NORTH HORSHAM PARISH COUNCIL PLANNING, ENVIRONMENT AND TRANSPORT COMMITTEE THURSDAY 30TH JULY 2020 AT 7.30pm AT ROFFEY MILLENNIUM HALL
CLERK’S REPORT TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE AGENDA Numbers relate to those on the agenda.
3. Public Forum The Public Forum will last for a period of up to 15 minutes during which members of the public may put questions to the Council or draw attention to relevant matters relating to the business on the agenda. Each speaker is limited to 3 minutes. Business of the meeting will start immediately following the public forum or at 7.45pm whichever is the earlier.
5. Declaration of Interests Members are advised to consider the agenda for the meeting and determine in advance if they may have a Personal, Prejudicial or a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in any of the agenda items. If a Member decides they do have a declarable interest, they are reminded that the interest and the nature of the interest must be declared at the commencement of the consideration of the agenda item; or when the interest becomes apparent to them. Details of the interest will be included in the Minutes.
Where a Member has a Prejudicial Interest (which is not a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest), Members are reminded that they must now withdraw from the meeting chamber after making representations or asking questions.
If the interest is a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest, Members are reminded that they must take no part in the discussions of the item at all; or participate in any voting; and must withdraw from the meeting chamber; unless they have received a dispensation.
7. Chairman’s Announcements 1. TPO/1528 – A Tree Preservation Order (TPO) have been placed on several trees on the boundary of Roffey Cricket Club. See Annex 1.
2. The Parish Council was notified that as part of HDC’s work to review the Local Plan, HDC are carrying out an assessment of the different types of open space and recreational areas in the District. This includes allotments and play areas as well as natural areas of open space such as nature reserves. A survey of local residents is being undertaken to understand what type of open space residents use, what is their favourite space and how far they travel to visit the open space. The survey was carried out online from 8th June 2020 to 6th July 2020. The District Council promoted the survey via this link and various social media platforms: https://www.horsham.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/current- planning-consultations 3. Horsham District Cycling Forum requested North Horsham Parish Council’s support for ‘pop-up’ cycle lanes. This was because in May 2020 the Government called on councils to make swift and significant changes to their road layouts to give more space to cyclists and pedestrians as to enable socially distanced active travel. West Sussex County Council has responded with seven schemes across the county. Horsham District Cycling Forum believe a clear show of support will ensure that the scheme is extended and forms the basis of future schemes to benefit the community. Cllr Mrs J. Gough commented the following: ‘This is a good idea to increase the use of cycles and the safety of walkers into town, but wondered whether it would send cars along other dangerous routes into town to avoid traffic queues in Albion Way. Here are a few thoughts about how the money could be spent to make shopping safer in Horsham: • Increase the number of cycle racks within sight or easy walking of the main shopping area. • Provide banks of hand sanitisers outside the shops, for people to use whilst waiting in queues to enter individual shops or to use when they leave. • Employ additional street cleaners to check the hand sanitisers are not empty and to wipe down and sanitise the seats and benches in the shopping areas • Provision of plastic face coverings and gloves for all market traders.’ These comments were endorsed by Cllr. Mrs S. Wilton. No other comments were made. These comments were sent to the Horsham District Cycling Forum noting that two councillors from the council had made/endorsed these comments.
4. Due to the Covid-19 epidemic the Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) application for double yellow lines at Roffey Corner, Crawley Road has been postponed. The deadline (31st July 2020) for applications to be considered at this year’s Council Local Committee (CLC) scheduled for November 2020 has been missed. Advertisement for community support will be sent out in the winter months where it is envisaged greater interest in public support will be gained.
5. HDC has commissioned management consultancy Knight, Kavanagh & Page (KKP) to review on its existing open space assessment. The study examines the quality, distribution and use of open space across the Horsham District area. KKP are engaging and consulting with NHPC on this work to review quantity, quality, and access of provision in the North Horsham Parish. In December 2019 the Parish Council expressed concern of the loss of green spaces in the parish, this has been reiterated in the completed survey along with the list of green spaces agreed at the meeting. Please find the completed survey attached (Annex 2).
6. The Finance Committee is recommending to full Council that they do not put money in an Ear Marked Reserve for welcome signs (£18,000) this year as the General Reserve will be depleted due to lack of income.
8 DC/20/0470 – Land South of Newhouse Farm Old Crawley Road North Horsham Parish Council received numerous concerns from residents and local groups in relation to the proposed development. Comments from members of the Planning, Environment and Transport Committee where received by the Committee Clerk and subsequently collated and structured into a consultation response (see Annex 3 attached). Prior to it being agreed by the Council, the response was distributed to the Planning Committee for comments or alterations. The comments where agreed on 1st May 2020 under the new scheme of delegation, a contingency plan which was agreed at the Parish Council meeting on 19th March 2020 due to the Covid-19 epidemic. These comments were also sent to West Sussex County Times for their information.
9. Land north of Horsham – Highways Monitoring Scheme Please find attached (Annex 4) the Highways Monitoring Scheme in relation to the Land North of Horsham site. As required by the S106 agreement, the scheme has been submitted to WSCC Highways. The scheme outlines the baseline for monitoring to take place to assess the impact of the traffic from the North of Horsham site, as it progresses. If there is deemed to be an impact, measures to address this are to be agreed.
10. Definitive Map Modification Order (DMMO) – Coney Croft to public footpath Due to the Covid-19 epidemic, the public inquiry in regards to an addition of a public footpath outside 21 Coney Croft to public footpath 1586/2 was cancelled by the Planning Inspectorate. This is to be rescheduled when the present circumstances change.
11. Consultations 1. Horsham Blueprint Business Neighbourhood Plan (Pre-submission) (Regulation 14) – Attached (Annex 5) is the response to the neighbourhood plan which has been formulated and submitted in line with the agreed actions of the previous Planning meeting held on 19th March 2020.
2. HDC’s Local Plan information request – The Parish Council has been asked to complete an Infrastructure Schedule template provided by HDC with any entry being supported by appropriate evidence and with possible costs, existing committed funding and timescales for delivery. See the letter to Parish Councils attached (annex 6). The main questions being asked are whether any infrastructure identified in the current IDP has been delivered and whether any additional infrastructure is needed. In addition, the Parish Council has been asked to comment on the Settlement Sustainability. The information was requested to be submitted by 3rd July 2020, but due to the restrictions offered by the Covid-19 pandemic, an extension was requested, and granted for comments to be submitted in early August.
Due to the significant workload, it was requested three members from the Planning Committee to volunteer to review and report on these documents for the Planning Committee at the earliest Planning meeting. Cllr Mrs J. Gough and Cllr Mrs S. Wilton volunteered. The report can be found attached (Annex 7)
3. Neighbourhood portion of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – The attached letter (Annex 8) outlines some of the items that could be put forward for consideration including healthcare facilities, sports facilities, transport etc. The consultation ends on 7th August 2020.
12. Planning Appeals Appeals Lodged: REASONS FOR Refused planning permission for the development APPEAL APPLICATION DC/19/2340 REFERENCE WARD Roffey North APPLICATION Retrospective application for the removal of existing front garden boundary hedge and erection of a fence SITE 2 Earles Meadow PC COMMENTS No objection, provided it will not cause an adverse visual impact on the entrance to the estate. It was noted that the nonpermeable hard surface installed for the driveway of the house has not been included on this application. APPEAL DECISION
13. Planning Applications Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, as envisaged at the Full Council meeting on 19th March 2020, applications would need to be considered during the months the Parish Council were unable to conduct meetings. Applications where circulated to the Planning Committee for comments. Comments received where organised and collated by the Committee Clerk and sent to HDC. The list of applications shows all Parish Council comments that have been submitted to HDC during the Covid-19 pandemic and are to be ratified by the committee.
Annex 1
Annex 2 PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL QUESTIONNAIRE
Name of Parish Council North Horsham
Parish Clerk, contact details Pauline Whitehead BA(Hons) FSLCC [email protected]. Parish Office, Roffey Millennium Hall, Crawley Road, Horsham RH12 4DT Telephone 01403 750786
SECTION ONE - OPEN SPACES SUMMARY OF OPEN SPACES OWNED/LEASED BY THE PARISH COUNCIL
Name and location of site Type of site e.g Site owned Size of How would you (nearest street name and amenity or leased site rate the quality of nearest post code if greenspace by the (in this open space - possible) Parish hectares) good, adequate, Council? poor State which. Earles Meadow Green open Owned by 5.5 Good space, meadow Parish hectares and board walks Council Amberley Close Green space Owned by Good surrounding and Parish including fenced Council play area Holbrook Tythe Barn Green space Owned by Good next to and Parish including fenced Council play area with football goals Birches Road Green space Owned by Good next to and Parish including fenced Council play area. Amberley Close Allotments Owned by 0.3 Good Parish hectares Council (approx.) Harwood Road Allotments Land Good leased from West Sussex County Council Managed by the Harwood Road Allotment Association. Examples of types of open space: Allotments, Parks and Gardens, Play areas, Natural and semi natural green spaces (i.e. wildlife sites, woodlands), Green corridors (i.e. footpaths, cycleways, bridleways), Cemeteries, Amenity greenspace (i.e. village greens, recreation grounds).
Are there any other open spaces in the Parish that are not owned/leased by the Parish that you are aware of? Please list below providing location of site(s).
Are there any issues with any open space sites e.g. dog foul, vandalism, tired play equip, litter? Please state which site the issues are occurring at.
Open Space General Information Yes No Are there any plans to develop new or existing open spaces No in the Parish? (including non-parish owned spaces) If yes, please provide details
Do you feel that there is enough open space in the Parish to Yes No meet the needs of residents? See attached minute. If no, please detail which type North Horsham Parish Council would like to retain all of the of open space? current open spaces and not see any lost to development. How do you rate the quality of open spaces in your Parish area? (including non-parish owned Generally the quality of the open spaces is spaces) good. If aware of any allotments, please indicate Amberley Close Allotment Site: approximately the number of plots on site and Number of plots = 29 the number of people on a waiting list. Please provide the nearest street name/post code. Number on waiting list = 9
Fresh Water Supply? = Yes
Other Allotment Sites in the Parish not owned by NHPC: • Beech Road Allotments – owned by HDC.
Do any play sites in the area feature equipment There are two MUGAs at Holbrook Tythe which caters for older age ranges i.e. skate Barn which are paid use only. parks/ ramps, BMX track, Multi-use Games Area (often caged)?
If so, please state the sites and the type of equipment: Please record any other comments about open spaces here:
SECTION TWO - ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Is there a Parish Plan? If so can this be No made available to KKP or can you please detail any specific references to open space or sport facilities. If you have any additional comments North Horsham has planned regarding open space, sport or recreation development over the next ten years provision please state here which includes areas of open space.
There are areas of dense housing in Roffey where open space is at a premium and areas like Manor Fields Recreation Ground, Roffey Recreation Ground and open space at South Holmes including Birches Road playground becomes essential.
Some of the housing in Roffey has no outside space or just a small garden, so open spaces are valuable for all sorts of recreational activity.
There are very few sports facilities in North Horsham. Although Horsham town has several sports opportunities, they may not be accessible to all of those wishing to use them due to cost.
THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THE SURVEY
Please return to [email protected]
Annex 3
North Horsham Parish Council Roffey Millennium Hall, Tel: 01403 750786 (Office & Hall Bookings) Crawley Road, Horsham, Roffey Millennium Hall, North Heath Hall West Sussex, RH12 4DT Holbrook Tythe Barn Email: [email protected] Website: www.northhorsham-pc.gov.uk
Horsham District Council Planning Department Parkside Chart Way Horsham West Sussex RH12 1RL
29th April 2020
Dear Sir/Madam,
North Horsham Parish Council strongly object to the planning application DC/20/0470 - Land South of Newhouse Farm Old Crawley Road - Outline application for the erection of 473 dwellings, with new access provided off the Crawley Road, with associated areas of open space and landscaping. All matters reserved apart from access.
The reasons for objection are set out below:
1. Public Concern The Parish Council has received a multitude of serious concerns from members of the public and local residents on the negative impact on the community and standard of life the development will introduce and exacerbate.
2. Detrimental Impact on the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) The site is located within the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that “great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty.” The NPPF goes on to say that “Planning permission should be refused for major developments in these designated areas except in exceptional circumstances and where it can be demonstrated they are in the public interest.”
The Parish Council is in full support of the High Weald AONB Unit objections to the proposal, which states the development converses the objectives of the High Weald AONB Management Plan, as it causes: 1. Significant harm to the AONB by detracting from the rural character, sense of naturalness and tranquillity of this part of the AONB and the setting of historic routeways;
2. A loss of fields for agricultural production; 3. Damage to the habitat of the priority woodland within the site and the ancient woodland adjacent to it.
3. ‘Not Currently Developable Land’ The application relates to land shown as “not being currently developable” on the Horsham District Council Strategic Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment” (SHELAA)
4. Local Infrastructure is at its Capacity The current infrastructure in the area is not able to accommodate the overwhelming increase in population that the additional development will generate. For example, doctors’ surgeries are already oversubscribed. In addition, there is a need for lower cost and affordable housing in this area. There are no specific details regarding the split between social housing and shared ownership within the application.
North Horsham has been forced to take on the development north of the A264 for 2,750 dwellings, including a new school, retail area and business park. This major development will increase traffic movements and congestion/queuing on the A264, further impacting the B2195, Crawley Road. The Moorhead Roundabout, which connects Crawley Road and the A264, is expected to be signalised as part of the North of Horsham Development. The Newhouse Farm proposal indicates that ‘non- standard’ traffic signals would be provided at the Crawley Road/Old Crawley Road and Earles Meadow Junction. Combined with the entrance to the new development, it is felt that this would have the potential to further increase queuing, congestion and driver confusion due to its close proximity to the roundabout.
In addition to the north of Horsham development, North Horsham has taken significant development in other locations within the parish which have attracted a substantial amount of public interest and concern. These include the former Novartis site on Parsonage Road and the former Novartis car park opposite, development on the former Holbrook Club site on North Heath Lane and probably most significantly, the agreement to build an incinerator plant on Langhurstwood Road. Other smaller infill sites shown on the SHELAA have also been developed. It is felt that the impact of a further substantial development in the Parish will place too much pressure on the wellbeing of those living within the Parish. This is clear from the unprecedented local opposition to the application.
5. Environmental Impact In addition to the impact on the AONB, as described above, the development will have negative implications on the environment.
The development site is visible from Earles Meadow open space that is owned and maintained by the Parish Council. The development site is highly visible from the eastern end of the open space, west of Crawley Road and just south of the Earles Meadow roadway. Construction on the site would have a detrimental effect on the views from this area and destroy the pleasant rural aspect constantly used by members of the public. The construction of housing on the site would urbanise the area. The Riverside Walk, a very popular route, will lose many of the views and scenic aspects due to the obstruction of the houses.
There are concerns that the surface water from the development will be discharged into the stream that crosses between the Upper and Lower Meadows of
the Earles Meadow Estate. This stream passes under the Horsham to Crawley railway line through a culvert which on occasions is not capable of taking the exiting flow of water.
It is considered for the above reasons that the Parish Council should object to this application in the strongest of terms and request that the District Council should refuse consent.
Annex 4
BY EMAIL: [email protected] Mr Ian Gledhill West Sussex County Council Principal Planner - County Highways West Sussex County Council Ground Floor Northleigh County Hall Chichester PO19 1RH 29152/A3/LP 10 February 2020 Dear Ian
LAND AT NORTH HORSHAM, HORSHAM, WEST SUSSEX HIGHWAYS MONITORING SCHEME
We write on behalf of Legal & General (Strategic Land North Horsham) Limited (‘L&G’), in respect of the above Site, and am pleased to enclose a submission pursuant to the s.106 Obligation requiring a Highways Monitoring Scheme. The submission relates to the strategic development of the Site (LPA reference DC/16/1167 as amended under application reference DC/19/0984).
Background
An application for Outline Planning Permission for development comprising the following was submitted to the Council on 4 August 2016:
Outline planning application with all matters reserved except access for a mixed use strategic development to include housing (up to 2,750 dwellings), business park (up to 46,450 m2), retail, community centre, leisure facilities, education facilities, public open space, landscaping and related infrastructure.
Permission was granted subject to conditions and a s.106 Agreement on 1 March 2018 (‘the OPP’).
Schedule 11, Part 3 of the s.106 Agreement requires submission of a Monitoring Scheme:
“3.1 To submit Monitoring Schemes to the County Council for approval in writing:
In respect of:
3.1.1 The increase in traffic using the rural lanes to the north of the Development, including Langhurstwood Road and Old Holbrook on or before Commencement of Phase 1 of the Development;
3.1.2 The increase in traffic on Tower Road and Faygate Lane arms of the A264 Faygate Roundabout and the impact upon the operation of the Faygate Roundabout on or before Commencement of Phase 1 of the Development;
3.1.3 The increase in traffic using routes through the villages of Warnham and Rusper on or before Commencement of Phase 1 of the development;
3.1.4 Pedestrian crossing demands at Old Holbrook junction on or before Commencement of Phase 3 of the Development;
3.1.5 Parking demands in and around Littlehaven Station on or before Commencement of Phase 1 of the Development
“Monitoring Scheme” is defined in the s.106 Agreement to be a scheme to monitor the above.
A Draft Monitoring Scheme was submitted to the County Council by Stantec in August 2018 and comments subsequently received. These comments have been taken into account in the final Monitoring Scheme enclosed.
In addition to the Monitoring Scheme, Stantec have carried out Phase 1 baseline survey work in accordance with the Monitoring Scheme. The results are set out in the attached Phase 1 Baseline Monitoring Report.
Submission
The submission therefore comprises the following:
01 Covering Letter (dated 10 February 2020);
02 S106 Highways Monitoring Scheme, dated February 2020, prepared by Stantec ; and
03 Phase 1 Baseline Monitoring Report, dated February 2020, prepared by Stantec.
We would be grateful if you could confirm receipt of this submission. Please do not hesitate to contact the writer at this office if you require further information or have any further queries.
Yours sincerely
LAUREN PATEL Associate cc: Jason Hawkes – Horsham District Council Elizabeth Orchard – L&G Sebastian Balcombe – L&G
Enc.
Land North of Horsham Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report
On behalf of Legal & General (Strategic Land North Horsham) Ltd
Project Ref: 25216 | Rev: A | Date: January 2020
Registered Office: Buckingham Court Kingsmead Business Park, London Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1JU Office Address: Caversham Bridge House, Waterman Place, Reading, Berkshire RG1 8DN T: +44 (0)118 950 0761 E: [email protected] Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Document Control Sheet
Project Name: Land North of Horsham Project Ref: 25216 Report Title: Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Doc Ref: 25216/5540/001 Date: January 2020
Name Position Signature Date
Prepared by: L Wardle Graduate Engineer LW January 2020
Assistant Transport M Martinez MM January 2020 Reviewed by: Planner
Director Transport S Matthews SM January 2020 Approved by: Planning
For and on behalf of Stantec UK Limited
Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approved
A 31.01.2020 Final changes LW MM SM
Final changes to address client’s B 03.02.2020 LW MM SM comments
This report has been prepared by Stantec UK Limited (‘Stantec’) on behalf of its client to whom this report is addressed (‘Client’) in connection with the project described in this report and takes into account the Client's particular instructions and requirements. This report was prepared in accordance with the professional services appointment under which Stantec was appointed by its Client. This report is not intended for and should not be relied on by any third party (i.e. parties other than the Client). Stantec accepts no duty or responsibility (including in negligence) to any party other than the Client and disclaims all liability of any nature whatsoever to any such party in respect of this report.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North ii Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Contents
1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Development Phasing ...... 2 1.3 Traffic Survey Methodology ...... 2 2 Langhurst Wood Road and Old Holbrook Traffic ...... 3 2.1 Langhurst Wood Road ...... 3 2.2 Old Holbrook Road ...... 4 3 Faygate Roundabout ...... 7 3.1 Introduction ...... 7 3.2 ATC Survey ...... 7 3.3 MCTC Surveys ...... 8 4 Warnham and Rusper Traffic ...... 11 4.1 Warnham Village ...... 11 4.2 Rusper Village ...... 18 5 Old Holbrook Pedestrian Crossing Demands ...... 23 6 Littlehaven Station Parking Demands ...... 24 6.1 Parking Beat Survey ...... 24 7 Summary and Conclusions ...... 27
Figures
Figure 1.1: Development Phasing ...... 2 Figure 2.1 – Langhurst Wood Road ATC Survey Location ...... 3 Figure 2.2 – Old Holbrook ATC Survey Location ...... 5 Figure 4.1: Warnham ATC Study area ...... 11 Figure 4.2: Rusper ATC Study Area ...... 18 Figure 5.1: Old Holbrook Pedestrian Crossing Points ...... 23 Figure 6.1: Littlehaven Station Parking Beat Survey Study Area ...... 24
Tables
Table 2.2: 2019 ATC Survey Results Langhurst Wood Road ...... 3 Table 2.3: 2019 Average Trips Langhurst Wood Road ...... 4 Table 2.4: 2014 ATC Survey Results Langhurst Wood Road ...... 4 Table 2.5: 2019 ATC Survey Results Old Holbrook Road ...... 5 Table 2.6: 2019 Average Trips Old Holbrook Road ...... 5 Table 2.4: 2014 ATC Survey Results Old Holbrook Road (Location 1) ...... 6 Table 3.1: 2019 ATC Survey Results Faygate Lane ...... 7 Table 3.2: Average Trips Faygate Lane ...... 7 Table 3.3: 2019 ATC Survey Results Tower Road ...... 8 Table 3.4: Average Trips Tower Road ...... 8
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North iii Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Table 3.5: 2019 Turning counts (PCUs) ...... 8 Table 3.5: 2015 Turning Counts (PCUs) ...... 9 Table 3.6: Traffic Increase at Faygate Roundabout ...... 9 Table 3.7: TEMPRO Growth Factors ...... 9 Table 3.8: 2019 Predicted Turning Counts (PCUs) ...... 9 Table 3.9: 2019 Surveyed Flows vs. 2019 Predicted Flows ...... 10 Table 4.1: 2019 ATC Survey Results Knob Hill...... 11 Table 4.2: Average Trips Knob Hill ...... 12 Table 4.3: 2015 ATC Survey Results Knob Hill...... 12 Table 4.4: 2019 ATC Survey Results Bell Road ...... 12 Table 4.5: Average Trips Bell Road ...... 13 Table 4.6: 2019 ATC Survey Results Church Street ...... 13 Table 4.7: Average Trips Church Street ...... 13 Table 4.8: 2019 ATC Survey Results Friday Street ...... 14 Table 4.9: Average Trips Friday Street ...... 14 Table 4.10: 2019 ATC Survey Results Bailing Hill ...... 14 Table 4.11: Average Trips Bailing Hill ...... 15 Table 4.12 – Personal Injury Collision Casualty Summary for Warnham ...... 16 Table 4.13: Personal Injury Collision Accidents Vehicles Involved Summary for Warnham ...... 17 Table 4.14: 2020 ATC Survey Results Horsham Road ...... 18 Table 4.15: Average Trips Horsham Road ...... 19 Table 4.16: 2020 ATC Survey Results East Street ...... 19 Table 4.17: Average Trips East Street ...... 19 Table 4.18: 2020 ATC Survey Results High Street ...... 20 Table 4.19: Average Trips High Street ...... 20 Table 4.20: 2020 ATC Survey Results Capel Road ...... 20 Table 4.21: Average Trips Capel Road ...... 21 Table 4.22: 2020 ATC Survey Results Newdigate Road ...... 21 Table 4.23: Average Trips Newdigate Road ...... 21 Table 5.1: Pedestrian Counts at Old Holbrook Road ...... 23 Table 6.1: Parking Beat Survey Results ...... 25
Appendices
Appendix A Traffic Survey Data
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North iv Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North v Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
1.1.1 Stantec has been commissioned by Legal & General (Strategic Land North Horsham) Ltd to prepare a baseline monitoring scheme report to fulfil a planning obligation included in the Section 106 (S106) Agreement associated with the outline planning permission DC/16/1677 for development at Land North of Horsham (LPA ref. no. DC/16/1677).
1.1.2 Item 3.2 of Schedule 11 of the S106 Agreement requires monitoring schemes to be submitted to West Sussex County Council (WSCC) for approval in respect of:
The increase in traffic using the rural lanes to the north of the Development, including Langhurst Wood Road and Old Holbrook (on or before commencement of Phase 1);
The increase in traffic on Tower Road and Faygate Lane arms of the A264 Faygate Roundabout and the impact upon the operation of the Faygate Roundabout (on or before commencement of Phase 1);
The increase in traffic using routes through the villages of Warnham and Rusper (on or before commencement of Phase 1);
Pedestrian crossing demands at Old Holbrook junction (on or before commencement of Phase 3); and
Parking demands in and around Littlehaven Station (on or before commencement of Phase 1).
1.1.3 In order to fulfil the above requirements, traffic surveys have been carried out prior to commencement of construction works for the site, these comprise the following:
Automatic Traffic Counts (ATCs) for a 7-day period between Thursday 3rd October 2019 and Wednesday 9th October 2019 along Langhurst Wood Road, Old Holbrook Road and within the villages of Warnham and Rusper
Manual Classified Turning Counts (MCTCs) on Thursday 3rd October between 07:00 and 10:00 and between 16:00 and 19:00 at the A264 / Faygate Lane / Tower Road roundabout;
On-street parking beat surveys on Thursday 3rd October 2019 between 11:00 and 14:00 around Littlehaven Station
Pedestrian crossing demand video surveys on Thursday 24th and Saturday 26th November 2016 the A264/ Old Holbrook junction; and
Accident record in the centre of Warnham and Rusper for the most recent 5-year period up to the end of December 2019.
1.1.4 The full traffic survey data has been included in Appendix A for information.
1.1.5 It is noted that previous surveys were carried out in 2011 and 2014/ 2015, which informed the Transport Assessment (TA) prepared as part of the outline planning. application. The results of the 2019 surveys have been compared with the TA flows for information, however the 2019 surveys should be considered the ‘baseline’ against which future surveys will be compared.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 1 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
1.1.6 Analysis of the above surveys is included in Sections 2 - 5 of this report. Moreover, the S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy, which sets out the overarching methodology and frequency of monitoring has been prepared separately in consultation with WSCC and is submitted alongside this document. These documents have been submitted prior to commencement of construction works for the Primary Access Works at the site.
1.2 Development Phasing
1.2.1 For reference, the consented development phasing plan is shown in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Development Phasing
1.3 Traffic Survey Methodology
1.3.1 Future monitoring surveys will be undertaken during ‘neutral’ months avoiding main and local school holidays and other abnormal traffic periods. DfT’s Webtag guidance defined neutral periods as days between Monday to Thursday in:
Late March and April – excluding the weeks before and after Easter;
May – excluding the Thursday before and the all of the week after the Bank Holiday;
June;
September – excluding the school holidays or return to school weeks;
All of October; and
All of November – provided adequate lighting is available.
1.3.2 Surveys will also be undertaken to avoid any events that will interfere with the traffic flows including roadworks.
1.3.3 Should surveys need to be undertaken outside of the neutral months, there may be a need to postpone or repeat the surveys so that traffic data collected is representative of typical conditions.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 2 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
2 Langhurst Wood Road and Old Holbrook Traffic
2.1 Langhurst Wood Road
2.1.1 ATC Surveys were undertaken for a 7-day period between Thursday 3rd October 2019 and Wednesday 9th October 2019 along Langhurst Wood Road. A plan showing the location of the counter is shown in Figure 2.1 below. Moreover Table 2.2 summarises the results obtained for a typical day at this location.
Figure 2.1 – Langhurst Wood Road ATC Survey Location
Table 2.2: 2019 ATC Survey Results Langhurst Wood Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 500 69 568
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 47 566 613
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,620 1,891 3,511
06:00 – 22:00 1,758 2,000 3,758
06:00 – 00:00 1,764 2,068 3,832
00:00 – 00:00 1,873 2,086 3,958
2.1.2 Table 2.3 below summarises the seven-day and five-day average travelling north bound and southbound on Langhurst Wood Road.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 3 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Table 2.3: 2019 Average Trips Langhurst Wood Road
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1,406 1,537 2,943
5 Day (Weekday average) 1,483 2,021 3,504
Total number of vehicles 9,845 10,756 20,601
2.1.3 The peak hour results of the 2014 ATC survey undertaken at Langhurst Wood Road have been extracted from the TA submitted in support of the outline application and are summarised below in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4: 2014 ATC Survey Results Langhurst Wood Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 384 101 485
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 45 345 390 2.1.4 When comparing the 2019 against the 2014 peak surveyed flows, the following changes in traffic have been observed:
Northbound: increase of 30% and 5% in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
Southbound: decrease of 32% and increase of 64% in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
2.2 Old Holbrook Road
2.2.1 Similarly, ATC Surveys were undertaken at two locations along Old Holbrook Road in 2019. The location of the counters is shown in Figure 2.2., whilst Table 2.5 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Old Holbrook Road.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 4 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Figure 2.2 – Old Holbrook ATC Survey Location
Location 2
Location 1
Table 2.5: 2019 ATC Survey Results Old Holbrook Road
Location 1 Location 2 Time Period NB SB Two-Way NB SB Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 20 12 32 10 4 14
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 26 36 62 14 26 40
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 258 275 533 115 128 243
06:00 – 22:00 276 293 569 118 136 254
06:00 – 00:00 280 293 573 119 137 255
00:00 – 00:00 282 296 577 119 137 256
2.2.2 Table 2.6 summarises the seven-day and five-day average travelling northbound and southbound on Old Holbrook Road.
Table 2.6: 2019 Average Trips Old Holbrook Road
Location 1 Location 2 Period NB SB Two-Way NB SB Two-Way
7-Day Average 263 268 531 116 127 243
5-Day (Weekday Average) 279 291 570 119 135 254
Total number of vehicles 1,843 1,879 3,722 812 886 1,698
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 5 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
2.2.3 The results of the 2014 ATC survey undertaken at Old Holbrook Road (ATC 1 location) for the 2014 TA as part of the outline application are summarised below in Table 2.4.
Table 2.4: 2014 ATC Survey Results Old Holbrook Road (Location 1)
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 19 14 33
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 20 20 40
2.2.4 A comparison between the 2019 and 2014 surveys at Location 1 indicates the following changes:
Northbound: increase of 7% and 31% in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
Southbound: decrease of 14% and increase of 78% in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 6 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
3 Faygate Roundabout
3.1 Introduction
3.1.1 The Faygate Roundabout is currently operating over capacity; however no upgrades are planned to date. However, during preapplication discussions at outline stage, it was agreed with WSCC that monitoring would be carried at the roundabout in order to inform any requirement for improvements.
3.1.2 In light of the above, an ATC Survey was conducted for a 7-day period between Thursday 3rd October 2019 and Wednesday 9th October 2019 on Tower Road and Faygate Lane. Additionally, MCTCs were carried out on Thursday 3rd October between 07:00 and 10:00 and between 16:00 and 19:00 at the A264 Faygate Roundabout in order to determine turning movements at the A264 / Faygate Lane / Tower Road arms. The results of each survey are summarised below:
3.2 ATC Survey
Faygate Lane
3.2.1 Table 3.1 summarises the volume of traffic travelling along Faygate Lane in both directions on a typical day.
Table 3.1: 2019 ATC Survey Results Faygate Lane
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 652 153 805
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 170 429 598
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 2,513 2,145 4,658
06:00 – 22:00 2,755 2,332 5,087
06:00 – 00:00 2,792 2,362 5,154
00:00 – 00:00 2,832 2,384 5,216
3.2.2 Table 3.2 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Faygate Lane.
Table 3.2: Average Trips Faygate Lane
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 2,380 2,015 4,395
5 Day (Weekday 2,808 2,368 5,176 average)
Total number of 16,661 14,104 30,765 vehicles
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 7 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Tower Road
3.2.3 Table 3.3 summarises the volume of traffic travelling along Tower Road in both directions on a typical day.
Table 3.3: 2019 ATC Survey Results Tower Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 380 279 659
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 195 353 548
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,759 2,023 3,782
06:00 – 22:00 1,924 2,173 4,097
06:00 – 00:00 1,946 2,190 4,136
00:00 – 00:00 1,965 2,202 4,168
3.2.4 Table 3.4 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Tower Road.
Table 3.4: Average Trips Tower Road
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1,642 1,876 3,518
5 Day (Weekday 1,963 2,217 4,180 average)
Total number of 11,491 13,134 24,625 vehicles
3.2.5 It is noted that, as part of the TA produced to support the outline planning application no ATC surveys were carried out at Faygate Lane or Tower Road.
3.3 MCTC Surveys
3.3.1 The results of the MCTC survey carried out at the A264 Faygate Roundabout are summarised below. In line with the TA, the peak hours between 08:00 – 09:00 (AM Peak) and 17:00 – 18:00 (PM Peak) are shown.
Table 3.5: 2019 Turning counts (PCUs)
Arm Time Period Faygate Total Tower Road A264 (W) A264 (E) Lane Movements
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 411 1,765 162 2,162 4,500
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 208 1,802 427 1,990 4,427
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 8 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
3.3.2 Moreover, the 2015 survey flows used in the TA are summarised in Table 3.5.
Table 3.5: 2015 Turning Counts (PCUs)
Arm Time Period Faygate Total Tower Road A264 (W) A264 (E) Lane Movements
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 206 1,930 143 1,901 4,180
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 125 1,853 272 1,968 4,218
3.3.3 A comparison between the 2019 and 2015 surveys indicates the following changes:
Table 3.6: Traffic Increase at Faygate Roundabout
Arm Time Period Faygate Total Tower Road A264 (W) A264 (E) Lane Movements
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) +100% -9% +13% +14% +8%
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) +66% -3% +57% +1% +5%
Expected Growth
3.3.4 Due to the inefficient operation of the roundabout, a more in-depth analysis has been carried out in this section in order to assess the reliability of growth factors employed in the TA to estimate projected traffic growth at the A264 Faygate roundabout. TEMPRO growth factors for the period 2015-2031 used in the TA have been prorated to determine growth factors between 2015 and 2019:
Table 3.7: TEMPRO Growth Factors
Assessment Years AM Peak PM Peak
2015 - 2031 1.2484 1.2661
2015 - 2019 1.0621 1.0665
3.3.5 Furthermore, the 2015 survey has been growthed, using the 2019 growth factors for the AM and PM peak hours from Table 3.7. This is shown in Table 3.8 below:
Table 3.8: 2019 Predicted Turning Counts (PCUs)
Arms Time Period Faygate Total Tower Road A264 (W) A264 (E) Lane Movements
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 218 2050 152 2019 4439
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 133 1976 290 2099 4499
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 9 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
3.3.6 A comparison between the 2019 surveyed flows and 2019 predicted flows has been included below:
Table 3.9: 2019 Surveyed Flows vs. 2019 Predicted Flows
Arms Time Period Faygate Total Tower Road A264 (W) A264 (E) Lane Movements
AM 411 1,765 162 2,162 4,500 2019
Surveyed PM 208 1,802 427 1,990 4,427
AM 218 2,050 152 2,019 4,439 2019
Predicted PM 133 1,976 290 2,099 4,499
3.3.7 Table 3.9 compares the 2019 surveyed and predicted flows and shows there is a significant difference on the Tower Road arm during the AM and PM peak periods, and on the Faygate Lane arm during the PM peak period. This suggests that traffic growth has been greater than the agreed growth factor applied to Tower Road and Faygate Lane. Surveyed movements on the A264 approaches is fairly consistent with the 2019 predicted flows.
3.3.8 As mentioned previously, construction works at the site have not started yet, therefore it can be concluded that the increase in traffic is not related to the development at Land North of Horsham.
3.3.9 In light of the above, it is proposed that the 2019 surveyed flows are used as the ‘baseline’ against which future surveys can be assessed.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 10 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
4 Warnham and Rusper Traffic
4.1 Warnham Village
4.1.1 The roads within Warnham village which have been surveyed are Knob Hill, Bell Road, Church Street, Friday Street and Bailing Hill. Figure 4.1 shows the study area for Warnham village.
Figure 4.1: Warnham ATC Study area
4.1.2 Furthermore, previous surveys were undertaken in 2014 and 2015 along Knob Hill. As previously stated, the 2019 survey data will be the baseline data for future surveys, however 2014/2015 flows along Knob Hill have also been included in this section for reference.
Knob Hill
4.1.3 Table 4.1 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Knob Hill which was recorded in 2019.
Table 4.1: 2019 ATC Survey Results Knob Hill
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 187 62 248
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 60 94 60
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 856 598 856
06:00 – 22:00 960 667 960
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 11 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
06:00 – 00:00 972 679 972
00:00 – 00:00 992 687 992
4.1.4 Table 4.2 below summarises the seven-day and five-day average travelling north bound and south bound on Knob Hill.
Table 4.2: Average Trips Knob Hill
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 841 619 1,460
5 Day (Weekday 977 695 1,672 average)
Total number of 5,885 4,335 10,220 vehicles
4.1.5 Table 4.3 summarises the 2015 ATC survey data obtained for the 2014 TA.
Table 4.3: 2015 ATC Survey Results Knob Hill
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 140 51 191
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 56 87 143
4.1.6 When comparing the 2019 against the 2014 peak surveyed flows, the following changes in traffic have been observed:
Northbound: increase of 33% and 8% in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
Southbound: decrease of 21% and increase of 64% in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.
Bell Road
4.1.7 Table 4.4 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Bell Road.
Table 4.4: 2019 ATC Survey Results Bell Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 143 149 292
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 61 185 245
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 839 1,349 839
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 12 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
06:00 – 22:00 967 1,553 967
06:00 – 00:00 990 1,584 990
00:00 – 00:00 1,011 1,611 1,011
4.1.8 Table 4.5 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Bell Road.
Table 4.5: Average Trips Bell Road
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 863 1465 2348
5 Day (Weekday average) 1001 1623 2623
Total number of vehicles 6182 10252 16434
Church Street
4.1.9 Table 4.6 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Church Street.
Table 4.6: 2019 ATC Survey Results Church Street
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 256 114 370
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 67 239 305
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,255 1,421 1,255
06:00 – 22:00 1,430 1,594 1,430
06:00 – 00:00 1,451 1,629 1,451
00:00 – 00:00 1,485 1,652 1,485
4.1.10 Table 4.7 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Church Street
Table 4.7: Average Trips Church Street
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1,264 1,502 2,766
5 Day (Weekday average) 1,461 1,672 3,133
Total number of vehicles 8,841 10,526 19,367
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 13 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Friday Street
4.1.11 Table 4.8 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Friday Street.
Table 4.8: 2019 ATC Survey Results Friday Street
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 74 71 144
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 28 81 109
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 453 676 453
06:00 – 22:00 508 771 508
06:00 – 00:00 522 789 522
00:00 – 00:00 533 802 533
4.1.12 Table 4.9 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Friday Street.
Table 4.9: Average Trips Friday Street
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 498 778 1,276
5 Day (Weekday 543 831 1,374 average)
Total number of vehicles 3,487 5,443 8,930
Bailing Hill
4.1.13 Table 4.10 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Bailing Hill.
Table 4.10: 2019 ATC Survey Results Bailing Hill
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 243 135 378
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 88 195 283
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,287 1,273 1,287
06:00 – 22:00 1,445 1,421 1,445
06:00 – 00:00 1,464 1,443 1,464
00:00 – 00:00 1,482 1,459 1,482
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 14 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
4.1.14 Table 4.11 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Bailing Hill.
Table 4.11: Average Trips Bailing Hill
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1308 1335 2643
5 Day (Weekday 1477 1480 2957 average)
Total number of vehicles 9157 9342 18499
Speeds in Warnham
4.1.15 Moreover, average and 85th percentile speeds at the surveyed locations have been included below for reference:
Table 4.12 – Average and 85th percentile Speeds in Warnham
Average Speed (mph) 85th percentile (mph) Location Speed Limit NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
Knob Hill 34.5 34.2 40.4 39.3 50mph
Bell Road 29.6 30.9 35.1 36.4 30mph
Church Street 22.2 21.4 26.9 25.8 20mph
Friday Street 21.1 22.0 26.2 27.3 20mph
Bailing Hill 29.6 28.8 34.7 33.6 30mph
NB – north bound, EB – east bound, SB – south bound and WB – west bound
Warnham Personal Injury Collision Data
4.1.16 The Personal Injury Collision (PIC) data has been obtained from the West Sussex County Council (WSCC) to review the highway safety in the vicinity of Warnham. The data analysed comprises the five year period 01/01/2015 – 31/12/2019 (60 months) and covers highway network links within Warnham village.
4.1.17 The collisions are classed into three injury categories based on their severity: Slight, Serious and Fatal, definitions of which are provided as follows:
Slight Injury: Injuries of a minor nature, such as sprains, bruises, or cuts not judged to be severe, or slight shock requiring only roadside attention (medical treatment is not a pre- requisite for an injury to be defined as slight
Serious Injury: Injuries for which a person is detained in hospital, as an in-patient, or any of the following injuries, whether or not a person is detained in hospital; fractures, concussion, internal injuries, severe cuts and lacerations, severe general shock requiring
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 15 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
medical treatment and injuries which result in death 30 days after the collision. The serious category, therefore, covers a very broad range of injuries; and
Fatal Injury: Injuries which cause death either immediately or any time up to 30 days after the collision
4.1.18 A total of 8 accidents occurred which resulted in 14 casualties. Four accidents were recorded at the Bell Road / A24 junction. One serious PIC involved a driver having a medical episode driving southbound on the A24, causing them to drift and collide with a driver travelling northbound. The other serious PIC involved a vehicle driving southbound on the A24 and turning right onto Bell Road and crashing into a motorcycle, who was travelling northbound. The other two PIC’s involved a vehicle driver travelling south on the A24 stopping to turn / allow a vehicle to turn into Bell Road and a vehicle behind hitting the back of them. Both of these accidents were slight.
4.1.19 Four accidents were recorded within Warnham Village, of which one was serious, and the others were slight. The serious PIC occurred slightly south of the Friday Street / Church Street / Bailing Hill roundabout. A vehicle travelling north on Bailing Hill had overtaken a cyclist and then turned right onto an unnamed road. The vehicle didn’t see a motorcyclist travelling southbound on Bailing Hill and collided with them. The motorcycle then skidded across the road and into the cyclist. The slight PIC’s involved the following:
A motorcycle being hit by a vehicle which was pulling out of a car park access. This occurred on Church Street, just south of the Bell Road / Church Street / School Hill roundabout.
A vehicle aggressively braking, hitting a mudbank on the side of the road and flipping the vehicle onto its roof. This occurred on Bailing Hill, south of the junction with Friday Street.
A vehicle pulling out of a mini roundabout and hitting a cyclist. This happened on the the Friday Street / Church Street / Bailing Hill roundabout.
4.1.20 No accidents occurred during the weekday AM and PM peak hours.
4.1.21 Table 4.13 summarises the mode associated with the accidents that took place within the recorded period:
Table 4.13 – Personal Injury Collision Casualty Summary for Warnham
Severity Casualty Total Fatal Serious Slight
Vehicle Driver 0 1 6 7
Passenger 0 1 1 2
Motorcycle Rider 0 2 1 3
Cyclist 0 0 2 2
Pedestrian 0 0 0 0
Other 0 0 0 0
Total 0 4 10 14 Source: WSCC, 2020
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 16 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
4.1.22 Table 4.14 summarises the vehicle types involved in the PIC’s
Table 4.14: Personal Injury Collision Accidents Vehicles Involved Summary for Warnham
Fatal Serious Slight Total
Motor vehicles only 0 2 10 12 (excluding 2 wheels)
2 wheeled motor 0 2 1 3 vehicles
Pedal cycles 0 0 2 2
Horses & Other 0 0 0 0
Total 0 4 13 17
Source: WSCC, 2020 4.1.23 None of the PIC’s recorded in the last five years in Warnham involved any underlying issues related to the highway network, with most accidents being the result of human error.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 17 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
4.2 Rusper Village
4.2.1 The roads within Rusper village which have been surveyed are Horsham Road, East Street, High Street, Capel Road and Newdigate Road. Figure 4.2 shows the study area for Rusper village.
Figure 4.2: Rusper ATC Study Area
4.2.2 No surveys had been carried out within the village of Rusper as part of the outline planning application. As previously stated, the survey results analysed below will be therefore the baseline data used for surveys in the future.
4.2.3 As mentioned previously, ATC Surveys were carried out between Thursday 3rd and Wednesday 9th October 2019. However, due to technical issues, surveys at the above locations within Rusper have been repeated. Results collated for a 7-day period up to Friday 24th January 2020 are presented below.
Horsham Road
4.2.4 Table 4.14 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Horsham Road.
Table 4.14: 2020 ATC Survey Results Horsham Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 396 133 529
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 128 338 466
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,823 1,594 3,417
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 18 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
06:00 – 22:00 2,021 1,990 4,011
06:00 – 00:00 2,037 2,018 4,055
00:00 – 00:00 2,066 2,035 4,101
4.2.5 Table 4.15 below summarises the seven-day and five-day average travelling north bound and south bound on Horsham Road.
Table 4.15: Average Trips Horsham Road
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1,757 1,780 3,537
5 Day (Weekday average) 2,053 2,060 4,113
Total number of vehicles 12,297 12,460 24,757
East Street
4.2.6 Table 4.16 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along East Street.
Table 4.16: 2020 ATC Survey Results East Street
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 263 198 460
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 241 226 467
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,739 1,326 3,065
06:00 – 22:00 1,959 1,768 3,727
06:00 – 00:00 1,982 1,800 3,783
00:00 – 00:00 2,015 1,836 3,850
4.2.7 Table 4.17 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on East Street.
Table 4.17: Average Trips East Street
Period Westbound Eastbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1,625 1,505 3,130
5 Day (Weekday average) 1,902 1,736 3,638
Total number of vehicles 11,381 10,553 21,934
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 19 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
High Street
4.2.8 Table 4.18 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along High Street.
Table 4.18: 2020 ATC Survey Results High Street
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 461 179 640
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 168 409 577
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 2,169 1,919 4,088
06:00 – 22:00 2,420 2,413 4,833
06:00 – 00:00 2,444 2,450 4,893
00:00 – 00:00 2,496 2,475 4,971
4.2.9 Table 4.19 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on High Street.
Table 4.19: Average Trips High Street
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 2,158 2,158 4,316
5 Day (Weekday average) 2,498 2,479 4,977
Total number of vehicles 15,106 15,104 30,210
Capel Road
4.2.10 Table 4.20 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Capel Road.
Table 4.20: 2020 ATC Survey Results Capel Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
83 88 171 AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00)
107 78 184 PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00)
684 553 1,237 12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00)
752 707 1,458 06:00 – 22:00
763 717 1,480 06:00 – 00:00
778 735 1,513 00:00 – 00:00
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 20 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
4.2.11 Table 4.21 below summarises the seven day and five day average travelling north bound and south bound on Capel Road.
Table 4.21: Average Trips Capel Road
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 679 652 1,331
5 Day (Weekday average) 772 733 1,505
Total number of vehicles 4,754 4,565 9,319
Newdigate Road
4.2.12 Table 4.22 summarises the volume of traffic for a typical day along Newdigate Road.
Table 4.22: 2020 ATC Survey Results Newdigate Road
Time Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
AM Peak (08:00 – 09:00) 424 134 558
PM Peak (17:00 – 18:00) 122 322 444
12 Hour (07:00 – 19:00) 1,809 1,474 3,283
06:00 – 22:00 1,994 1,852 3,846
06:00 – 00:00 2,011 1,878 3,889
00:00 – 00:00 2,050 1,893 3,943
4.2.13 Table 4.23 below summarises the seven-day and five-day average travelling north bound and south bound on Newdigate Road.
Table 4.23: Average Trips Newdigate Road
Period Northbound Southbound Two-Way
7 Day (Average) 1,745 1,653 3,397
5 Day (Weekday average) 2,053 1,914 3,967
Total number of vehicles 12,212 11,570 23,782
Speeds in Rusper
4.2.14 Moreover, average and 85th percentile speeds at the surveyed locations have been included below for reference:
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 21 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Table 4.12 – Average and 85th percentile Speeds in Rusper
Average Speed (mph) 85th percentile (mph) Location Speed Limit NB/EB SB/WB NB/EB SB/WB
Horsham Road 21.4 22.8 26.2 26.5 30mph
East Street 38.2 38.4 33.2 32.4 40mph
High Street 27.9 25.8 32.2 30.6 30mph
Capel Road 39.7 38.6 45.2 44.6 40mph
Newdigate Road 35.3 33.9 39.7 39.0 30mph
NB – north bound, EB – east bound, SB – south bound and WB – west bound
Rusper Personal Injury Collision Data
4.2.15 PIC data has been obtained from the WSCC to review the highway safety in the vicinity of Rusper. The data analysed comprises the five year period 01/01/2015 – 31/12/2019 (60 months) and covers highway network links within Rusper village.
4.2.16 The collisions are classified into three injury categories based on their severity, as described in Paragraph 4.7.2 earlier in this report.
4.2.17 Five accidents were recorded within the village of Rusper. All of these PIC’s were slight injuries and are summarised below:
Two PIC’s involved weather conditions being wet / icy and vehicles losing control and going off of the road. One occurred on Capel Road and the other on Newdigate Road.
A vehicle drifting into the opposing traffic lane and colliding with a vehicle. This occurred on Capel Road.
A vehicle stopping to turn onto Gardeners Green and the vehicle behind crashing into the back. This occurred on Horsham Road.
A vehicle reversing and shunting into the front of the vehicle behind it, causing this vehicle to hit another vehicle behind them. This occurred on Horsham Road, south of the junction with East Street.
4.2.18 One of these accidents occurred in the AM peak hour. In total, a total of 5 accidents occurred which resulted in 6 casualties. All of these casualties were for the vehicle driver, except one which was a car passenger.
4.2.19 In addition, nine motor vehicles (excluding two wheels) were involved in all of the accidents within Rusper village.
4.2.20 None of the PIC’s recorded in the last five years in Rusper involved any underlying issues with the highway network, with most accidents being the result of human error.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 22 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
5 Old Holbrook Pedestrian Crossing Demands
5.1.1 Pedestrian crossing demands of the A264 at Old Holbrook Road were surveyed on Thursday 24th and Saturday 26th November 2016. Figure 5.1 shows the crossing points which were recorded by video surveys.
Figure 5.1: Old Holbrook Pedestrian Crossing Points
5.1.2 Table 5.1 below shows the survey counts for both days and the average count of pedestrians crossing throughout the whole day (24 hours) at each crossing point.
Table 5.1: Pedestrian Counts at Old Holbrook Road
Pedestrian Crossing Point
Day P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6
Thursday 24th 0 0 0 0 7 9
Saturday 26th 2 0 0 0 16 7
Worst Case 2 0 23
5.1.3 The results in Table 5.1 demonstrate that there are few pedestrian movements which occur at this junction throughout the day. More movements were recorded on Saturday 26th November, and the highest number was recorded on the western side (P5 and P6). Pedestrian movements at this junction will continue to be surveyed on annual basis in order to identify any potential increase which may result in safety issues. Mitigation will be sought if the number of pedestrian movements at this junction increases following commencement of construction works.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 23 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
6 Littlehaven Station Parking Demands
6.1 Parking Beat Survey
6.1.1 A parking beat survey was undertaken on Thursday 3rd October 2019 between 11:00 – 14:00 and covered all of the roads within a 400 metre radius of the station. Figure 6.1 shows the study area below:
Figure 6.1: Littlehaven Station Parking Beat Survey Study Area
6.1.2 The survey undertaken will be used as the baseline data for any surveys undertaken in the future.
6.1.3 Table 6.1 summarises the results of the parking beat survey.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 24 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Table 6.1: Parking Beat Survey Results
No. Cars No. Parking Stress Street Name Parked Spaces (%)
Rusper Rd (Southbound) 52 181 28.73%
Northdown CL (Eastbound) 35 52 67.31%
Naldrett CL (Westbound) 22 35 62.86%
Foxleigh Chase (Westbound) 5 20 25.00%
Agate Lane (Westbound) 11 76 14.47%
Haven Gate (Northbound) 2 13 15.38%
Searle's View (W to E) 7 50 14.00%
Searle's View (S to N) 12 36 33.33%
Treadcroft Drive (Northbound) 4 70 5.71%
Little Hatch (Westbound) 0 0 0.00%
Little Haven Lane (Eastbound) 23 102 22.55%
Dale Cl (Northbound) 8 12 66.67%
Hawkesbourne Rd (Southbound) 21 82 25.61%
Laughton Rd (Westbound) 23 88 26.14%
Lambs Crescent (Westbound) 12 27 44.44%
Lambs Farm Rd (Eastbound) 20 93 21.51%
Luxford Cl (Southboundbound) 14 19 73.68%
Farhalls Crescent (NB to SB) 50 206 24.27%
Morell Avenue (Northbound) 12 103 11.65%
Rough Way (Eastbound) 2 85 2.35%
Lower Barn Cl (Westbound) 18 24 75.00%
Kidmans Cl (Eastbound) 2 22 9.09%
Brook Road(Westbound) 15 115 13.04%
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 25 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
No. Cars No. Parking Stress Street Name Parked Spaces (%)
Badgers Cl (Southbound) 13 30 43.33%
Rook Way (Southbound) 8 48 16.67%
Raven Cl (Westbound) 2 13 15.38%
Swallowtail Rd(Eastbound) 11 73 15.07%
Red Admiral (Eastbound) 28 36 77.78%
Serrin Way (Eastbound) 16 60 26.67%
Jackdaw Lane (Southbound) 23 64 35.94%
Kestrel Cl (Westbound) 9 42 21.43%
Siskin Cl (Eastbound) 12 24 50.00%
Mallow Cl (Northbound) 9 22 40.91%
Foxglove Ave (Northbound) 7 37 18.92%
Beaver Cl (Northbound) 10 37 27.03%
Copse Cl (Northbound) 3 8 37.50%
Gateford Dr (Eastbound) 16 111 14.41%
Total 537 2116 25.38%
6.1.4 The survey results indicate that there is currently capacity for further parking within the surveyed area, with only 25% of car spaces occupied by cars during the recorded period.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 26 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
7 Summary and Conclusions
7.1.1 This report has been prepared by Stantec on behalf of Legal & General (Strategic Land North Horsham) to fulfil a planning obligation included in Item 3.2 of Schedule 11 of the S106 Agreement associated with the outline planning permission for the development.
7.1.2 Traffic surveys, including ATCs, MCTCs and parking beat survey have been recently carried out at a number of locations agreed with WSCC, which have informed this report. Additionally, pedestrian crossing demand video surveys conducted in 2016 and collision data obtained from Sussex Police have been used for the purpose of this report.
7.1.3 Previous surveys were carried out in 2011, 2014 and 2015, which were employed in the TA prepared in support of the outline planning application.
7.1.4 The results presented in this report will be used as the baseline against which future surveys will be assessed. Where possible, results from the 2019 surveys have been compared with traffic flows extracted from the TA.
7.1.5 It can be concluded that, in general, traffic flows have moderately increased since the previous surveys were carried out, however a significant increase in turning movements has been observed at the Faygate Roundabout.
7.1.6 The pedestrian crossing demand video survey carried out at the A264/Old Holbrook junction in 2016 suggested that there are currently very few movements currently take place at this location.
7.1.7 The results from the on-street parking survey carried out around Littlehaven station suggested that there is capacity for further parking within the surveyed streets.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 27 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
Appendix A Traffic Survey Data
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North 28 Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Moni toring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Phase 1 Baseline Highway Monitoring Scheme Report Land North of Horsham
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\Phase 1 Baseline Transport
Land North of Horsham Section 106 Agreement Highway Monitoring Scheme
On behalf of Legal & General (Strategic Land North Horsham) Ltd
Project Ref: 25216/55XX | Rev: 1 | Date: September 2019
Registered Office: Buckingham Court Kingsmead Business Park, London Road, High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, HP11 1JU Office Address: Caversham Bridge House, Waterman Place, Reading, Berkshire RG1 8DN T: +44 (0)118 950 0761 E: [email protected] Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Document Control Sheet
Project Name: Land North of Horsham Project Ref: 25216 Report Title: Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Doc Ref: 25216/5540/S106TMS Date: 5 February 2020
Name Position Signature Date
Prepared by: Sarah White Associate 19.07.2019
Reviewed by: Sarah Matthews Director 19.07.2019
Approved by: Sarah Matthews Director 19.07.2019
For and on behalf of Peter Brett Associates LLP
Revision Date Description Prepared Reviewed Approved
1 19.07.2019 First draft for client comment SCW SCM SCM
2 24.07.2019 Draft for discussion with WSCC SCW SCM SCM
3 05.09.2019 Final EF SCW SCM
4 05.02.2020 Final MM SCM SCM
This report has been prepared by Stantec UK Limited (‘Stantec’) on behalf of its client to whom this report is addressed (‘Client’) in connection with the project described in this report and takes into account the Client's particular instructions and requirements. This report was prepared in accordance with the professional services appointment under which Stantec was appointed by its Client. This report is not intended for and should not be relied on by any third party (i.e. parties other than the Client). Stantec accepts no duty or responsibility (including in negligence) to any party other than the Client and disclaims all liability of any nature whatsoever to any such party in respect of this report.
ii
\\pba.int \cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Contents
1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Background ...... 1 1.2 Development Phasing ...... 1 1.3 Traffic Survey Methodology ...... 2 2 Langhurstwood Road and Old Holbrook Traffic ...... 3 2.1 Langhurstwood Road ...... 3 2.2 Old Holbrook ...... 4 3 Faygate Roundabout Traffic ...... 7 4 Warnham and Rusper Traffic ...... 9 4.1 Warnham ...... 9 4.2 Rusper ...... 10 4.3 Old Holbrook Pedestrian Crossing Demands ...... 12 5 Littlehaven Station Parking Demands ...... 13
Figures
Figure 1.1: Development Phasing ...... 1 Figure 2.1: Langhurstwood Road ATC Survey Location ...... 3 Figure 2.2: Langhurstwood Road ANPR Survey Locations ...... 4 Figure 2.3: Old Holbrook ATC Survey Location ...... 5 Figure 2.4: Old Holbrook ANPR Survey Locations ...... 6 Figure 3.1: Faygate Roundabout ATC and MCTC Survey Locations ...... 7 Figure 4.1: Warnham ATC Survey Location...... 9 Figure 4.2: Old Holbrook ANPR Survey Locations ...... 10 Figure 4.2: Rusper ATC Survey Location ...... 11 Figure 4.4: Rusper ANPR Survey Locations ...... 12 Figure 5.1: Littlehaven Station Parking Beat Survey Area ...... 13 Figure 5.2: Littlehaven Station ANPR Survey Locations ...... 14
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 iii Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 iv Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
1.1.1 PBA, now part of Stantec has been commissioned by Legal & General (Strategic Land North Horsham) Ltd to prepare a monitoring strategy to fulfil the obligations relating to Item 3 of Schedule 11 of the Section 106 Agreement associated with the planning permission DC/16/1677 for development at Land North of Horsham.
1.1.2 The Section 106 Agreement requires monitoring schemes to be submitted to West Sussex County Council (WSCC) for approval in respect of:
The increase in traffic using the rural lanes to the north of the Development, including Langhurstwood Road and Old Holbrook (on or before commencement of Phase 1)
The increase in traffic on Tower Road and Faygate Lane arms of the A264 Faygate Roundabout and the impact upon the operation of the Faygate Roundabout (on or before commencement of Phase 1)
The increase in traffic using routes through the villages of Warnham and Rusper (on or before commencement of Phase 1)
Pedestrian crossing demands at Old Holbrook junction (on or before commencement of Phase 3)
Parking demands in and around Littlehaven Station (on or before commencement of Phase 1)
1.2 Development Phasing
1.2.1 The consented development phasing plan is shown in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Development Phasing
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 1 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
1.3 Traffic Survey Methodology
1.3.1 Traffic surveys will be undertaken during ‘neutral’ months avoiding main and local school holidays and other abnormal traffic periods. DfT’s Webtag guidance defined neutral periods as days between Monday to Thursday in:
Late March and April – excluding the weeks before and after Easter;
May – excluding the Thursday before and all the week after Bank Holiday;
June;
September – excluding school holidays or return to school weeks;
All of October; and
All of November – provided adequate lighting is available.
1.3.2 Surveys will also be undertaken to avoid any events that will interfere with the traffic flows including roadworks.
1.3.3 Should surveys need to be undertaken outside of the neutral months there may be a need to postpone or repeat the surveys so that traffic data collected is representative of typical conditions.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 2 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
2 Langhurstwood Road and Old Holbrook Traffic
2.1 Langhurstwood Road
Methodology
Survey Type, Duration Location
Timescales
Future Reporting and Liaison
Establishing the Baseline
2.1.1 An initial Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) survey will be carried out on Langhurstwood Road, as shown in Figure 2.1, prior to commencement of site access works. The ATC survey will cover a week-long period, and will allow a baseline to be established, prior to any development of the site.
Figure 2.1: Langhurstwood Road ATC Survey Location
2.1.2 A further ATC survey will be carried out in the six months prior to the first occupations of Phase 3 of the development, to allow the baseline position to be updated with any background traffic growth that may have occurred.
Monitoring
2.1.3 Upon the completion of both the new A264 Langhurstwood Road Roundabout and the Langhurstwood Road / Mercer Road / development roundabout , biennial ATC surveys will be carried out, terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if Phase 3 is completed or if agreed with WSCC and HDC.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 3 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
2.1.4 Each year, the ATC survey data will be analysed to determine the level of growth that has been seen on the road. If this shows an increase greater than that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission (pro-rating growth annually), ANPR surveys will be undertaken at all open vehicle site accesses (excluding the emergency access at Wimland Road) and on Langhurstwood Road, as shown in Figure 2.2.
Figure 2.2: Langhurstwood Road ANPR Survey Locations
2.1.5 This will allow the number of vehicles using Langhurstwood Road with an origin or destination within the Land North of Horsham development to be identified. Subsequently, the development impact on the road can be determined and compared to that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission.
2.2 Old Holbrook
Establishing the Baseline
2.2.1 Initial ATC surveys will be carried out on Old Holbrook, as shown in Figure 2.3, prior to commencement of site access works. One counter will be located just north of the access with T Giles Caravans with the other further south along Old Holbrook before the junction with A264.
2.2.2 The ATC surveys will cover a week-long period, and will allow a baseline to be established, prior to any development of the site.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 4 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Figure 2.3: Old Holbrook ATC Survey Location
2.2.3 Further ATC surveys will be carried out in the six months prior to the first occupation of Phase 3 of the development, to allow the baseline position to be updated with any background traffic growth that may have occurred.
Monitoring
2.2.4 Upon the completion of the Old Holbrook/development crossroads, biennial ATC surveys will be carried out terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if Phase 3 is completed or if agreed with WSCC and HDC.
2.2.5 The ATC survey data will be analysed to determine the level of growth that has been seen on the road. If this shows an increase greater than that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission (prorating growth annually), ANPR surveys will be undertaken at all open vehicle site accesses (excluding the emergency access at Wimland Road) and on Old Holbrook, as shown in Figure 2.4.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 5 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Figure 2.4: Old Holbrook ANPR Survey Locations
2.2.6 This will allow the number of vehicles using Old Holbrook with an origin or destination within the Land North of Horsham development to be identified. Subsequently, the development impact on the road can be determined and compared to that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 6 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
3 Faygate Roundabout Traffic
Establishing the Baseline
3.1.1 Initial ATC surveys will be carried out on Tower Road and Faygate Lane, in addition to a MCTC survey of the junction, as shown in Figure 3.1, prior to first occupation of phase 1 of the development.The ATC survey will cover a week-long period, whilst the MCTC will cover the period 07:00-10:00 and 16:00-19:00 on a single weekday. This will allow a baseline to be established, prior to any occupation of the site.
Figure 3.1: Faygate Roundabout ATC and MCTC Survey Locations
Monitoring
3.1.2 From 25% occupation of Phase 1 of the development, biennial annual ATC and MCTC surveys will be carried out, terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if the development is completed or if agreed with WSCC and HDC.
3.1.3 The ATC survey data will be analysed to determine the level of growth that has been seen on Tower Road and Faygate Lane. Additionally, the overall junction level of traffic using the junction in the peak hours will be determined, and the queues and delays on each arm
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 7 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
compared to that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission.
3.1.4 If this shows that the increases in traffic on Tower Road and Faygate Lane, and associated increases in delay and queuing at the junction, forecast within the Transport Assessment Addendum supporting the outline planning permission (pro-rating growth annually) are likely to be realised, further discussions will be held with WSCC and HDC to identify a way forwards (on the basis of the proposals contained within the Transport Assessment Addendum).
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 8 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
4 Warnham and Rusper Traffic
4.1 Warnham
Establishing the Baseline
4.1.1 Initial ATC surveys will be carried out on Knob Hill, Bell Road, Church Street, Friday Street and Bailing Hill, as shown in Figure 4.1, prior to first occupation of Phase 1 of the development. The ATC surveys will cover a week-long period, and will allow a baseline to be established, prior to any occupation of the site.
Figure 4.1: Warnham ATC Survey Location
Monitoring
4.1.2 From 25% occupation of Phase 1 of the development, biennial ATC surveys will be carried out, terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if the development is completed or if agreed with WSCC and HDC.
4.1.3 The ATC survey data will be analysed to determine the level of growth that has been seen on the roads within Warnham. If this shows increases greater than that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission (pro-rating growth annually), ANPR surveys will be undertaken at all open vehicle site accesses (excluding the emergency access at Wimland Road) and on Knob Hill, Bell Road, Threestile Road, as shown in Figure 4.2.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 9 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Figure 4.2: Warnham ANPR Survey Locations
4.1.4 This will allow the number of vehicles travelling through Warnham village with an origin or destination within the Land North of Horsham development to be identified. Subsequently, the development impact on the road can be determined and compared to that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission.
4.1.5 In addition, an biennial review of the accident record will be undertaken for the village centre and any locations in the immediate vicinity where there are any pre-existing accident issues including the junctions with the A24 Dorking Road.
4.2 Rusper
Establishing the Baseline
4.2.1 Initial ATC surveys will be carried out on Horsham Road, East Street, High Street, Capel Road and Newdigate Road, as shown in Figure 4.3, prior to commencement of A264 Rusper Road Roundabout works. The ATC surveys will cover a week-long period, and will allow a baseline to be established, prior to any development of the site.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 10 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Figure 4.3: Rusper ATC Survey Location
Monitoring
4.2.2 Upon completion of the A264 Rusper Road Roundabout and delivery of the new Rusper Road roundabout, biennial ATC surveys will be carried out, terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if the development is completed or if agreed with WSCC and HDC.
4.2.3 The ATC survey data will be analysed to determine the level of growth that has been seen on the roads within Rusper. If this shows increases greater than that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission (pro-rating growth annually), ANPR surveys will be undertaken at all open vehicle site accesses (excluding the emergency access at Wimland Road) and on Old Holbrook, as shown in Figure 4.4.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 11 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
Figure 4.4: Rusper ANPR Survey Locations
4.2.4 This will allow the number of vehicles travelling through Rusper village with an origin or destination within the Land North of Horsham development to be identified. Consequently, the development impact on the road can be determined and compared to that forecast within the Transport Assessment supporting the outline planning permission.
4.2.5 In addition, an biennial review of the accident record will be undertaken for the village centre and any locations in the vicinity of the site where there are any pre-existing accident issues.
4.3 Old Holbrook Pedestrian Crossing Demands
Establishing the Baseline
4.3.1 Pedestrian crossing demands of the A264 at Old Holbrook were surveyed to support the planning application for the development. These surveys were carried out in November 2016.
4.3.2 New pedestrian crossing demand video surveys, for a period of 24 hours on a typical weekday, will be carried out in the six months prior to commencement of Phase 3 of the development, to allow the baseline position to be updated with any increases in crossing demands that may have occurred.
Monitoring
4.3.3 From the 100th occupation of Phase 1 of the development, annual pedestrian crossing demand surveys will be carried out, terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if the development is completed or if agreed with WSCC and HDC.
4.3.4 Each year, the survey data will be analysed to determine whether the demand for crossing the A264 at Old Holbrook has increased.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 12 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
5 Littlehaven Station Parking Demands
Establishing the Baseline
5.1.1 A parking beat survey will be undertaken on a typical weekday, between 11:00 – 14:00, prior to first occupation of Phase 1 of the development. The survey will cover all roads broadly within a 400-metre radius of the station, as shown in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1: Littlehaven Station Parking Beat Survey Area
5.1.2 This survey will allow the baseline position to be established and it will also allow the identification of the capacity within the survey study area to accommodate additional car parking associated with Littlehaven Station.
Monitoring
5.1.3 From 25% occupation of Phase 1 of the development, a biennial parking beat survey will be carried out, terminating at 15 years, or prior to this if the development is completed, a railway station is delivered at the development or if otherwise agreed with WSCC and HDC.
5.1.4 The survey data will be analysed to determine whether the demand for parking in the area has increased, and whether the level of parking can be reasonably accommodated within the space available on the highway for parking.
5.1.5 If the surveys indicate that the level of car parking cannot safely be accommodated on the highway, or that it is likely to be causing obstructions for local residents (for example, the blocking of driveways), ANPR surveys will be undertaken at all open vehicle site accesses
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 13 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Section 106 Agreement Transport Monitoring Strategy Land North of Horsham
(excluding the emergency access at Wimland Road) and on Rusper Road and Lambs Farm Road, as shown in Figure 5.2.
Figure 5.2: Littlehaven Station ANPR Survey Locations
5.1.6 This will allow the number of vehicles parking in the that originate from within the Land North of Horsham development to be identified. Subsequently, the development impact on parking associated with Littlehaven Station can be determined. Further discussions with WSCC and HDC will be held if the development impact is beyond that which could have been accommodated within the highway network prior to commencement of the development, with a view to consulting local residents on the introduction of further car parking restrictions designed to deter commuter parking.
\\pba.int\cbh\Projects\25216 North Horsham\Transport\2019 L&G Work\S106 Transport Monitoring Strategy\S106 14 Transport Monitoring Strategy Final 24.12.2019.docx
Annex 5 North Horsham Parish Council
Roffey Millennium Hall, Tel: 01403 750786 (Office & Hall Crawley Road, Horsham, Bookings) Roffey Millennium Hall, North West Sussex, RH12 4DT Heath Hall, Holbrook Tythe Barn
Website: www.northhorsham-pc.gov.uk Email: [email protected] ______
Horsham Blueprint By e-mail:- [email protected]
23rd March 2020
Dear Chairman,
Please find below North Horsham Parish Council’s response to the consultation on the draft Horsham Blueprint Business Neighbourhood Plan (HBBNP).
North Horsham Parish lies adjacent to the north of the area covered by the draft HBBNP, that comprises the three neighbourhood areas of Denne, Forest and Trafalgar. All the areas and issues covered by this document have a significant impact on the residents of North Horsham parish, as the large majority of this parish lies no more than a few miles from Horsham town centre.
North Horsham Parish Council has considered many aspects of the HBBNP and appreciate the scope, depth and attention to detail contained within it. It is recognised that this was produced at a time when Horsham District Council (HDC) was formulating its own Local Plan and the requirement for the HBBNP to work within and support the parameters of the National Planning Policy Framework and the existing and proposed Horsham District Planning Framework.
The Parish Council notes the scope and variety of community engagement and consultation along with the discussions HDC during the forming of this plan.
Policy 5. Housing:
North Horsham Parish Council strongly supports the vision and objectives set out on pages 11 and 12. In particular the Statements 5.6 and 5.7 Housing Cooperatives and Aim 1: in support, on page 1, as this is an area that is relevant and important to us.
Policy 6. Character, Heritage and Design:
North Horsham Parish Council supports the Energy efficiency and design policy on p27, especially with the fore-knowledge that planned large scale building is due to take place within our parish which will have an impact on both the Horsham Blueprint area and North Horsham parish.
Policy 8. Environment and Green Space: North Horsham Parish Council encourage the values and benefits of green spaces. The Riverside Walk runs through our parish and we fully support the need for its protection, maintenance and development. Horsham Park is a valuable asset to Horsham and is used by many residents from the wider Horsham District including NHPC.
Policy 9. Transport and Movement: North Horsham Parish Council agree with encouraging sustainable movement including access to public transport, cycle ways and footpaths together with the protection and retention of unregistered twittens.
Policy 10: Community Facilities: North Horsham Parish Council recognise the need for indoor activities for children and young people and support the aims of the policy statement on p54 for the provision of sport leisure and recreation activities especially with regard to the visions for Horsham Park that will benefit all residents in the Horsham area. The Parish Council also supports the retention of community halls with a more diverse usage as laid out on p55 and reinforce statement 10.14 which highlights the need for more allotment or community growing space.
In conclusion, North Horsham Parish Council supports the Horsham Blueprint Neighbourhood Business Plan and applaud, recognise and congratulate the work that has been undertaken.
Yours sincerely
Pauline Whitehead BA(Hons) FSLCC Clerk to the Council
Annex 6
To All Parish/Neighbourhood Our reference: Infrastructure Delivery Plan Update / Council Clerks Settlement Sustainability Review Please ask for: Carol Algar (IDP) Natasha Robinson (SSR) Direct Lines: 01403 215062 / 01403 215293 Email: [email protected] Date: 27 May 2020
Dear all,
Local Plan Preparation information request – Infrastructure and Settlement Sustainability
As you will be aware, Horsham District Council is in the process of reviewing our Local Plan. We are in the process of reviewing comments which you submitted to us as part of our recent Local Plan consultation held earlier this year. As we received over 6,000 comments in total, we are still in the process of analysing the detail of these comments. Nevertheless, it is clear to us that concerns have been raised on a range of issues including both infrastructure and settlement sustainability, on which we hope you will be able to provide us with additional information as we progress to the next stages of plan making.
Infrastructure
To support the preparation of the Local Plan, the Council is currently updating the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP). This identifies the infrastructure or services that are required to support the delivery of the Council’s current Horsham District Planning Framework, the emerging Horsham District Local Plan (2019 – 2036) and Neighbourhood Development Plans. The IDP is also an important tool in determining the prioritisation of infrastructure projects seeking CIL funding. The Council’s current Infrastructure Delivery Plan is available to view here and the Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan to support the emerging Horsham District Local Plan can be viewed here.
Approved by Cabinet on 29 November 2019, the Community Infrastructure Levy Governance Arrangements report sets out that consultation will take place with a range of stakeholders including Parish Councils, Neighbourhood Councils and Horsham Blueprint to establish:
• Whether any infrastructure identified in the current IDP has already been delivered. • Whether there is any additional infrastructure required to support development in the district not already identified in the IDP. • Whether there is any additional infrastructure contained within emerging and made neighbourhood plans not already identified in the IDP.”
Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive: Glen Chipp We would therefore be grateful if you could complete the attached Infrastructure Schedule setting out the infrastructure required to support development in your area. This could include infrastructure required to cope with capacity issues, co-location of services or upgrades to existing facilities. We would also encourage you to contact community groups, sports clubs, village halls etc. in your area if this is appropriate.
Any information that you provide should be supported by appropriate evidence and we would also be grateful if you could provide as much detail as possible regarding costs, existing committed funding and timescales for delivery. We are particularly interested to understand what infrastructure is anticipated to be delivered through the neighbourhood portion of CIL and what infrastructure will require funding outside of this mechanism. We would also be delighted to hear details of any individual parishes who have started their own Parish Infrastructure Delivery Plans.
Please note that the emerging Draft IDP provided an early indication of the possible strategic-scale infrastructure that would be required to support any potential development allocated in the new Local Plan. Although we are aware that this work is still very much ongoing, and no decisions have been made, it is important for us to understand local infrastructure requirements that have not yet been identified.
Although infrastructure that has already got committed funding should not be included within the IDP it will be useful for us to understand any infrastructure that you are already planning to meet future growth across the District.
Settlement Sustainability Review
In addition to the work currently being undertaken on the IDP and other supporting evidence base documents, the Council has also started the process of reviewing the Settlement Sustainability Review (SSR). The Sustainability Review is a key document which informs the classification of each settlement within the defined development hierarchy of the District. The hierarchy seeks to ensure that development is sustainable by being located in the areas which have the greatest access to services, facilities and employment.
The Local Plan Review process has reviewed and updated information about settlement sustainability in 2014 which was initially produced as part of the evidence base in order to produce our current local plan, the Horsham District Planning Framework (HDPF). The review process has carried out research to identify the different services and facilities currently within, and relating to, each settlement. We are aware that a number of parishes have provided feedback on this issue as part of the recent Local Plan consultation, and are keen to seek further local knowledge and feedback on this issue.
Please find attached a copy of the Settlement Sustainability Review data, in the form of an Excel spreadsheet. The data has been collected by a range of methods including internet based research, investigations of planning records and discussions with officers local to a particular location. Any feedback / comments that you have with regards to the outcome of the research would be gratefully received. In order to assist with this process, we have also attached a comments form for completion. Please be aware that the nature of the review means that data collected is a ‘snap-shot’ in time and you may find that some information has now changed since we completed our review. Where
Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive: Glen Chipp
this is the case your feedback would be very much appreciated. Any information you provide will assist with, and feed into the progress of the current review.
If you are able to return the completed Infrastructure Schedule and SSR comments form to [email protected] by 3 July 2020, we would be very grateful. We fully understand that the current Covid-19 pandemic is causing many organisations operational challenges, therefore if responding by this date is not possible, please do let us know the challenges you are experiencing and what timescales may be possible.
Many thanks in advance for your help and we look forward to hearing from you. If you require any assistance or wish to discuss any of the enclosed, please do contact us.
Yours faithfully
The Strategic Planning Team
Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive: Glen Chipp
Annex 7 North Horsham Parish Council Roffey Millennium Hall, Tel: 01403 750786 (Office & Hall Bookings) Crawley Road, Horsham, Roffey Millennium Hall, North Heath Hall West Sussex, RH12 4DT Holbrook Tythe Barn Email: [email protected] Website: www.northhorsham-pc.gov.uk
North Horsham Parish Council response to HDCs Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan 2020
These comments have been submitted by North Horsham Parish Council.
We have restricted our comments to the area within the North Horsham Parish
Transport: Road network (2.1.1)
Junctions
• NHPC is concerned with mitigating the effect on traffic congestion resulting from the development north of the A264, including the potential plans to signalise this important link between the A24 (coast) and Gatwick (London/motorway network) • Signal controlled crossing required near the junction of North Heath Lane and Parsonage Road (big increase in traffic, especially when the Novartis site is built) • Concerns about the junction (roundabout) that links North Heath Lane to the L& G North Horsham development. There is discussion about a pedestrian road bridge. (Is a traffic fly over above the A264 possible with a very wide open subway underneath which contains lanes for cyclists and pedestrians?) • Roundabout connecting Crawley Road, Kings Road and Rusper Road is very dangerous for pedestrians (needs signal controlled crossing points especially as many elderly people may use this as a route into Horsham town/ station/ nearby Tesco express/ facilities/ shops and Millennium Hall/ community centres etc.)
Transport: Bus Service (2.1.2)
Current provision – There is a frequent bus service between Crawley Road, Horsham Town,Gatwick Airport etc. Also between North Heath Lane and Horsham Town, hospital and station and Gatwick airport. However, Pondtail Road only has an hourly connection that finishes early in the afternoon. Also, a very limited or non-existent evening timetable on most routes means that people in the North of Horsham are unable to use the clubs, pubs and dining facilities in Horsham Town without using a car.
• NHPC has concerns about connectivity and extension of bus routes across the A264 into the new development.
• The planned provision by Metrobus of higher quality bus shelters and real time information is to be especially welcomed, as many elderly people use the buses with their highly valued bus passes. However, the electronic signage sometimes displays incorrect information. It would be beneficial if cancellations or changes to the route could be clearly shown, especially if it is a route with only an hourly bus service 1 • If bus travel needs to be more attractive and to offer a “green alternative” to travel around Horsham District, subsidies to the bus services commercial operations should be funded either by WSCC or HDC, to prevent services being cut, particularly in the more rural areas to aid connectivity to Horsham Town. • The existing bus station is too small for current use. • Could a new bus station be provided in the North of Horsham near to the proposed rail station site to aid workers in the new planned light industrial site and for the future housing developments and pedestrians living in the North of Horsham. With connectivity between the two bus stations, it may reduce the limited capacity of the Horsham Town Centre Bus station. • Encouragement and increase of timetabled, small community bus services door to door to Horsham hospital and East Surrey hospital may mean fewer elderly people need to rely on their own use of cars or being driven by friends, neighbours or family.
Transport: Rail Network (2.1.3)
• The current provision at Littlehaven station has been improved, but there needs to be safe access from the platform on one side of the station to the platform on the other side to enable passengers to use ticket machines and avoid having to cross the busy road or miss their trains when the railway crossing gates are shut
• Horsham station is well served, but very congested particularly at rush hour. There is very limited parking, causing travellers to park in the neighbouring residential streets.
• The North Horsham development has land provided for a railway station with nearby parking. If this were to be made possible it would alleviate travel to, parking and pressure on Horsham Town Rail Station. Also, despite the aspiration that people will work in or around Horsham, where they live, many people will still continue to commute to London, Brighton etc. Currently people travel from as far away as Worthing to use Littlehaven Station and to have free parking in the nearby residential streets . This does cause congestion in Rusper Road, although it does serve to slow the speed of traffic in the road but parking in and around Littlehaven Station causes difficulties for local residents.
• The Parish Council has much to contribute about the future development of North Horsham and it would be helpful if a representative could also be involved in the group discussing potential options for a new station and how the impact on infrastructure improvements impacts on services (noted under planned provision)
Transport: Cycling, walking and equestrian Routes (2.1.4)
• NHPC supports the plan to develop the Horsham to Crawley corridor. NHPC also supports the NPPF that “development should give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements” and through the NHPC and L&G liaison meetings aims to facilitate this aspiration in the development of the A264.
• The presence of physical barriers, particularly examples of busy roads should be considered in detail in the IDP 2020.e.g. the road under the railway bridge in 2 Pondtail Road is poorly paved and extremely narrow. The pavement is only on one side of the road and is extremely dangerous for walking for the elderly and parents accompanied by young children. The cars travel at fast speed and there is no clear view around the bend under the bridge, which makes it particularly dangerous for both cyclists and walkers, especially with the opening of a day nursery in close proximity.
• The pavements in Wimblehurst Road and other parts of North Heath Lane are also very narrow and the amount of traffic using the road (with potential increased flow from the Novartis site), often makes it very difficult for pedestrians to cross the road.
• Increased use of cycles as a result of the Covid pandemic increases the need for safe cycling paths for young children who are not old enough to travel on the roads with their cycles, scooters etc, which would avoid endangering aged or vulnerable pedestrians on the footway.
• The Riverside Walk and open areas such as Earles Meadow, The Motte and Bailey site, Leechpool and Owlbeech Woods, and areas that border our parish such as Warnham Nature Reserve, Rookwood Golf Course and Horsham Park, contribute massively for the opportunity to cycle and walk. They should be protected in the IDP
• A crossing over the A264 from Newhouse Farm to Wimlands Road is desired to connect 2 parts of a public footpath which is part of the Riverside Walk.
• NHPC endorses HDC issue raised by IDP about maintenance and improvement of the Public Rights of Way network which needs support, financial and otherwise, for the volunteers who regularly improve these areas
Education: (2.2)
• NHPC is aware of the consultation on Forest School becoming Co-Ed in September 2021 and that the building of the Bohunt School is delayed due to Covid 19. This has an impact on residents in our parish.
• The school pupil numbers are rising and particularly children with mental health difficulties are feeling the effect of the 2020 pandemic. An alternative provision (AP) or Pupil Referral Unit (PRU/special school) should be given priority in the IDP. Maybe land could be available on the North Horsham Development. A statement alluding to this should be included in the HDC IDP 2020
• Road safety around the existing schools is a recurrent concern, particularly for North Horsham. Perhaps there should be a section in the plan on how HDC plan to address this to resolve the problems arising from collection and delivering children to school e.g. road closures at certain times of the day and parking restrictions and/or traffic warden patrols to monitor this.
Health Primary Care: (2.3.1)
• NHPC support the potential plan to “relocate services around the South East in order to continue to offer the level of health care required, with a smaller estate
3 footprint.” We understand this to mean that there may be more satellite services under a larger umbrella.
• NHPC have concerns that current primary health care will be unduly stretched due to planned development. NHPC would welcome health care plans taking place alongside building development.
• As the CCG which covers North Horsham consider there is no possibility of a new hospital to be provided in Horsham, perhaps the IDP could include further suggestions to extend Horsham hospital particularly as land may become available, which is currently used by the fire service and is next door to the hospital. E.g. minor injuries provision could be extended or a minor injuries unit/pharmacy on the North of Horsham development to relieve pressure on GP surgeries that are overstretched. There is added pressure on current health care provision from planned development.
Acute care and general hospitals: (2.3.2)
• The ongoing need to recruit staff from overseas will require accommodation and housing for these staff. North Horsham Community Land Trust, and other CLT’s within HDC (if supported by HDC with the provision of small pockets of land) may be able to provide affordable rented housing for staff working within their local hospitals
Community and Sports facilities: (2.4.1)
• The L&G North of Horsham development is planning to deliver substantial sports facilities together with those associated with the Bohunt School.
• NHPC supports and welcomes the planned provision. In particular the running tracks provided on the grounds of some schools should be mentioned in the IDP and additional tracks be facilitated by HDC. They contribute enormously to children’s health and fitness and unlike team sports do not require close physical interaction.
• NHPC endorses the compulsory requirement for children’s play space to be provided alongside any new development schemes in the IDP.
Indoor sports facilities: (2.4.2)
• There is a dire need for youth facilities and places for youth to meet socially throughout the district and particularly in North Horsham. Organisations hire halls for their particular clubs, but there also need to be places where the youth can meet socially without being part of a particular organisation. Since the Youth Club in North Horsham closed the NHPC has held a small sum of money in case Youth facilities should be re-opened. In the IDP could there be a statement made that HDC will support youth work and positively seek a building that could be made available with the financial provision for the employment of youth workers. The existing Roffey Youth Centre (which is not used as a youth centre) could be used in the evenings for general youth work.
4
Local halls and neighbourhood halls: (2.4.3)
• NHPC welcomes the inclusion of a new community hub in the North of Horsham development, but it is planned for the latest stage of development, which could be many years away. Could the IDP seek to require developers to provide community hubs sooner in their stages of development, as these centres develop a community feel and can accommodate religious services, social gatherings, help centres, library facilities, café, day centre, pharmacy, hall for hire etc. for which a manager would be required.
Cemeteries: (2.4.4)
• The recent pandemic 2020 has revealed the lack of capacity in HDC cemeteries. In North Horsham Roffey cemetery no longer has capacity. NHPC welcomes the proposal for a new cemetery and a lodge house on the North of Horsham development. Could the IDP put an indication of a date when this could be achieved in the near future, rather than being delayed for 7/8 years.
Allotments: (2.4.5)
• As a result of the Covid pandemic there will be many people struggling financially. Having the use of an allotment may ease some of the struggle, encourage healthy eating and teach children how to provide for themselves. NHPC support the idea of community based schemes (however small the area available may be) e.g. a series of raised beds within built up areas surrounded by blocks of flats without gardens. Could there be a sentence in the IDP to say that there should be spaces provided for this in any area of multiple accommodation without garden space. The tenants should be jointly responsible to the property owner, financially and for their upkeep.
Emergency Services: Fire and Rescue Service (2.6.2)
• NHPC have some concerns about cutting down numbers of fire-fighters to crew fire engines, particularly in areas where there is a high density of flats e.g. the South Holmes Estate in North Horsham and also where there are vast areas of woodland e.g. Leechpool and Owlbeech Woods.
• The lack of recruitment of on-call fire-fighters is a concern as North Horsham develops. Some school children take part in courses run by the local fire station, which raises their interest in fire fighting. Is it possible to run apprenticeships in fire fighting in liaison with Further Education Colleges e.g. Crawley College.
• Although ‘Prevention and Protection activity’ increases the demand on WSFR resources, Horsham has a high elderly population (currently Horsham households have between 14 – 30% residents age 65 and over) and averting the danger of fire hazard for this group, particularly by improving knowledge may be a very worthwhile use of resources.
Emergency Service: Police Service (2.6.3) 5 • North Horsham is already experiencing a considerable growth in population and this will increase greatly as new housing sites develop. The HDC IDP should state the number of additional officers and staff they may require over the period of the plan based on the estimated growth of population.
• NHPC would particularly value technology, such as closed circuit television cameras (providing a monitoring service is available) in places that have a high crime rate or drug problems.
Waste and recycling 2.7.4
• An Electricity substation for the North of Horsham development has a planning application in progress.
• There is planned medium Gas pressure reinforcement taking place as part of the North of Horsham development.
• Hop Oast Waste and recycling Site at Worthing Road is too small for the number of households who queue to use this site and another facility may be needed as a result of the growth in population on the new developments.
• The need for a separate regular waste food bin collection could be included in the HDC IDP
• Better permanent information and reminder posters are required on shared bin storage in areas of multiple occupancy/flats etc. This is to prevent recyclable materials from being wasted as a result of bins being filled with unsorted bags of rubbish.
NHPC: Joy Gough & Sally Wilton
July 2020
6 Annex 8
Horsham Town Community Infrastructure Our reference: Horsham Town CIL Consultation Levy Consultee Please ask for: Suzanne Shaw / Charlotte Grant Direct Line: 01403 215075 / 215368 Email: [email protected] Date: 29 June 2020
Dear Sir/Madam
CONSULTATION REGARDING THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS OF HORSHAM TOWN
Horsham District Council implemented a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule in October 2017. The CIL is a charge which can be levied by local authorities on relevant new development in their area and is an important tool for local authorities to use to help deliver the infrastructure needed to support development in their area.
The levy can be used to fund a wide range of infrastructure, including transport, flood defences, schools, hospitals, and other health and social care facilities. This allows the levy to be used to fund a broad range of facilities such as play areas, open spaces, parks and green spaces, cultural and sports facilities, healthcare facilities, academies and free schools, district heating schemes, police stations and other community safety facilities. The levy can be used to increase the capacity of existing infrastructure or to repair failing existing infrastructure, if that is necessary to support development.
Communities also benefit from the CIL by way of the neighbourhood portion which is 15% of the CIL receipts arising from developments in their area, rising to 25% once there is a neighbourhood development plan in place.
In the case of areas without a parish council, the neighbourhood portion is retained by the District Council to be used to support the development of the area by funding the provision, improvement, replacement, operation or maintenance of infrastructure, or anything else that is concerned with addressing the demands that development places on the area.
The purpose of this consultation is to understand what the community of Horsham Town considers is required to support development of the area (in the way of infrastructure or anything else) in order to establish how best to spend the neighbourhood portion.
Current Infrastructure Delivery Plan:
The Horsham District Council Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) was approved in April 2016 and sets out the infrastructure required to support development in the Horsham District Planning Framework to 2031.
So that we have an understanding of the current position, I would be grateful if you would review the current IDP and advise us whether any of the projects already identified as being required in Horsham Town have since been delivered or are no longer required.
Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive: Glen Chipp Other infrastructure requirements:
I would also be grateful if you would provide details of any infrastructure (or anything else concerned with addressing the demands of development on the area) that has not yet been identified in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan which you consider is required in Horsham Town to support development of the area. We would also encourage you to engage with local community groups / organisations and sports clubs etc. to gain their input.
I have included a blank schedule for your use. Please note that the following information will be required for each project/requirement:
Anticipated costs including ongoing management/maintenance costs, if any, and who will be responsible for that management/maintenance; Anticipated additional sources of funding; Status of any additional funding already secured; Status of the project e.g. no/part/all other funding secured, all permissions obtained etc. Details of the party responsible for delivery; Timescale within which it is required in order to meet the demands of development; Timescale for delivery / build programme; Where multiple projects are put forward, the projects of the highest priority;
On receipt of this information, the projects will be reviewed and those considered appropriate to receive funding from the Horsham Town neighbourhood portion will be collated into a Horsham Town Neighbourhood CIL Funding Plan. This document will provide the background to any subsequent applications for release of the CIL funds.
This consultation will be repeated on a regular basis in order to ensure the Infrastructure Delivery Plan and Horsham Town Neighbourhood CIL Funding Plan remain up to date.
I would be grateful if you would return the completed schedule to [email protected] by 5pm on Friday 7 August 2020.
Should you have any questions, please do contact us.
Regards,
Suzanne Shaw Planning Obligations Officer
Horsham District Council, Parkside, Chart Way, Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1RL Telephone: 01403 215100 (calls may be recorded) www.horsham.gov.uk Chief Executive: Glen Chipp