glastonbury Town Councils and Wells City Council were also sent a letter offering them a chance to submit their views.

All of the Council’s were sent a letter explaining the nature of the study and inviting them to describe how HGVs were affecting their settlements. The letter set out that the study was focused on HGV movements associated with the peat and quarry industries. Table 2.1 shows a list of the parishes contacted.

*Ashcott Parish Council Pawlett Parish Council Parish Council Puriton Parish Council * Parish Council ∞Rodney Stoke Parish Council *Burtle Parish Council *Shapwick Parish Council Catcott Parish Council Parish Council Parish Council St Cuthbert (Out) Parish Council *∞Cheddar Parish Council Stawell Parish Council * Parish Council *Street Parish Council *Cossington Parish Council Walton Parish Council Parish Council Weare Parish Council *Edington Parish Council *Wedmore Parish Council *Godney Parish Council Parish Council Parish Council ∞Westbury Sub Mendip Parish Council Mark Parish Council *Wookey Parish Council *Meare and Westhay Parish Council *Woolavington Parish Council Parish Council Table 2.1 – Summary of Parish Councils Consulted (Parish Councils in bold were sent additional maps to annotate. *denotes Parish Councils who responded. ∞ denotes Parish Councils who responded collectively)

2.2.1 Summary of Responses A transcript of the main points relevant to the HGV study received in response to the initial consultation letters is included in Appendix A. The following paragraphs provide a summary of this correspondence. The Parish Council(s) commenting on the issues summarised in the main text is provided in italics the right hand margin.

2-1

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Road Suitability

The suitability of the road network was a major issue raised Ashcott PC; by several of the Parish Councils. Several of the comments Burnham Without PC; related to the appropriateness of the road network which, it is Meare & Westhay PC; suggested, has not been designed for “high levels” of HGV Street PC; Shapwick PC; movements that occur on some of the roads. Wedmore PC; Wookey PC.

Four Parishes stated that their settlement is not suitable for Chilton Polden PC; any HGV movements and would like these to be banned Edington PC; from entering their village. The villages in question are: Shapwick PC; Chilton Polden; Edington; Shapwick; and Wedmore. The Wedmore PC. reasons given are similar in all cases and relate to the difficulties HGVs have in negotiating their route through each of the settlements.

Several other Parishes highlighted specific pinch points Burnham Without PC; within or adjacent to their villages where HGVs are unable to Burtle PC; pass oncoming traffic safely at the speed limit. Cheddar Cheddar PC; Parish Council raised the issue that the A371, which is the Meare & Westhay PC; Shapwick PC; primary route to the north of the study area, has several Wedmore PC. pinch points between Cheddar and Draycott.

Meare and Westhay Parish Council suggested that the Meare & Westhay PC. Ashcott Road should be widened to accommodate the HGV and Tractor/Trailer Movements that pass along the route. It also highlighted that this road has “high volumes” of private vehicles and coaches accessing the RSPB site on Ashcott Road. The Parish Council does, however, concede that widening the road near Meare village is not practical, due to the proximity of properties to the junction.

Godney Parish Council says that the village receives weekly Godney PC. HGV movements of animal feed and dairy vehicles. The PC suggests that the route via Polsham should be improved. This would require improvements to the road network and the upgrading of Garslade Bridge.

On a general point, Wookey PC suggests that when a road is Wookey PC. closed for maintenance work, HGV drivers will use the most direct route to get to their site even if the road is unsuitable.

Road Surfaces

Several of the Parish Councils expressed concerns relating Ashcott PC; to the standard of road surfaces within the area. Burnham Burnham Without PC; Without, Wookey and Ashcott Parish Councils all suggested Wookey PC. that the HGV movements were to blame for the poor road

quality in their areas. Wookey PC also stated that the noise

and vibration created by HGVs in the early morning wakes the residents on a daily basis. Burnham Without PC state that empty HGVs associated with the peat industry often travel through the village at night. The same vehicles, once filled, then pass through the village in the early morning on their way to the M5.

2-2

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Road Maintenance

Road maintenance on the Levels and Moors is a complex Burtle PC; issue due to the underlying peat substrate which makes Wookey PC. improvements difficult to maintain. In the village of Bleadney, Wookey PC states that the road surface has been damaged

by HGVs, despite being relayed last year [2005]. The council

suggests that this has created potholes and loose gravel on the road which can damage cars and make the route unsafe for cyclists and pedestrians.

Godney PC also suggests that road maintenance and road Godney PC. closures should be carried during the low season for the peat industry, as this would reduce the number of HGVs using inappropriate routes on the Levels and Moors. The Council presents an example from March 2006 when the road to Shapwick was closed at the start of the peat industry’s peak period. This means that traffic that would normally pass through Shapwick was diverted via Edington and Burtle.

Weight Restrictions/ Traffic Restriction Orders (TROs)

Several Parish Councils requested that a traffic restriction Edington PC; should be placed on their village to prevent HGVs using the Shapwick PC; route. The reasons for such action relate primarily to the Wedmore PC. safety of other road users (particularly pedestrians). Edington

PC illustrate their views with the example of HGVs turning at

the cross roads in the town. The council has stated that on several occasions HGVs attempting this manoeuvre have become stuck and required assistance before being able to complete the manoeuvre.

Burtle PC is opposed to such restrictions, as their view is that Burtle PC; the HGV traffic should be shared between all of the Cheddar Valley settlements. The PC suggests that any action that prevents Parishes Transport HGV movements will increase the level of HGVs passing Group. through their village. This is a view shared by the Cheddar Valley Parishes Transport Group, who believe that any restrictions on the Levels and Moors will increase the volume of traffic through their parishes on the A371.

Peat Industry Traffic

Several communities are affected by HGV movements Burtle PC; associated with the peat industry. Both Meare & Westhay PC Meare and Westhay and Burtle PC broadly accept the industry as it is indigenous PC. to this part of the Levels and Moors. This is not a view that is

shared by all settlements.

Ashcott PC suggest that the Ashcott Road between Ashcott Ashcott PC; and Meare has been damaged by HGV usage. This route Burnham Without PC; has a weight restriction between Ashcott and Meare Shapwick PC. preventing HGVs passing through Ashcott to join the A39. The village of Watchfield is affected by HGV movements throughout the day and night, as vehicles associated with the peat industry use this route to gain access to depots in Highbridge and the M5.

Edington PC does not currently have HGV movements Edington PC;

2-3

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

passing through the village. However the PC are concerned that the extraction of peat on Edington Moor to the north of the village may increase these movements.

Several PCs are concerned about the perceived increase in Burnham Without PC; size of HGVs associated with the peat industry. Burtle and Burtle PC. Burnham Without Parish Councils note the increase in size of HGVs passing through their settlements. Burtle PCs clerk also suggests that the drivers have little regard for other road users.

Quarry Industry Traffic

HGV movements associated with the Cheddar quarry Meare and Westhay industry cause problems for several communities on the PC; Levels and Moors. The Aggregates Board has agreed set Wedmore PC; routes for the quarry HGVs to use. This route includes the Wookey PC.

A371 through the Cheddar Parishes.

Despite this agreement, several Parishes claim that Quarry Meare and Westhay HGVs pass through their settlements. In Wookey these PC; movements are claimed to occur in the early morning, Wedmore PC; between 0500 and 0630 and wake the residents who live Wookey PC.

close to the road. The village of Wedmore, on the main north-south route across the Levels, has several 90° bends that the HGVs have to negotiate and this can cause a hazard to property and other road users.

The Cheddar Valley Parishes Transport Group is concerned Cheddar Valley about the current level of HGV movements through their Parishes Transport parishes. It has an interest group that reformed in 2006 as it Group. believes that Somerset County Council has not acted on a 2002 report aimed at reducing such movements along the A371. It believes that any schemes that displace HGV movements from the Levels and Moors will increase traffic along the A371.

Signposting

One of the major concerns for the several Parish Councils is Burnham Without PC; the lack of adequate signposting in the area. It is suggested Chilton Polden PC; that this leads to HGV drivers who are unaccustomed to the Godney PC. area taking inappropriate routes and encountering difficulties. Godney Parish Council raise this issue, as access to the village is difficult for HGVs on the main routes; if HGVs take alternative route they often get into difficulties.

In the village of Meare the PC and the local peat industry have erected a sign at the junction of Ashcott Road directing HGV drivers to local sites.

2.2.2 Summary of Main Concerns The Parish Council responses have provided a useful insight into HGV movements around the Levels and Moors. From the information provided it was possible to establish data that needed to be collected to confirm their comments.

2-4

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

The responses highlight the routes that HGVs are using in the study area. This was useful in deciding where to place the Automatic Traffic Counts (ATC) and HGV Cordon Survey.

The responses were also used to plan a route for the HGV Route survey to collect current data for the study area that incorporates as many of the problem sites as possible. By traversing the road network by HGV it has been useful to assess whether the problems are physical, perceived or both.

The information supplied by the Parish Councils was also used to assess the routes that are used by HGVs associated with the quarry industry. This information is useful in determining the number of people who might be affected by such movements.

Finally the responses highlighted the need for a Local Signs Survey of the area. The Parish Council’s understand that better signposting may reduce the problems of HGVs using inappropriate routes to access sites on the Levels and Moors. By reducing this, there is the possibility of reducing the perceived impact of HGV movements on the area.

2.3 Peat Industry Response Atkins held a meeting with Ben Malin of the Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA) on 22nd March 2006. The purpose of this meeting was to gather information on the local peat industry.

2.3.1 Brief History of the Industry Extracting peat on the Somerset Levels is believed to have occurred in the area since Roman times. The first recorded extraction in the area dates from over 600 years ago, when the peat was used as fuel. Extracting the peat by hand continued up until the 1950s when the process became increasingly mechanised. The use of peat changed from fuel to a soil enhancer during this period and the practice of importing peat has occurred in the industry since the 1950s. The SPPA believe that the main difference is that people have started noticing HGV movements associated with these imports in recent years.

Activities in the peat industry occur all year. Peat is traditionally harvested between the months of May and September, as these are the driest months of the year. The peat can be hauled from the extraction sites to storage sites or processing plants at any time of the year. These movements are made by tractors with trailers. The volume of tractor/trailer movements are influenced by a number of factors including: • Quotas • Weather • Size of Trailer

The period between February and April traditionally has a high volume of vehicle movements, as the previous year’s peat is processed and bagged for the high season of sales. This period is between March and June. There is also a mini peak in the months of September and October as people prepare their gardens for the winter.

Peat is extracted in the Somerset Levels between 0600 and 1800hrs on weekdays, and Saturdays between 0600 and 1200hrs. There is no extraction on Sundays. The processing of the peat takes place all through the day, seven days a week. In March 2006 Godwin’s site near Burtle was processing peat between 0600 and 2300hrs in two shifts. This means that there could be HGV movements to and from the site at any time during this period. HGVs can also collect the processed and bagged peat at any time of the day.

2-5

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

2.3.2 Importing Peat and other Mixing Materials Due to the nature of the Somerset Levels peat it has to be mixed with other materials to be used as a soil enhancer. This is mainly imported peat from Ireland or the Baltic States (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania). Also other materials (diluents), such as wood chippings and coir are blended with the peat so that it is suitable to be used as a soil enhancer.

In 2006 imported peat has mainly come from Ireland, due to the cost of oil which affects transportation costs - importing peat by ship from the Baltic States is not economically viable at present. If peat is imported by the shipload, it is delivered to the docks at , Avonmouth or Portland (Dorset). The imported peat usually has to be moved promptly to the processing site due to the lack of storage facilities at the ports, and this can cause a high volume of HGV movements bringing peat to the Levels’ processing plants over a short period of time.

HGV routes into the Somerset Levels vary due to the material being imported and where it has been imported from. However, the main producers - Godwins, Durstons and Vapogro - all have agreements with Shapwick Parish Council that they will not send HGVs accessing their sites through the village (see Figure 1.1 for a location plan).

2.3.3 Certificate of Lawfulness of Existing Use and Development (CLEUDs) The SPPA stated that three sites on the Levels and Moors have been issued with Certificate of Lawfulness of Existing Use and Development (CLEUD) licences: Godwins; Vapogro; and Durstons. The certificate allows a site to be used for any purpose as defined under B2 Industrial Use under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. This means that if the peat industry were to cease trading at these sites on the Levels and Moors, the owners could use the site for any business included in the B2 Industrial Use classification.

At present the Godwins site, one of the sites with a CLEUD, and the SPPA estimate that the site has up to 50 HGV movements to and from the site each day during the peak season. Some of the smaller sites may have less than one HGV movement a day in the peak season. It is suggested by some that if peat processing were to finish at a site with a CLEUD, the owner may look to maximise the profitability of the land, so may decide to use the site for a business that has a higher volume of HGVs than the current peat industry.

2.3.4 HGV Accessibility The SPPA are opposed to any measures that would restrict HGV movements such as weight restrictions. The SPPA believe that this will unfairly increase traffic through other settlements. As mentioned above, agreements are currently in place from three of the companies that reduce HGV movements through Shapwick.

The SPPA have highlighted several barriers to access for HGVs in the Levels and Moors and these are shown in Figure 2.1. The issues include the state of Ashcott Road, Meare. The road surface along this section is currently very poor. There are several peat producers based along this road (including Vapogro) and accessing them is difficult due to this. The Ashcott Road junction with the B3151 in the village of Meare is also a problem for HGV movements, as vehicles turning left have to straddle both lanes when turning.

The SPPA have also highlighted Back Lane in Westhay as a pinch point that requires improvement to ease the flow of traffic through the village (see Figure 2.1). Back Lane is used by HGVs travelling eat-west between Meare and areas to the west to avoid a tighter turn in the centre of Westhay village. A recent housing development has been completed on Back Lane at the point where the lane turns through 90°, but

2-6

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

the road has not been improved for HGV movements and does not satisfactorily cater for the swept path of articulated vehicles. The SPPA stated that there is a verge that could be removed to aid HGV movements.

Other general improvements suggested are increasing the number of HGV passing points on the Levels and Moors, providing parking lanes for HGVs close to the major peat processing plants and improving hedgerow management by setting the hedgerows further back from the road (excessive growth into the carriageway from hedgerows ‘clips’ the wing mirrors of HGVs resulting in these vehicles travelling closer to the centre of the road rather than keeping tight in to the left hand kerbline).

B3151/Ashcott Road Junction - Difficult left turn for HGVs

Back Lane - HGV pinch point

Ashcott Road - Poor quality road surface

Figure 2.1 – Problem sites highlighted by the SPPA

The SPPA suggests that soft mitigation measures for the area could include all peat suppliers providing hauliers with the best routes to access their sites. The main problem with this is that many hauliers use agency drivers and there are no guarantees that the routes would be adhered to.

2.3.5 Moving the Peat Processing Plants It has been suggested by others that one way to reduce HGV movements on the Levels is to relocate the processing plants to the periphery of the area. The SPPA dismissed this idea on several grounds. The main issue is that peat is a high volume, low cost material and that renting land in a town such as Glastonbury would not be affordable to the industry. The second point is that the peat from the Levels would still need to be moved by HGV or tractor with trailer from the extraction and storage sites on the Levels and Moors, so this would not reduce the number of HGV movements in the area. Lastly the SPPA believe moving the industry closer to the M5 would require SCC financial assistance and would not significantly reduce the number of HGV movements to the area.

2-7

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

2.3.6 Future Trends of the Peat Industry The SPPA are optimistic about the future of the peat industry in the Somerset Levels. Due to the rationalisation of the industry there is still an abundance of peat in the PPZs. Current levels of local peat used are likely to reduce over time, particularly if new extraction licenses are not granted. If this is the case new sources are likely to be considered. This includes the use of green waste. The SPPA suggest that Green Waste movements by HGV have to happen in Somerset, so by bringing them to the Somerset Levels, where the waste can be recycled, makes environmental and commercial sense.

The industry is already using other materials such as wood filings, bark and compost and this is likely to be the trend for the industry. The SPPA say that it is impossible to predict the future, but state that if the peat industry ceases to be profitable, then the sites are likely to be switched to other industries under B2 Industrial Use, providing they have CLEUD licenses.

2.4 Summary of Data The data supplied by the stakeholders is the foundation of the study. By consulting with the Parish Councils and the SPPA at the earliest opportunity, it has been possible to direct the study to the key areas that are affecting the local community. The data has pinpointed key areas where HGV movements are causing problems for the local community, and issues affecting the transportation of goods and materials for local industries.

The key perceptions and comments of the Parish Councils and the SPPA are summarised below.

PARISH COUNCILS:

• The Suitability of the Road Network to sustain HGV traffic.

• The Quality of the Road Surface which is prone to subsidence and damage by vehicular traffic due to the peat substrate.

• Road Maintenance Schedule where poor planning may impact on HGV routes, such as works in March 2006 in Shapwick that coincided with the start of the main peat production season that impacted on HGV routes.

• Weight Restrictions/TROs - Parish Councils’ views differ on the suitability of such measures.

• Peat Industry Traffic, in terms of perceptions of volume, size of vehicle and time of vehicles movements.

• Quarry Industry Traffic movements relating to the Cheddar quarry industry.

• Signposting - is the current level of signposting adequate for the HGV traffic in the area?

PEAT PRODUCERS:

• Seasonality of HGV Movements - there are two peaks in HGV movements associated with the industry, April to June and September to October.

• Imported Peat and other Materials for blending has been occurring since the 1950s. HGVs associated with these movements have only become a ‘problem’ over the past few years.

2-8

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

• Agreements with Parish Councils are in place with Godwins and Vapogro that have agreed not to send their HGVs through the village of Shapwick.

• Certificates of Lawfulness of Existing Use or Development (CLEUDs) are in place at three sites: Durstons; Godwins; and Vapogro. These certificates could enable site operators to change industrial activities at their sites to any other within the B2 user class.

• HGV Accessibility is problematic on some parts of the Levels and Moors highway network which may influence perceptions of HGV movements by some Parish Councils.

• Moving the industry from the Levels and Moors would be at prohibitive cost to the peat industry and would likely fail to significantly reduce HGV movements in the area – peat would still need to be extracted from the PPZ and transported to relocated plants on the periphery of the Levels.

• Future of the industry depends on the availability of extraction licences, as there are still significant quantities of peat that could be extracted, the cost of importing products and the profitability of processing the product.

2.5 HGV Route Survey After collating the information received by the Parish Councils and the SPPA, an HGV Route Survey was conducted of the main routes across the Somerset Levels and Moors. The route survey used an SCC operated HGV and followed a route pre- determined to include areas highlighted by the Parish Councils and SPPA with the aim of getting first hand experience of the problems facing HGV drivers in the area. Throughout this survey, the HGV driver provided a commentary on his experiences and perceptions travelling along every section of highway.

To ensure that a record was kept of the issues identified and raised traversing the route, the route was videoed and the drivers views were recorded. A similar method was conducted by Somerset County Council in 2002 looking at HGV movements along the B3141 between Highbridge, Walrow and Woolavington.

2.6 Local Signs Survey As was highlighted by the local parish councils, the quality of signposting for HGV drivers could be an area for improvement in the study area. As part of the study, a signpost survey of the study area has been undertaken to check whether HGV drivers are given sufficient information on the suitability of certain roads for HGV movements.

The Local Signs Survey looked at the information provided for HGV drivers trying to access certain sites on the Somerset Levels and Moors. As stated earlier, an informal sign has been provided at the junction of Ashcott Road in Meare directing HGV drivers to the local peat processing sites.

2-9

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 2)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

3 Data Sources

3.1 Introduction This section presents a summary of traffic flows and accidents across the Levels and Moors in the study area. Historical traffic and accident data has been supplemented by counts completed in Spring 2006 to provide an indication of the movements of HGVs in particular through the area.

Historical traffic data is sporadic and generally provides ‘snapshots’ of traffic flows on a number of routes in the area.

Automatic traffic counts (ATCs) were completed by Somerset CC in 2006 that formed a cordon around the study area. Unfortunately damage to counter tubes due to poor road surface quality and, in some instance, vandalism of the tubes has meant that the more recent count data is not as reliable as had been hoped for.

The automatic count data was supplemented by a 12-hour record of HGV registration numbers at many of the ATC counter sites on 25 April 2006. The aim of this survey was to match registration plates of HGVs so that a pattern of movements could be gained, understanding how different HGVs route across the area. This data was also flawed and a relatively poor match of vehicles was regrettable outcome. However analysis of this data has identified some general trends of traffic associated with a number of industrial activities on the Levels.

Personal injury accident (PIA) data was provided by SCC for accidents involving HGVs and agricultural vehicles on the Levels.

In accordance with the Brief, the study has also identified the number of listed buildings and schools on the Levels, and and nature reserves that may be affected by HGV movements.

3.2 Traffic Data Automatic traffic data has been provided by SCC from 2001 onwards. This data has been supplemented by ATC and manual traffic surveys carried out in April and May 2006. Figure 3.1 shows the locations of this historical data.

Analysis of the data has tried to identify any clear evidence of peaks and troughs in HGV movements that may reflect the seasonality of the peat industry, i.e. ‘peaks’ of HGV flows in spring and the autumn which are the main periods when processed peat products are transported from the area. The Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA) state that the peak season for HGV movements is between April and June, with a second peak during September and October.

3.2.1 Automatic Traffic Data To reflect the seasonality of the peat industry traffic, existing traffic counts supplied by SCC have been broken down into four different times of the year to reflect the peaks and troughs of the peat industry.

3-1

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Aggregate Industries

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 71 3 8 135 32 4 Brean 3 B3 B A Axbridge Cheddar

B3140 A 3 71 B3135 1 Berrow 5 1 3 Draycott B B 3 13 8 5 3 Rodney Stoke A 2

B3140 9 Burnham- 3 22 Westbury- A on-Sea 4 sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 5 Easton 7 A 6 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield 3 Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill 1 Bason Bridge Wookey No 3139 R rth D B East 11 iver Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 13 1 A371 5

8 1 3 39 A B H unts pill R Burtle Godney Pawlett iver

3141 Westhay B

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Meare r 10 Godwins P a 9 r 3 re 23 tt A 8 A 39 Cossington R ive Chilton r B ru B3 e Polden 15 Edington Vapogro 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick A Durstons

Bridgwater 39 12 Ashcott A

Kin g’s Se dge Westonzoyland mo or D Street rain

Figure 3.1 – Existing traffic count sites

April, May and June Traffic Counts

Traffic data from six sites on the Somerset Levels and Moors is available for traffic movements between April and June. The counts took place in 2003 and 2004. The location of these sites is shown in Figure 3.1 as sites one to six. All six of the sites are around the village of Wedmore, located on the main roads into and out of the village, and are to the north of the main peat processing sites. Tables 3.1 and 3.2 show the total volume of traffic and number of HGVs that use each route for either a 12 hour or 24 hour period. It should be noted that some of these counts are from a single day and others are for an average volume over several days.

Table 3.1 below shows 12-hour counts at sites around Wedmore. The table clearly shows the section of B3151 to the north of Wedmore carries a higher volume of traffic than roads to the south and east. It could be inferred that this is because the route north of Wedmore is acting as a feeder route to roads to the south and east. In all cases, the percentage of HGVs is low, between 2% and 4% of all vehicles with a maximum of 177 HGVs shown in a 12-hr period north of Wedmore. A higher volume of HGVs is shown on the B3151 south of Wedmore than on the B3139 to the east, suggesting that a greater number of HGVs are travelling north-south through Wedmore than on any other ‘compass point’ movement through the village.

Table 3.2 shows 24-hour counts at sites around Wedmore. Over the longer time period, the proportion of HGVs expressed as a percentage of all traffic remains similar to the shorter 12-hr period described above. The absence of comparable data to enable some indication of east-west movements through the village is regrettable as the count data from the B3139 Coombe Batch west of Wedmore shows a relatively high number (109) of HGVs. This compares with just 44 HGVs recorded on the snapshot, one day survey in May 2003 at Theale (Site 3). Taken on face value, this would suggest that HGV movements are mainly between the north and routes south and west of Wedmore with fewer HGVs routeing to and from the east of the village.

3-2

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Ref Location Survey Date Period Direction All Vehs HGV %HGV North of Wedmore NB 1791 40 2 14 Apr 04 – 4 B3151 Cheddar Road Av. 12hr SB 1853 56 3 24 Apr 04 TOTAL 3644 94 3 NB 1595 58 4 2 B3151 Oxmoor 19 May 04 12hr SB 1591 59 4 TOTAL 3186 117 4 South of Wedmore NB 997 31 3 15 Apr 04 – 3 B3151 Mudgley Av. 12hr SB 1002 34 3 27 Apr 04 TOTAL 1999 65 3 East of Wedmore EB 898 22 2 1 B3139 Theale 22 May 03 12hr WB 822 22 3 TOTAL 1720 44 3 Table 3.1 – April, May and June 12 Hour traffic counts

Ref Location Survey Date Period Direction All Vehs HGV %HGV North of Wedmore NB 2100 44 2 14 Apr 04 – 4 B3151 Cheddar Road Av. 24hr SB 2202 58 3 24 Apr 04 TOTAL 4302 102 2 South of Wedmore NB 1140 33 3 15 Apr 04 – 3 B3151 Mudgley Av. 24hr SB 1178 38 3 27 Apr 04 TOTAL 2318 71 3 West of Wedmore EB 1207 65 5 14 Apr 04 – 6 B3139 Coombe Batch Av. 24hr WB 1103 44 4 28 Apr 04 TOTAL 2310 109 5 Wedmore Village EB 1882 68 4 14 Apr 04 – 5 B3139 Pilcorn Street Av. 24hr WB 1817 52 3 28 Apr 04 TOTAL 3699 120 3 Table 3.2 – April, May and June 24 Hour traffic counts

July and August Traffic Counts

Data from only one traffic count in the study area has been provided for the summer months of July and August, this being a permanent ATC site of the A39 to the South of Shapwick (site 12 in Figure 3.1). Data is available for this site from August 2005 to February 2006. This road is the primary route for all traffic travelling east-west to the south of the study area. In the month of August the average flow was 800 HGVs per day, representing 8% of the total flow on the route. The volumes of HGVs is significantly higher than on any other road in the study area. The traffic flows are summarised in Table 3.3 for a 24hr period.

3-3

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Ref Location Survey Date Period Direction All Vehs HGV %HGV A39, South of Shapwick EB 4767 368 8 12 A39 near Shapwick August 2005 Av. 24hr WB 4824 436 9 TOTAL 9591 804 8 Table 3.3 August Traffic Count

September and October Traffic Counts

Six traffic counts are available for the months of September and October. Two of the counts are from the A39 site (site 12), whilst the other counts are on the three B roads in the study area. The count sites are numbered seven to ten in Figure 3.1.

Ref Location Survey Date Period Direction All Vehs HGV %HGV Between Wedmore and Westhay NB 1193 112 10 9 B3151 Blakeway 25 Sep 03 12hr SB 1143 63 6 TOTAL 2336 175 7 East of Meare NB 1631 41 3 8 B3151 Cold Harbour 15 Oct 01 12hr SB 1673 36 2 TOTAL 3304 77 2 Between Watchfield and Mark EB 1240 44 4 7 B3139 Mark Causeway 18 Oct 01 12hr WB 1264 43 3 TOTAL 2504 87 3 Basson Bridge NB 1099 32 3 17 Sep 02 – 10 B3141 Woolavington Av. 12hr SB 1132 25 3 18 Sep 02 TOTAL 2231 57 3 Table 3.4 – HGV % for September and October 12 Hour traffic counts

In Table 3.4 above, Count Sites 3 (south of Wedmore) and 9 should have broadly comparable data as they are located on the same road with few intervening opportunities or destinations for HGVs. This comparison highlights a discrepancy in the northbound count at Site 9 which shows considerably more HGVs than Site 3. Whilst the southbound HGV count is also higher at Site 9, it is of a similar magnitude to Site 3. This difference could be a mistake in the ATC data northbound, or could simply be a reflection of the one day count at Site 9 showing the variability of traffic data when compared with an average 12hr count over several days (as is the case with Site 3).

The site east of Meare will include peat industry HGVs travelling between the production sites south of the village (and west of the count site) and routes at Glastonbury to the east. However this count (a one day count in 2001) shows a very low proportion of HGVs (2% of the total flow of 3304 vehicles).

In the west of the study area, count sites near Mark and Basson Bridge show similarly low proportion of HGVs when expressed as a total of all traffic, and the total traffic volume is also comparable with other count data across the area.

Table 3.5 shows average 24hr count data on the A39 near Shapwick in September and October 2005. This data shows higher traffic flows in these months when compared to August (around 12,000 vehicles in 24hrs in September and October compared with 9,500 vehicles in August) and higher HGV proportions (11% compared to 8% in August). This difference in the traffic volumes and proportion of HGVs does not appear to be reflected in the counts across the levels, i.e. the difference in HGVs as a percentage and in absolute terms is not so marked.

3-4

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Ref Location Survey Date Period Direction All Vehs HGV %HGV A39, South of Shapwick August 2005 EB 4767 368 8 (for Av. 24hr WB 4824 436 9 comparison) TOTAL 9591 804 8 EB 6260 689 10 12 A39 near Shapwick Sept 2005 Av. 24hr WB 6009 690 11 TOTAL 12269 1379 11 EB 5892 606 10 Oct 05 Av. 24hr WB 5849 658 10 TOTAL 11741 1264 11 Table 3.5 – HGV % for September and October 24 Hour traffic counts

November to March Traffic Counts

There are three sets of data for the period November to March, the period of least activity for peat-related traffic. These are at Sites 11 to 13 in Figure 3.1, all to the south and west of Westhay and Meare. The count data is summarised in Table 3.6. Note that the Burtle count is a 12hr count, and the other counts all 24hr counts. On the B3141 at East Huntspill the total traffic volume is a little higher than at Sites 7 and 10 to the north (3,270 vehicles compares to 2,500 and 2,230 at Sites 7 and 10 respectively) but the proportion of HGVs is comparable at around 4% of all traffic in the 12hr period.

At the count site west of Burtle, the total number of vehicles is significantly lower than the flow at East Huntspill, but the proportion of HGVs is greater at 10% of the total flow, representing close to 100 HGVs at the Burtle counts site in 12hrs and 140 HGVs at East Huntspill over 24hrs. It should also be noted that the Burtle count dates from 2002 and the East Huntspill count from 2005.

Ref Location Survey Date Period Direction All Vehs HGV %HGV West of Burtle NB 496 51 10 13 West of Burtle 5 Feb 02 12hr SB 520 47 9 TOTAL 1016 98 10 East Huntspill NB 1623 79 5 11 B3141 East Huntspill Dec 05 Av. 24hr SB 1648 63 4 TOTAL 3271 142 4 A39, south of Shapwick EB 5888 652 10 Nov 05 Av. 24hr WB 5755 633 11 TOTAL 11643 1285 11 EB 5961 634 11 Dec 05 Av. 24hr WB 5855 634 11 TOTAL 11816 1268 11 12 A39 near Shapwick EB 5351 553 10 Jan 06 Av. 24hr WB 5268 556 11 TOTAL 10619 1109 10 EB 5417 599 10 Feb 06 Av. 24hr WB 5227 607 11 TOTAL 10644 1206 11 Table 3.6 – HGV % for November to March traffic counts

As may be expected, all of the traffic data has consistently shown the A39 to be the most heavily trafficked road in the Somerset Levels area, and carries a greater number of HGVs than any other route. Figure 3.2 shows the two way volume of traffic along the A39 between August 2005 and February 2006 taken from the permanent count site on this route. The table shows average volume of traffic per day between August and February 2006. The level of traffic peaks in September after a ‘low’ in August and then remains fairly constant between October through to December. The level of traffic then drops slightly in January and February from 11,800 vehicles in

3-5

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

December to around 10,600 vehicles per day. The total number of HGV movements follows a similar pattern to other traffic levels, with a peak in September. The volume of HGVs does not change significantly as a proportion of all traffic movements throughout the period.

14000 12000 es

cl 10000 i

h Total Traffic Flow Inc. e 8000 HGVs V f

o 6000 Total HGVs er b 4000 m u

N 2000 0

n st pt ct ov ec b u e O N D Ja Fe ug S A Month

Figure 3.2 – Total Vehicle Movements on the A39 near Shapwick between August 2005 and February 2006

3.2.2 Automatic Traffic Data: Summary The A39 is clearly the main HGV route in the area, with HGVs typically representing around 10-11% of around 11,000 vehicles per day on that road. Elsewhere the ATC data shows lower traffic volumes on roads in the Levels area of typically 2,500-3,000 vehicles per day, with HGVs representing around 4% of all traffic on these roads.

Analysis of traffic data does not appear to show any clear reflection of changes in HGV movements across the Levels. This would suggest that the peaks and troughs of HGV movement in the peat industry do not register against the general background HGV volumes in the area, i.e. the number of peat-related traffic movements are small in real terms when compared with the net total of HGVs in the area.

3.3 2006 Traffic Counts To gain a perspective of the traffic movements on the Levels and Moors, SCC conducted 11 ATC counts in April and May 2006. Figure 3.3 shows where these traffic count sites were placed within the study area. The sites were chosen to create a cordon around the peat production area such that HGV vehicle movements could be recorded. Automatic traffic counts (ATC) were located on the main routes into the study area: the B3139 (Count site ref. B and H); B3141 (Ref. G); B3151 (A and C); Burtle Road (F); Ashcott Road (D); and Shapwick Road (E). ATC sites were also included at Stone Allerton (Site I), near Westhay (Site J) and in Meare (Site K).

HGV registration plates were also recorded for a single 12-hour period between 0600 and 1800hrs on Tuesday 25 April 2006 at sites A to H in an attempt to record the type of vehicle and its movements into and through the Levels area.

From this information it has been possible to gain an impression of HGV movements across the study area.

3-6

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Aggregate Industries Key

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 1 3 7 4 8 135 32 Brean 3 B3 B A ATC and MCC Count A Axbridge Cheddar Reservoir Cheddar I ATC Count

B3140 A 3 HGV Cordon 71 B3135 1 Berrow 5 1 3 Draycott B B 3 13 8 A 5 3 A Rodney Stoke

9 B3140 I 3 Burnham- A 22 Westbury- on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 H Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Alstone Wells B Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge Wookey No 3139 R rth D B East iver Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 G 5 8 1 3 3 A B H J untsp ill Riv F Burtle Godney Pawlett 1 er HGV Cordon Westhay B314

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Meare r Godwins P a 9 r r K 3 e 23 tt A C A 39 Cossington R ive Chilton r B ru Polden B3 e D 15 Edington Vapogro 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 E 3 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick A Durstons

Bridgwater 39 Ashcott A

Kin g’s Se dge Westonzoyland mo or D Street rain

Figure 3.3 – HGV Count Sites

The data available for analysis consists of 11 ATC sites using data collected in the period 20 April to 4 May 2006, providing 14 days of traffic data. The HGV registration plate data (MCCs) was collected at eight of those sites on Tuesday 25 April 2006 between 0600 and 1800hrs. Six of these sites coincided with ATC data from 2003/4 surveys:

• B3141 at East Huntspill (Site 11 in Figure 3.1, near Site G); • B3139 near Blackford (Site 6, near Site H); • B3151 North of Westhay (Site 9, near Site J); • Burtle Road, Northwest of Burtle (Site 13, near Site F) • B3151 near Clewer (Site 2, near Site A); and • B3139 at Theale (Site 1, near site B).

A description of 2003/4 ATC data was provided earlier in Section 3.2.

Traffic flow charts have been prepared using the 2006 data to identify key trends relating to HGV flows at each of the 11 sites. These charts were used to check initially the validation and accuracy of the data collected, as we were warned by the data collection manager that problems had been experienced during the data collection period as a consequence of damage to the ATC counter tubes caused by vehicles and, in some cases, by vandalism. A Summary Note regarding interpretation and the potential reliability and accuracy of the ATC data is in Appendix B. The key points from this note are outlined below. Section 3.3.4 presents an analysis of the MCC data.

3.3.1 Reliability of Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) Data A number of data reliability concerns have been identified. This was generally caused by damage to some ATC counter tubes caused, in most cases, by the unevenness of the road surface on several of the roads which has lead to incomplete data in some

3-7

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

cases and both over estimation and under estimation of HGV movements at others. Vandalism to the counting equipment at sites on the B3151 at Cold Harbour (Site C) and in Chapel Allerton (Site I) was identified by the data collection manager.

The problems with the ATC data has meant that only three of the ATCs from April 2006 are considered to be reliable, while four have uncertain reliability. The remaining four ATCs are considered to be unreliable. This is summarised by count site location in Table 3.7. This assessment of reliability is based on whether data analysis appears to show sensible trends in traffic flow, the comparability of data for both directions, and the comparability of ATC and MCC counts. Further detail is supplied in the Summary Note in Appendix B.

Site G – B3141 E Huntspill Reliable H – B3139 Blackford J – B3151 N of Westhay A – B3151 Clewer Reliability uncertain B – B3139 Theale E – N of Shapwick K – B3151 Meare C – B3151 Cold Harbour Unreliable D – N of Ashcott F – Burtle I – Chapel Allerton Table 3.7 – Reliability of Automatic Traffic Counts, April 2006

The reliability concerns surrounding data recorded at many of the ATC sites makes it difficult to identify trends in HGV movements. Therefore, only the main features of the data sets where we consider data to be reasonably reliable are reported here.

3.3.2 ATC Data Interpretation HGVs represent between 3% and 9% of all traffic at the ‘reliable’ April 2006 ATC sites over a 12-hour period. The highest proportion of HGVs is recorded on the B3141 through East Huntspill (Site G). These proportions accord with earlier survey results from historic traffic counts completed between 2001 and 2006.

At all sites, HGV movements are lower on Saturdays and Sundays, although the difference is fairly small; HGV movements are occurring seven days a week throughout the Somerset Levels and Moors.

At the majority of count sites, HGV movements are primarily occurring between 0600 and 2000hrs, with relatively few movements outside these hours. However, limited HGV activity seems to continue until around midnight on the B3139 Blackford (Site H). On the B3151 North of Westhay (Site J), a small number of HGV movements are recorded up to midnight on most days, with some movements occurring after midnight. While the number of night-time HGV movements is fairly small, the vehicles recorded at sites H and J are likely to pass through Wedmore due to the lack of alternative routes suitable for HGV movements in the area.

3.3.3 HGV Cordon Count Data A 12-hour survey of HGV movements was carried out enumerators at eight count sites recording the registration and livery of HGVs and Agricultural Vehicles (AVs) passing cordon points between 0600 and 1800hrs on Tuesday 25 April 2006. A total of 670 HGV and AV movements were recorded that could be used to track HGVs through the Levels area. From this data it has been possible to create indicative diagrams of movements across a simplified road network of the Somerset Levels and

3-8

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Moors, broken down into industry type. These diagrams are in Appendix C, along with the matrices of HGV and AV movements.

It should be noted that, from the data collected, only a relatively small number of heavy goods and agricultural vehicles could be tracked in the cordon area, i.e. a match of vehicle registration plate and/or a detailed description of a vehicle was made at two or more cordon points. This was for a number of reasons, but it was primarily a result of variability in the accuracy of data collection by respective enumerators. However, even though the data is limited, it has enabled us to highlight some of the indicative HGV movement patterns within the Levels and Moors.

The B3141 at East Huntspill (Site G) was shown to have very few traffic movements associated with the rest of the study area (i.e. very few HGVs or AVs were recorded at other cordon points). The MCC data showed that out of 170 HGV and AV movements recorded at the site, only seven HGVs and AVs could be tracked across the Levels and Moors, accessing the area via Blackford (Site H) and Burtle (Site F) (Note that this is only seven of the 170 HGVs and AVs counted in the 12-hour period at Site G. More vehicles will almost certainly have travelled through the Levels area, but the vehicle point of entry or exit could not be identified because their registration number was either erroneously or not recorded by another enumerator. This example highlights the general poor reliability of this data, but it is useful to suggest trends of route choice by HGVs and AVs). The 170 HGVs recorded at this site compares well with the 142 HGVs recorded at a similar location on the same section of road in December 2005 (Site 11, Table 3.6).

Purpose

In addition to recording the registration plate details of HGVs and AVs, enumerators were asked to note a description of the vehicle, its size and, where possible its load and most importantly the vehicle owner/operator if the vehicle was marked with such information. A large number of movements (251) recorded from all sites could not be attributed to any particular industry due to a lack of information or livery on the vehicles. However, of those vehicles that could be identified and attributed to a particular industry or business purpose, 122 HGV movements (18%) were made by hauliers. The building supplies industry generated 63 HGV movements (9%). The peat industry and quarry industry, along with public services, generated 40 HGV and AV movements (6% each), although some of these 122 movements made by hauliers might also be related to the peat industry, i.e. the operator’s contact details on the vehicle could not be attributed with any confidence to a peat producer and/or the contents of the vehicle could not be identified (for example, the trailer concealed its contents with a side curtain). Less significant were HGV movements made by agricultural and dairy vehicles, HGVs related to wood products, heavy machinery, and the transportation of foodstuffs.

Entry and Exit at the same point

In terms of all HGVs and AVs recorded at cordon points surrounding the Somerset Levels and Moors, common movements were those where vehicles entered and exited the area at the same count site/cordon point. In particular, 28 in/out movements were recorded on the B3151 Cold Harbour site (Site C) and on Ashcott Road (Site D). It can be inferred that these vehicles were visiting business sites within the Somerset Levels and Moors.

Through Traffic

The most common ‘through’ route identified was 13 vehicles travelling on the B3151 between Cold Harbour (Site C) and Clewer (Site A) through Wedmore, Westhay and Meare. Analysis of the entry and exit time data shows that the majority of these vehicles passed through the cordon area without a delivery or driver break, i.e. the

3-9

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

time of cordon entry and exit would appear to suggest the vehicle did not stop as a reasonable average speed was maintained between cordon points. Although this was the most common movement identified, this represents a relatively small sample set in comparison to the total number of vehicles entering the area at the same cordon points - a total of 107 HGVs entered the study area at Site C and 58 at Site A yet only 13 vehicle matches could be identified between these two points.

Wedmore

Due to the nature of the road network across the Somerset Levels, Wedmore could be considered to be at the ‘crossroads’ on the Levels’ road network. Historical traffic survey data shows approximately 100-120 HGVs per day use the B3151 to the north and south of the village, with a similar number to the west of the village on the B3139 through Mark and approximately 50 HGVs per day on the B3139 at Theale. The MCC survey corroborates this data, having identified that approximately 80 HGVs would have passed through Wedmore during the 12-hour MCC period. This figure has been obtained based on the assumption that most vehicles entering (or leaving) the cordon area at sites A, B, and H (see Figure 3.3) and leaving (or entering) at a different site would have to pass through Wedmore. From analysis of the entry and exit time data, it can be estimated that approximately 60% of the HGVs travelling through Wedmore would have passed through the Levels and Moors cordon area without a delivery or driver break. Any vehicles recorded as entering and leaving the cordon area at the same site (for example, recorded as entering at Site A and then leaving at Site A at a later time and not recorded at any other cordon point) have not been included in this analysis of Wedmore traffic, although it is likely that many of these will also have passed through the village to reach a destination in the village or within the cordon area.

Peat Industry Vehicles

Where it is certain that HGVs and AVs were related to the peat industry, the most common movements identified were those where vehicles entered and exited the cordon area at the same cordon point, mainly via the B3151 to and from Glastonbury and passing through the Ashcott Road cordon. There were 12 in/out movements recorded on the B3151 at Cold Harbour (Site C) and 16 on Ashcott Road (Site D). For the Ashcott Road site, it is important to note that this does not necessarily mean that the 16 vehicles recorded had travelled through Ashcott village; it is very likely that they were accessing sites to and from the north, from agricultural sites within the Levels and Moors area (and by proxy within the cordon area). This is supported by the fact that 14 of these 16 movements were made by tractors, many of them carrying extracted peat in one direction, and that they tended to cross the cordon in the first instance from the north.

Unfortunately, the MCCs did not identify any HGV or AV movements associated with the peat industry in Burtle (Site F), close to the Godwins peat processing site. This may be a result of the use of hauliers’ to transport peat products rather than dedicated vehicles - many hauliers’ vehicles have enclosed loads and this may have caused identification difficulties for the enumerator(s).

Quarry Industry Vehicles

The numbers of HGVs passing through the Levels and Moors and originating from the quarry industry accounted for 40 HGV movements (6%) on the MCC survey day. Of these, 17 HGVs passed fully through the cordon area, i.e. entering at one site and exiting at another. Five HGV movements associated with the quarry industry were recorded as travelling southbound through the cordon area from the B3151 Clewer (Site A) through Shapwick (Site E), and four were recorded in the opposite direction. Due to the sparse nature of the road network it is likely that most of these vehicles would have passed through Wedmore. The movements of quarry vehicles was

3-10

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

perceived as being a problem for Meare & Westhay PC, Wedmore and Wookey Parish Councils.

3.3.4 Summary Due to the problems with the reliability of the count data, regrettably it has not been possible to gain an accurate picture of HGV movements on the Levels and Moors at this time. However, the surveys have enabled a reasonable representation of HGV movements in the area to be defined. The MCC count represents a more accurate level of HGV movements over a 12 hour period than the ATC data, but poor enumerator records has enabled this data to be used only to provide a snapshot of some HGV and AV movements in the area.

Traffic data has shown that the B3151 between Westhay and Wedmore is a major route for HGV and agricultural vehicle movements within the area, although the proportion of HGV movements as a percentage of all traffic is relatively low. The A39 is the main traffic distributor across the Levels, carrying by far the greatest number of vehicles and HGVs (10% of all traffic). Highways across the Levels carry significantly fewer vehicles in comparison.

The ATC data did not show any significant variations in HGV demand flows through the year, suggesting that HGV movements associated with the peat industry do not contribute a significant number of vehicles when measured against the background traffic flow of HGVs generally.

Comparison of the proportion of HGVs detailed in the ATC data and expressed as a percentage of all traffic would appear to be steady throughout the period 2001 and 2006, suggesting no growth in relative terms against other traffic flows. This may however ‘hide’ any local increases in HGV movements caused by, for example, a change in activities at a given site or by short-term peaks in HGV movements which may occur at a time when a temporary count site is not in operation.

The MCC survey suggests that peat industry vehicles tend to use the east-west routes to enter and leave the Levels area, using Burtle Road between Westhay and East Huntspill (through Site F) and using the B3151 between Meare and Glastonbury (Site C).

The registration matches did clearly identify a number of quarry vehicles travelling north-south across the Levels (through Sites A and E) which would route them through Wedmore and Shapwick, probably to and from the quarries located to the north of Cheddar.

3.4 Accident Data Personal injury accident (PIA) data involving HGVs and Agricultural Vehicles (AVs) for the study area was provided by SCC for a five year period between August 2000 and July 2005. For the purposes of the study HGVs have been defined as 7.5 T and over. The study has concentrated solely on PIAs involving HGVs and AVs and did not consider any accidents that did not involve one or other of these vehicle classes. The analysis is therefore deliberately biased to review accidents involving only these two vehicle types.

Over this five-year period, there were 33 PIAs involving HGVs, two of which were serious and the remaining 31 were slight. There were 11 PIAs involving Agricultural Vehicles (AVs), three of which were serious and the remaining eight were slight.

Three of the accidents involving HGVs also involved vulnerable road users: two PIAs involved pedestrians; and the other a motorcyclist. One AV accident involved a motorcyclist. All accidents with these vulnerable road users were recorded as slight.

3-11

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

3.4.1 Accident Clusters The PIA data was analysed for accident clusters. For the purpose of the study a cluster has been defined as a junction or 1000m section of road that has had two or more PIAs involving HGVs or AVs in the past five years. Five cluster sites were identified within the Somerset Levels area and these are identified on Figure 3.4. The clusters are described below.

Aggregate Industries Key

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 71 3 8 135 32 4 Brean 3 B3 B HGV Accident Slight A Axbridge Cheddar Reservoir Cheddar HGV Accident Serious

B3140 A 3 Agricultural Vehicle 7 Cluster 5 1 B3135 1 Berrow 5 Slight 1 3 Draycott B B 3 13 8 Agricultural Vehicle 5 3 Rodney Stoke A Serious

9 B3140 3 Burnham- A 22 Westbury- on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge Wookey No 3139 Riv rth D B Cluster 1 East er Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 5

8 1 3 3 A B H unts pill R Burtle Pawlett iver

3141 Westhay B

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Meare r Godwins P a 9 r 3 re 23 tt A A3 Cossington 9 R ive Chilton r B ru Polden B3 e 15 Edington 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 Vapogro 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick

A Cluster 2 Bridgwater 39 Cluster 3 Ashcott A

Ki ng’s Se dge Westonzoyland mo or D Street rain Cluster 4

Figure 3.4 – HGV and AV accidents on the Somerset Levels

Cluster 1 is on the A39 between M5 J23 and Hillside, Puriton. Four slight PIAs occurred over the study period. All four involved errors on behalf of the HGV driver. The hill’s steepness and manoeuvring errors were identified as contributory factors.

Cluster 2 is on the A39 at the Puriton Hill/Bath Road (Silverfish) junction. Two slight PIAs occurred in the study period and both of the accidents involved driver error when a vehicle was turning. An accident involving an HGV occurred when the HGV driver failed to stop at the junction hitting the vehicles in front. The second accident involved a car pulling out in front of an AV that was travelling along the main carriageway.

Cluster 3 is at the Bawdrip Lane junction of the A39. Two slight PIAs occurred at this junction within the study period. HGV/AV driver error was a contributing factor within both accidents.

Cluster 4 covers the A39 from the A39/Middle Street junction near Ashcott to the A39/Berhill junction. This cluster has the highest number of accidents, with six occurring within five years of the study period. There was one serious PIA, whilst the other five were recorded as slight. The serious accident involved the HGV driver failing to negotiate a left hand bend. This resulted in the HGV rolling and colliding with a car travelling in the opposite direction. Three of the slight PIAs occurred with vehicles colliding with vehicles turning right. This was a contributory factor in two of the accidents that occurred at the Berhill junction. Two accidents also occurred at the Bradley Lane junction with the A39. One of these involved a car pulling into the path

3-12

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

of an HGV and the other involved the HGV colliding with a car waiting to turn. Other factors contributing to the accidents involved: a poorly secured load; one driver pulling out of a side road; and one driver driving too fast for the weather conditions.

Cluster 5 is in the village of Stone Allerton in the Somerset Levels. Two accidents occurred on Notting Hill Way within the village. Both were head on collisions when HGVs attempted to negotiate a tight bend in the village. Both accidents were recorded as slight.

There were also two accidents on the A39 in Wells between Jocelyn Drive and Strawberry Way, but these did not have similar characteristics and were not therefore grouped together as a cluster.

There were five PIAs described as serious between 2001 and 2005. The accident in Cluster 4 has already been described above. Of the remaining four one involved an HGV and the other three involved AVs. The accident involving an HGV occurred at Haybridge on the A371 between Wells and Cheddar. In the incident the car driver crossed the white centre line on a right hand bend, colliding with an HGV travelling in the opposite direction.

Of the serious PIAs involving AVs, two occurred on the A39. The first occurred at Horsey, between Bridgwater and the Silverfish Junction and involved the AV overtaking a stationary vehicle. A car hit the trailer of the AV and the driver lost control of their vehicle. The second accident occurred at Coxley, between Glastonbury and Wells, where a car was overtaking an AV towing a forager. The car clipped the forager, span and collided with a car travelling in the opposite direction. The final serious PIA occurred on the Levels and Moors at Bason Bridge on the B3141. A car was overtaking the AV when a second car pulled out of the junction. The first car swerved to avoid the second and collided with the AV.

In summary the majority of HGV and AV accidents in the Levels and Moors study area occurred on the A roads that bound the area. Only six accidents involving HGVs and three accidents involving AVs actually occurred on the minor roads of the area within the five year period. The accident at Bason Bridge was the only PIA classified as serious. Only two of the 44 accidents involved pedestrians and two involved motorcyclists within the 5 year period. The majority of accidents appear to have been caused by driver error or the driver manoeuvring without paying due care and attention to other traffic.

3.4.2 Summary of Accidents There were no distinctive trends highlighted in the accident data, and the number of PIAs within the study area involving HGVs and AVs is low in comparison to the volume of HGVs that pass through the area every day. For example, earlier traffic analysis shows the A39 at Shapwick has between 800 and 1400 HGV movements per day, yet there were only 14 PIAs involving HGVs recorded on the A39 in the five- year study period.

The accident figures on the Somerset levels, indicating nine PIAs involving HGVs and AVs on Levels roads (excluding A roads), suggests show a low number of accidents compared to the perceived safety concerns highlighted by the Parish Councils.

3.5 Roads Review Methodology The study is also required to consider the relevance of the Roads Review Methodology (RRM) as part of the HGV impact assessment. The RRM was created by SCC in January 2005 as part of the Local Transport Plan (2006-2011). The aim of the methodology is to score different road schemes against a defined set of criteria that are comparable for each scheme. The criteria set out in the RRM are as follows:

3-13

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

• The nature of the route passing through the settlement; • The levels of congestion; • Severance; • Air quality; • Fear and intimidation; • Safety; • Heritage impacts; and • Noise pollution.

Section 5 completes a detailed assessment of sections of the Somerset Levels roads against these criteria. The following paragraphs detail the collation of data relevant to enable this analysis.

3.5.1 Heritage Data English Heritage has given three different types of Listing for buildings identified as being of historical significance and hence gaining protection to varying degrees from being demolished or being developed inappropriately. These listings are:

• Grade 1 Listed – buildings of exceptional interest; • Grade 2* Listed – particularly important buildings of more than special interest; and • Grade 2 Listed – buildings of special interest, warranting every effort to preserve them.

Buildings can be listed by English Heritage for several reasons and these include: architectural interest; historic interest; close historical association to an event; and group value of several buildings.

Atkins has used the data supplied by SCC via its website to draw up a list of buildings in the study area that may be affected by HGV movements in the Levels and Moors. A full list of the buildings is available in appendix x. The information obtained from SCC shows that there are six Grade 1 Listed buildings in the study area. Four of the buildings with this designation are Churches, and three of the buildings are in the village of Meare.

There are eight Grade 2* listed buildings in the study area. Four of these buildings are along the A371 which bounds the area to the north east.

There are 139 Grade 2 listed buildings. The highest concentration of these is in the village of Wedmore, where there are 42 buildings with listed status. The village of Mark has 18 Grade 2 listed buildings along the B3139 through the village.

The heritage data has been used to show the buildings of local and national importance that may be affected by the HGV movements on the Somerset Levels and Moors.

3.5.2 Environmental Data The environment of the Somerset Levels and Moors is unique in the UK. It has been influenced by human activity since the Bronze Age. The low lying sections of the study area are protected from flooding by sea defences at Bridgwater. In turn, this has created a peat wetland that is an important habitat for migratory birds and birds of prey. The area is also rich in biodiversity and is an internationally recognised area with three different levels of protection:

3-14

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

• Special Protection Area (SPA); • RAMSAR1 (Wetlands Protection); and • Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).

These protected areas are shown in Figure 3.5 (Source: English Nature Website). The area to the north and west of Westhay is covered by all three protection standards. There are three other sites that are classed as SSSIs in the study area, at Axbridge, south of Meare and at Henton, near Wookey.

Aggregate Industries Key

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 71 3 8 135 32 4 Brean 3 B3 B SPA/Ramsar/SSSI A Axbridge Cheddar Protected Site Reservoir Cheddar SSSI Site B3140 A 3 7 1 B3135 1 5 Berrow 1 3 Draycott B B 3 13 8 5 3 A Rodney Stoke

B3140 9 Burnham- 3 22 Westbury- A on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge Wookey No B3139 Rive rth D East r Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt A371 51

8 3 31 A B H unts pill R Burtle Pawlett iver Westhay B3141

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Godwins Meare r P a 9 r 3 re 23 A tt A3 Cossington 9 R ive Chilton r B ru Polden B3 e 15 Edington 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 Vapogro 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick

A

Bridgwater 39 Ashcott A

K ing ’s S ed ge Westonzoyland mo Street or D rain

Figure 3.5 – Environmentally Protected Sites on the Levels

Somerset County Council has proposed that the Levels and Moors are recognised as an area having special conservation value under the UNESCO ‘Man and Biosphere’ designation. The council undertook work towards gaining this designation in 2004 and 2005, but at present this is on hold.

The County Council’s heritage department has also been considering the area for designation as a World Heritage Site under the ‘Cultural Landscape’ category, due to the interaction between humans and the landscape over the last 8000 years.

The area contains waterlogged prehistoric remains, including the ‘’ which is the oldest known engineered roadway. The wooden structure is believed to date back 8000 years. The area also contains several preserved Roman relics, land reclamation sites and canalisations that date back to the Middle Ages (http://somersetlevels.com, 2006).

3.5.3 Tourism Initiatives The Somerset Levels and Moors’ unique environment and heritage attract tourists to the area. Several schemes are being undertaken by SCC to enhance tourism in the area and to ensure that this is achieved in a sustainable manner. In addition to several tourism initiatives, the Council has in place a number of policy documents to

1 The convention on wetlands was signed in Ramsar, Iran in 1971. The treaty outlines national frameworks and international cooperation to protect wetlands worldwide.

3-15

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

promote sustainable modes of transport to the area. This shows that SCC is committed to reducing the impact of vehicle movements on the Levels and Moors to protect the local environment.

Tourism Initiatives

There are currently two main tourist attractions on the Levels and Moors. They are: • Ashton Windmill near Stone Allerton • The Peat Moors Visitor Centre, between Shapwick and Westhay.

Both sites are visited by less than 20,000 people each year.

Waterlinks Project

Waterlinks is a project that the County Council is working on along with several other partners including Mendip and Sedgemoor District Councils and the Levels and Moors Partnership (LAMP). The aim of the project is to regenerate Somerset (including the Levels and Moors) through the redevelopment and reuse of the County’s waterways.

The County’s waterways will be the focal point of the scheme that aims to redevelop the local economy and enhance the environment. Part of this process involves the promotion of Green Tourism in the area. This is especially important on the Levels and Moors which has a Special Protection Area (SPA) designation.

The overall aim of the project is to create 4500 new jobs that are sustainable by 2016. The scheme aims to link up the waterways network from Bridgwater and Glastonbury to the and via the Bridgwater and Canal.

Tourist initiatives will also include cycling and walking schemes along with sailing the waterways. A visitor centre in Glastonbury has been proposed as part of the scheme.

Food Links Cycle Route

The food links cycle route is designed to link cyclists to the local food producers across the Somerset Levels and Moors area. Shown in Figure 3.6, the route transects the Levels and Moors and runs through the settlements of Wookey, Godney, Westhay, Meare, Shapwick and Ashcott to Street.

The cycle route between Meare and Ashcott includes Ashcott Road which is the main highway used by peat industry vehicles, including HGVs and tractor/trailer movements. The route from Westhay to Meare takes cyclists on a route adjacent to the B3151 allowing cyclists to avoid interaction with other traffic along this section.

3.5.4 Population Data SCC has provided Atkins with 2001 Census data detailing the average number of people living at each address in the Levels and Moors by ward. By matching this information to postcode data, it is possible estimate the number of people living along each corridor in the area and affected by road traffic in the Levels area. RRM criteria requires an assessment to be made of the number of properties and population within 50 metres of the road that could be affected by noise pollution, and of the population within 200 metres of the road that may be affected by air pollution.

3-16

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Aggregate Industries

B Hanson Aggregates 3 A371 1 1 3 7 4 8 135 32 Brean 3 B3 B A Axbridge Cheddar Reservoir Cheddar

B3140 A 3 71 B3135 1 Berrow 5 1 3 Draycott B B 31 35 8 3 A Rodney Stoke

9 B3140 3 Burnham- A 22 Westbury- on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge Wookey No 3139 Ri rth D B East ver Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 5

8 1 3 3 A B Hun tspil l Rive Burtle Pawlett 1 r 4 1 Westhay B3

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Meare r Godwins P a 9 r re 23 3 tt A A 39 Cossington R ive Chilton r B ru B3 e Polden 15 Edington 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 Vapogro 61 A A 3 8 39 A 3 Shapwick

A

Bridgwater 39 Key Ashcott A

K ing ’s Sed gem Westonzoyland oor Food Links Dra Street in Route

Figure 3.6 – Food Links Cycle Route

3.5.5 Schools There are a total of 38 schools in or close to the study area of the Somerset Levels and Moors. These are broken down into the following categories: • Primary Schools • Junior/Middle Schools • Secondary Schools

Primary Schools

There are 24 state and private primary schools in or bounding the study area. For the purposes of the study any schools that are within 200 metres of the local road network and the boundary roads have been included in the RRM assessment. The school age ranges vary starting at two years old at Pre-Preparatory School and running through to 11 years old at fifteen of the schools. Only three primary schools currently have a Safe Routes to School travel plan in place, whilst three are working towards implementing a scheme.

Junior Middle Schools

There are six Junior or middle schools in the Somerset Levels and Moors, catering for children between the ages of seven and 13. Two of the six schools have completed travel plans, whilst two are in the process of completing them. There are no records of whether the private schools of Edington and in Burtle and Millfield Preparatory School in Glastonbury have completed their own travel plans.

3-17

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Secondary Schools

There are eight secondary schools in the study area which may be affected by HGV traffic. The schools cater for children between the ages of 11 to 18. The exception is the Mendip Centre in Glastonbury, which teaches children between the ages of eight and 16. Two of the eight schools have had travel plans implemented since 2004. There are no records of travel plans being in place with the other schools. Table 2.5 lists the number of schools with plans.

3.6 Summary This section has presented an analysis of traffic movements in the Somerset Levels area, and has summarised the analysis of other key data required in the assessment of HGV and peat industry impacts in the Somerset Levels.

Traffic data analysis suggests that there is no measurable impact peat-related traffic on the Levels highway network. This could only be ascertained by a more focussed and extensive study of this industry, which did not form part of the brief for this study.

Analysis of accident data has shown only a small number of PIAs involving HGVs and AVs on the Somerset Levels. The accident rate is considered to be very low when compared to the total number of HGV and AV movements in the area.

Data has been collected to allow analysis of traffic impacts under the Roads Review Methodology. This is detailed in Section 5.

Section 4 presents the policy context through which traffic and development impacts are controlled on the Somerset Levels and Moors.

3-18

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 3)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

4 Existing Planning and Land Use Policy

4.1 Introduction This section summarises the policy context of peat extraction and related activities on the Somerset Levels and Moors.

4.2 Somerset and National Park Joint Structure Plan 1996-2011 (Deposit Draft June 2004) The Joint Structure Plan is the strategic base for all land use planning in Somerset and any new development within the Somerset Levels and Moors will have to comply with The Structure Plan. The Joint Structure Plan is supported by the Somerset Minerals Local Plan and the Somerset Waste Local Plan.

The Structure Plan is broken down into four areas that are relevant to business development within the Levels and Moors: • Strategic Policies • Environmental Policies • Economic Policies • Transport and Infrastructure Policies

4.2.1 Strategic Policies Strategic Policies STR1 and STR2 are the most relevant to any future developments on the Levels and Moors. STR1 relates to sustainable development and STR2 to the spatial strategy. These ‘catch-all’ policies cover the need to reduce environmental impact and minimise the use of non renewable resources. They also highlight the need for rural development to be linked to the local economy.

4.2.2 Environmental Policies There are several environmental policies that influence development on the Levels and Moors; Policy 4 is the most relevant for this study as it relates specifically to the Levels and Moors. The Moors have been designated a Specially Protected Area (SPA). As well as outlining the importance of protecting the SPA, this policy also highlights the Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA) status that the area has been designated. This aims to protect and manage the landscape, nature conservation and historic interests including particular farming practices.

The Government’s policy is to safeguard the environment, especially areas that have environmental designation (PPS7 and PPG9). Consequently, other environmental policies will also influence new development in the area. Policy 1 of the structure plan relates to nature conservation. The policy stipulates that all future Local Development Frameworks (LDF) will need to ensure wildlife protection is considered in the development process. Sites such as the Special Protection Area (SPA) and RAMSAR site on the Somerset Levels shown in Figure 2.4 are to have the greatest level of protection due to their international importance.

The policies state that developments expected to have an adverse impact on wildlife will not be dismissed outright if the developers can demonstrate an overriding need and an appropriate mitigation plan to minimise the impact on the environment.

The Built Historic Environment is covered by Policy 9, which stipulates that buildings that highlight the local distinctiveness should be protected and where possible enhanced. Conservation areas are also to be maintained or enhanced under this policy.

4-1

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 4)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

4.2.3 Economic Policies The two key economic policies that relate to the Levels and Moors are Policy 19 and Policy 29.

Policy 19 relates to employment in rural areas. The policy covers development for agricultural purposes and development associated with the diversification of agricultural units. The policy does highlight that any agricultural redevelopment will need to be consistent with the current landscape character and not lead to unacceptable levels of vehicle movements.

Policy 29 relates specifically to Peat Working, stating where the Peat Production Zone is and the stipulations to the workings. The policy states that peat production is covered in greater depth by the Minerals Local Plan, and that by concentrating the workings it is hoped that this will have a minimised impact on the environment.

The Levels and Moors are politically split into two districts, Mendip and Sedgemoor respectively. Over the length of the Structure Plan, employment in Mendip is predicted to grow, whilst in Sedgemoor there is expected to be a slight growth in employment, although this is likely to be lower than the rest of Somerset. However the one industry that employment may be uncertain is the minerals industry. This has been attributed to uncertainty in the level of construction in Somerset over the Structure Plan period.

The development of tourism is covered in policy 23 and states that the priority is to improve existing attractions and mitigate their impact. Any new developments need to be compatible with their location and accessible by public transport.

The Structure Plan states that known mineral resources and infrastructure associated with the transportation of minerals should be safeguarded. Also that any new resources should aim to balance between the environmental impact and the economic and social (jobs) benefits of the schemes. Accordingly, the Minerals Planning Authority (MPA) will need to consult English Nature before agreeing any new workings that affect SSSI sites. Similarly the MPA will need to consult English Heritage if there is likely to be any impact on archaeological sites or listed buildings.

The final economic policy is Policy 32 that relates to Extraction Criteria. The provisions for new extraction sites are: • Achieves acceptable balance between environmental costs and economic benefits • Take into account planning controls imposed to minimise impact • Is adequately linked to the highway network and other transport infrastructure, where only a small number of HGVs require access.

4.2.4 Transport and Infrastructure Policies Under Policy 49 all new development proposals need to manage the demand for transport to the most sustainable modes of transport. Developments that generate significant freight traffic need to be located close to rail facilities or national primary routes or county routes if they are suitable.

Policy 50 highlights the measures that should be included for rural areas. The main points are to introduce measures that improve the operation of the strategic network. The policy also aims to minimise volume, reduce speeds and maximise the use of walking, cycling and public transport in rural areas.

Policy 51 lists the National Primary Routes, the County Routes and the unclassified routes. The routes that affect the Somerset Levels and Moors are outlined in

4-2

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 4)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Table 4.1. It is noted that the B3139 and B3151 that cross the Levels are County Roads.

Road No. Section National Primary Routes (J22 – J23) A39 A38 Dunball Roundabout – A361 Glastonbury County Routes A38 Edithmead roundabout – Dunball Roundabout A39 A38 Bridgwater – Crandon Bridge (Silverfish Junction) A361 A38 Walford Cross - A39 Pipers Inn, Ashcott A371 Axbridge – Wells B3139 A38 Highbridge – A371 Wells B3151 A371 Cheddar – A39 Glastonbury

Table 4.1 – National Primary and County Routes of the Study Area

The final policy that affects traffic on the Somerset Levels and Moors is Policy 52, which is related to Freight Traffic. The policy is particularly relevant to this study as it states that HGVs should be encouraged to use the National Primary Routes where possible. The methods for encouraging this include appropriate signing and traffic management schemes. The policy specifically mentions the quarrying in the Mendips whose traffic should be advised to use the National Primary routes where possible.

4.3 Local Development Framework (LDF) Local Development Frameworks are a collection of planning documents created separately by the Levels and Moors District Councils. The LDF aim is to guide planning within the respective districts over the subsequent 20 years.

The framework contains the following documents: • The Local Development Scheme (LDS): Sets out the framework and timetable for LDF production over the following three years. The latest LDF took effect in March 2006 and will run until 2009. • Core Strategy: This is the key document setting out the vision and objectives for the next 20 years in the district, urban and rural development policies, where development will be permitted and core policies that will help the district achieve its aims. • Development Control Policies: The policies will set out the criteria by which development proposals will be assessed. • Statement of Community Involvement (SCI): The SCI sets out how the council will involve the community in the setting up of the framework and in future planning decisions. • Supplementary Planning Documents: These will provide more detailed guidance on policies within the LDF. • Proposals Map: A visual tool to enable the council to describe how policies will work within the district. • Site Allocations: This will outline specific sites in the district that have been allocated land uses such as: employment; retail; housing; and community facilities.

This study will assist the district councils with the completion of the Core strategy and subsequent LDS submissions, with relation to new development on the Levels and Moors.

4-3

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 4)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

4.4 Somerset Minerals Local Plan 1997-2011 The Somerset Mineral Local Plan was adopted in April 2004 and covers all mineral related planning policy until 2011. The minerals plan takes into account Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) 10 for the South West of . RPG 10 states that the Mineral Planning Authority (MPA) and the mineral operators should work together to ensure a sufficiently environmentally acceptable level of supply for current and future needs of the resource (For the Levels and Moors area, Somerset County Council is the MPA).

The Minerals Local Plan states that mineral extraction and processing (except minor schemes) should not be located in or where they have an adverse impact on National Parks, AONBs and other internationally designated sites. The Somerset Levels and Moors are an internationally designated site, with the area shown in Figure 3.5 designated as a Special Protection Area (SPA) and a RAMSAR (wetland) site.

Policies 40 – 45 are focused on the Peat Industry. They relate to the extraction, storage and aftercare of the sites of peat extraction and processing. Policy 40 states that peat extraction will only take place within the peat production zones. Licences for peat extraction outside this area will be rejected by the MPA. The Minerals Local Plan also states that processing plants need to process at least 40 percent peat sourced in the Levels and Moors.

Policy 10 covers the protection of important archaeological heritage within Somerset. Due to the unique nature of the Somerset Levels there are many archaeological artefacts that are in situ within the local area. Artefacts such as the Sweet Track between Shapwick and Westhay are of important historical significance to the local area. Policy 11 states that listed buildings should also be protected where possible.

The Minerals Local Plan covers the need to protect against adverse environmental impact through mineral extraction and transportation of minerals. The plan aims, where feasible, to reduce the number of journeys made by road or to use the primary road network when this is not possible.

The policy’s scope is to test the acceptability of any new planning proposals within the county rather than influence changes in current business use.

4.5 Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987 The peat processing sites are classed as B2 Industrial Use sites under the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987. Under the current legislation all of the current processing sites would be able to change to other business use within this category without planning permission. This could mean that industries that are HGV intensive could move into the sites if the indigenous peat industry were to close.

Under the Planning Order the sites could in theory be turned to other classes such as B1 business use or B8 storage and distribution, providing the site had no more than 235 sq metres of storage space. Changes to either of these classes would have a significant impact on HGV movements within the area.

Extraction sites with associated peat workings are designated planning permission by the MPA (Somerset County Council), whilst stand alone peat processing sites are the responsibility of the District Council (either Mendip or Sedgemoor).

Some sites have not applied for stand alone permission and operate without the appropriate consent. The owners of these sites may be able to apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness for Existing Use and Development (CLEUD) (see following paragraph).

4-4

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 4)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

4.6 Certificates of Lawfulness for Existing Use and Development (CLEUD) If a site has been operating without the correct or any consent for the previous 10 years, the owners are able to apply to the Local Planning Authority for a Certificates of Lawfulness for Existing Use and Development (CLEUD). At the time of writing, three sites have been granted a CLEUD:

• Vapogro at Ashcott Road, Meare; • Godwins, west of Westhay; and • Durston Garden Products at Sharpham.

The CLEUD causes problems for the planning authorities as it means that the site is effectively exempt from any enforcement action on the type of industry permitted or any conditions of use. This means that the site owners are able to continue and use the site without processing the 40 percent local peat that is defined in the Minerals Local Plan. The Vapogro site is currently importing 100 percent of the peat that it processes, rather than including the minimum 40 percent local peat.

The CLEUD process takes one year from submitting the CLEUD application to receiving the result of the application. If this process is successful then the LPA and/or the MPA will have no authority to install conditions on the site.

4.7 The Somerset Waste Local Plan 2001 - 2011 The County of Somerset currently has a lack of waste management facilities. The of green waste as an alternative to local peat is an option being considered by both the council and the peat producers. In 2005 Godwins successfully applied for a licence to process green waste. At present the company has not started this practice. The Somerset Waste Local Plan sets out the guidance for waste recycling within the county.

Eight policies within the Waste Local Plan may influence the introduction of waste recycling facilities at the peat production sites on the Somerset Levels and Moors in the next 20 years. These are described here.

Policy W1 and W2 relate to how to deal with the waste stream. W1 states that the Best Practicable Environmental Option should be used for any waste stream, whilst W2 states that planning permission will be granted to sites close to the source of the waste stream.

Policy W3 states that sites will only be granted permission if any adverse effects to the environment and local amenities can be successfully mitigated. Any effect on the transport network will need to be mitigated also.

Policy W10 is very significant to determining whether a peat site will gain planning permission for green waste. It states that any waste facility that will have an adverse impact on an ecological site of international importance will only have planning permission granted if there is no other alternative available. Many of the peat workings are very close to the RAMSAR site on the Somerset Levels.

Areas of high Archaeological importance and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty will also only have waste facility planning permission granted if the benefits vastly outweigh the costs and any adverse impact can be mitigated.

The Godwins site to the west of Westhay which has been granted a licence to recycle green waste on their premises is very close to the RAMSAR site on the Somerset Levels. Other sites may also be granted similar permission if applied for.

4-5

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 4)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

4.8 Summary of Local Planning Policy There are several policies that will affect development in the Somerset Levels and Moors over the next 20 years. Several of the policies will directly affect the peat industry and the level of HGV movements in the area. The key policies are as follows:

The Joint Structure Plan: • Covers all future development in the Somerset Levels and Moors. • Environmentally sensitive areas should be protected against inappropriate development. • New agricultural developments must be consistent with the existing landscape character. • The B3139 and B3151 through the Levels and Moors are defined as county routes under the Joint Structure Plan. • Peat extraction sites need to minimise their impact on the environment. • New developments should where possible minimise freight movements by HGV.

Local Development Framework: • Sets out planning policy in the local district over the next 20 years. • This study will be used to inform future planning policy on the Somerset Levels and Moors via the LDF.

Somerset Minerals Local Plan: • Policy 40 states that peat extraction will only take place within the Peat Production Zone (PPZ). Licences to extract peat outside the PPZ will be rejected. • The Minerals Local Plan also states that at least 40% of peat processed at processing plants needs to be locally sourced. • The plan also states that mineral extraction and processing must not be located at sites that have an adverse impact on environmentally important sites and the archaeological heritage of the area.

Use Classes and CLEUDs • Existing extraction sites and processing plants are not subject to the planning controls above. • Extraction sites are designated planning permission by the Mineral Planning Authority (Somerset County Council). • Processing plants are designated planning permission by the local district councils. • Sites that do not have planning permission to process peat, but have been operating for 10 years or more can apply for a Certificate of Lawfulness for Existing Use and Development (CLEUD). • A CLEUD allows the site to be used for any purpose under B2 Industrial use under the Use Classes of the Town and Country Planning Order 1987. • Therefore any site with a CLEUD could change from peat processing to another industry. At present three sites have a CLEUD.

Somerset Waste Local Plan • The recycling of green waste by peat producers is being considered by both the council and the peat producers. • The green waste can be blended with the local peat and other materials. • Godwins, near Westhay has been granted a licence to recycle green waste, but has yet to take up the option. • Green waste is likely to come from all over the county, so the Levels and Moors central location means that the area is in a very good position to be accessed from across the county.

4-6

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 4)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

5 Route Analysis

5.1 Introduction An analysis of the impact of HGV movements on the Levels and Moors has been conducted using a methodology based on Somerset County Council’s Roads Review Methodology (RRM). The analysis has been completed by breaking down the main highway corridors on the Levels into a number of sections.

The RRM was created by SCC in January 2005 as part of the Local Transport Plan (2006-2011) to score different road schemes against a defined set of criteria that are comparable for each scheme. The outcome of the RRM was to enable schemes to be ranked and hence to identify those schemes that justified an earlier place in the Council’s capital scheme programme.

The criteria set out in the RRM are as follows:

• The nature of the route passing through the settlement; • The levels of congestion; • Severance; • Air quality; • Fear and intimidation; • Safety; • Heritage impacts; and • Noise pollution.

The criteria are generally measured by the number of people affected by traffic within each road scheme. A weighting is then placed on each scheme, so the highest scoring scheme would be at the top of the LTP2 list for infrastructure improvements in Somerset between 2006 and 2011.

The road network on the Levels and Moors is not being considered for major infrastructure improvement, so several of the RRM criteria will not be relevant in relation to the route analysis. Where available, the data that would be used in the RRM is summarised in Table 5.1. The following section outlines how each section of the Levels highway network has been analysed.

5.2 SCC Roads Review Methodology (RRM) Nature of Route

The nature of the route is a description of the characteristics of the highway corridor, based on the road layout, road surface quality, number of settlements along the route and ease of traversing the route by HGV. This information has been collated from site visits, an HGV audit of the route network and from information supplied by the Parish Councils and the Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA).

5-1

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

B3151 B3139 B3151 B3139 Walrow Wedmore 3 Westhay and Ashcott Road, B3151 Meare to Cheddar to Wedmore to Wedmore to Burtle Road Shapwick 3 3 to Wedmore Village 3 Meare Meare Glastonbury Wedmore Wells Westhay Length (km) 6 8.5 1.5 10.6 5.3 10.8 3.4 5.5 5.1 4.3 18 Hour 4 4337 4006 n/a n/a 3108 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a Traffic 18 Hour HGV4 107 135 n/a n/a 133 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 18 hour %HGV4 3% 3% n/a n/a 4% n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a AADT 4077 3703 n/a 1908 2514 1225 n/a n/a n/a 3801 LGV/AADT 123 165 n/a 189 106 152 n/a n/a n/a 35 HGV/AADT 77 99 n/a 38 73 96 n/a n/a n/a 163 AADT %HGV 2% 3% n/a 2% 3% 7% n/a n/a n/a 4% Pop (50m) 242 906 572 869 63 269 672 290 74 67 Pop (200m) 781 2073 1118 1485 257 378 1179 519 208 391 Pop/km (200m) 130 243 745 140 48 35 347 94 41 91 Pop (300m) 1389 2731 1372 2192 421 420 1237 542 372 947 96.5 (rural) 96.5 (rural) 96.5 (rural) 96.5 (rural) 96.5 (rural) 96.5 (rural) 96.5 (rural) 48 Speed (KPH) 48 96.5 48 48 (village) 48 (village) 48 (village) 48 (village) 48 (village) 48 (village) (village) Crossings 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 % of Footpath 0% 0% 25%¹ 0% 0% 0% 25%¹ 2%¹ 0% 0% PIA (2000 - 2005) HGV and 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 AV only Listed 2 22 43 8 0 1 13 5 0 1 Buildings Schools 0 4 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 Multiple Better than Better than Better than Worse than Better than Better than Lowest 25%² Lowest 25%² Lowest 25%² Lowest 25%² Deprivation Average² Average² Average² Average² Average² Average² Table 5.1 – Route Data available for the RRM Criteria ¹ % Footpath estimated from HGV Audit Survey. ² Multiple Deprivation ranked in comparison to other wards in Somerset (ODPM, 2004). The ranking is then broken down into quarters: Highest (most deprived) 25%; Worse than Average; Better than Average; and Lowest (Least Deprived) 25%. 3 Traffic data has been factored using growth factors to approximate to 2006 data. n/a = data not available. 4 18hr traffic data is based on the actual survey data recorded on a weekday, so represents a snapshot of traffic flows. AADT has been averaged to representative of the full year (including weekend flows), removing any seasonality and daily variation factors that are inherent in snapshot surveys. Hence AADT flows may be less than 18hr counts.

5-2

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Levels of Congestion

Congestion is usually associated with the interaction of high volumes of traffic, which is often the cause of congestion on major inter-urban routes and in large urban areas. Congestion is less likely to occur on the Levels and Moors as traffic volumes are generally lower away from the main A39 and, to a lesser extent, the A371. Local congestion is generally short lived on the Levels and caused, in the main, by short term difficulties, for example by movement of agricultural vehicles or by larger goods vehicles passing through village centres as a result of pinch points or, and especially in Wedmore, by parked vehicles and multi-purpose road frontage (e.g. houses, local shops and businesses).

The Congestion Reference Flow, based on the Department for Transport’s methodology detailed in the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB, Vol. 5.1.3), is the recommended approach to measure congestion in the RRM. However, because of the lesser incidence of congestion on the Levels, the DfT methodology has not been completed. Instead, congestion is reported on a qualitative basis following the route audits, supplemented by anecdotal evidence from the Parish Council’s. Congestion is therefore not considered further in this study with the exception of highlighting where short term congestion may occur.

Severance

The use of severance as an indicator of the level of service of a route has also not been considered in this study. Severance is generally a description of the obstruction to safe and/or ‘easy’ movement of pedestrians caused by high volumes of traffic, or by the physical construction of a transportation or naturally occurring feature (e.g. a major highway, river or stream).

Traffic flows are generally light on all roads within the study area, so severance caused by traffic volumes is not considered to be significant on the Levels. Hence the effect of severance is not considered further in this study.

Air Quality

Air quality is analysed in the RRM by comparing the link speed, average annual daily traffic (AADT), percentage of light goods vehicles (LGVs) and HGVs, length of route, and population within 200 metres of the carriageway. The data for these factors is included in Table 5.1. Again, traffic volumes are generally low on the Levels highway network, so detailed assessment of air quality has not been considered and any effect on air quality is reported qualitatively. In most cases, there would be no issue associated with air pollution caused by traffic.

Fear and Intimidation

Several of the Parishes have supplied qualitative examples of fear and intimidation experienced by residents in relation to HGV movements. In the RRM, fear and intimidation is measured against the following criteria:

• Indices of Deprivation; • Population within 200 metres of carriageway; • Percentage of footpaths; • Speed of traffic; and • Percentage HGVs/ AADT

5-3

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Indices of deprivation are included here as deprived communities suffer disproportionately from pedestrian deaths, pollution and the isolation which can result from living near busy roads. The indices are reported at ward level.

As with other measures in the RRM, fear and intimidation has been discussed in qualitative terms using the above criteria. Because of the generally lower traffic volumes in this area, fear and intimidation may be experienced on rural route sections by large vehicles passing at speed along the main roads, and in village centres simply by the large HGVs passing through narrow streets, possibly constrained further by on-street parking, which would magnify the perception that HGVs and other traffic is ‘out of place’.

Safety

The RRM states that the accident rate for a five-year period should be considered, expressed as the number of accidents per million vehicle miles. However, as this study is primarily analysing HGV movements, safety is being considered in terms of total number of Personal Injury Accidents (PIAs) involving HGVs or AVs on each route over the five years between 2000 and 2005. The study has not considered accidents involving any other vehicles. As discussed earlier, the number of PIAs involving HGVs and AVs is generally very low on the Levels – a greater number of accidents have been reported on the A39, but this is excluded from this study. Therefore safety is reported as summarising the number of type of accidents occurring in a given corridor.

Heritage Impacts

The impact of HGV and traffic movements on the local heritage of the Levels and Moors has been considered by identifying the number of listed buildings along each route. The greatest concentration of listed buildings is found in the village of Wedmore.

Noise

Noise impacts are measured by identifying the number of properties within 50m of a highway corridor. This information has been estimated from 2001 Census data and postcode data provided by SCC. From these data, it is possible to estimate the number of people living within 50m of the carriageway. This is usually then assessed using 18 hour traffic flows, the percentage of HGVs and the speed of traffic passing along the route. As before, generally low traffic volumes and a relatively sparse population across most of the Levels has resulted in a qualitative analysis of noise impacts rather than following DMRB methodologies.

5.3 The Levels and Moors Road Network The following paragraphs outline the major routes on the Levels and Moors that have been considered for HGV impacts on the local population using the RRM as a template to discuss the qualitative assessment of impacts. Although the routes on the Levels and Moors are predominantly rural and could not be described as ‘strategic’ in the wider context of strategic roads in Somerset, several of the routes are frequently used by HGVs to access sites within and surrounding the study area.

For the purposes of analysis, Figure 5.1 shows the breakdown of the road network into 10 sections, each with different characteristics in respect of HGV movements. The village of Wedmore is considered separately as it has different characteristics to the rest of the Levels highways network.

Table 5.1 outlines the information (where available) that is required for the RRM criteria. Due to the poor quality of the 2006 traffic counts, it has not been possible to

5-4

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

produce 18 hour traffic flows for seven of the sections. Historic counts have been used to estimate AADT along four of these sections, and 18 hour traffic flows on the B3151 between Cheddar and Wedmore. However, in many cases traffic data is not available.

Aggregate Industries

B Hanson Aggregates 3 A371 1 1 3 7 4 8 135 32 Brean 3 B3 B A Axbridge Cheddar Reservoir Cheddar

B3140 A B3151 Cheddar 3 71 B3135 1 Berrow to Wedmore 5 1 3 Draycott B B 31 35 8 3 A B3139 Walrow Rodney Stoke

to Wedmore 9 B3140 3 Burnham- A 22 Wedmore Westbury- on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 B3139 WedmoEasre ton A to Wells 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge B3151 Wedmore Wookey No 3139 Ri rth D B East ver Brue to Westhayrain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 5

8 1 3 Burtle Road from 3 A B Westhay and Hun Watchfield tot sWpil esthay l Rive Burtle Pawlett 1 r Meare 4 1 Westhay B3

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Meare r Godwins B3151 Meare P a 9 r re 23 to Glastonbury 3 tt A A 39 Cossington Shapwick R ive Chilton r B ru B3 e Polden 15 Edington 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 Vapogro 61 A A 3 8 39 A 3 Shapwick A Ashcott Road, Meare

Bridgwater 39 Ashcott A

K ing ’s S edg Westonzoyland emo or D Street rain

Figure 5.1 – Sections of the Somerset Levels and Moors Road Network

5.3.1 B3151 Cheddar to Wedmore The B3151 is the principal entry and exit point of the northern section of the Levels and Moors providing access to/from the A371 and Cheddar1. Where traffic data is available, this is the busiest section of highway on the Levels with an AADT greater than 4,000 vehicles; HGVs represent just 2% of this flow, equating to around 80-100 HGVs per day, which is locally a significant number of HGVs relative to other roads on the Levels network.

The B3151 runs north-south between Cheddar and Wedmore, with the national speed limit applied outside of Cheddar and Wedmore. The majority of vehicle movements along this section will pass through the centre of Wedmore. The highway bypasses the settlements of Clewer and Cocklake and is generally of a level gradient across Cheddar Moor, rising to the south of the section as it approaches Wedmore.

1 Vehicles can also travel between the A371 and Wedmore via Stone Allerton and Weare. A traffic counter was located on this route, but this was one of the sites where the tube was vandalized so no traffic data is available. This is a single track road and is therefore unlikely to be attractive to any traffic other than for local access. Hence this route has been excluded from further analysis.

5-5

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

The route has two significant ‘pinch points’ along the 3.7 miles of single carriageway. Travelling north to south the first pinch point drivers encounter is crossing Hythe Bow Bridge, which rises sharply in the its centre relative to the rest of the highway. Figure 5.2 shows the location of the bridge along the route.

The geometry of the highway and the rise in the centre of Hythe Bow Bridge mean that southbound traffic may have difficulty seeing oncoming traffic the other side of the bridge. Visibility is better for northbound traffic as drivers do not have to turn as sharply before crossing the bridge, but the raised centre still impedes visibility.

Clewer Bridge, to the north of Clewer, is a second pinch point that slows vehicles travelling in both directions. Visibility is good at this point in comparison to Hythe Bow Bridge.

Traffic analysis shows that this section of the B3151 is the main distributor for traffic between Cheddar, Wedmore and origins and destinations to the south and east via Westhay. The manual HGV cordon survey did suggest that, where registration number matches could be made, that main HGV movements along this section were vehicles with an origin/destination within the Levels and Moors with a smaller proportion of through HGV movements. However, several Quarry Industry HGVs were recorded crossing the Levels and Moors between Cheddar to the north and Shapwick and Glastonbury to the south and east respectively.

Blind corner

Centre of bridge raised to cross The

Figure 5.2 – Hythe Bow Bridge

This section of the B3151 passes just two Listed Buildings, both to the north of Wedmore. The route passes through an area defined as being in the Lowest 25% deprived area as measured by the Indices of Deprivation. The average number of residents per kilometre living within 200m of the route is 130 persons/km, which is the

5-6

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

average of all routes across the Levels (excluding Wedmore)2. Most of this population lives in the settlements of Clewer and Cocklake. The route does not pass any schools and there have been no recorded PIAs involving HGVs or AVs between 2000 and 2005.

5.3.2 B3139 Walrow to Wedmore The B3139 extends east-west from Wedmore to Walrow. The Walrow industrial estate is located immediately west of the M5 close to Highbridge. This is likely to be a route for traffic between Wedmore and M5 J22 (via Burnham Moor Lane). The single lane carriageway runs across the northern section of Mark Moor before rising through Blackford into the centre of Wedmore. It is estimated that 2,100 residents live within 200m of the carriageway at an average density of 243 persons/km, making this section one of the greatest populated corridors on the Levels. Most of this population would live in the linear Mark Causeway settlement, and the villages of Mark and Blackford.

The single carriageway has a derestricted speed limit outside the settlements, where speed limits are reduced to 30mph. There is one pinch point in Mark and the other in Blackford. In Mark there are two 90° bends either side of the White Horse Inn. In Blackford signs notify drivers in both directions that oncoming vehicles will be in the centre of the road. Traffic calming chicanes have been placed at the eastern end of Mark to reduce the speed of vehicles entering the village.

The type of HGVs recorded traversing this route are predominantly medium HGVs and 2 or 3 axle rigid HGVs. This road has a relatively high AADT, this being 3,700 vehicles which is only slightly lower than the north-south volume on the B3151 between Cheddar and Wedmore. The proportion of HGVs is about 3% (110 HGVs/day). The route has had no recorded HGV or AV PIAs in the 5 year accident data period.

The route passes four schools along the 5.3 miles (8.5km) of the route, three of which are currently completing school travel plans. There are 22 listed buildings on the route, mainly in the settlements and villages, which ranks this route as second in terms of the number of listed buildings (Wedmore has 43 listed buildings and B3151 through Meare and Westhay, in ranked 3rd, 13 buildings). The route passes through one of the 25% most deprived wards of the country.

5.3.3 B3139 Wedmore to Wells The B3139 between Wedmore and Wells passes through eight settlements. The route has an estimated population of 1,485 persons living within 200m of the highway, at an average density of 140 pers/km.

The national speed limit applies outside of the villages, with Latcham having a 40mph speed limit. Traffic data shows this route has an AADT of approximately 1,900 vehicles, with HGVs representing 2% (40 vehicles) per day. The traffic analysis showed that the HGVs predominantly using this route are medium HGVs and 2 to 3 axle HGVs.

The 6.6 mile length of highway follows the bottom of two ridges to its southern edge, descending steeply eastbound at Panborough on to Knowle Moor. The steep bend here is only suitable for one vehicle to pass and is the most significant pinch point along this route section. The village centres in Bleadney, Henton and Yarley also

2 The average number of residents per kilometre living within 200m of the route sections included in this study is 191 persons/km including the village of Wedmore, and 129 pers/km excluding Wedmore. This is based on data shown in Table 5.1.

5-7

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

create pinch points for vehicles in both directions. Outside the villages the road width reduces to a single lane at several points.

There is one primary school on the section, this located in Wookey. The route had one recorded PIA involving an HGV in five years. This occurred in Henton where an HGV failed to stop to allow a vehicle travelling in the opposite direction to pass.

The area is classified as ‘better than average’ in the indices of multiple deprivation.

5.3.4 B3151 Wedmore to Westhay The B3151 is the main north-south artery across the central area of the Levels and Moors, between Wedmore and Westhay. The road crosses the main peat production zone, and is generally level except for the section immediately south of Wedmore where it rises to cross the ridge on which the village is located.

The highway is a single carriageway with a derestricted speed limit outside of the villages. Traffic analysis shows that the road is used by a locally significant number of HGVs per day (75 vehicles, or 3% of AADT) with a total AADT of 2,500 vehicles. Few HGVs were identified as being peat-related movements, but there were a number of quarry HGV movements which were recorded as traversing north-south across the Levels to and from the north of Wedmore and south of Shapwick.

There was one recorded PIA involving an HGV, at Blakeway between Wedmore and Westhay. This involved the HGV skidding and overturning on mud.

The route section has no listed buildings of historic interest, and is relatively sparsely populated – in total less than 260 persons are estimated to live within 200m of the carriageway with a population density of 48 pers/km. There are no schools or listed buildings on this route section, which is located in a ward that is classed as ‘better than average’ in the indices of multiple deprivation.

5.3.5 Wedmore Village The B3139 and B3151 meet in the centre of the village of Wedmore. As a result, most traffic on the two roads has to pass through the village to reach its destination, due to the lack of suitable alternative routes.

Wedmore is a historical settlement with 43 listed buildings. The village centre is characterised by a grid pattern of narrow streets with on-street parking. The layout is shown in Figure 5.3. Village-related activities and frontages for shops, businesses and houses causes local congestion to traffic on village roads and presents particular difficulties for larger vehicles such as HGVs; HGVs have to negotiate 90° bends when travelling through the centre of the village.

Just over 1,100 residents live within 200 metres of the carriageway in Wedmore (the route density of 743 pers/km is largely meaningless in the context of Wedmore as the population is concentrated in a fairly tight knit community).

Three of the four sections of the B3139 and B3151 have pavements on one side of the carriageway, but these are not connected and there are no pedestrian crossing facilities in the village centre. However there have been no PIAs in the village centre involving HGVs or AVs which is often the case when perceptions of danger are high, i.e. accident statistics do not always appear to support perceptions of danger. This should not however be used to downplay the real risks to pedestrians, cyclists, vehicles and property caused by the movement of larger vehicles in confined spaces (damage only accidents are not recorded by the police). The survey data suggests that HGVs traversing the roads in and around the village of Wedmore are

5-8

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

predominantly either medium HGVs with fixed cabs or rigid HGVs with 2 or 3 axles. These vehicles are smaller and more manoeuvrable than the 5 and 6 wheel HGVs.

= B3151 to 90°Bend Cheddar

B3151 to B3139 to Wells Mark

B3151 to Westhay

Figure 5.3 – The Village of Wedmore

5.3.6 Burtle Road – Watchfield to Westhay Burtle Road is the shortest route across the Levels between Highbridge and Westhay. This route runs through the centre of the protected wetlands area of the Levels and Moors. The route to Burtle is a lightly trafficked, single lane carriageway, with passing points created by field access points. Of the 1,225 vehicles of the AADT, 7% (approximately 100 vehicles) are HGVs. The cordon survey highlighted that the majority of HGVs were 5 or 6 axle articulated vehicles, and many were highlighted as being operated by hauliers who may be accessing the peat processing sites around Burtle.

There was one recorded PIA in this corridor, at Southwick (near Watchfield), which involved a tractor exiting a field and colliding with a motorcycle. The accident was recorded as slight.

The 10.8km route section is predominantly level and passes through only one settlement, Burtle, between the B3139 and Westhay. There are less than 400 people living within 200 metres of the carriageway, which represents a population density of 35 pers/km. This is the least densely populated corridor on the Levels, with most of the population concentrated in Burtle. The village has one boarding school, and there is just one listed building in the corridor.

There is a blind bend in the centre of Burtle where vehicles have to travel in the centre of the carriageway to pass through this section. The Bridge to the north west of Burtle is a pinch point for northbound traffic, as the road narrows at this point through to the B3139. Southbound, crossing the River Brue Bridge, the road widens through to the village.

5-9

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Godwins peat processing plant is located on both sides of the carriageway 0.6 miles to the west of Westhay.

The road surface deteriorates between Burtle and Westhay. This is due to the road being laid directly onto the peat substrate and hence the road is liable to subsidence. There are several points along this section where vehicles have to slow to allow HGVs to pass.

5.3.7 Shapwick Village The most direct route for vehicles between Westhay and the A39 is through the village of Shapwick. HGVs travelling between the A39 to the west and Westhay to the north have to make a 90° turn in the village centre opposite the church. This has been observed to cause problems for the largest HGVs due to the close proximity of properties, boundary walls and parked cars in the centre of the village. There are five listed buildings in Shapwick.

The village centre has a short pavement to the east of the carriageway through the village, but this is not continued to the school or hotel at the northern end of the village.

The road outside the village is single carriageway with a derestricted speed limit. The road surface to the north of the village is very poor as it is laid directly onto the peat substrate. Moorgate Bridge is the only point to the north of the village where two vehicles cannot pass.

This route section has not had any PIAs involving HGVs and AVs. Unfortunately there is no traffic data available for this route section. However the manual cordon survey did record 48 separate HGVs travelling through the village, of which nine could be positively identified as being operated for the quarry industry.

Shapwick is in a ward defined as being in the 25% most deprived groups in terms of indices of multiple deprivation.

5.3.8 B3151 Meare to Glastonbury The section of the B3151 between Meare and Glastonbury covers 2.7 miles of rural single carriageway. The national speed limit applies along this section and HGVs can pass at this speed, as there are no pinch points to impede the vehicles. The route is the principal route into the southern section of the Levels and Moors with 197 HGV movements recorded during the 12 hours of the cordon count, the highest number at any of the count sites.

West of Glastonbury, the route is sparsely populated and does not pass through any settlements. Therefore the population of 390 persons living within 200m of the corridor reflects the population living close to the B3151/A39 junction at Glastonbury, which is not representative of the whole route.

There have been no accidents involving HGVs or AV along this section. Unfortunately the count site was damaged by vandals during the 2006 count, so it has not been possible to gain a comprehensive understanding of HGV movements in the peak season for the local peat industry. However, the manual cordon survey did identify 12 HGV movements associated with the peat industry on this corridor, indicating (quite reasonably) that this is a route used by such traffic.

There are no listed buildings in this corridor.

5-10

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

5.3.9 Ashcott Road, Meare The Ashcott Road route to Westhay and Meare has a weight restriction between Ashcott Corner and Buscott to prevent HGVs travelling through Ashcott Village. This means that the majority of HGVs accessing industries on Ashcott Road north of Buscott do so via the B3151 from Glastonbury and Westhay respectively.

Shown in Figure 5.4, the Ashcott Road section is 3.2 miles long and has several businesses along the 1 mile section closest to Meare. These businesses include Vapogro (peat processors) and Middleton Engineering. The road is very uneven due to the underlying peat substrate and in a poor state of repair. The road does not have any road markings and HGVs would not be able to pass at the speed limit along the route. Access to an RSPB site is also off this road.

In the cordon count the northern section of Ashcott Road was principally used by AVs hauling peat and articulated HGVs. As with the B3151 the 2006 count data for this section is unreliable.

The route section has no listed buildings. The population living within 200m of the road is estimated to be 210 persons, these being concentrated in the south of the section in the village of Ashcott; the route has few residences north of Ashcott.

5.3.10 Westhay and Meare Villages The villages of Westhay and Meare are likely to have the highest volume of combined LGV and HGV movements of all the sections detailed in this report, these being movements to and from the peat processing plants south of Meare and of HGVs travelling between Wedmore and Glastonbury. The HGVs travelling through this area are predominantly 5/6 axle articulated HGVs or tractor and trailer movements of peat.

The B3151 varies in width and surface quality through both villages. The village of Westhay has narrow roads that make HGV manoeuvring difficult. The B3151 Main Road turns sharply in the centre of the village, which makes it difficult for HGVs to pass other vehicles due to the width of the road and parked vehicles. Vehicles travelling between Meare and Shapwick or Burtle tend to use Back Lane, which is highlighted in Figure 5.4. Back Lane is also preferred by HGVs making this movement as they avoid the centre of Westhay and can turn relatively easily at the junctions at either end of the lane. However Back Lane has a 90° bend where the pavement is run over repeatedly by HGVs turning. Both the Parish Council and the SPPA have requested that this section is modified to ease movement of HGVs through the village.

5-11

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

B3151/Ashcott Road Junction - Difficult left turn for HGVs

Back Lane - HGV pinch point

Ashcott Road - Poor quality road surface

Figure 5.4 – The Villages of Westhay and Meare

Travelling eastbound, the B3151 continues through the village of Meare, where the road widens and pavements are provided for pedestrians to the southern side of the carriageway. The road narrows before the Ashcott Road junction with a blind corner before the junction when heading out of the village towards Glastonbury.

The HGVs turning left out of Ashcott Road towards Westhay have to straddle both lanes when exiting the junction. On a site visit there was evidence of damage to the bollards possibly caused by turning vehicles.

The villages have just fewer than 1200 residents living within 200 metres of the carriageway. Collectively, the villages have 13 listed buildings. Meare has one primary school. The ward is considered to be ‘better than average’ in indices of deprivation.

5.4 Summary Away from the A39 and A371, traffic volumes on the Levels’ highway network are relatively low. The busiest routes are the B3151 between Cheddar and Glastonbury (3,700 vehicles AADT between Cheddar and Wedmore, and 3,800 vehicles AADT between Meare and Glastonbury) and the B3139 between Wedmore and Walrow (3,700 vehicles AADT). On these routes, HGVs represent around 2-3% of all traffic, slightly higher on the B3151 east of Meare (4%).

The location of Wedmore at the crossroads of the B3151 and B3139 that traverse the Levels has resulted in particular problems for this historic village (it has 43 listed buildings). It has a number of residential, shop and business frontages that require on-street parking. Its narrow streets and ‘tight’ geometry has resulted in local problems for light vehicles and, at time, great difficulties for larger vehicles and HGVs passing through the village. However there have been no PIAs in the village over the last five-year period.

Peat industry vehicles do not appear to pass through Wedmore, but north-south movements of quarry lorries have been recorded travelling between Cheddar and

5-12

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Shapwick confirming visual observations of these vehicles passing through the centre of the village.

Another through route across the Levels is between Cheddar, Wedmore and Glastonbury via the B3151. This takes large vehicles through the centres of Westhay and Meare which collectively have 13 listed vehicles. Peat industry traffic was observed travelling between the peat processing sites on Ashcott Road and Glastonbury, and to and from the Godwins site on the Burtle Road east of Westhay. Generally peat industry HGVs and tractors with trailers appear to use east-west routes between Watchfield, Burtle, Westhay, Meare and Glastonbury, and appear to respect the HGV ban through Ashcott village.

‘Pinch points’ for large vehicles have been identified at the following locations:

• Hythe Bow Bridge (B3151), Hythe; • Clewer Bridge (B3151), Clewer; • Mark village (B3139); • Blackford village (B3139); • Panborough village (B3139); • Bleadney village (B3139); • Henton village (B3139); • Yarley village (B3139); • Wedmore village (B3151 & B3139, several locations); • Burtle village (Burtle Road); • River Brue Bridge (Burtle Road); • Shapwick village; • Westhay village (B3151); and • Back Lane, Westhay.

Poor quality road surfaces were noted at the following locations:

• Ashcott Road, between Meare and Ashcott Corner; • between Wedmore and Westhay; • between Wedmore and Wells; • Burtle Road between Burtle and Westhay; and • between Shapwick and Westhay.

There were generally very few accidents involving HGVs and AVs on the Levels; most accidents involving these vehicles occur on the A39. Of the three PIAs that were reported in the period 2000-2005 appear to involve an element of driver error and cannot be attributed to the design of the highway or other geometrical features (the highway could perhaps have a role in terms of its historical geometry, but the costs to address these locations would far exceed the return in improvements to safety given the relatively low incidence of accidents involving HGVs and AVs. This conclusion is of course based only on the analysis of accidents involving HGVs and AVs; accidents involving other vehicles have not been considered in this report).

Overall, it is considered that HGVs represent only a small proportion of all traffic flows on the Levels and Moors. However, given the local highway network geometry, especially in historic village centres, the impacts of these HGV movements is magnified which affects the perception of these vehicles on the local environments through they pass.

5-13

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section 5)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

6 Proposed Actions

Following the analysis of the road network of the Levels and Moors and acting on the responses to the Parish Councils’ comments and perceptions regarding HGV movements, this section outlines the proposed actions that could be carried out to mitigate the impact of HGV movements on the Levels and Moors.

6.1 Road Maintenance on the Levels and Moors Many of the roads on the Levels and Moors are currently in a poor state of repair. This has increased the perceptions that many of the roads are unsafe.

Both Wookey Parish Council and Burnham Without Parish Council raised the issue of the level of noise and vibration caused by HGVs passing through their settlements. Wookey PC stated that if an HGV strikes a pot hole or a drain cover this can disturb residents, particularly late at night or in the early hours of the morning.

Maintenance Regime

An improved maintenance scheme for the road network in this area may be a solution to reduce the impacts of heavy traffic on the local community. By regularly maintaining the roads, filling potholes and resurfacing the network, the impact of the movements could be greatly reduced. The following sections of road have all been highlighted by the parishes as being in a poor state of repair and this was confirmed by the HGV audit. Therefore these routes should be considered as part of any maintenance regime and they are also highlighted in Figure 6.2:

• Ashcott Road, between Meare and Ashcott Corner; • B3151, between Wedmore and Westhay; • B3139, between Wedmore and Wells; • Burtle Road between Burtle and Westhay; and • between Shapwick and Westhay.

Other road surfaces in the Levels and Moors should also be included in the regime, although the ones that are highlighted are currently the roads in the poorest state of repair and tend to be used by the greater number of HGVs.

Planning of Works

A secondary measure to reduce the impact of HGV movements could be to improve notification of when works will be conducted, and to consult with local industry before works commence. For example, in March 2006 Shapwick Road was closed for maintenance. This meant that vehicles had to pass through Edington and Burtle to access Westhay. These works coincided with peak activities for the peat industry, with the transfer of stored peat by tractor and trailer to the processing sites, and the export of processed products by HGV to points of sale. Informing local businesses and communities of the regime’s schedule ahead of will enable them to make adjustments to prepare for the works, to advise delivery drivers of changes in the choice of available routes, and would also give the industries an opportunity to influence the timing of the works if the works would coincide with a period of greater traffic activity. This will also help to improve the perception of the maintenance scheme, as the local stakeholders will be aware of the work being conducted and the local communities less impacted by changes in HGV routes.

6-1

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

6.2 Improved Signing for the Levels and Moors 6.2.1 Direction Signposts Improved signposting to sites would help to reduce the impact of HGV movements across the Levels and Moors. Signposting to the key sites on the Levels and Moors from the motorway and the A roads is currently poor. Placing signposts of preferred route for industries (such as the peat industry) may help to reduce the number of HGVs that use inappropriate routes to access sites. A colour coded system could be used to inform HGV drivers of the best routes to certain sites on the Levels and Moors. The site owners would then be able to advise hauliers which coloured HGV signs to follow to access their site. Similar schemes have been used successfully elsewhere in the UK, such as Kent, where HGVs follow different coloured signs to the industrial estates to the east and west of the town, thus avoiding the historic centre. Simple colour coded signs reduce the need for several explanatory signs that would ‘clutter up’ the countryside.

Similarly, appropriate routes away from the production sites could be provided perhaps using a common, discrete symbol. This could follow the example of hurricane evacuation routes in the US, where a single symbol is used to highlight the appropriate route rather than relying on drivers to follow a changing number of destinations or different road numbers.

A further type of sign would be advisory signs at the start of certain routes that are unsuitable for HGVs and agricultural vehicles unless they require specific access. If such signs were placed at key points on the road network this would help to reduce the number of HGVs using inappropriate routes.

6.2.2 Safety Signing Two sites were highlighted as part of the HGV audit as sites having risk potential. Neither site had a Personal Injury Accident (PIA) involving an HGV or AV occur between 2000 and 2005, but this statistic does not include any near misses or the risk of an incident occurring. Both sites are shown in Figure 6.3. The risk of incidents occurring could be reduced with appropriate warning signs.

The first site is in the village of Shapwick. At the exit to the village there is a double bend where HGVs have to use both lanes to manoeuvre through the junction. Placing a sign stating ‘Oncoming vehicles in the centre of the carriageway’ could reduce the risk of an accident.

The second site is on the B3151 at the Ashcott Road junction. A signpost in Meare before the junction stating ‘Caution HGVs turning’, may help reduce the speed of vehicles approaching the junction.

6.3 Speed Reduction Reducing the speed limit on Ashcott Road and the B3151 between Westhay and Wedmore has been suggested as ways to improve safety. Currently the road surfaces along each section are very poor, as highlighted in Figure 6.2, and this may act as a deterrent to speed. If the surfaces are improved then this may increase the speeds on these routes.

Reducing the speed on both routes is therefore an opportunity to reduce the risk of an accident. However, given the relatively remote and sparsely populated sections of carriageway, a change in speed limit, on balance, may be considered to be unnecessary.

6-2

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Ashcott Road currently has low levels of vehicle movements, so any speed reduction may be difficult to enforce. Along the B3151 the road surface may also act as a deterrent to speeding.

6.4 Routing for Deliveries of Green Waste At present no peat processing sites on the Levels and Moors are processing green waste from Somerset, although Godwins currently have a licence to do this. As this is potentially a new product to be delivered there is an opportunity for the Somerset Peat Producers Association (SPPA) and the local parish councils to devise routes through the study area to minimise the impact of these movements. Green waste can be used instead of other materials in the peat production process, so the number of HGV and AV movements associated with the industry is not likely to increase dramatically if several sites decide to use green waste as a substitute to other diluents. By having an agreement in place at the start of the process, it may be possible to reduce the perceived impact of the HGV movements on the area.

6.5 Consultation Consultation between the key stakeholders in the area will help to reduce the impact of HGV movements on local communities, or would assist in gaining an understanding about why certain movements have to take place.

Shapwick Parish Council already has an agreement with Godwins and Vapogro to prevent movements of peat vehicles through their village. The manual cordon survey of vehicle number plates would appear to show that this agreement is effective. A similar scheme could be set up between the Parish Council and other producers in the area.

Similarly, several of the Parish Councils have issues with quarry HGVs from the Cheddar area passing through their settlements. A consultation exercise between the Parishes and the Quarry Industry could help to reduce these movements.

The problems experienced by Burnham Without Parish Council in Watchfield and Southwick caused by HGVs passing through the village during the night could be mitigated by a consultation exercise between the Parish Council and the companies based in Walrow that are using the route.

The traffic data shows that 40 percent of HGV movements in the village of Wedmore are likely to be local traffic, so consultation between the Parish Council and these companies may help to discourage the use of the roads through Wedmore.

A regular programme of consultation between the parishes and the local businesses would help to reduce the perceived impact of HGV movements. Stakeholders would be able to express their concerns and hopefully this will enable an understanding to be reached with regard to HGV movements.

6.6 Improvements to the Road Network There are several sites where slight adjustments to the road network will improve HGV movements within the Levels and Moors. There were 14 pinch points highlighted in the data analysis. These are:

• Hythe Bow Bridge (B3151), Hythe; • Clewer Bridge (B3151), Clewer; • Mark village (B3139); • Blackford village (B3139);

6-3

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

• Panborough village (B3139); • Bleadney village (B3139); • Henton village (B3139); • Yarley village (B3139); • Wedmore village (B3151 & B3139, several locations); • Burtle village (Burtle Road); • River Brue Bridge (Burtle Road); • Shapwick village; • Westhay village (B3151); and • Back Lane, Westhay.

Many of these sites already have signposting in place to notify drivers of the pinch point along the route. Making physical infrastructure changes at some of these points may also be impractical due to the proximity of properties, or natural features such as rivers or streams.

Godney Parish Council raised a specific point regarding HGV access to the village of Godney. The Parish Council stated that at present there are no suitable routes for HGVs into the village and the surrounding farms. The PC suggested that a route via Polsham would be the best route into the village for HGVs, although HGVs would then have to cross Garslade Bridge which is not currently suitable for HGV movements. This route would require extensive infrastructure change and may not be cost effective due to the number of HGV movements involved (Godney Parish Council have said they receive limited animal feed and dairy HGVs to the village ‘every week’, but other HGVs pass the through the village when attempting to take a short cut and often encounter difficulties). Improving access to this area for HGVs may ease access for HGVs in the local area, but perhaps a study should first be carried out to satisfy SCC that investment in infrastructure would represent good value for money.

A short term alternative may be simply to advice all non-essential access that the roads surrounding the village are unsuitable for large vehicles.

Of the routes listed above, two routes have been identified for further study, these being at Hythe Bow Bridge and Back Lane in Westhay.

6.6.1 Hythe Bow Bridge The safety improvement at Hythe Bow Bridge is not specifically related to HGV movements, but the cordon count shows that the B3151 at this point does have over 100 HGV movements per day. The bridge is approached by a tight bend in both directions, and also has a steep approach making it difficult for road users to see oncoming traffic. By changing the layout and/or creating a priority crossing over the bridge, the risk of an incident occurring at this site may be reduced. Further work is required to assess the feasibility of any improvements.

6.6.2 Back Lane HGV access improvements Both the SPPA and Meare and Westhay Parish Council have requested that the bend on Back Lane, shown in Figure 6.5, is improved to allow HGVs to pass through the village more easily. Due to a recently completed property development, there is a pavement and verge that acts as a buffer between the new housing and the road. If the verge were to be modified and the road realigned then HGVs would have an easier route through the village. This would not necessarily result in HGV speeds increasing. Further work relating to land ownership, services and the feasibility of the modifications needs to be considered.

6-4

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

6.7 Wedmore Traffic problems in the village of Wedmore are not only associated with HGV movements. General traffic movements, parking, the appropriateness of the road network for the volume of traffic and safety concerns are also issues for the village. A separate study into all of these factors may be required to help mitigate the problems experienced by residents, businesses and visitors in the village.

6.8 Summary It is very difficult to suggest ways of reducing HGV movements within the Levels and Moors, as many of the vehicles traversing the road network are related to businesses in the area. The volume of HGVs is, by comparison with other roads in the area such as the A39, very low. However given the geometry and historic nature of roads across the Levels, their impact on the communities can and is serious on some locations.

On the Levels, historical construction of the highways onto the peat substrate has resulted in road subsidence and poor road surface and riding qualities. In the villages, narrow streets, often combined with on-street parking and buildings constructed close to the highway, cause pinch points, accessibility, traffic circulation and passing problems for HGVs. These effects magnify the negative perception of HGV movements in the area.

The peat industry and other businesses are an important part of the economy of the Levels, providing employment for the local communities. Many of these industries have been in business for a considerable length of time, and will continue to trade whilst it is still viable to do so. Therefore the majority of actions detailed above are aimed at mitigating the impacts of HGV movements on the local community rather than recommending route bans or restrictions to operating hours.

The mitigation schemes suggested rely on moving HGVs through the area as safely and efficiently as possible along appropriate routes, as well as establishing a strategy for reasoned consensus on HGV movements. This requires regular consultation and an understanding of need on both sides between the businesses and parish councils in and surrounding the area. The results of these suggestions will hopefully reduce the impact of HGVs on the Somerset Levels and Moors.

6-5

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Aggregate Industries

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 71 3 8 135 32 4 Brean 3 B3 B A Axbridge Cheddar Reservoir Cheddar

B3140 A Hythe Bow 3 71 B3135 1 Berrow 5 1 Bridge 3 Draycott B B 3 13 8 5 3 A Rodney Stoke

9 B3140 3 Burnham- A 22 Westbury- on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge Back Lane, Wookey No 3139 Riv rth D B East er Brue rain Huntspill Westhay Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 5

8 1 3 3 A B Hun tspil Ashcott Rd, l Riv Burtle Godney Pawlett 1 er

14 Westhay B3 junction Garslade R iv e Puriton Woolavington Godwins Meare r P a 9 Bridge r 3 re 23 A tt A 39 Cossington R ive Chilton r Br Polden B3 ue 15 Edington Vapogro 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick A Durstons

Bridgwater 39 Shapwick Hotel Ashcott A Pinch Point Ki ng’s Se dge Westonzoyland mo or D Street rain

Figure 6.1 – Sites where action can be taken to aid HGV movements

Aggregate Industries Key

Hanson Aggregates B 3 A371 1 71 3 8 135 32 4 Brean 3 B3 B Roads Requiring A Axbridge Cheddar Maintenance Reservoir Cheddar

B3140 A 3 Possible Speed 71 B3135 1 Berrow 5 Limit Alterations 1 3 Draycott B B 3 13 8 5 3 A Rodney Stoke

9 B3140 3 Burnham- A 22 Westbury- on-Sea sub-Mendip Mark Wedmore B3139 Easton A 3 B3139 7 Blackford 1 Watchfield Wells Alstone Theale Huntspill Bason Bridge Wookey No 3139 Riv rth D B East er Brue rain Huntspill Henton Stratcholt 1 A371 5

8 1 3 3 A B Hun tspi ll Riv Burtle Godney Pawlett 1 er 4 1 Westhay B3

R iv e Puriton Woolavington Meare r Godwins P a 9 r 3 re 23 A tt A 39 Cossington R Chilton ive r B ru Polden B3 e 15 Edington Vapogro 1 Catcott Glastonbury 9 3 61 A A 3 8 3 A 3 9 Shapwick A Durstons

Bridgwater 39 Ashcott A

Ki ng’s Se dge Westonzoyland mo or D Street rain

Figure 6.2 – Sites for road maintenance and speed restrictions

6-6

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Caution HGVs Oncoming Turning Vehicles in the centre of the Carriageway

Figure 6.3 – Sites for Road Safety Signs

Slow. Oncoming vehicles in the centre of the carriageway

Changes to road layout or priority

Figure 6.4 – Hythe Bow Bridge

6-7

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)

Somerset County Council Somerset Levels HGV Management Study

Adjustments to the road layout will ease HGV movements through the village

Figure 6.5 – Back Lane, removal of verge

Key

Carriageway Improvements

Bridge Improvement

Figure 6.6 –HGV access improvements to Godney

6-8

160107.item8.PaperD.App(section6)