Dunsfold Airport Ltd

Dunsfold Park

Dunsfold Park Preliminary Transport Assessment

Volume 1 – Text

November 2014

Contents

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...... III

Strategic Transport Assessment ...... iii Scope of Report ...... iv The Proposals ...... iv The Sustainable Transport Strategy ...... iv The Assessment Process ...... v Highway Enhancements ...... vi The Results of the Assessments ...... vi Summary of Findings ...... vii What Has Changed since the Appeal Decision ...... viii Next Steps ...... ix

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 1

Background ...... 1 Report Scope and Structure ...... 1

2 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS ...... 3

Development Quantum ...... 3 Access Strategy ...... 4

3 TRIP GENERATION ...... 6

2008 Planning Application Trip Generation Summary ...... 6 Updated Trip Generation ...... 8 Residential Trip Generation ...... 8 Employment Trip Generation ...... 11 Hotel Trip Generation ...... 13 Education Trip Generation ...... 15 Internal Trips ...... 16 Summary ...... 17

4 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT ...... 21

2008 Planning Application Trip Distribution Summary ...... 21 Updated Trip Distribution ...... 21 Residential Trip Distribution...... 21 Employment Trip Distribution ...... 22 Education Trip Distribution ...... 23

5 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT OPPORTUNITIES ...... 24

2008 Planning Application Sustainable Transport Strategy ...... 24 Changes since 2008 ...... 25

i

Proposed Sustainable Transport Opportunities ...... 26 Mixed Use Scheme ...... 26 Walking and Cycling ...... 26 Bus Services ...... 27 Access to Rail ...... 29 Car Club and Car Share Schemes ...... 29 Community Vehicles ...... 29 Smart Technology ...... 29 Site Wide Travel Plan ...... 29

6 POTENTIAL HIGHWAY ENHANCEMENT MEASURES ...... 32

2008 Planning Application Highway Mitigation ...... 32 Current Highway Mitigation Opportunities ...... 33 A281/Kings Road and A281/Broadford Road, Shalford ...... 33 A281/Station Road, Bramley ...... 34 A281/Barrihurst Road ...... 35 A281/Elmbridge Road ...... 35 A281/Site Access ...... 35 Alfold Crossways ...... 36

7 PRELIMINARY RESIDUAL TRAFFIC EFFECTS ...... 37

2014 Base ...... 37 2031 Reference Case ...... 38 Modelling Scenarios ...... 38 Potential Residual Effects ...... 41 1,800 Houses at Dunsfold Park ...... 41 2,600 Houses at Dunsfold Park ...... 42 3,400 Houses at Dunsfold Park ...... 44 Summary ...... 46

8 SUMMARY OF CHANGES SINCE THE APPEAL DECISION ...... 47

Location ...... 47 Congestion on the A281 ...... 48 Traffic Growth ...... 49 Traffic Effects of Dunsfold Park ...... 50 Mitigation Strategy ...... 51 Summary ...... 51

9 NEXT STEPS ...... 53

ii

Figures

Figure 5.1 - Downs Link Bus Option 1 Figure 5.2 - Downs Link Bus Option 2 Figure 5.3 - Downs Link Bus Option 3 Figure 5.4 - Downs Link Bus Option 4 Figure 7.1 - A281 Corridor Model Network Area Figure 8.1 - 2031 Do Minimum Average Junction Delay for the AM Weekday Peak Period

Appendices

Appendix A - A281 Site Access (Drawing Number 110047_A_09) Appendix B - TRICS Output Appendix C - 2008 Planning Application Highway Improvement Proposals Appendix D - Current Highway Enhancement Opportunities Appendix E - 2014 Traffic Data Collection Summary Appendix F - Summary of Paramics Results

iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report has been prepared by Vectos on behalf of Dunsfold Airport Ltd (DAL) to consider the allocation of Dunsfold Park for residential and employment land uses within Waverley Borough Council’s Local Plan.

The report considers three options for mixed use schemes at Dunsfold Park comprising 1,800, 2,600 and 3,400 residential units along with employment, education and community uses. In terms of highway impact, these options are compared with Waverley’s Option 1 which has no residential development at Dunsfold Park but a greater level of development elsewhere in the borough (i.e. 1,800 units at Cranleigh and 1,000 in villages). This is known as the Reference Case.

This report focuses on the highway network closest to Dunsfold Park and, in particular, the A281 corridor between the site and Shalford. Associated with each level of development there are a series of highway mitigation measures. Table EX1 below summarises the highway mitigation measures that have been explored for each option for Dunsfold Park.

Table EX1: Dunsfold Park Development Scenarios Mitigation Number of Houses included at Mixed Use Development at Dunsfold Park 1,800 2,600 3,400 Signalisation of A281/Kings Road, Shalford X   Signalisation of A281/Broadford Road, Shalford    Signalisation of A281/Station Road, Bramley and restricted access X   to Snowdenham Lane Use of Downs Link as bus bypass & restricted car access to Bramley X   Right turn ghost island at A281/Barrihurst Lane    Enhanced signalised junction at A281/Elmbridge Road, Cranleigh   

The modelling results look at the change in journey times to pass along the A281 corridor during the morning and evening peak periods. Along the length of road under consideration there may be sections of road and junctions that suffer some small delay whilst others that are improved due to the highway mitigation schemes that would be introduced. It is therefore important to look at the corridor as a whole since it is the overall journey time that people will notice. Table EX2 below compares the journey times along the A281 corridor for the 2031 Reference Case with the journey times for the three Dunsfold Park options (with highway enhancements).

Dunsfold Park Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table EX2: Summary of A281 Journey Time Comparison for 2031 Peak Hour A281 Corridor 2031 Reference Journey Time Increase (+) or Saving (-) compared to Direction Case Journey 2031 Reference Case (min:sec) Time (min:sec) Number of Houses included at Mixed Use Development at Dunsfold Park 1,800 2,600 3,400 AM Northbound 37:51 - 06:21 - 12:24 - 12:15 (0800-0900) Southbound 24:39 + 00:16 + 00:37 + 00:45 PM Northbound 25:18 - 00:13 - 00:02 + 00:03 (1700-1800) Southbound 27:59 - 03:49 - 02:16 - 02:02

It is also interesting to compare future journey times with existing (2014) journey times. For the full 3,400 unit scheme the changes in journey times along the A281 corridor are summarised in Table EX3 below.

Table EX3: Summary of A281 Journey Time Comparison of 2014 Base with 2031 Reference Case + 3,400 Unit Development Option at Dunsfold Park Peak Hour A281 Corridor 2014 Base Case Journey Time Increase (+) or Saving Direction Journey Time (-) of 2031 Reference Case + 2400 (min:sec) Houses compared to 2014 Base Case (min:sec) AM Northbound 24:41 + 00:54 (0800-0900) Southbound 23:37 + 01:48 PM Northbound 24:06 + 01:15 (1700-1800) Southbound 24:23 +01:34

It can therefore be concluded that up to 3,400 units at Dunsfold Park can be accommodated on the local highway network with the appropriate mitigation. The impacts on journey times, compared with the Reference Case are, at worst, minimal and in many instances beneficial. Even compared with existing journey times, the increases are less than 2 minutes, and significantly less than 10%. This is notwithstanding the addition of a significant proportion of Waverley’s housing need.

These findings are consistent with those within Surrey County Council’s (SCC) Strategic Transport Assessment (STA). The report found that whatever housing option was adopted by Waverley, there was a modest effect on overall vehicle speeds within the borough (an increase of up to 2.5%). On a comparative basis, putting no housing at Dunsfold Park (Waverley’s Option 1) leads to the greatest reduction in vehicle speeds. This is primarily due to the impacts on existing congestion around Farnham of placing more housing in that area. Figure 4.5 from the STA reproduced below shows

Dunsfold Park i Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

that Farnham currently experiences the most congestion in the borough and, relative to this, the junctions along the A281 experience far less congestion.

It can therefore be concluded from SCC’s STA and this Preliminary Transport Assessment that allocating up to 3,400 units at Dunsfold Park has benefits when compared with other options for housing within Waverley and that, with appropriate mitigation, the impacts can be accommodated on the local highway network.

The report also outlines the Sustainable Transport Strategy associated with the proposals and identifies factors that have changed since the 2008 planning application for residential development on the site.

We look forward to continuing to work with Waverley Borough Council and Surrey County Council to agree the assessments and refine the proposals.

Dunsfold Park ii Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This report, prepared by Vectos on behalf of Dunsfold Airport Ltd, considers the transport benefits and effects of proposals for a residential led, mixed use scheme at Dunsfold Park. The report provides information for the local area around Dunsfold Park. It should be read in conjunction with Surrey County Council’s (SCC) Strategic Transport Assessment (STA) which compares the highway impacts of Waverley’s alternative housing strategies.

Strategic Transport Assessment

The STA considered four alternative housing strategies with a differing quantum of housing at Dunsfold, ranging from zero to 3,400 units. We have previously commented on the results of the STA but, in summary:

 All four housing scenarios tested would result in a minimal reduction in average speeds, with the worst case being a reduction of 2.5% for the scenario with no growth at Dunsfold Park and an emphasis on growth in Farnham. With development of 3,400 units at Dunsfold Park the overall reduction in average speeds would be 2%.  Regardless of the quantum and distribution of development, the assessment shows that Farnham is already a congested network that is sensitive to increases in traffic and will experience the greatest increase in junction delays as a result of provision of additional housing. Parts of Farnham are also identified as Air Quality Management Areas which are sensitive to increases in traffic.  Prior to the implementation of sustainable transport and highway mitigation measures there would not be a “severe” impact on the highway network for the high growth scenario of Dunsfold Park (i.e. 3,400 houses).  In terms of sustainability, existing residents in Dunsfold are no more car dependent (59% car driver mode share) than residents in Farnham (63% car driver mode share) and therefore it cannot be assumed that a new development at Dunsfold Park would be less sustainable than providing housing in other parts of the borough.

The clear conclusions from the report were that the scenarios for housing allocations at Dunsfold Park perform well against the alternatives and would not have a severe impact on the local highway network.

Dunsfold Park iii Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Scope of Report

This report builds on the findings of the STA and examines, in detail, both the issues identified for further study in that report and other issues of local concern. The report:

 Examines options for 1,800, 2,600 and 3,400 residential units at Dunsfold Park;  Considers a Sustainable Transport strategy for the site;  Derives the likely travel patterns of those living at and visiting the site;  Reports the results of the detailed Paramics modelling undertaken of the A281 corridor;  Considers what changes have occurred since the Secretary of State’s Decision on the previous proposals;  Sets out the suggested next steps.

The Proposals

The proposals are for a mixed use scheme at Dunsfold Park comprising housing, education, health, community and employment uses. This is important since a mix of uses will encourage self- containment and a reduction in external trips. It is relevant to note that Census data shows that within Cranleigh 32% of residents work within the village. The largest of the options at Dunsfold Park is 80% of the size of Cranleigh and therefore a similar level of containment can be anticipated.

It is also important to recognise that development, wherever it takes place will do so over an extended period of time. Therefore, the full effects of any development will not be felt immediately and in one short period. Instead development will take place in a gradual way. The build-out trajectory at Dunsfold Park is yet to be determined but could be up to 250 / 300 dwellings to be built per year along with new employment floorspace. This will allow infrastructure to be provided and people to adjust their travel patters over time in order to accommodate the growth.

The Sustainable Transport Strategy

Sustainability relates to the proposals and not to the site as it currently exists. This approach is set out by paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

The Sustainable Transport Strategy builds on that developed for the Appeal scheme. The Inspector commented that:

Dunsfold Park iv Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 “The Appellants have produced compelling evidence to demonstrate that the development would achieve a very high overall level of sustainability and a low carbon lifestyle, well in excess of what is normally expected in new development and would compare favourably with other leading schemes both in the UK and abroad” (paragraph 369).  “The Appellants have put a great deal of thought into formulating those measures [Sustainable Transport Strategy] and I accept that there is a high probability that they would be effective” (paragraph 376).  “…..the proposals would benefit the wider area as well as residents of the Eco-Village by introducing a high quality bus service” (paragraph 378).

The proposals comprise the following:

 A mixed use scheme;  A high quality bus scheme;  A high quality pedestrian network and facilities;  A high quality cycle network and facilities;  A car club and car share scheme;  Community Electric Vehicles;  Smart Technology;  Individualised travel planning; and,  An innovative and robust Site Travel Plan.

The Downs Link is an important local asset and we consider there a number of ways it could be used to further enhance sustainable transport solutions in the area. These solutions range from using a short length to provide relief to Bramley for buses to the use of its full length from Cranleigh to provide a dedicated bus link that could serve both Cranleigh and Dunsfold Park.

The Assessment Process

Vectos, on behalf of DAL, have invested considerable resource in developing a Paramics micro- simulation model of the A281 corridor between the site and Shalford. Paramics is a considerably more responsive and precise modelling tool than conventional programmes that are used to assess individual junctions and which were used to assess the 2008 appeal proposals.

The model has been validated against existing conditions in order to demonstrate that the tool is correctly modelling the area.

Dunsfold Park v Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

The model produces a number of outputs. The most useful are the journey times through the area and average speeds and these are reported in this report along with queuing.

Highway Enhancements

As a result of the modelling we have developed a number of potential highway enhancements as follows. These are not required under all scenarios and in any case would be introduced in a phased manner:

 Signalisation of A281/Kings Road junction, Shalford;  Signalisation of the A281/Broadford Road junction, Shalford  Signalisation of A281/Station Road junction, Bramley;  Further potential traffic management measures around Bramley;  Improvement of A281/Barrihurst Road junction by introduction of ghost island right turn lane;  Improvement of A281/Elmbridge Road junction (Nanhurst Crossroads) by widening of approaches;  Provision of a new link road into the site with a signalised access onto the A281.

The Results of the Assessments

The results of the assessments are as follows:

 It is concluded that 1,800 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park along with an appropriate mitigation strategy that can be accommodated within the highway boundary and land under the control of DAL or the local authorities. With the mitigation package proposed there is a minimal effect on queuing on some arms of junctions and a betterment in many locations. There is generally a betterment in journey times along the A281 corridor in the network peak hours.  It is concluded that a mixed-use development including up to 3,400 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park and would have an acceptable impact on the transport network with an appropriate mitigation strategy. In relation to mitigation at Bramley a number of options exist. However, with use of the Downs Link and restrictions on the movements on Snowdenham Lane an overall improvement in journey time and average speed along the corridor can be achieved. Further work and discussion with stakeholders is required to refine the optimum mitigation package.

Dunsfold Park vi Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Summary of Findings

The SCC Strategic Transport Assessment demonstrated that development at Dunsfold Park did not have a significant impact on vehicle speeds within the borough and had material benefits over alternative development options (including a greater level of development around Farnham).

This report has moved matters forward and demonstrates that a mixed use scheme including up to 3,400 units is deliverable at Dunsfold Park. A highway improvement strategy has been developed that means that journey times along the A281 corridor between the site and Shalford are not increased to a significant degree and in some instances there are reductions.

The precise details of the enhancements and in particular their phasing will be the subject of further analysis and discussions with stakeholders. However, the mitigation required for 1,800 units is likely to be deliverable entirely within highway land or land owned by DAL/local authorities. No mitigation is required at Bramley with this level of development.

In practice it is likely that following initial phases of development, the traffic effects will be monitored as the development progresses under a monitor and manage regime. This will allow the effects on travel patterns to be monitored and the need for mitigation to be assessed, remembering that government policy encourages a reduction in vehicle trips through travel planning rather than the provision of physical infrastructure. This is a similar approach that has been taken recently by the Highways Agency and Cambridgeshire County Council for the Alconbury Weald development, which will provide 5,000 houses and 8,000 jobs as well as for the Stanton Ironworks site in Derbyshire.

The phased manner of development also means that any effects are felt over the plan period rather than in a single short period and this allows people to adjust to the changed circumstances.

The Sustainable Transport Strategy has been developed from that proposed at the time of the 2008 planning application, with options to utilise the Downs Link asset as development progresses. The strategy will assist existing members of the community as well as future residents at Dunsfold Park. Analysis demonstrates that a significant element of self-containment is likely – to a similar extent to that at Cranleigh.

It should be recognised that a larger development does not necessarily lead to proportional increase in external impacts since the larger the development the greater the self-containment.

Dunsfold Park vii Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

This report has looked in detail at the A281 corridor. It has not sought to undertake a comparative analysis of other potential housing allocations to the same level of detail. However, based on the results of the STA it is likely that the congestion issues associated with development in the Farnham area will be more significant than any impacts in the Dunsfold Park area.

Conclusion

We therefore conclude that Waverley Borough Council can allocate a mixed-use development with up to 3,400 units at Dunsfold Park without creating an unacceptable transport impact and that development would pass the tests set out in NPPF paragraph 32 i.e.:

 The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure;  Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people;  Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that, cost effectively, limit the significant impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of the development are severe.

What Has Changed since the Appeal Decision

A significant number of factors have changed since the Secretary of State’s decision letter of 24 September 2009. These changes mean that it is no longer appropriate to simply rely on comments made in that decision without understanding the context then and now. In summary:

 The current exercise is to consider the best location for housing within the borough and therefore transport matters need to be considered borough wide, comparing the merits of alternative strategies, rather than just examining one site as was the case in 2008. The Inspector recognised this and stated that “When seen in the context of other options the appeal proposals may well prove to be the best solution for meeting the South East Plan housing requirement”;  NPPF has now been published and sets out the policy tests to be applied when considering the merits of an allocation;  2011 Census data is now available that shows that, in terms of the proportion of car drivers, the Dunsfold area performs better than Cranleigh and Farnham;

Dunsfold Park viii Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 The Inspector stated that “there is severe congestion on the A281” (IR paragraph 372). We now have available Surrey’s STA. Whilst it is acknowledged that there is some peak hour congestion in the SE of the borough, this is not characterised in the report as severe. Furthermore, the report is clear that Farnham currently experiences the most congestion in the borough.  The STA also demonstrates that the option that causes the greatest reduction in speeds is that with no housing at Dunsfold Park.  We now have data that shows there has been no traffic growth on the A281 since 2000. Therefore, the growth assumptions made in the 2008 assessments were a significant over- estimate.  The STA correctly uses average trip rates for assessing housing options. The 2008 assessment used 85%ile rates which led to a significant over-estimate of vehicle trips.  As well as the STA, we now have available a Paramics model of the A281 corridor. This allows a much more precise and comprehensive assessment of traffic effects to be undertaken, including matters such as journey time and average speeds.  The highway mitigation strategy has been further developed, particularly in the Bramley area.

Next Steps

This preliminary report has responded to the STA produced by Surrey CC and requests for additional information from Waverley Borough Council. Following submission of this report, we are keen to work with the authorities and other stakeholders to refine the analysis and provide the information necessary for Waverley to undertake an objective assessment of the appropriate level of development at Dunsfold Park.

Dunsfold Park ix Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

1 INTRODUCTION

Background

1.1 Vectos is retained by Dunsfold Airport Limited (DAL) to provide transport advice on the Dunsfold Park site in Waverley, Surrey.

1.2 Waverley Borough Council (WBC) is currently developing their Local Plan and, as part of this, is testing a number of housing options to determine their proposed housing strategy up to 2031. WBC recently consulted on their ‘Consultation on Potential Housing Scenarios and Other Issues for the Waverley Local Plan’, which set out four housing options that would provide 8,450 homes over the period from 2013 to 2031. Three of the four Waverley housing options include housing at the Dunsfold Park site ranging from 1,800 to 3,400 residential units.

1.3 Surrey County Council (SCC), as highway and transport authority, prepared a Strategic Transport Assessment (STA) in September 2014 to support the Local Plan consultation. SCC tested various housing options using the strategic Surrey Integrated Traffic Model (SINTRAM) and summarised the findings of their assessment in the STA. The next stage is for SCC to consider potential mitigation solutions.

1.4 DAL submitted a response to the recent Waverley consultation, which included a Transport Statement (October 2014). The Transport Statement reiterated that DAL are keen to work with the borough and county councils in order to progress the assessment of the Dunsfold Park proposals and, in particular, potential mitigation measures.

Report Scope and Structure

1.5 This Preliminary Transport Assessment summarises the work undertaken to date by Vectos to provide an initial assessment of the potential local effects of the Dunsfold Park site and potential mitigation options.

1.6 In 2008 an application was submitted to WBC for a new settlement at Dunsfold Park comprising 2,601 residential units, the existing 45,000 sqm of business space increased to 60,000 sqm, a primary school and village centre with a range of facilities. The application was refused by WBC, a decision supported by the appeal Inspector and upheld by the Secretary of State in 2009. However, neither the Inspector’s nor Secretary of State’s decisions ruled

Dunsfold Park 1 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

out the scheme being supported in the future if it proved to be the best option for meeting WBC’s housing needs. The Inspector stated (Inspectors Report paragraph 387), and the Secretary of State agreed that:

“Despite its disadvantageous location relative to the surrounding transport infrastructure, the appeal site has many advantages. When seen in the context of other options the appeal proposals may well prove to be the best solution for meeting the South East Plan housing requirement. However, those other options have yet to be explored. The South East Plan had not even been approved at the time of the Inquiry and the Council does not as yet have an adopted Core Strategy. The superiority of the appeal proposals cannot be assumed. A decision to allow the Eco-Village to proceed at this stage, prior to the formulation of the LDF, would be premature and would effectively pre-empt the proper consideration of alternatives as part of the development planning process.”

1.7 Section 8 of this report summarises what has changed since the 2008 planning application.

1.8 This is a preliminary assessment to assist WBC and SCC with their work on the emerging Waverley Local Plan. The assessment will require further refinement, based on discussions with the local authorities and information requested from the SCC SINTRAM model. This is discussed further in Section 9 of this report on Next Steps.

1.9 This report is structured as follows:

 Section 2: Development Proposals;  Section 3: Trip Generation;  Section 4: Trip Distribution;  Section 5: Sustainable Transport Opportunities;  Section 6: Potential Highway Enhancement Measures;  Section 7: Preliminary Residual Traffic Effects;  Section 8: Summary of Changes since the Appeal Decision; and  Section 9: Next Steps.

Dunsfold Park 2 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

2 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS

Development Quantum

2.1 DAL provided WBC with three development scenarios for the Dunsfold Park site. The options are summarised in Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: Dunsfold Park Development Scenarios Land Use Land Use Class Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 (20% (30% (40% Housing Housing Housing Need) Need) Need) Residential Units C3 1,800 2,600 3,400 Retained Existing Employment Mix of B uses 36,692 36,692 36,692 Office (sqm) B1a/b 2,200 9,440 12,000 Industrial (sqm) B1c/B2 4,500 6,099 18,000 Storage and Distribution (sqm) B8 7,624 7,624 7,624 Retail (sqm GFA) A1 600 1,035 1,500 Professional Services (sqm GFA) A2 0 0 300 Food and Drink (sqm GFA) A3-A5 270 460 850 Hotel (bedrooms) C1 100 bed 100 bed 100 bed Day Nursery (sqm GFA) D1 500 500 500 Primary Education (pupils) D1 420 pupils 630 pupils 840 pupils Medical Centre (sqm GFA) D1 150 210 270 Community Facilities (sqm GFA) D1 466 676 880 Museum (sqm GFA) D1 4,370 4,370 4,370 Church (sqm GFA) D1 649 649 649 Sports Facilities (sqm GFA) D2 2,185 2,185 2,185 Existing Special School D1 60 pupils 60 pupils 60 pupils

2.2 Option 2 in Table 2.1 is consistent with the development quantum included in the 2008 planning application for the site.

2.3 All of the above three scenarios for Dunsfold Park were included within the WBC housing options that have recently been consulted on. The WBC housing options are summarised in Table 2.2 below.

Dunsfold Park 3 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table2.2: Waverley Housing Options Scenario Proposed Housing Allocation (including existing commitments) Total Farnham Godalming Haslemere Cranleigh Villages Dunsfold Houses Park WBC 1 3,800 1,050 800 1,800 1,000 0 8,450 WBC 2 2,600 1,050 800 1,200 1,000 1,800 8,450 WBC 3 2,100 1,050 700 1,050 950 2,600 8,450 WBC 4 1,800 1,050 700 650 850 3,400 8,450

2.4 It is important to note that any development at Dunsfold Park will be built out over a period of time and therefore any effects will not be instantly felt. Instead there will be a gradual provision of development and it is likely that travel patterns will adapt and evolve over time to reflect this increased provision.

Access Strategy

2.5 The SCC STA assumed that 100% of traffic travelling to and from the Dunsfold Park site would access the site via a new junction on the A281 Horsham Road between the junctions with Alfold Road and Wildwood Lane. The STA did not specify what type of access was modelled.

2.6 To facilitate access onto the main highway network it is proposed that a new highway link would be provided from the Dunsfold Park site to the A281. This is located on land owned by the developer. The new link road is envisaged to be used by cars, LGVs, buses and HGVs and would be the only access to the development for HGVs. This would ensure that HGVs are routed away from existing dwellings on Stovolds Hill and at Alfold Crossways.

2.7 It is proposed to provide a new signal controlled junction at the A281/New Link Road junction and a preliminary layout of this junction is shown in Drawing Number 110047_A_09 at Appendix A of this report.

2.8 Whilst the Link Road is envisaged to be the primary access to the Dunsfold Park site, it is also proposed to retain the existing Stovolds Hill access to the north of the site and the Compasses Bridge entrance on Dunsfold Road to the south of the site to be used as secondary accesses for cars and LGVs. There is also the potential to create an additional access at the existing Tickner’s Heath access to the southwest of the site.

Dunsfold Park 4 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

2.9 The access strategy is subject to further refinement in consultation with SCC as the design for the site progresses.

Dunsfold Park 5 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

3 TRIP GENERATION

3.1 This section summarises the trips assumed to be generated by the Dunsfold Park site at the time of the planning application in 2008 and how this has been progressed to provide the current position on trip generation.

2008 Planning Application Trip Generation Summary

3.2 The 2008 planning application used the TRICS trip rate database to derive vehicular trip rates for each of the proposed land uses. The analysis was inherited by Vectos and there was insufficient time in the lead up to the inquiry to agree a revised approach with SCC. There are a number of issues with the TRICS analysis undertaken at the time of the planning application, which can be summarised as follows:

 85th percentile trip rates were taken from the TRICS database, which is considered to be an overly robust approach. Advice provided in the Department for Transport ‘Guidance on Transport Assessment, March 2007 (paragraph 4.62) is that average trip rates should be used. Furthermore, given the size of development, it is highly unlikely that the great majority of the development would have trip rates significantly above average, therefore leading to an 85th percentile result in total. It is much more likely, given the size of development, that some would display a higher trip rate and some lower, thus leading to average trip rates overall.  The TRICS surveys used for the planning application are now out of date (i.e. dating back 16 years to 1998). The TRICS advice is to use surveys that are less than 8 years old and therefore the TRICS site selection needs to be updated.  Some of the TRICS sites selected are not considered comparable to the Dunsfold Park site in terms of regional location (e.g. some Greater London sites were included in the site selection). Whilst the TRICS Good Practice Guide states that “regional selection is not as important a factor as location type and other important factors” (paragraph 4.1), it does go on to state that a major city is not comparable to a rural location. Therefore, major cities should not be included in the updated Dunsfold Park site selection.

3.3 A summary of the 85th percentile vehicular trip rates used for residential and employment elements of the 2008 planning application is provided in Table 3.1 below. There were some trips associated with the other proposed uses but these were minimal when compared to

Dunsfold Park 6 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

the residential and employment uses, particularly in the critical network peak hours, and are therefore not included in Tables 3.1 and 3.2 below.

Table 3.1: Planning Application 85th Percentile Vehicular Trip Rates Land Use AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Two- In Out Two- way way Privately Owned 0.15 0.53 0.67 0.53 0.30 0.83 Residential Affordable 0.14 0.31 0.45 0.33 0.23 0.56 (per unit) Retirement 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.05 0.14 Employment Office (B1) 2.54 0.31 2.85 0.51 2.25 2.76 (per 100 Manufacturing (B2) 1.15 0.53 1.68 0.42 0.99 1.41 sqm) Storage/Distribution (B8) 0.60 0.26 0.86 0.20 0.42 0.61

3.4 Applying the trip rates in Table 3.1 to the planning application development quantum provides the vehicular trips summarised in Table 3.2 below.

Table 3.2: Planning Application Vehicular Trips (based on 85th percentile trip rates) Land Use Quantum AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Two-way Two-way Privately Owned 1,495 units 1,007 1,238 Affordable 956 units 430 531 Residential Retirement 150 units 8 22 Total Residential 2,601 units 1,455 1,791 Office (B1) 9,440 sqm 269 261 Manufacturing (B2) 6,099 sqm 102 86 Employment Storage/Distribution (B8) 7,624 sqm 65 47 Total Employment 23,163 sqm 436 393 Total Residential and Employment 1,891 2,184

3.5 Having estimated the number of vehicular trips based on TRICS 85th percentile trip rates, the 2008 planning application then reduced the vehicular trips based on the likely effect of internal trips and sustainable transport measures. The residential and employment trips with the reductions taken forward to the 2008 application assessment was 1,549 two-way vehicles in the AM peak hour and 1,863 two-way vehicles in the PM peak hour.

Dunsfold Park 7 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Updated Trip Generation

Residential Trip Generation

3.6 The following criteria have been used to select residential trip rates:

 Sub-Land Use: Mixed Private/Non-Private Housing as it is uncertain at this stage what the split of private and affordable housing will be;  Calculation Option: Multi-modal trip rates;  Regions: England but excluding Greater London;  Location Types: Suburban Area, Edge of Town or Neighbourhood Centre;  Date Range: TRICS default of 8 years (i.e. 01/01/06 to 23/01/14);  Local Population: population within 1 mile less than 5,000 people; and  Major Cities: removal of sites within major cities (e.g. 2 sites in Liverpool).

3.7 The above site selection approach has been taken recently by West Sussex County Council when supplying Vectos with residential trip rates for a proposed development in a similar location to Dunsfold Park.

3.8 Table 3.3 below summarises the multi-modal residential TRICS sites that have been selected based on the above criteria and the full TRICS output is included at Appendix B.

Table 3.3: Multi-modal Residential TRICS Sites TRICS Site Town/City Area Location Number of Reference Dwellings ES-03-M-01 Near Uckfield East Sussex Neighbourhood Centre 74 ES-03-M-03 Near Uckfield East Sussex Neighbourhood Centre 68 SC-03-M-02 Near Frimley Surrey Neighbourhood Centre 342 SC-03-M-04 Guildford Surrey Suburban Area 130

3.9 The TRICS ‘Total Person’ residential trip rates are summarised in Table 3.4 below.

Table 3.4: Residential Total Person TRICS Trip Rates per Dwelling Period Hour Arrival Departure Two-way (people per (people per (people per dwelling) dwelling) dwelling) AM Peak Hour 0800-0900 0.143 0.684 0.827 PM Peak Hour 1700-1800 0.485 0.246 0.731

Dunsfold Park 8 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

3.10 Using the above trip rates, Table 3.5 below summarises the ‘Total Person’ residential trips in the AM and PM network peak hours for the range of residential houses being considered at Dunsfold Park.

Table 3.5: Residential Total Person Trips (prior to internalisation and transport strategy) Peak Hour Number of Arrival Departure Two-way Houses (people) (people) (people) 1,800 257 1,231 1,489 AM Peak Hour 2,600 372 1,778 2,150 (08:00-09:00) 3,400 486 2,326 2,812 1,800 873 443 1,316 PM Peak Hour 2,600 1,261 640 1,901 (17:00-18:00) 3,400 1,649 836 2,485

3.11 Census 2011 data has been interrogated to estimate a reasonable baseline vehicular mode share for the development (i.e. prior to taking account of internal trips and the Sustainable Transport Strategy). The Dunsfold Park site lies within both the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward and the Alfold, Cranleigh Rural and Ellens Green ward. However, there is only 2011 Census journey to work data available for the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward and therefore this has been used to establish a baseline car driver mode share. Table 3.6 below summarises the method of journey to work for residents in the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward taken from the 2011 Census.

Table 3.6: 2011 Census Mode Share for Journey to Work (Chiddingfold and Dunsfold Ward) Mode Percentage Work from home 13% Train 12% Bus 2% Car Driver 59% Car Passenger 4% Bicycle 1% Walk 8% Other 1% Total 100%

3.12 It can be seen from the table above that 59% of residents in the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward currently drive to work. Table 3.7 below applies the 59% car driver mode share to the

Dunsfold Park 9 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

‘Total Person’ residential trips to establish the vehicular residential trips for each of the housing options for the Dunsfold Park site.

Table 3.7: Residential Vehicular Trips (prior to internalisation and transport strategy) Peak Hour Number of Arrival Departure Two-way Houses (vehicles) (vehicles) (vehicles) 1,800 152 726 879 AM Peak Hour 2,600 219 1,049 1,269 (08:00-09:00) 3,400 287 1,372 1,659 1,800 515 261 776 PM Peak Hour 2,600 744 378 1,122 (17:00-18:00) 3,400 973 493 1,466

3.13 The above residential trip rates do not consider the reduction in trips as a result of internalisation and implementation of a Sustainable Transport Strategy. This is considered later in this section.

3.14 As a sense check, the vehicular trip rates from the selected residential TRICS sites have been applied to the proposed housing at Dunsfold Park to see if they are similar to the approach taken above (i.e. baseline 2011 Census mode share applied to total person trips). Table 3.8 below provides a comparison of both approaches.

Table 3.8: Residential Vehicular Trips (prior to internalisation and transport strategy) Peak Hour Number of Two-way Vehicles Two-way Vehicles Houses (Census mode share (TRICS vehicle trip rates applied to TRICS total applied to proposed person trips) housing units) 1,800 879 909 AM Peak Hour 2,600 1,269 1,313 (08:00-09:00) 3,400 1,659 1,717 1,800 776 886 PM Peak Hour 2,600 1,122 1,279 (17:00-18:00) 3,400 1,466 1,673

3.15 It can be seen from Table 3.8 above that both approaches provide similar levels of trips. The baseline car driver mode share for the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward is slightly lower than the average car driver mode share for the selected TRICS sites, hence the slightly lower vehicular trips when using this data.

Dunsfold Park 10 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Employment Trip Generation

3.16 The following criteria have been used to select employment trip rates:

 Sub-Land Use: Office (B1)/Industrial Unit (B1c/B2)/Warehousing Commercial (B8);  Calculation Option: Vehicular trip rates (due to the low number of relevant multi modal sites in the TRICS database it was considered more representative to obtain vehicle only trip rates);  Regions: England but excluding Greater London;  Floor Area: 1,000 – 30,000 sqm;  Location Types: Suburban Area or Edge of Town;  Date Range: TRICS default of 8 years (i.e. 01/01/06 to 23/01/14) with the exception of B8 uses which were selected from surveys since 01/01/00 due to limited surveys;  Local Population: population within 1 mile less than 10,000 people for B1c/B2 uses and less than 15,000 for B1 and B8 uses (N.B. limiting it any further would result in too few employment sites); and  Major Cities: removal of sites within major cities.

3.17 Table 3.9 below summarises the Office (B1) TRICS sites that have been selected based on the above criteria and the full TRICS output is included at Appendix B.

Table 3.9: Office (B1) TRICS Sites TRICS Site Town/City Area Location GFA (sqm) Reference CW-02-A-03 Truro Cornwall Edge of Town 30,000 DH-02-A-01 Darlington Durham Suburban Area 3,177 DH-02-A-02 Near Durham Durham Edge of Town 2,000 KC-02-A-06 Tunbridge Wells Kent Edge of Town 5,139 KC-02-A-07 Ashford Kent Edge of Town 1,113

3.18 Table 3.10 below summarises the Industrial (B1c/B2) TRICS sites that have been selected based on the above criteria and the full TRICS output is included at Appendix B.

Dunsfold Park 11 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 3.10: Industrial (B1c/B2) TRICS Sites TRICS Site Town/City Area Location GFA (sqm) Reference CH-02-C-01 Northwich Cheshire Edge of Town 15,000 CW-02-C-01 Camborne Cornwall Suburban Area 10,200 CW-02-C-02 Bodmin Cornwell Edge of Town 17,675 NY-02-C-01 Masham North Yorkshire Neighbourhood Centre 2,491 SF-02-C-01 Near Ipswich Suffolk Edge of Town 1,100

3.19 Table 3.11 below summarises the Storage and Distribution (B8) TRICS sites that have been selected based on the above criteria and the full TRICS output is included at Appendix B.

Table 3.11: Storage and Distribution (B8) TRICS Sites TRICS Site Town/City Area Location GFA (sqm) Reference BD-02-F-01 Dunstable Bedfordshire Edge of Town 6,050 CW-02-F-01 Near Truro Cornwall Edge of Town 5,150 KC-02-F-01 Snodland Kent Edge of Town 7,500 SF-02-F-01 Thetford Suffolk Edge of Town 4,550 SF-02-F-02 Felixstowe Suffolk Suburban Area 22,270

3.20 The TRICS vehicular trip rates for the proposed employment uses are summarised in Table 3.11 below.

Table 3.11: Employment Vehicular TRICS Trip Rates per 100 sqm GFA Peak Hour Land Use Arrival Departure Two-way (vehicles per (vehicles per (vehicles per 100 sqm) 100 sqm) 100 sqm) B1 1.723 0.203 1.926 AM Peak Hour B1c/B2 0.297 0.077 0.374 (08:00-09:00) B8 0.090 0.094 0.184 B1 0.138 1.320 1.458 PM Peak Hour B1c/B2 0.047 0.237 0.284 (17:00-18:00) B8 0.064 0.125 0.189

3.21 Tables 3.12 and 3.13 below summarises the vehicular trips in the AM and PM network peak hours, respectively, for the range of employment floorspace being considered at Dunsfold Park.

Dunsfold Park 12 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 3.12: Employment Vehicular Trips (AM Peak Hour 08:00 – 09:00) prior to internalisation and sustainable transport strategy Dunsfold Land Employment Arrival Departure Two-way Park Use GFA (sqm) (vehicles) (vehicles) (vehicles) Option B1 2,200 38 4 42 B1c/B2 4,500 13 3 17 1 B8 7,624 7 7 14 Total 14,324 58 15 73 B1 9,440 163 19 182 B1c/B2 6,099 18 5 23 2 B8 7,624 3 14 17 Total 23,163 188 31 219 B1 12,000 207 24 231 B1c/B2 18,000 53 14 67 3 B8 7,624 7 7 14 Total 37,624 267 45 312

Table 3.13: Employment Vehicular Trips (PM Peak Hour 17:00 – 18:00) prior to internalisation and sustainable transport strategy Dunsfold Land Employment Arrival Departure Two-way Park Use GFA (sqm) (vehicles) (vehicles) (vehicles) Option B1 2,200 3 29 32 B1c/B2 4,500 2 11 13 1 B8 7,624 5 10 14 Total 14,324 10 49 59 B1 9,440 13 125 138 B1c/B2 6,099 3 14 17 2 B8 7,624 5 10 14 Total 23,163 21 149 169 B1 12,000 17 158 175 B1c/B2 18,000 8 43 51 3 B8 7,624 5 10 14 Total 37,624 30 211 240

Hotel Trip Generation

3.22 The following criteria have been used to select employment trip rates:

 Sub-Land Use: Hotels

Dunsfold Park 13 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 Calculation Option: Vehicular trip rates (due to the low number of relevant multi modal sites in the TRICS database it was considered more representative to obtain vehicle only trip rates);  Regions: England but excluding Greater London;  Floor Area:50 – 250 beds;  Location Types: Suburban Area or Edge of Town;  Date Range: Surveys since 01/01/00 due to limited surveys within default 8 years;  Local Population: population within 1 mile less than 10,000 (N.B. limiting it any further would result in too few employment sites); and  Major Cities: removal of sites within major cities.

3.23 Table 3.14 below summarises the Hotel (C1) TRICS sites that have been selected based on the above criteria and the full TRICS output is included at Appendix B.

Table 3.14: Hotel (C1) TRICS Sites TRICS Site Town/City Area Location Number of Reference Bedrooms BU-06-A-01 Aylesbury Buckinghamshire Edge of Town 139 HF-06-A-03 Stevenage Hertfordshire Edge of Town 100 WO-06-A-02 Redditch Worcestershire Suburban Area 73 WO-06-A-03 Bromsgrove Worcestershire Suburban Area 58

3.24 Table 3.15 below summarises the hotel trip rates and resultant vehicular trips for the proposed 100 bedroom hotel at the Dunsfold Park site for all three development options.

Table 3.15: Hotel Vehicular TRICS Trip Rates (per bedroom) and Vehicular Trips Period Vehicular Trip Rates and Arrival Departure Two-way Trips AM Peak Hour Trip Rates (per bedroom) 0.200 0.278 0.478 (08:00-09:00) Vehicular Trips 20 28 48 PM Peak Period Trip Rates (per bedroom) 0.278 0.195 0.473 (17:00-18:00) Vehicular Trips 28 20 47

Dunsfold Park 14 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Education Trip Generation

3.25 For the purpose of the assessment it has been assumed that all children attending the proposed primary school will live within Dunsfold Park. The capacity of the primary school being proposed for each development scenario has been based on this assumption.

3.26 Therefore the proposed primary school is unlikely to generate a noticeable increase in traffic flows on the external highway network. However, there will be additional employee trips and these have been assessed using the assumptions shown in Table 3.17. The Department for Education ‘School Workforce in England: November 2013’ Statistical Release states that “Half of school staff are teachers with teaching assistants and non-classroom based support staff each accounting for a quarter of school staff.” This has been applied to Table 3.17.

Table 3.17: Primary School Employees Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Total Pupils 420 630 840 Pupils per Class 30 Number of Classes 14 21 28 Number of Teachers 28 42 56 Number of Teaching Assistants 14 21 28 Number of Non-classroom based staff 14 21 28 Total Employees 56 84 112

3.27 At this stage, it has been assumed that 60% of the employee trips will occur during the peak hours (08:00-09:00 and 17:00-18:00). In the AM peak period, the remaining 40% of the trips have been assumed to occur between 07:00-08:00. In the PM peak period, 30% of the trips have been assumed to occur between 16:00-17:00 and 10% between 18:00-19:00.

3.28 As part of this preliminary assessment, it has been assumed that 80% of staff will be car drivers to/from the school (prior to internalisation and sustainable transport strategy reductions). Tables 3.18and 3.19below summarise the vehicular trips for the proposed primary school in the AM and PM peak periods, respectively.

Dunsfold Park 15 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 3.18: Primary School Vehicular Trips in the AM Peak Period (prior to internalisation and sustainable transport strategy) Dunsfold Park Hour Arrival Departure Two-way Option (vehicles) (vehicles) (vehicles) 07:00-08:00 18 0 18 1 (420 Pupils) 08:00-09:00 27 0 27 09:00-10:00 0 0 0 07:00-08:00 27 0 27 2 (630 Pupils) 08:00-09:00 40 0 40 09:00-10:00 0 0 0 07:00-08:00 36 0 36 3 (840 Pupils) 08:00-09:00 54 0 54 09:00-10:00 0 0 0

Table 3.19: Primary School Vehicular Trips in the PM Peak Period (prior to internalisation and sustainable transport strategy) Dunsfold Park Hour Arrival Departure Two-way Option (vehicles) (vehicles) (vehicles) 16:00-17:00 0 14 14 1 (420 Pupils) 17:00-18:00 0 27 27 18:00-19:00 0 4 4 16:00-17:00 0 20 20 2 (630 Pupils) 17:00-18:00 0 40 40 18:00-19:00 0 7 7 16:00-17:00 0 27 27 3 (840 Pupils) 17:00-18:00 0 54 54 18:00-19:00 0 9 9

Other Land Uses

3.29 At this stage it has been assumed that the remainder of the land uses within the proposed Dunsfold Park site will be largely ancillary to the residential and employment uses. Therefore it has been assumed that the trips to these uses will be internal to the site and they will not generate a noticeable level of additional trips on the external highway network, particularly in the network peak hours.

Internal Trips

3.30 Internal trips are those that remain within the site. They will be due to a number of factors including:

Dunsfold Park 16 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 Those who live and work on the Dunsfold Park site;  Trips from residential properties to schools on the Dunsfold Park site;  Trips to other facilities on the site including: shops, leisure, health and community facilities; and  Trips from the employment uses to facilities on the site at lunchtime, e.g. to shops and leisure facilities.

3.31 Cervero (1989 and 1996) developed much of the early literature concerning jobs and housing balance, arguing that communities with effective balance (0.75-1.50 jobs per household) are associated with higher than average self-containment ratios and low car dependency. The 2008 planning application for Dunsfold Park had a jobs to housing ratio of approximately 0.77 (i.e. circa 2,000 jobs for 2,600 houses). A similar ratio has been applied to the current development options. The proposed jobs to housing ratio of 0.77 at the Dunsfold Park site is intended to optimise self-containment.

3.32 For the purposes of this Preliminary Assessment, it has been assumed that only 10% of the residential trips will remain internal to the Dunsfold Park site in the AM and PM network peak hours (e.g. trips associated with employment, education, education escort, leisure, shopping, health etc). This is considered to be a conservative estimate, given the level of proposed mix of uses within the site, and will need to be updated in discussion with SCC. However, it provides a robust analysis at this stage.

3.33 In addition, it has been assumed that 10% of the employment trips remain internal to the Dunsfold Park site (i.e. people living and working within the development). Again further analysis will be required to refine the level of internalisation there may be for employment trips but at this stage it provides a robust analysis.

3.34 A separate technical note on potential level of containment at Dunsfold Park will be prepared and issued to the local authorities as part of the next stage of work.

Summary

3.35 The vehicular trips to be assessed for each development scenario as part of this Preliminary Transport Assessment are summarised in the tables below.

Dunsfold Park 17 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

3.36 Table 3.20 below summarises the Option 1 vehicular trips to be assessed as part of this Preliminary Transport Assessment.

Table 3.20: Option 1 Vehicular Trips 0800-0900 1700-1800 Type Quantum Unit In Out Total In Out Total Residential 1,800 houses 137 654 790 464 235 699 B1 a/b 3,000 sqm 34 4 38 3 26 29 B1c/B2 4,500 sqm 12 3 15 2 10 12 B8 7,624 sqm 6 6 13 4 9 13 Hotel 100 beds 20 28 48 28 20 47 Education 35 staff 27 0 27 0 27 27 Total 236 695 931 500 326 826

3.37 Table 3.21 below summarises the Option 2 vehicular trips to be assessed as part of this Preliminary Transport Assessment.

Table 3.21: Option 2 Vehicular Trips 0800-0900 1700-1800 Type Quantum Unit In Out Total In Out Total Residential 2,600 houses 197 944 1,142 670 340 1,009 B1 a/b 9,440 sqm 146 17 164 12 112 124 B1c/B2 6,099 sqm 16 4 21 3 13 16 B8 7,624 sqm 6 6 13 4 9 13 D1 Hotel 100 beds 20 28 48 28 20 47 Education 50 staff 40 0 40 0 40 40 Total 427 1,000 1,427 716 533 1,249

3.38 Table 3.22 below summarises the Option 3 vehicular trips to be assessed as part of this Preliminary Transport Assessment.

Table 3.22: Option 3 Vehicular Trips 0800-0900 1700-1800 Type Quantum Unit In Out Total In Out Total Residential 3,400 houses 258 1,235 1,493 876 444 1,320 B1 a/b 12,000 sqm 186 22 208 15 143 157 B1c/B2 18,000 sqm 48 12 61 8 38 46 B8 7,624 sqm 6 6 13 4 9 13 D1 Hotel 100 beds 20 28 48 28 20 47 Education 65 staff 54 0 54 0 54 54 Total 572 1,304 1,876 930 707 1,637

Dunsfold Park 18 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

3.39 It can be seen from Tables 3.20 to 3.21 above that the largest proportion of trips to be generated from the Dunsfold Park site are residential trips (i.e. 80 - 85% of the total trips).

3.40 The trips summarised in the tables above include a conservative 10% internalisation of trips within the site based on the proposed mix of uses, but the extent of internalisation is likely to be higher than this and will need to be analysed further in consultation with SCC. At this stage, the 10% internal trip factor is considered to provide an extremely robust assessment.

3.41 No account at this stage has been made for mode shift as a result of the implementation of a Sustainable Transport Strategy. Therefore the trip generation set out in Tables 3.20 to 3.22 is based on the mode share without Transport Strategy.

3.42 As a final comparison, Table 3.23 below compares the AM peak hour vehicular trips derived in the 2014 SCC STA, this Preliminary Transport Assessment report and the 2008 planning application. SCC only assessed the AM peak hour so Table 3.23 only compares these trips. Likewise SCC did not take account of any trip reductions as a result of internalisation or sustainable travel planning and therefore the trips in Table 3.23 are prior to any reductions. Finally, SCC only assessed 1,800 and 3,400 houses at Dunsfold Park so the trips have been pro-rated to provide vehicular trips for 2,600 houses for the purposes of comparison.

Table 3.23: Comparison of AM Peak Hour Residential and Employment Vehicular Trips for 2,600 houses (prior to internalisation and Sustainable Transport Strategy) Hour TRICS trip rates Two-way (vehicles) SCC Strategic Transport Assessment Average 1,399 Vectos Preliminary Transport Assessment Average 1,488 2008 Planning Application Average 1,394 2008 Planning Application 85th Percentile 1,891

3.43 It can be seen from Table 3.23 that the trips being assessed within this Preliminary Transport Assessment are higher than those assessed by SCC, both of which are based on average trip rates. The trips that were assessed as part of the 2008 planning application were based on 85th percentile trip rates and so are significantly higher than the trips being assessed within this report (i.e. 1,891 trips compared to 1,488 trips). However, were the 2008 application to have used average trip rates, based on the same site selection as for the 85th percentile trip rates, the vehicular trips would have been lower than those currently being assessed.

Dunsfold Park 19 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

3.44 Based on Table 3.23 it can be concluded that this Preliminary Transport Assessment uses a robust trip generation.

Dunsfold Park 20 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

4 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT

4.1 This section summarises the trip distribution assumed for the development trips. It also provides a summary of the distribution approach used for the 2008 planning application and how this has been updated.

2008 Planning Application Trip Distribution Summary

4.2 For the 2008 planning application a gravity model was developed for each land use to distribute the development trips onto the local highway network. The gravity model was a function of the distance from the site to the surrounding towns. The distributions generated by the gravity model were compared against National Travel Survey data and 2001 Census data to ensure that the proposed distributions were in accordance with observed trends.

4.3 The gravity model was not approved by SCC at the time of the application or subsequent planning appeal. Whilst the gravity model could be updated based on current data, it is considered that, at least at this stage, a similar approach to trip distribution should be taken to Surrey County Council in their 2014 Strategic Transport Assessment that supported the recent WBC consultation on the Waverley Local Plan, which was to use Census data.

Updated Trip Distribution

Residential Trip Distribution

4.4 In order to distribute the updated Dunsfold Park residential trips to the highway network we have used 2011 Census data. The 2011 Census data only has origin-destination data available for the journey to/from work at ‘Middle Layer Super Output Area’ level and therefore this has been used to establish the trip distribution of the residential trips to/from the Alfold Cranleigh Rural and Ellens Green middle layer super output area.

4.5 At this stage we are only concerned with distributing vehicle trips for the purposes of input to the highway model and therefore only the existing car driver distribution has been extracted from the 2011 Census data. Table 4.1 below summarises the residential trip distribution to/from the Dunsfold Park site based on 2011 Census data.

Dunsfold Park 21 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 4.1: Residential Trip Distribution (based on 2011 Census data) Direction Distribution (%) A281 northbound towards Guildford 31% Station Road eastbound, Bramley 3% Kings Road eastbound, Shalford 0% Elmbridge Road (B2130) eastbound towards Cranleigh 9% A281 southbound towards Horsham 21% Loxwood Road (B2133) southbound 1% Westbound towards Farnham and Godalming 8% Westbound towards Haslemere 3% Westbound towards Milford and beyond (A3 and A31) 25% Snowdenham Lane westbound, Bramley 0% Total 100%

4.6 The residential trips account for over 80% of the total development trips and it is therefore the most critical distribution to this assessment. It should be noted that the residential trip distribution set out in Table 4.1 is based on Census data for the journey to work that is now 3 years old and may not reflect where people will be travelling to work in 2031. The SCC STA stated that it was not possible for WBC to provide planning data regarding committed or proposed commercial developments within the borough. This data would assist in refining the residential trip distribution so that it was more reflective of the trip distribution in 2031 and we will seek to explore this further with WBC.

Employment Trip Distribution

4.7 Due to the existing limited level of employment within the Dunsfold area (with the exception of the Dunsfold Park site itself), 2001 Census data for the Cranleigh West ward has been used to estimate the employment trip distribution. Again only the existing car driver distribution has been extracted from the Census data. Table 4.2 below summarises the employment trip distribution to/from the Dunsfold Park site.

Dunsfold Park 22 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 4.2: Employment Trip Distribution (based on 2001 Census data) Direction Distribution (%) A281 northbound towards Guildford 26% Station Road eastbound, Bramley 0% Kings Road eastbound, Shalford 0% Elmbridge Road (B2130) eastbound towards Cranleigh 33% A281 southbound towards Horsham 20% Loxwood Road (B2133) southbound 4% Westbound towards Farnham and Godalming 5% Westbound towards Haslemere 1% Westbound towards Milford and beyond (A3 and A31) 11% Snowdenham Lane westbound, Bramley 0% Total 100%

Education Trip Distribution

4.8 TEMPro journey purpose for Cranleigh has been used to establish the percentage of trips in the AM and PM peak periods that are to/from education. As a starting point it has then been assumed that half of these trips will be primary school trips and half will be secondary school trips.

4.9 It is proposed to provide a primary school as part of the Dunsfold Park development and it has already been assumed that all primary education and education escort trips would be internal to the site. The only external trips that have been assigned to the highway network are those generated by school employees and these vehicular trips have been distributed using the employment trip distribution summarised in Table 4.2 above.

4.10 With regards to secondary school trips made by residents at Dunsfold Park, in order to provide a conservative estimate, it has been assumed that 60% of secondary education trips are to the secondary school in Cranleigh and that 40% are elsewhere, which are distributed in accordance with the residential trip distribution at this stage. The secondary school split between Cranleigh and other schools in the area and corresponding education distribution will need to be refined once further information on secondary schools in the area is determined.

Dunsfold Park 23 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

5 SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT OPPORTUNITIES

5.1 This section summarises the potential sustainable transport opportunities for the Dunsfold Park site. It does this by providing an overview of what the Sustainable Transport Strategy for the site was in the 2008 planning application and how elements have progressed since that time.

2008 Planning Application Sustainable Transport Strategy

5.2 The 2008 planning application put forward a Sustainable Transport Strategy that was at the heart of the proposals for the Dunsfold Park development. The objective was to create a development where residents could undertake many of their day to day activities on site, and use sustainable means of travel to access off site locations. A number of innovative measures were introduced in order to strongly encourage use of non-car modes. The Sustainable Transport Strategy comprised the following elements:

 A mixed use scheme;  A restrained parking policy;  A high quality bus scheme;  A cordon charge within the development;  A high quality pedestrian network and facilities;  A high quality cycle network and facilities;  A car club and car share scheme;  Community Electric Vehicles;  Smart Technology;  Individualised Marketing; and,  An innovative and robust Site Travel Plan.

5.3 The Inspector made the following comments on this strategy in his report:

 “The Appellants have produced compelling evidence to demonstrate that the development would achieve a very high overall level of sustainability and a low carbon lifestyle, well in excess of what is normally expected in new development and would compare favourably with other leading schemes both in the UK and abroad” (paragraph 369).

Dunsfold Park 24 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 “The Appellants have put a great deal of thought into formulating those measures [Sustainable Transport Strategy] and I accept that there is a high probability that they would be effective” (paragraph 376).  “…..the proposals would benefit the wider area as well as residents of the Eco-Village by introducing a high quality bus service” (paragraph 378).

Changes since 2008

5.4 The vast majority of the elements proposed for the 2008 planning application are still considered to be consistent with latest best practice and will therefore be incorporated into the updated Sustainable Transport Strategy for the site, subject to consultation with SCC.

5.5 However, there are some elements that have evolved since that time as follows:

5.6 Previously, it was proposed to introduce a cordon charge for residents, which would charge residential vehicles each time they left the site (charge to vary by time of day and carbon emissions of the vehicle). Any shortfall between operating costs and revenue of the proposed bus service for the site was to be funded by the proposed cordon charge and employee parking levy.

5.7 Whilst evidence from Barratt Homes was submitted as part of the planning appeal that stated that a cordon charge would “not prevent the company from continuing to pursue its earlier stated interest in the site”, it is considered that alternative ways of encouraging the use of sustainable modes of travel and deterring the use of the private car should be explored.

5.8 One option could be to introduce an annual service charge, which would include, amongst other things, a contribution towards the cost of maintaining a high quality bus service to the site. This approach has been successfully taken at the Caterham Barracks development in Surrey, as summarised in the ‘Making Residential Travel Plans Work’ document published by the DfT in 2005.

5.9 Parking Restraint has been subject to considerable debate in recent years. Government policy is now that local authorities should set their own standards. Furthermore, there is a recognition that appropriate levels of parking should be provided that reflect car ownership and discourage un-designated on-street parking.

Dunsfold Park 25 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

5.10 Bus service enhancements will take account of the current levels of service and where development in the South East of the borough takes place so that, for example, they can take account of the level of development at Dunsfold Park and at Cranleigh.

Proposed Sustainable Transport Opportunities

5.11 A summary of the currently proposed transport strategy is set out in the paragraphs below.

Mixed Use Scheme

5.12 The benefits of the mixed use nature of the development are set out elsewhere in this report.

Walking and Cycling

5.13 The villages and towns in Waverley all have similar characteristics in terms of walking provision. They provide footways within the villages and towns but little provision to connect to other areas. The majority of pedestrian facilities between settlements are rights of way and used primarily for recreation purposes.

5.14 It is interesting to note that the percentage of people that cycle to work in the Farnham wards is an average of 1%. This is the same as those who currently cycle to work in the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward. Therefore, the more rural nature of the existing road network does not impact on cycle usage.

5.15 The 2008 planning application proposed to provide an off-road cycle route (4.2km) connecting the Dunsfold Park site to Cranleigh. This is still considered to be a viable and effective option in improving the connectivity between the two villages. A summary of the route is as follows:

 The route leaves the site via the proposed new site access onto the A281;  A controlled crossing of the A281 is proposed;  The route then follows Lions Lane byway, the surface of which will be improved using a rural surfacing suitable for cyclists and pedestrians;  At its eastern end Lions Lane joins Knowle Lane. Minor improvements can be introduced here to link the route to Footpath 381 which then connects to the Downs Link. The surfacing of this footpath will also need upgrading along with upgrading its

Dunsfold Park 26 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

status to be usable by cyclists. This can be done using the highway authority’s statutory powers.

5.16 Cranleigh is approximately 5km from the site. This is a comfortable cycling distance (approximately 15 minutes) and will allow people to cycle to Cranleigh for work, leisure and education opportunities.

5.17 The effectiveness of good quality cycling provision and encouragement is demonstrated by the approach taken to cycling in South Cambridgeshire. Their policy is to provide a network of off-road cycle routes to facilitate cycling between relatively rural settlements. Whilst the car driver mode share in South Cambridgeshire is higher than in the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward (i.e. 64% compared to 59%), the percentage of residents cycling to work, based on 2011 Census data, is 8% in South Cambridgeshire compared to 1% in the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward.

5.18 Further work will be required to progress the off-site walk and cycle opportunities, in consultation with the local authorities.

Bus Services

5.19 The provision of a quality bus system was one of the key elements of the Sustainable Transport Strategy for the site in the 2008 planning application. It was proposed to provide bus services to Guildford, Cranleigh, Godalming and Horsham, serving existing residential areas along the route. As set out above, if necessary, the bus service was to be subsidised by revenue from the proposed cordon charge and workplace parking levy.

5.20 As noted above, the details of the bus services will reflect the size of the scheme at Dunsfold Park along with other development planned in the area.

5.21 One issue with a conventional bus service is that buses can get delayed in the congested parts of the highway network unless bus priority is provided. There is little scope to provide bus priority in the form of bus lanes within the villages along the A281 corridor. Therefore, alternative off-road bus priority measures have been explored.

5.22 The Downs Link is a 37 mile footpath and bridleway linking the North Downs Way in Surrey with the South Downs Way in West Sussex. Within the Dunsfold Park study area the Downs Link routes to the east of the A281 between Shalford and Cranleigh along the disused

Dunsfold Park 27 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

‘Cranleigh Line’ railway line. Whilst it is acknowledged that it is an important local asset, we consider there a number of ways it could be used to further enhance sustainable transport solutions in the area. These solutions range from using a short length of the route to provide relief to Bramley for buses (as well as existing cycles and pedestrians using the route) to the use of the route from Cranleigh to provide a dedicated bus link that could serve both Cranleigh and Dunsfold Park and the villages along the route to Guildford.

5.23 The potential options are illustrated in Figures 5.1 to 5.4 and are described as follows:

 Option 1: Figure 5.1 illustrates the Downs Link being utilised between Shalford and Cranleigh with a connection to the Dunsfold Park site via existing roads (i.e. Elmbridge Road and A281).  Option 2: Figure 5.2 illustrates the Downs Link being utilised between Shalford and Cranleigh with a connection to the Dunsfold Park site via existing roads (i.e. Knowle Lane and Alfold Road) and a new road linking the existing roads.  Option 3: Figure 5.3 illustrates the Downs Link being utilised between Shalford and Cranleigh, continuing along the Downs Link to the south of Cranleigh. This option provides a new road between the Downs Link and Alfold Road to connect through the Dunsfold Park site.  Option 4: Figure 5.4 illustrates a bus route on the A281 between the Dunsfold Park site and Guildford with a bypass of Bramley utilising the Downs Link.

5.24 It should be noted that the more direct connections from Dunsfold Park to the Downs Link utilise, in part, Lions Lane which is a byeway and is discussed under the Walking and Cycling section above.

5.25 There are many factors that would go into determining the preferred option. Routes via Cranleigh have the advantage of picking up passengers from both Cranleigh and Dunsfold Park. However they clearly have a more significant cost and impact on the Downs Link.

5.26 We have undertaken initial investigations of the above routes and consider them to be feasible. However, further detailed analysis and discussions will be required to determine the preferred option.

Dunsfold Park 28 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Access to Rail

5.27 The 2011 Census data shows that 12% of existing residents within the Chiddingfold and Dunsfold ward travel to work by rail, which is higher than both the Farnham wards (average 9%) and the Cranleigh wards (average 5%). Further analysis is required to better understand where people are travelling to and from by rail and what measures could be implemented to improve access to rail. However, at this stage, it is envisaged that residents would link to rail stations by bus.

Car Club and Car Share Schemes

5.28 A car club and car share scheme will be provided on site for those travelling to and from the site. Liftshare are the prime operators of car share schemes in the UK and have an impressive track record of success.

Community Vehicles

5.29 It is proposed to run a community bus service within the development and possibly to Cranleigh that would be tailored to the needs of the community and use a sustainable fuel source, probably electric.

Smart Technology

5.30 Advances in smart card technology allow greater flexibility in providing residents with travel choices (i.e. using one card for all travel options).

Site Wide Travel Plan

5.31 The Travel Plan will be developed to serve residents and employees on the site and offer financial incentives where appropriate. In particular a personal travel planning service will be provided. This is an area that has grown considerably in recent years and allows transport professionals to provide straightforward information on travel choices using the latest technology.

Effectiveness of Sustainable Transport Measures

5.32 It should be noted that no account has been made in this report of the potential mode shift that could be brought about by the Sustainable Transport Strategy for the site. However,

Dunsfold Park 29 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

there is now a plethora of empirical evidence on the effects of introducing sustainable transport measures.

5.33 As an overall indication of the potential effectiveness of sustainable transport measures, the ‘Smarter Choices’ research undertaken by the Department for Transport (DfT) in 2005 found that an intensive smarter choices programme could cut urban peak-hour traffic by 21% and off-peak traffic by 13%.

5.34 Evidence of the potential mode shift of various sustainable transport measures is summarised as follows:

Individualised Marketing 5.35 Nine TravelSmart projects were undertaken between 2005 and 2010 in different towns around the UK. TravelSmart aims to reverse the trend towards increased car use by providing people with tailor-made information and support they need to choose to walk, cycle and use public transport more often, through the process of Individualised Marketing. The results of these nine Individualised Marketing projects showed a reduction in car driver trips of between 10 and 14%, with the reduction in trips switching to sustainable travel modes.

Car Sharing 5.36 The term 'car sharing' refers to two or more people traveling together by car for all or part of a trip. Evidence that informed the ‘Making Car Sharing and Car Clubs Work’ good practice guide published by the DfT in 2005 demonstrates that car sharing schemes have produced significant increases in multi occupancy car use (a 21% increase on average).

Car Clubs 5.37 UK studies suggest that each car club car typically replaces at least 6 private cars. Research in car clubs (Carplus UK member survey 2008) has found the following travel behaviour changes:

 Drive less: Members use cars for a third of the number of trips of non-members (23% journeys versus 65%), and members reduce their mileage by 50% once they start using a club.  Walk / cycle more: Car club members showed a 15% increase in use of cycling and walking post joining a car club.

Dunsfold Park 30 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 Use public transport more: Members use public transport three times more than non- members (32% journeys versus 9%).

5.38 Car club users also typically give up owning a first or second car on joining; others defer purchasing one, preferring to use the car club vehicle instead. Survey results show that over half of Scotland’s car club members owned a car before joining a car club, and just over a quarter after becoming members. Car clubs also reduce the number of cars purchased. A quarter of Scottish members said they would have bought a car had they not joined.

Dunsfold Park 31 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

6 POTENTIAL HIGHWAY ENHANCEMENT MEASURES

6.1 The SCC STA assessed the relative traffic effects of different options for providing housing within Waverley borough. The analysis undertaken by SCC showed that there will be impacts on journey times and delays wherever development is placed. In fact the STA demonstrates that there will be greater congestion impacts if development is focussed around Farnham rather than in the south and east of the borough and in particular at Dunsfold Park.

6.2 The STA did not include any mitigation and therefore, the next stage is for SCC to consider potential mitigation for the Waverley Local Plan both in the form of highway improvements and measures to reduce the need to travel and the reliance on the private car.

6.3 DAL is keen to work with SCC and WBC on this next stage and this section summarises the potential highway mitigation options that have been developed to mitigate impacts associated with the Dunsfold Park site. It also sets out what highway works were proposed as part of the 2008 planning application and how the mitigation package has progressed since that time.

2008 Planning Application Highway Mitigation

6.4 The following highway improvements were proposed as part of the 2008 planning application, none of which were agreed with SCC at the time:

 Junctions of A281/A248 Kings Road and A281/Broadford Road: The junction of A281/A248 Kings Road is an existing roundabout junction and the junction of A281/Broadford Road is an existing priority junction. Both junctions are within Shalford village, to the north of the site, and are in close proximity to one another. As part of the planning appeal it was proposed to widen and signalise the junction of A281/Broadford Road as illustrated in Drawing Number 83724_A_07 included at Appendix C.  Junction of A281/Elmbridge Road (Nanhurst Crossroads): This is an existing signal controlled junction that provides access to Cranleigh to the east and Dunsfold Park (Stovolds Hill access) to the west. It was proposed to widen the approaches to this junction as set out in Drawing Number 83724_A_01 included at Appendix C. The junction design was amended post application to reflect the Stage 1 Safety Audit comments.

Dunsfold Park 32 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 Junction of A281/A29 Stane Street: This is an existing roundabout junction that is located to the south-east of the Dunsfold Park site on the route to Horsham. The 2008 planning application proposed to signalise this junction as shown in Drawing Number 83724_A_03 included at Appendix C. However, the analysis provided at the planning appeal demonstrated that the junction operated within capacity with the development traffic and therefore the proposed improvement was not considered to be necessary.

Current Highway Mitigation Opportunities

6.5 Vectos on behalf of DAL has invested considerable resource in developing a Paramics micro- simulation model of the A281 corridor between Alfold Crossways and Shalford. The model has been used to inform this Preliminary Assessment in terms of the potential effects of the Dunsfold Park development and mitigation opportunities along the A281 corridor. It is recognised that the development traffic may have an impact beyond the A281 corridor but, given the trip distribution and the knowledge gained from the 2008 planning application, it is considered that the main effects will be along this corridor.

6.6 Based on the modelling undertaken to inform this Preliminary Transport Assessment, a number of highway improvements have been developed. The full range of potential improvements would not be required for all three development scenarios for Dunsfold Park site and in any case would be implemented in a phased manner.

A281/Kings Road and A281/Broadford Road, Shalford

6.7 Two options have been explored for these two junctions in Shalford as follows:

 Option 1: Widening at the junction of A281/Broadford Road and converting the existing priority junction to a signal controlled junction. This option is consistent with that put forward at the public inquiry and is illustrated in Drawing Number 110047_A_11 included at Appendix D.  Option 2: Widening at the junctions of A281/Broadford Road and A281/Kings Road and converting the existing priority and roundabout junctions to signal controlled three arm junctions. This option was not previously explored as part of the 2008 planning application/appeal and is illustrated in Drawing Number 110047_A_10 included at Appendix D.

Dunsfold Park 33 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

6.8 Highway boundary information has been obtained from SCC and is included in Appendix D. It is recognised that both options for the Shalford junctions go beyond the existing highway boundary but that the land is existing common land owned by Guildford Borough Council with no physical impediment to implementing the proposals.

6.9 It is likely that there would be a further refinement of the junction layout at this location that seeks to balance capacity enhancements and land take. We would welcome the opportunity to explore this further in consultation with SCC, once they have reviewed this report.

A281/Station Road, Bramley

6.10 The junction of A281/Station Road/Snowdenham Lane in Bramley is an existing mini- roundabout that is the main junction within the village. Three options have been explored for improving capacity at the junction as follows:

 Option 1: Converting the mini-roundabout to a four arm signal controlled junction and restricting Snowdenham Lane so that traffic can continue to turn into Snowdenham Lane from the junction and route westbound but only traffic from houses on Snowdenham Lane can route eastbound and turn out of Snowdenham Lane at the signal controlled junction. This would significantly reduce the demand on the Snowdenham Lane arm of the junction so that this arm could be demand actuated. This option is illustrated in Drawing Numbers 110047_A_04 and 110047_A_07 included at Appendix D. This would have the advantage of improving the environment for properties in Snowden Lane by removing eastbound through traffic. Traffic currently making this manoeuvre would be diverted to Foxburrow Hill Road or may reassign earlier in their journey.  Option 2: This is the same as Option 1 but also utilises the Downs Link to provide a one- way northbound bypass of the A281/Station Road junction to be used by buses and some local traffic (section south of Station Road) and buses only (section north of Station Road). The existing traffic that turns right from A281 into Station Road would instead turn off the A281 onto the Downs Link to the south of Bramley in order to access Station Road. This would improve the capacity of the A281/Station Road junction within Bramley village. Buses would also be able to continue to route northbound across Station Road along the Downs Link to re-join the A281 to the north of Bramley near the

Dunsfold Park 34 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

junction of A281/Trunley Heath Road. This option is illustrated in Drawing Numbers 110047_A_05, 110047_A_07 and 110047_A_08 included at Appendix D.  Option 3: This is the same as Option 1 but also utilises the Downs Link to provide a one- way northbound bypass of the A281/Station Road junction to be used by buses only (section south of Station Road) and buses and some local traffic (section north of Station Road). The existing traffic that turns right from Station Road onto the A281 would instead turn right from Station Road onto the Downs Link and would re-join the A281 to the north of Bramley near the junction of A281/Trunley Heath Road. Buses would be able to use the entire ‘Bramley bypass’ northbound along the Downs Link which would route from just to the south of Bramley to the junction of A281/Trunley Heath Road to the north. This option is illustrated in Drawing Numbers 110047_A_06, 110047_07 and 110047_A_08 included at Appendix D. As well as improving junction operation this option also reduces traffic passing the school which will be of benefit, particularly as children are required to cross the road between the primary and secondary schools.

A281/Barrihurst Road

6.11 Based on the fixed assignment modelling to date there is an increase in demand for the right turn from the A281 into Barrihurst Road, which provides access to the Dunsfold Park site via the Stovolds Hill access. In order to increase safety at this bend and reduce right turning traffic blocking southbound ahead traffic the potential for providing a right turn ghost island has been explored. This option is illustrated in Drawing Number 110047_A_02 Rev A included at Appendix D.

A281/Elmbridge Road

6.12 The proposed improvement to the A281/Elmbridge Road junction that was included within the planning appeal is still considered to be an appropriate and deliverable solution for this junction. The scheme is contained within highway land and would increase capacity. The improvement is illustrated in Drawing Number 83724_A_01 included at Appendix D.

A281/Site Access

6.13 Within the 2008 planning application a new roundabout junction was proposed to be provided on the A281 to provide access to the Dunsfold Park site. Further analysis post application demonstrated that a signal controlled three arm junction would operate more

Dunsfold Park 35 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

efficiently in capacity terms. The proposed signal controlled site access is illustrated in Drawing Number 110047_A_09 included at Appendix A.

Alfold Crossways

6.14 The SCC STA concluded that the Alfold Crossways junction (A281/B2133 Loxwood Road junction to the south of the Dunsfold Park site) was the junction within the modelled network with the highest increase in average journey delay for the scenarios that included development at Dunsfold Park. However, further analysis of the STA modelling results showed that even with 3,400 houses at Dunsfold Park, the junction would operate with considerable spare capacity in 2031.

6.15 The Alfold Crossways junction has been included within the Paramics model in order to determine if any improvements may be required at this junction. At this stage, based on the modelling results to date, no improvements have been proposed.

Dunsfold Park 36 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

7 PRELIMINARY RESIDUAL TRAFFIC EFFECTS

7.1 This section summarises the preliminary assessment that has been undertaken to assess the effects of the proposed development scenarios for Dunsfold Park and considers the potential phasing of the highway enhancement schemes summarised in the previous section.

2014 Base

7.2 A Paramics micro-simulation model has been built of the A281 corridor between Alfold Crossways and Shalford in order to provide a corridor wide assessment of the potential effects of development at Dunsfold Park. Paramics is a considerably more responsive and precise modelling tool than conventional programmes that are used to assess individual junctions and which were used to assess the 2008 planning application proposals. Figure 7.1 below illustrates the extent of the Paramics model.

Figure 7.1: A281 Corridor Model Network Area

7.3 The Paramics model includes the following junctions:

 A281 / A248 Kings Road, Shalford (3 arm roundabout);  A281 / A248 Broadford Road, Shalford (3 arm priority junction);

Dunsfold Park 37 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 A281 / Station Road, Bramley (4 arm mini-roundabout);  A281 / Barrihurst Lane (3 arm priority junction);  A281 / Elmbridge Road, Cranleigh (4 arm signalised staggered junction); and  A281/Loxwood Road referred to as Alfold Crossways (priority junction).

7.4 Traffic data for the study area was collected in March 2014 to be used to develop the Paramics model. A summary of the data collection exercise is included as Appendix E of this report. The Paramics model has been validated against the traffic data and is considered to be fit for purpose. The model along with a Local Model Validation Report and Forecasting Report will be made available to SCC for their own review.

7.5 The results of the modelling are contained in a spreadsheet that will be issued with the model to SCC for technical review. The results are summarised within the text later in this section.

2031 Reference Case

7.6 The recent WBC consultation on their emerging Local Plan included four housing options for the borough (refer to Table 2.2 of this report). WBC Option 1 includes no housing at Dunsfold Park but does propose other development that would impact to some extent on the A281 corridor (i.e. 1,800 houses at Cranleigh and 1,000 houses at the Waverley villages). Therefore, even if no development is provided at Dunsfold Park there will be traffic effects on the A281 corridor as a result of planned growth in Waverley borough. This alternate with a collection of smaller sites would be more difficult for WBC and SCC to form a comprehensive mitigation strategy and to deliver it.

7.7 In order to develop a 2031 Reference Case model to compare against the various development options at Dunsfold Park, the vehicular trips associated with WBC Option 1 have been estimated (based on the residential trip rates set out Section 3 of this report) and assigned to the highway network using 2011 Census data for the journey to work.

Modelling Scenarios

7.8 Table 7.1 below summarises the modelling scenarios that have been run using the Paramics model.

Dunsfold Park 38 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 7.1: Modelling Scenarios Scenario Houses at Dunsfold Reference Park 1 2014 Base 0 2 2031 Reference Case 0 3 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option A 1,800 4 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option B 1,800 5 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option C 2,600 6 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option C 3,400 7 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option D 2,600 8 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option D 3,400 9 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option E 2,600 10 2031 Reference Case + Dunsfold Park + Mitigation Option E 3,400

7.9 The mitigation options referred to in Table 7.1 above are summarised in Table 7.2 below. All of the scenarios include the same improvements at A281/Barrihurst Lane and A281/Elmbridge Road. They only vary with respect to improvements at Shalford and Bramley.

Dunsfold Park 39 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Table 7.2: Highway Mitigation Options Mitigation Junction Improvement Option A281/Kings Road A281/Station Road, A281/Barrihurst A281/Elmbridge and Bramley Lane Road, Cranleigh A281/Broadford Road, Shalford Widening and No capacity Right turn ghost Widen signalisation of improvements island on A281 carriageway at A281/Broadford Rd (Drawing No signalised A (Drawing No 110047_A_02 at junction (Drawing 110047_A_11 at Appendix D) No 83724_A_01 Appendix D) at Appendix D) B Widening and No capacity Right turn ghost Widen signalisation of improvements island on A281 carriageway at A281/Kings Road (Drawing No signalised and A281/Broadford 110047_A_02 at junction (Drawing Rd (Drawing No Appendix D) No 83724_A_01 110047_A_10 at at Appendix D) Appendix D) C Widening and Signalised junction with Right turn ghost Widen signalisation of restricted access island on A281 carriageway at A281/Kings Road Snowdenham Lane (Drawing No signalised and A281/Broadford (Drawing No 110047_A_02 at junction (Drawing Rd (Drawing No 110047_A_04 and 07 at Appendix D) No 83724_A_01 110047_A_10 at Appendix D) at Appendix D) Appendix D) D Widening and Option C plus Downs Right turn ghost Widen signalisation of Link bypass for buses island on A281 carriageway at A281/Kings Road and cars southern (Drawing No signalised and A281/Broadford section and buses only 110047_A_02 at junction (Drawing Rd (Drawing No northern section Appendix D) No 83724_A_01 110047_A_10 at (Drawing No at Appendix D) Appendix D) 110047_A_05, 07 and 08 at Appendix D) E Widening and Option C plus Downs Right turn ghost Widen signalisation of Link bypass for buses island on A281 carriageway at A281/Kings Road only southern section (Drawing No signalised and A281/Broadford and buses and cars 110047_A_02 at junction (Drawing Rd (Drawing No northern section Appendix D) No 83724_A_01 110047_A_10 at (Drawing No at Appendix D) Appendix D) 110047_A_06, 07 and 08 at Appendix D)

Dunsfold Park 40 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Potential Residual Effects

7.10 The complete spreadsheet with the modelling results will be provided to SCC but a summary of the results is provided in Appendix F of this report.

1,800 Houses at Dunsfold Park

7.11 Two mitigation strategies have been tested for 1,800 houses at Dunsfold Park as summarised in Table 7.2 above. No mitigation has been tested at Bramley for 1,800 houses and the only variation in the two mitigation strategies is the extent of mitigation at Shalford.

7.12 The preliminary modelling results show the following:

Queuing

 Shalford: Mitigation Option A (i.e. smaller level of mitigation at Shalford) does not sufficiently mitigate the effects of the Dunsfold Park site at the junction of A281/Kings Road. However, it does mitigate the effects of the development at the A281/Broadford Road junction. The larger level of improvement at the Shalford junctions (i.e. Mitigation Option B) provides a significant betterment in terms of capacity.  Bramley: Overall there is predicted to be a similar level of average hourly maximum queues in Bramley as in the 2031 Reference Case. The largest increases in queues are on Snowdenham Lane in the AM peak hour (increase from 20 to 29 vehicles) and A281 southbound in the PM peak hour (increase from 11 to 16 vehicles).  Cranleigh: There is predicted to be a significant betterment in average hourly maximum queues at A281/Elmbridge Road junction and the improvement at the A281/Barrihurst Lane junction mitigates the impact when compared to the 2031 Reference Case.  Alfold Crossways: No discernible impact is predicted at this junction.

Journey Time

7.13 The Paramics model allows the average time taken to travel through the modelled highway network to be compared for the ‘with’ and ‘without’ development scenarios (i.e. comparison of 2031 Reference Case with the 2031 Reference Case + 1,800 houses Dunsfold Park + mitigation). Whilst the initial queuing results show that the larger mitigation scheme at Shalford (Mitigation Option B) may be required, when looking at the overall journey times through the network it may be that the journey times are not unduly effected with Mitigation Option A. The journey time results show the following:

Dunsfold Park 41 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

 AM peak hour: For both Mitigation Options A and B there is a similar average journey time along the A281 southbound when compared to the 2031 Reference Case and a noticeable betterment in average journey time along the A281 northbound.  PM peak hour: For both Mitigation Options A and B there is a noticeable betterment in average journey time along the A281 southbound when compared to the 2031 Reference Case and a similar average journey time along the A281 northbound to the 2031 Reference Case.

Average Speed 7.14 Another useful output from the Paramics model is the average speed per vehicle. The model results show that in the AM peak period (07:00-10:00) the average speed improves for both Mitigation Options A and B when compared with the 2031 Reference Case. However, in the PM peak period (16:00-19:00) the average speed reduces slightly (i.e. from 35 to 31 mph) for Mitigation Option A when compared to the 2031 Reference Case but Mitigation Option B provides a betterment in average vehicle speed.

Conclusion 7.15 It is therefore concluded that 1,800 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park. With the mitigation package proposed there is a relatively small effect on queuing, journey times and speeds. At this stage we consider that Mitigation Package A is appropriate but further work is required to refine the analysis.

2,600 Houses at Dunsfold Park

7.16 With regards to the scenario testing for 2,600 houses at Dunsfold Park, three scenarios have been run and the only variation in the scenarios is the level of mitigation at Bramley. All other highway improvements are consistent across the three scenarios for 2,600 houses.

7.17 The preliminary modelling results show the following:

Queuing

 Shalford: For 2,600 houses at Dunsfold Park, the larger level of improvement at the Shalford junctions provides a significant betterment in terms of capacity.  Bramley: Mitigation Option C (i.e. signalised junction with restricted access for Snowdenham Lane) still results in a noticeable increase in queuing on the A281 mainline in the AM and PM peak hours. By utilising the Downs Link for buses and to remove

Dunsfold Park 42 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

some traffic from the A281/Station Road junction (i.e. either Mitigation Options D or E), the impact on queuing is mitigated.  Cranleigh: There is predicted to be significant betterment in average hourly maximum queues at A281/Elmbridge Road junction and mitigated the impact at A281/Barrihurst Lane junction when compared to the 2031 Reference Case.  Alfold Crossways: No discernible impact is predicted at this junction.

Journey Time 7.18 Whilst the initial queuing results show that there would be a noticeable increase in queuing if just Mitigation Option C was implemented at Bramley, it may be that the overall journey time through the A281 corridor is not severely impacted as a result of betterment elsewhere along the corridor. Taking a further look at the journey time data shows the following:

 AM peak hour: There is a negligible increase in average journey time along the A281 southbound for all three options tested for 2,600 houses at Dunsfold Park when compared to the 2031 Reference Case. However, there is a significant increase in average journey time along the A281 northbound corridor for Mitigation Option C (i.e. no utilisation of the Downs Link). Both options that utilise the Downs Link provide a betterment in average journey time along the A281 northbound corridor in the AM peak hour. Option D (i.e. removal of right turn from A281/Station Road junction and route along Downs Link) provides a greater betterment than Option E.  PM peak hour: For all three Mitigation Options there is a noticeable and similar betterment in average journey time along the A281 southbound when compared to the 2031 Reference Case and a similar average journey time along the A281 northbound to the 2031 Reference Case.

Average Speed

7.19 The model results show that in the AM peak period (07:00-10:00) the average speed improves for all three mitigation options when compared with the 2031 Reference Case. Option C only provides a 2mph increase in average speed (i.e. 40mph to 42 mph) but Options D and E provide a greater increase in average speed, with Option D performing the best in the AM peak period. In the PM peak period (16:00-19:00) the average speed increases for all three mitigation options when compared to the 2031 Reference Case.

Dunsfold Park 43 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Conclusion 7.20 It is therefore concluded that 2,600 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park. In relation to mitigation at Bramley a number of options exist. However with use of the Downs Link and restrictions on the movements on Snowdenham Lane an overall improvement in journey time and average speed along the corridor can be achieved. Further work and discussion with stakeholders is required to refine the appropriate mitigation package.

3,400 Houses at Dunsfold Park

7.21 With regards to the scenario testing for 3,400 houses at Dunsfold Park, the same three scenarios have been run as for 2,600 houses (i.e. the only variation in the scenarios is the level of mitigation at Bramley). All other highway improvements are consistent across the three scenarios for 3,400 houses.

7.22 The preliminary modelling results show the following:

Queuing

 Shalford: For 3,400 houses at Dunsfold Park, the larger level of improvement at the Shalford junctions provides a significant betterment in terms of capacity.  Bramley: Mitigation Option C (i.e. signalised junction with restricted access for Snowdenham Lane) still results in a noticeable increase in queuing on the A281 mainline in the AM and PM peak hours. By utilising the Downs Link for buses and to remove some traffic from the A281/Station Road junction (i.e. either Mitigation Options D or E), the impact on queuing is largely mitigated, particularly for Option E.  Cranleigh: There is predicted to be significant betterment in average hourly maximum queues at A281/Elmbridge Road junction and mitigated the impact at A281/Barrihurst Lane junction when compared to the 2031 Reference Case.  Alfold Crossways: No discernible impact is predicted at this junction in the AM peak hour. In the PM peak hour there is no increase in queues at the junction with the exception of the A281 southbound arm, with queues increasing from 13 to 22 when compared to the 2031 Reference Case.

Journey Time 7.23 Whilst the initial queuing results show that there would be a noticeable increase in queuing if just Mitigation Option C was implemented at Bramley, it may be that the overall journey

Dunsfold Park 44 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

time through the A281 corridor is not severely impacted as a result of betterment elsewhere along the corridor. Taking a further look at the journey time data shows the following:

 AM peak hour: there is a negligible increase in average journey time along the A281 southbound for all three options tested for 3,400 houses at Dunsfold Park when compared to the 2031 Reference Case. However, there is a significant increase in average journey time along the A281 northbound corridor for Mitigation Option C (i.e. no utilisation of the Downs Link). Both options that utilise the Downs Link provide a betterment in average journey time along the A281 northbound corridor in the AM peak hour. Option D (i.e. removal of right turn from A281/Station Road junction and route along Downs Link) provides a greater betterment than Option E.  PM peak hour: for all three Mitigation Options there is a noticeable and similar betterment in average journey time along the A281 southbound when compared to the 2031 Reference Case and a similar average journey time along the A281 northbound to the 2031 Reference Case.

Average Speed 7.24 The model results show that in the AM peak period (07:00-10:00) the average speed improves for all three mitigation options when compared with the 2031 Reference Case. Option C only provides a 1mph increase in average speed (i.e. 40mph to 41 mph) but Options D and E provide a greater increase in average speed, with Options D and E performing similarly.

Conclusion 7.25 It is therefore concluded that a mixed use development including for up to 3,400 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park with an acceptable impact on the transport network. In relation to mitigation at Bramley a number of options exist. However with use of the Downs Link and restrictions on the movements on Snowdenham Lane an overall improvement in journey time and average speed along the corridor can be achieved. Further work and discussion with stakeholders is required to refine the appropriate mitigation package.

Dunsfold Park 45 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Summary

7.26 The results of the analysis summarised above demonstrate that a mixed use development with up to 3,400 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park with appropriate highway enhancements.

7.27 The precise details of the enhancements and in particular their phasing will be the subject of further analysis and discussions with stakeholders. However, it can be seen that the 1,800 units can be accommodated at Dunsfold Park along with an appropriate mitigation strategy that can be accommodated within the highway boundary and land under the control of DAL or the local authorities and would require no mitigation at Bramley.

7.28 In practice it is likely that following initial phases of development, the traffic effects will be monitored as the development progresses under a monitor and manage regime. This will allow the effects on travel patterns to be monitored and the need for mitigation to be assessed, remembering that government policy encourages a reduction in vehicle trips through travel planning rather provision of physical infrastructure. This is a similar approach that has been taken recently by the Highways Agency and Cambridgeshire County Council for the Alconbury Weald development, which will provide 5,000 houses and 8,000 jobs as well as for the Stanton Ironworks site in Northamptonshire.

Dunsfold Park 46 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

8 SUMMARY OF CHANGES SINCE THE APPEAL DECISION

8.1 The Inspector’s Report for the Dunsfold Park 2008 planning application set out a number of issues with the transport aspects of the scheme at that time. This section considers the transport issues raised by the Inspector and provides commentary on the validity of the statements in today’s context.

Location

8.2 First, the Inspector stated that the site is “in an isolated rural location” (IR paragraph 372) and also made reference to the “inherently unsustainable location of the site” (IR paragraph 376). Taking these points in turn:

 The isolation of a place is defined by its geographic location in relation to its surroundings. The Dunsfold Park site is not considered to be any more ‘isolated’ than Cranleigh, and in some respects is less isolated in terms of distance to Guildford, the Higher Tier Centres in Waverley and the strategic road network. Furthermore, it is the proposals rather than the existing site that need to be considered. The mixed use proposals will create a community up to 78% the size of Cranleigh and it is accepted that Cranleigh is a viable community.  With regards to the sustainability of the location of Dunsfold Park (i.e. prior to any measures to improve sustainability), Table 8.1 below is based on the latest 2011 Census data for journey to work and demonstrates that residents in Dunsfold are no more car dependent (59% car driver mode share) than residents in Farnham (63% car driver mode share), which is perceived by WBC to be a more sustainable location.  The use of the word “inherent” by the Inspector to describe the unsustainability of the site, suggests that the sustainability of a location is fixed. This is contrary to latest national planning policy set out in NPPF, which states in paragraph 17 that planning should “actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling, and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.” This suggests that the sustainability of a location can be improved. NPPF also emphasises that solutions will vary from urban to rural areas (paragraph 29).

Dunsfold Park 47 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

8.3 Table 8.1 below summarises the 2011 Census car driver mode share for resident journey to work for wards around Farnham and Dunsfold/Cranleigh.

Table8.1: Census 2011 Journey to Work (Residents) Area Ward Percentage Car Driver Farnham Farnham Bourne 60% Farnham Castle 53% Farnham Firgrove 58% Farnham Hale and Heath End 72% Farnham Moor Park 54% Farnham Shortheath and Boundstone 65% Farnham Upper Hale 69% Farnham Weybourne and Badshot Lea 72% Farnham Wrecclesham and Rowledge 67% Average Farnham 63% Dunsfold and Cranleigh Chiddingfold and Dunsfold 59% Cranleigh West 61% Cranleigh East 66% Average Dunsfold/Cranleigh 62% Waverley Borough 60%

Congestion on the A281

8.4 Secondly, the Inspector stated that “there is severe congestion on the A281” (IR paragraph 372). Whilst it is acknowledged that there is peak hour congestion at certain points on the A281, it is not considered to be ‘severe’ relative to both the rest of Waverley borough and the South East of England.

8.5 The SCC STA is very useful in this respect in providing an overall understanding of the baseline traffic conditions across Waverley borough that was not available at the time of the appeal. It is evident from the SCC STA that Farnham currently experiences the most congestion in the borough and, relative to this, the junctions along the A281 experience far less congestion. This is illustrated in Figure 8.1 below, which is Figure 4.5 of the STA.

Dunsfold Park 48 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

Figure 8.1 – 2031 Do Minimum Average Junction Delay for the AM Weekday Peak Period

8.6 Therefore, had the Inspector had the borough wide baseline traffic evidence available to him at the time of the appeal, he may have come to a different conclusion about baseline traffic conditions on the A281.

Traffic Growth

8.7 As set out in the April 2014 Vectos note entitled ‘Transport Input for SCC Modelling’ (included as part of the supporting documentation for the WBC consultation) analysis of Department for Transport traffic data for the A281 corridor demonstrates that there has been no growth in traffic on the A281 since 2000.

8.8 Notwithstanding this, the 2008 planning application applied TEMPro traffic growth to the 2008 baseline traffic data to provide a 2022 Reference Case position. At the time of the application there was no emerging spatial housing strategy for Waverley and therefore, the traffic growth accounted for the full TEMPro housing provision of nearly 4,400 houses, which were all assumed to route traffic along the A281. This was an unrealistic scenario in that the TEMPro housing allocation would have inevitably been dispersed throughout Waverley rather than focused along the A281 corridor.

Dunsfold Park 49 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

8.9 The planning application then assumed that the proposed 2,600 houses at Dunsfold Park would be provided in addition to and not part of the TEMPro housing allocation. Again this is unrealistic in light of the current WBC consultation on the Local Plan which includes Dunsfold Park in three of the four Waverley housing options.

Traffic Effects of Dunsfold Park

8.10 The Inspector considered that the additional vehicular movements from Dunsfold Park would put “severe and unacceptable pressure on an overstretched road network” (IR paragraph 375). It can be seen from the evidence in the SCC STA that the road network in the vicinity of the site is not currently ‘overstretched’, particularly when compared to other locations in the borough such as Farnham.

8.11 The assessment of traffic impacts for the planning application was based on a series of individual junction models to assess the residual impacts of the development, taking into account the proposed Transport Strategy for Dunsfold Park (albeit by applying conservative reductions in traffic). This assessment identified some junctions would operate close to or over capacity in the baseline and ‘with development’ scenarios, whilst the majority of junctions would operate within capacity. This assessment was limited in terms of a number of elements as follows:

 Unlike the recent SCC modelling, the assessment for the planning application was based on a fixed assignment of development traffic and background traffic and therefore there was no route choice available to traffic. This provides an overly robust assessment as, in reality, traffic changes route and time of travel in order to reach ‘equilibrium’.  Whilst the assessment in the planning application provided an indication of the capacity of individual junctions, it was not able to consider the effects of development traffic along whole routes. For example, it might be that traffic will experience an increase in delay at certain junctions along the A281 corridor but, with mitigation in place, it may be that traffic is not unduly delayed along the corridor as a whole.

8.12 In order to address the limitations of the 2008 application assessment, a Paramics micro- simulation model has been built of the A281 corridor. Paramics is a considerably more responsive and precise modelling tool than conventional programmes that are used to assess individual junctions and which were used to assess the appeal proposals.

Dunsfold Park 50 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

8.13 In addition, the SCC strategic model of Waverley provides a useful tool for analysing the behaviour of traffic, including route choice. We are keen to work with WBC and SCC to better understand the outputs of the strategic traffic model so that we can feed it into our detailed analysis.

Mitigation Strategy

8.14 Whilst the Inspector acknowledged that a great deal of thought had been put into formulating the package of sustainable transport measures for Dunsfold Park and that there was a “high probability that they would be effective”, he considered that “their failure would be very severe given the scale of the development” (IR paragraph 376).

8.15 The current WBC consultation considers four housing options, all of which would provide circa 8,500 houses within Waverley by 2031. The only strategic site that is being considered within the WBC consultation is Dunsfold Park and the remaining sites are much smaller. It could therefore be said that it is the very scale of the development at Dunsfold Park that provides greater certainty that a step change in mode shift can be delivered through both a mix of land uses, to reduce the need to travel, and the implementation of a Sustainable Transport Strategy to reduce the use of the private car. A more dispersed housing strategy through the delivery of a series of smaller developments is unlikely to provide the same mode shift, regardless of location.

8.16 The Inspector was concerned that if the sustainable measures failed, there would be a “very severe” impact on the highway network. However, the SCC STA has tested a higher level of housing on the Dunsfold Park site to that previously proposed (i.e. 3,400 houses compared to 2,600 units) with no sustainable transport or highway mitigation and the results show that there would not be “very severe” impact but does highlight areas of the network that mitigation should be concentrated on.

Summary

8.17 It needs to be recognised that the Local Plan process is very different from that undertaken in connection with the previous planning application for a mixed use scheme. Those studies were undertaken in isolation and contained no comparative assessment to other locations in the borough, a fact recognised by the Inspector and Secretary of State. Indeed the Inspector recognised that “When seen in the context of other options the appeal proposals may well

Dunsfold Park 51 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

prove to be the best solution for meeting the South East Plan housing requirement“. Since the time of the appeal, policy has moved on, particularly with the publication of NPPF, and DAL’s own analysis set out in this Preliminary Transport Assessment has sought to both address the particular issues raised by the Inspector and look afresh at the proposals for the site in the current context.

Dunsfold Park 52 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014

9 NEXT STEPS

9.1 This report has built on the helpful analysis contained within the STA undertaken by Surrey CC. Following submission of this report we are keen to work with Waverley BC, Surrey CC and other stakeholders to refine and agree the analysis.

9.2 In particular we recognise that Surrey will wish to examine the Paramics model. We are content to issue the model to them along with supporting information and provide whatever other information is requested.

9.3 We would also seek to draw on information that lies behind the STA (such as vehicle assignment) and seek to agree certain parameters for the assessments so that the overall objective analysis can proceed in on an agreed basis.

IMPORTANT SECTION BREAK NEXT – DO NOT DELETE PAST THIS CHEVRON >

Dunsfold Park 53 Preliminary Transport Assessment November 2014