DOCSLIB.ORG

A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report May 2016 Prepared for: A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report @ Mouchel Consulting 2015 A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report Executive Summary Highways England has commissioned Mouchel Consulting to undertake a feasibility study of additional effective safety, accessibility and sustainability improvements that will work with, and complement, the installation of Average Speed Enforcement Cameras (ASEC), between Scotney Castle roundabout (south of Lamberhurst), and Hastings (Baldslow) on the A21. The A21 is an all-purpose trunk road serving as the main access route to Hastings from London and the North. The route forms a north-south link between the M25 at Junction 5 near Sevenoaks in West Kent and the Hastings Borough boundary on the south coast in East Sussex. The northern section of the route between the M25 and Lamberhurst is mostly dual carriageway. This study concentrates on the A21 south of the Lamberhurst bypass, from Scotney Castle roundabout to Baldslow. This 26km section of the route is a predominantly rural single carriageway which is considered to be of poor quality. It serves a number of villages and settlements in addition to forming part of the strategic road network. The main settlements on the route have a high degree of direct frontage access and there are also agricultural accesses throughout. Conflict between strategic through traffic and local trips, combined with the below- standard highway alignment, results in collision rates which are above the national average for severity ratio. As the route is single carriageway, recovery time from incidents is slow and this impacts on journey time reliability. Pedestrian facilities are generally only provided in and on the approach to the more built up village settlements and very little designated provision is available for Non- Motorised Users (NMU’s) to cross the A21. With the exception of village locations, there are generally no clearly identifiable footways serving bus stops, and a number of the existing bus stops are not sign posted. The only cycle facilities within the study area are at Scotney Castle Roundabout, and no specific equestrian facilities exist within the highway boundary. In the project brief, Highways England recognise that the A21 is a challenging route due to its complexity and the need to treat the route issues holistically. There are no easy blanket fixes and large scale projects have fallen short of the required economic benefit threshold at value management workshops in the past. In addition to these Page (ii) @ Mouchel Consulting 2015 A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report challenges, the A21 runs through areas sensitive to environmental concerns including the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, (AONB). The project brief also states that the A21 has the worst personal injury collision record on the trunk road network and there is an imperative to improve that using a variety of measures. Currently Highways England has no major projects programmed for the route and as such there is an urgent need to address the issues on-line. The key aim of this desk based feasibility study is to propose consistent and strategic measures to improve safety, accessibility and sustainability along this section of the A21. This approach has been developed to compliment the planned installation of average speed enforcement cameras and Managing Agent Contractor, Balfour Beatty Mott MacDonald, (BBMMjv) safety and cycle facility improvement schemes. In addition to these known schemes, this report identifies potential route wide measures and specific treatments which may be considered and taken forward for outline design development and assessment as future schemes. It is intended that the combination of bespoke local schemes and consistent route treatments (in areas such as signing and road markings) will create an operational regime which is easily understood by road users, encourages compliance with speed restrictions and therefore contributes to improvements in the road safety performance of the A21. In order to understand the route and develop our proposals, data collection, review and analysis has been undertaken including a review of two reports detailing the BBMMjv proposed safety and cycle facility improvement schemes. (See Section 1.3 and Chapter 3 for further details). Following the review of existing reports, analysis of the most recent five years (2010-2014) of personal injury collision data for this section of the A21 was undertaken from the STATS19 database and this is reported in the A21 Collision Analysis Report, Mouchel Consulting, April 2016 . (See Section 4.1 for further details.) Information on existing Non-Motorised User (NMU) facilities was sourced and collated in the A21 Route Treatment, Lamberhurst to Hastings, NMU Context Report, Mouchel Consulting, April 2016, which includes identification of NMU objectives. (See Section 5.1) Stakeholders were also consulted through the Average Speed Enforcement Camera (ASEC) Working Group. Page (iii) @ Mouchel Consulting 2015 A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report A21 route assessment workshops were then carried out. The first of these workshops focused on the identification of proposals to improve safety along the route and the second focused on NMU improvements. The workshops enabled the Mouchel project team to better understand the route, the existing layout and constraints, and they highlighted the current lack of route consistency. Following the safety workshop a strategy for measures to improve consistency and asset condition that would have positive safety benefits when applied for the entire route was developed, and a tiered standardised safety treatment structure for both the mainline and at junctions was developed. This tiered structure was then applied to address the individual areas which were identified as requiring intervention during the workshop. Chapter 4 of this report details our route safety proposals. A similar route wide strategy was developed for measures to improve accessibility and sustainability following the second workshop, and specific areas were also identified for treatment. Chapter 5 of this report details the NMU proposals. The main recommendations of this feasibility study include the following: - Undertake a detailed network review and technical surveys for the full length of the study area to identify and then implement measures to improve consistency and driver understanding of the route to encourage appropriate driver behaviour. (E.g. signing, road markings, consolidation of street furniture, coloured and high friction surfacing and visibility improvements.) - Regularly undertake all maintenance treatments which are likely to have road safety benefits (including replacing areas of worn road surfacing and road markings, cleaning signs and cutting back vegetation which is obscuring visibility and signing). - As the dark collisions without street lighting are above the national average, the installation of intelligent, or self-lit, road studs may be beneficial in some locations and should be investigated further. - Undertake a detailed review of direct vehicular access onto the A21 from private properties and farms to determine whether any accesses can be rationalised or relocated onto local roads. - Consider a local road safety awareness campaign for the A21 targeted at both motorised and non-motorised users. - Consider further development of the proposals at identified safety treatment sites in Section 4.4 of this report. Page (iv) @ Mouchel Consulting 2015 A21 Route Treatment Project Feasibility Study Report - Apply the standardised safety treatment structure for junctions and the mainline carriageway at areas where collision numbers and severity require intervention as a starting point to develop future improvement schemes. - Undertake a network review and survey focussing on accessibility and sustainability for the full length of the study area to identity opportunities to locally improve NMU facilities and identify wider existing and predicted future NMU usage patterns, including trip origins, key destinations and desire lines. - Consult with User Groups and work in partnership with Local Authorities to identify opportunities to provide new NMU facilities (to connect key destinations, other NMU routes and public transport) as off carriageway routes, outside the highway boundary where appropriate. Cycle facilities in particular should be provided as off carriageway routes for safety reasons. - Undertake specific reviews and surveys for the full length of the study area to identify and then implement measures to improve NMU facilities (e.g. signing, upgrading footways, consolidation of street furniture, upgrading access to bus stops and bus stop facilities and NMU crossings.) - Regularly undertake maintenance treatments to NMU facilities (including replacing areas of worn surfacing and road markings, cleaning signs and clearing vegetation growing over and obstructing footways and accesses to public rights of way, or obstructing visibility at NMU crossings). - Consider further development of proposals at identified NMU treatment sites in Section 5.3 of this report. - All improvement proposals progressed by others should be designed to ensure that route consistency is maintained. - Provision of facilities for NMU’s should be considered in any proposed schemes which are being developed by others. - If the schemes outlined in the BBMMjv Project
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Appendix 1 I.01: DEPARTMENT for TRANSPORT (DFT) ROAD INVESTMENT STRATEGY (2014) Road Investment Strategy: Overview
    Appendix 1 I.01: DEPARTMENT FOR TRANSPORT (DFT) ROAD INVESTMENT STRATEGY (2014) Road Investment Strategy: Overview December 2014 Road Investment Strategy: Overview December 2014 The Department for Transport has actively considered the needs of blind and partially sighted people in accessing this document. The text will be made available in full on the Department’s website. The text may be freely downloaded and translated by individuals or organisations for conversion into other accessible formats. If you have other needs in this regard please contact the Department. Department for Transport Great Minster House 33 Horseferry Road London SW1P 4DR Telephone 0300 330 3000 Website www.gov.uk/dft General enquiries https://forms.dft.gov.uk ISBN: 978-1-84864-148-8 © Crown copyright 2014 Copyright in the typographical arrangement rests with the Crown. You may re-use this information (not including logos or third-party material) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or e-mail: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third-party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum. Photographic acknowledgements Alamy: Cover Contents 3 Contents Foreword 5 The Strategic Road Network 8 The challenges 9 The Strategic Vision 10 The Investment Plan 13 The Performance Specification 22 Transforming our roads 26 Appendices: regional profiles 27 The Road Investment Strategy suite of documents (Strategic Vision, Investment Plan, Performance Specification, and this Overview) are intended to fulfil the requirements of Clause 3 of the Infrastructure Bill 2015 for the 2015/16 – 2019/20 Road Period.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of a Holistic Index for Safer Roads
    DEVELOPMENT OF A HOLISTIC INDEX FOR SAFER ROADS By ABEER KHUDHUR JAMEEL A thesis submitted to the University of Birmingham for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Civil Engineering School of Engineering College of Engineering and Physical Sciences The University of Birmingham December 2018 University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. ABSTRACT Generally, road safety is an important issue. Some global and national organisations have recognised the size of this problem and introduced the “safe system approach ” approach as a successful guide for road safety management. The concept of this approach considers road safety as a system compiled of the elements of road infrastructure, mobility, and vehicles; which all should be designed to accommodate the vulnerability of the road users. This corrected the traditional view which considered road-user behaviour as the main contributing factor to the road safety problem. The question raised in this research is to what extent the safe system approach contributes to the national road safety strategic plans? To answer this question, an assessment of road safety performance is needed.
    [Show full text]
  • M5 Oldbury Viaduct Traffic Management Study Executive Summary
    M5 Oldbury Viaduct Traffic Management Study Executive Summary Oldbury and Park Street viaducts carry approximately 3km of the elevated sections of the M5 to the west of Birmingham between junctions 1 and 2. Constructed in 1970, it has deteriorated in recent years and has seen increased emergency interventions (55 in 2016). Therefore we need to repair and upgrade sections now in order to prevent bigger challenges and further disruption in the future. By maintaining this key corridor we’re delivering a huge investment that will support economic growth locally and in the wider West Midlands. Once complete, customers will benefit from a safer, more resilient route and enhanced driver experience. Other planned interventions on the strategic network in coming years include HS2, M6 J10 redesign, and on the local network, proposed Birchley island project and M5 junction 1 redesign. Therefore, we have a window of opportunitybetween April 2017 and autumn 2018 to complete this work at M5 Oldbury Viaduct. This section of the M5 motorway is particularly busy, carrying both local and strategic south-west and south-east to north-west traffic, with seasonal peaks. It is a commuter hub with traffic joining with the M6, other roads into and out of the Birmingham hub, and other cities in the region. Our engineers advised that in order to carry out the work safely, the carriageway would have to be treated in sections under traffic management. Four options were progressed to the modelling stage to understand impact and we chose the one that was safest, offered most value for money and most appropriate timeline.
    [Show full text]
  • (TWA) Transport and Works (Inquiries Procedure) Rules 2004
    Transport and Works Act 1992 (TWA) Transport and Works (Inquiries Procedure) Rules 2004 Application for the Rother Valley Railway (Bodiam to Robertsbridge Junction) Order Public Local Inquiry - Department for Transport Reference: TWA/18/APP/02/OBJ/1002 Statement of Case Sally-Ann Hart, Perryfield House, Udimore, Rye, East Sussex, TN31 6AY, District Councillor for Eastern Rother Ward, Rother District Council and Portfolio holder for Tourism, Culture and Public Realm. Summary Position • Negative economic impact on the wider population • Inadequate economic bases for the Application • Abuse of Transport and Works Act 1992 legislation • Investment required on the A21 to improve the road to encourage tourism and other economic growth - not add further impediments by way of a level crossing • Growth in tourism is vital in our deprived coastal, rural communities - not just about the commercial position of Kent & East Sussex Railway • Additional pressure on Robertsbridge due to existing parking issues • Safety of level crossings - the creation of new level crossings on the national network is banned unless unavoidable • Highways England objects for reasons including safety and economic grounds 1. Rother Valley Railway (the Applicant) has submitted various documentation in its application for the above Order, none of which comprises, nor addresses, adequate economic bases for the Application. RVR’s Application focusses on what it perceives as the environmental argument in favour of a new stretch of railway through an area of High Weald AONB. 2. The Applicant commissioned a Local Economic Impact Study from Manchester Metropolitan University in 2007, with an update in October 2013. These reports provide an assessment of the socio- economic impacts of the re-construction of the railway (the Scheme) based on, for example, economic modelling, desk research and field work.
    [Show full text]
  • Highways England Annual Report and Accounts 2015-2016
    Highways England Annual Report and Accounts 2015-2016 Highways England Annual Report and Accounts 2015-2016 Presented to the House of Commons pursuant to Section 7 of the Government Resources and Accounts Act 2000 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 13 July 2016 HC 529 © Crown copyright 2016 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected]. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at: [email protected] Print ISBN 9781474134279 Web ISBN 9781474134286 ID 2815682 07/16 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the Williams Lea Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office Contents Our role and how to contact us 6 Section 1 Chairman’s statement 7 Section 2 Chief Executive’s review 9 Strategic report Section 3 Overview A snapshot of our performance against our KPIs 12 Performance headlines 13 Section 4 Making our network safer 14 Section 5 Improving customer service Customer satisfaction 17 A better maintained network 19 A free-flowing network 22 An accessible and
    [Show full text]
  • Bus Facilities on the Strategic Road Network Demonstration Project: Stakeholder Engagement Report by Campaign for Better Transport for Transport Focus
    Bus facilities on the Strategic Road Network demonstration project: stakeholder engagement report by Campaign for Better Transport for Transport Focus March 2019 Bus facilities on the Strategic Road Network demonstration project: stakeholder engagement report by Campaign for Better Transport for Transport Focus March 2019 CONTENTS Executive Summary Full report 1. Introduction 2. Methodology Our approach Stakeholder identification and contact Workshops Online survey Other submissions 3. Stakeholder views Common themes M32 case study A27 case study 4. Conclusions and next steps Lessons learned Key messages Next steps Appendices 1. List of participant groups 2. Examples of awareness raising materials 3. Workshop materials 4. Workshop notes 5. Survey questions and responses 6. Other submissions 1 Bus facilities on the Strategic Road Network demonstration project: stakeholder engagement report: Executive Summary Campaign for Better Transport has been commissioned in partnership with Transport Focus to collect stakeholder views on the priorities and opportunities for improving bus facilities on the Strategic Road Network to inform Highways England. This report records how the engagement with stakeholders was undertaken, and the responses received. Having captured their feedback, the report sets out some of the key issues identified by stakeholders, including challenges to be addressed, and opportunities to deliver improvements. It contains full reports of the stakeholder workshops and responses from the online surveys together with some additional individual submissions. This stakeholder engagement is part of a larger demonstration project commissioned by Highways England looking at two locations, to identify issues affecting bus and coach operation on the strategic road network to inform future investment. Methodology We contacted a wide range of local stakeholders in both case study areas and invited them to participate in a workshop held in January 2019 in the local area.
    [Show full text]
  • HIGHWAYS ENGLAND Asset Management Development Group
    HIGHWAYS ENGLAND Asset Management Development Group ASSET DATA MANAGEMENT MANUAL Part 2 – Requirements and Additional Information October 2020 Version: 12.0 Asset Data Management Manual Page 1 of 237 Date of Issue: October 2020 Part 2 - Requirements and Additional Information This page is intentionally left blank. Asset Data Management Manual Page 2 of 237 Date of Issue: October 2020 Part 2 - Requirements and Additional Information Revision Sheet For revisions across all ADMM documents see the Revision Log available on Standards for Highways: http://www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/admm/index.htm Version Date Issued 3.0 April 2016 4.0 September 2016 5.0 March 2017 6.0 September 2017 7.0 March 2018 8.0 October 2018 9.0 April 2019 10.0 October 2019 11.0 April 2020 12.0 October 2020 Asset Data Management Manual Page 3 of 237 Date of Issue: October 2020 Part 2 - Requirements and Additional Information Contents Contents……… ......................................................................................................... 4 Foreword…….. .......................................................................................................... 9 Part 2.1 – GENERIC ASSET DATA REQUIREMENTS .......................................... 12 1 Asset Data Lifecycle Requirements ......................................................... 13 1.1 Capture or Update ....................................................................................... 13 1.2 Store ...........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • M180/M181 A180/A160 Investing in Our Road Network
    M180/M181 A180/A160 Investing in our road network We’ll be working on the M180 At Highways England we believe in a of Immingham which plays a key role in the long- connected country and our network term growth of the economy and provides essential access to global markets. makes these connections happen. Our improvements include vital repairs to the surface We strive to improve our major roads and motorways on the M180 and A180, bridge maintenance and – engineering the future to keep people today and improvements to junction 5 of the M180. moving better tomorrow. We want to make sure all We’re working closely with North Lincolnshire our major roads are more reliable, durable and, most Council to unlock jobs and homes in the Scunthorpe importantly, safe and that’s why we’re investing more area. The Lincolnshire Lakes development one of the than £5 million improving our network in this area. largest residential developments, not just in Yorkshire We’re carrying out a range of improvements along and the Humber region but in the whole of the UK the M180, M181, A180 and A160 over the next 12 and will create new homes, a business park and months to ensure we make the road safer and office accommodation. provide better journeys for drivers and residents. A new M181 junction will be created to improve By improving safety and creating smoother journeys access routes to the motorway and make the area we’ll create better links for those travelling to the Port more accessible as a place to live, visit and work.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Assessment of Highways England's
    Annual Assessment of Highways England’s Performance April 2020 to March 2021 HC454 Annual Assessment of Highways England’s Performance April 2020 to March 2021 Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 10(8) of the Infrastructure Act 2015 Ordered by the House of Commons to be printed 15 July 2021 HC454 © Crown copyright 2021 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/version/3. Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/official-documents. © Crown copyright 2020 Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at This 25 Cabot Square, London, E14 publication is licensed under 4QZ. the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/ open-government-licence/version/3ISBN 978-1-5286-2760-3 . Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain CCS0621812220 07/21 permission from the copyright holders concerned. Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum This publication is available at orr.gov.uk Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery OfficeAny enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at orr.gov.uk/contact-us Office of Rail and Road | Annual Assessment of Highways England’s Performance: April 2020 to March 2021 Contents Foreword ..............................................................................................................6 Executive summary ..................................................................................................8 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Hastings Borough Council Cc Cllr Dawn Poole – Lead Member Regeneration, Communities & Culture Appendix B
    Matter 3 – HBC, SR8 APPENDICES INDEX Appendix A HBC letter to ESCC 25 February 2016 Appendix B ESCC Cabinet Report 8 March 2016 Appendix C HBC comments on the draft Waste & Minerals Sites Plan 19 August 2014 Appendix D HBC comments on the draft Waste & Minerals Plan 09 December 2015 Appendix E Queensway Gateway Road Letter of Support from Rupert Clubb, Director of Communities, Economy & Transport 5 August 2015 Appendix F Statement from John Shaw, Chief Executive, SeaChange Sussex Appendix G Statement from Kerry Culbert, Planning Policy Manager, HBC Appendix H Hastings Local Plan, Hastings Planning Strategy 2011-2028 (adopted 19.02.14); Hastings Local Plan, Development Management Plan (adopted 23.09.15); Hastings Local Plan, Policies Map, Development Management Plan (adopted 23.09.15) (incorporating Planning Strategy Policies adopted 19.02.14) Appendix A Please quote: Your reference: Date: 25th February 2016 Please ask for: Kerry Culbert Telephone direct: 01424 783304 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.hastings.gov.uk/planning Regeneration and Culture Aquila House, Breeds Place Hastings, East Sussex TN34 3UY Mr Tony Cook Planning Policy and Development Management Planning Services Communities, Economy and Transport County Hall St Anne’s Crescent Lewes East Sussex BN7 1UE By email and by post Dear Mr Cook Thank you for the opportunity to meet with yourself and Sarah Iles on the 9th February to discuss your potential proposed Main Modifications to the Waste & Minerals Sites Submission Plan (W&MSP). We also welcomed your invitation to Rother District to attend in light also of that Council’s concerns with the Plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Post Opening Project Evaluation M1 J10-13 HSR & Junctions
    Post Opening Project Evaluation M1 J10-13 HSR & Junctions One Year After Study October 2016 Notice Although this report was commissioned by Highways England, the findings and recommendations are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Highways England. While Highways England has made every effort to ensure the information in this document is accurate, Highways England does not guarantee the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of that information; and it cannot accept liability for any loss or damages of any kind resulting from reliance on the information or guidance this document contains. Post Opening Project Evaluation M1 J10-13 HSR and Junctions: One Year After Study Foreword Highways England’s motorways are some of the safest in the world. Our road network carries a third of road traffic and we have seen demand grow by a quarter since 2000 with continued growth forecast. One reason for the introduction is smart motorways is because there are more vehicles on the road. By making use of the full width of the road, smart motorways add that extra capacity to carry more vehicles and ease congestion. They have evolved from Controlled Motorways (with variable speed limits) to Dynamic Hard Shoulder Running (opening the hard shoulder as a running lane to traffic at busy periods) to All Lane Running (permanently removing the hard shoulder and converting it into a running lane). Compared to a traditional motorway widening they deliver: • Increased capacity at significantly less cost than traditional motorway widening. • New technology and variable speed limits to improve traffic flow.
    [Show full text]
  • A21 Briefing from Highways England July 2019
    A21 SEVENOAKS TO HASTINGS ALL PURPOSE TRUNK ROAD Overview The A21 travels north south through Kent (M25 Chipstead) to East Sussex (Hastings). The route has gradually been upgraded predominantly from the M25 southwards - the last major project being the Tonbridge to Pembury dualling scheme completed in 2018. The route features strongly in the Highways England, South Coast Central, Route Strategy in terms of safety and congestion. As a result, a preliminary study was carried out which considered the opportunities for safety improvements and any further capacity improvements. The route strategy will support possible options for further safety and capacity improvement needs. Details of the next RIS will be announced by Government later this year and will be prioritised on the basis of strategic need, deliverability, buildability and value for money. Works undertaken on the route (last 5 years) These are works that we have carried out on the network, as well as some additional investigative activities. 1. Tonbridge to Pembury A21 dualling scheme completed 2018. 2. Kent cycle scheme funded in conjunction with Tonbridge to Pembury major project. 3. Double white lining south of Whatlington at Stream Lane and Ricards Lane junction to reduce collisions resulting from overtaking manoeuvres. 4. Resurfacing at A21 Kiln Down and Hurst Green Village including new markings and strengthened verges. 5. Review of Hurst Green pedestrian crossing, adjustment of sensors in response to complaints. 6. New signal heads at Hurst Green School – replacement of failed existing signs. 7. Comprehensive assessment for the installation of average speed cameras – unfortunately the scheme did not meet DfT and police enforcement criteria.
    [Show full text]