Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Ref No. Transport SPT18(09/10) Approval to Make Planning Applications, Publish Draft Compulsory Purchase Orders and Make a Funding Bid for the A24 Ashington to Southwater Gap Closure and Junction Improvement Scheme Key Decision: Yes October 2009 Part I Report by Director Operations Infrastructure Electoral Divisions: Southwater Billingshurst Henfield Storrington Executive Summary The A24 south of Horsham is a national primary route carrying over 30,000 vehicles per day and is one of very few remaining high standard dual carriageways in the County to retain gaps in the central reserve. This stretch of the A24 consequently has a significantly higher accident rate than the national average for a road of its type Interim safety measures have been partially successful in limiting the numbers of injury accidents at these gaps, but radical reductions depend upon the closure of all 28 gaps between Ashington and Southwater. This in turn requires the provision of 3 two- level interchanges to permit turning movements and minimise detours. The A24 Ashington to Southwater Gap Closure and Junction Improvement Scheme involves the closure of all 28 central reservation gaps and the provision of grade separated junctions at Buck Barn, Steyning Road junction and Dial Post. The scheme was granted planning permission in April 2005, which expires in April 2012. The planning conditions include the provision of additional accommodation works, notably a grade separated crossing at Pollards Hill and an alternative access to Hill House Farm. The Department for Transport (DfT) provisionally accepted the scheme for a start of construction in 2006. However, the scheme was not initially prioritised for funding when the Regional Funding Allocation (RFA1) process was introduced in 2005/06. Consequently, the County Council decided to defer further technical work on the scheme until the situation regarding central Government funding was clarified. Subsequently the Regional Transport Board (RTB) and the Secretary of State confirmed that the scheme should be a priority, albeit with a later implementation date (2015/16). Following a refresh of the prioritisation of schemes in 2008/09, the RTB recommended to the DfT that the scheme start date should be brought forward to July 2012 and the recommendation was recently accepted by Ministers. The total estimated cost of the scheme is £31.88m (including allowance for inflation). The DfT has agreed to make a total provisional contribution of £28.087million with West Sussex County Council contributing £3.793million. A re-run of the scheme economic assessment in 2005 produced a reasonably high benefit to cost ratio of 3.44 which makes the scheme exceptionally worthwhile. However, owing to the delayed start date and the associated increased cost estimate, the Secretary of State has asked the County Council to re-run the scheme economic assessment and submit a new Major Scheme Business Case (MSBC) to enable the DfT to re-confirm the scheme’s Programme Entry status. Conclusions The statutory procedures entail obtaining planning permission for the scheme and acquiring either ownership or rights over land required for the scheme. In order to partly satisfy conditions attached to the planning permission granted to the scheme in April 2005, it is proposed to seek Cabinet Member approval to make separate supplementary planning applications for accommodation works required by the planning conditions. In addition, the Finance Director will now be requested to publish a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) and Side Road Order (SRO) in respect of land required for the scheme. Recommendations The Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Transport is recommended to approve the following: a) That the scheme for the A24 gap closures and junction improvements, as shown on drawing numbers 507144/EXT/001, 507144/PRE/001-008, 507144/CPO/001-007 and 507144/SRO/001-008, be approved. b) That separate planning applications be made for the accommodation works listed in Section 2.4 and shown in drawing numbers 507144/004-005 and 007. c) That a Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) be made, sealed and submitted to the Secretary of State for Transport under the provisions of Sections 239, 240, 246 and 250 of the Highways Act 1980 for the acquisition of approximately 228,556 square metres of land shown coloured pink and acquisition of rights to approximately 29,603 square metres of land shown coloured blue on drawing numbers 507144/CPO/001- 007. These are for the purposes of the construction and use in connection with the new highways and improvement of existing highways and private accesses. d) That the Head of Legal Services be authorised to take all necessary action to secure entry onto all such land covered by the CPO. e) That a Side Roads Order be made sealed and submitted to the Secretary of State for Transport for confirmation under Sections 14, 124 and 125 of the Highways Act 1980 for the stopping up, diversion, improvement and alteration of sections of existing highway and of any private accesses and the provision of new private accesses as necessary. f) A Major Scheme Business Case (MSBC) be submitted to the Department for Transport for re-confirmation of the scheme’s Programme Entry status. 1. Background 1.1 The West Sussex section of the A24 London to Worthing road is a national primary route and forms an important element of the West Sussex Strategic Road Network. The Ashington to Southwater section carries over 30,000 vehicles per day and is one of very few remaining high standard dual carriageways in the County retaining gaps in the central reserve. This stretch of the A24 consequently has a significantly higher accident rate than the national average for a road of its type. Table 1 is the West Sussex Junction Study List-Top Ten Worst Case Junctions: July 2006 to June 2009. It lists the top ten worst case junctions in terms of accidents in the County over a three year period to the end of June 2009. It shows that of the 470 junctions on the major road network in West Sussex that are regularly monitored by the Highway Authority for their collision rates, the A24/A272 junction at Buck Barn expressed the worst casualty rate. It also shows that there were a total of 14 collisions during the period involving 2 serious and 17 slight casualties. The A24/B2135 junction ranked 18 out of 470 (a ranking of 1 represents the worst case). 77% of collisions involving serious injury were within 20 meters of a junction. Therefore, the primary objective of the A24 Ashington to Southwater scheme is to reduce the number and severity of personal injury accidents along this stretch of the A24. 1.2 In March 2002 the County Council approved a Route Safety Strategy for the West Sussex section of the A24 (Decision SES6 of 2002/03 refers). This includes the closure of all the 28 gaps between Ashington and Southwater, installation of a continuous central reserve crash barrier and major junction improvements with the A272 at Buck Barn, the B2135 at Steyning Road junction and with Grinders Lane at Dial Post. The provision of these junctions will allow safe turning movements and limit the lengths of detours for drivers joining the A24 between the junctions, while helping the County Council to meet national and Local Transport Plan targets for accident reduction. This was followed by the grant of provisional approval by the DfT in December 2002, which permits the County Council to seek planning consents and publish CPOs and SROs for the scheme. 1.3 West Sussex County Council progressed this scheme in close consultation with the Statutory Environmental Bodies, land owners, residents, local councils and interested groups and reached the stage where it would normally seek to acquire the necessary land through CPO. However, in 2005 the scheme was referred, along with others, to the RTB for an assessment of regional priority. The RTB, in its January 2006 advice to the DfT, did not prioritise the scheme for funding. Consequently, the County Council decided to defer further technical work on the scheme until the situation regarding central Government funding was clarified (Published in the Members Information Service on 28 June 2005). Subsequently the RTB and the Secretary of State confirmed that the scheme should be a priority, albeit with a 2015/16 implementation date and subject to the submission of an MSBC that shows the scheme to be value for money at the higher cost and later start date. 1.4 The RTB undertook a refresh of the prioritisation of schemes in 2008/09 and recommended to the DfT that the scheme start date should be brought forward to July 2012 instead of 2015. This recommendation was accepted by Ministers recently. Prior to making its recommendation to the DfT, the RTB sought and was given an assurance by the Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Transport that West Sussex County Council will make available the necessary resources for scheme development towards achieving the July 2012 start date. The County Council has therefore made budgetary provision for scheme development. 1.5 A re-run of the scheme economic assessment in 2005 produced a reasonably high benefit to cost ratio of 3.44 which makes the scheme exceptionally worthwhile in terms of its value for money. However, in accordance with the Secretary of State’s request West Sussex County Council will re-run the scheme economic assessment and submit an MSBC to seek re-confirmation of the scheme’s Programme Entry status. 2. Discussion 2.1 In order for this scheme to be progressed it is necessary to undertake a number of statutory procedures. These include: Planning Permission 2.2 Under the Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992, local authorities must apply for planning permission for their own development proposals, including local road schemes.