Supporting Planning Statement

SUPPORTING PLANNING STATEMENT

PLANNING APPLICATION

FOR

THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SATELLITE STOCKING YARD TO SERVE OPERATIONS FROM GONSAL QUARRY AT NORTON FARM, NORTH OF CONDOVER

DECEMBER 2020

BLANK

CONTENTS 1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Description of Proposals ...... 1 1.2 Content of Statement ...... 2 2 Site Context ...... 3 2.1 Application Site ...... 3 3 Planning Policy ...... 4 3.1 Introduction ...... 4 3.2 Development Plan ...... 4 3.3 National Policy Guidance ...... 7 3.4 Emerging Policy Guidance...... 8 3.5 Key Development Plan and other Policy Considerations ...... 8 4 Proposed Development ...... 9 4.1 Reasoning and Justification ...... 9 4.2 Description of Operations ...... 10 5 Environmental Considerations of the Development ...... 11 5.1 Introduction ...... 11 5.2 Landscape and Visual Assessment ...... 11 5.3 Transport ...... 11 5.4 Ecology ...... 13 5.5 Flood Risk and Drainage Considerations ...... 14 5.6 Potential Impacts on Amenity ...... 15 6 Cumulative Impact Considerations ...... 17 7 Conclusion ...... 21

Appendices Appendix 1 - PICADY Outputs

BLANK

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

1 Introduction

1.1 Description of Proposals

1.1.1 This Planning Application submitted on behalf of Salop Sand and Gravel Co. Ltd (hereafter referred to as the Applicant) is for the creation of a satellite stocking yard at Norton Farm to serve operations at Gonsal Quarry.

1.1.2 The applicant operates Gonsal Quarry, which lies approximately 1.6km to the south- southwest of Condover village. A planning application is currently under consideration for the “Formation of southern extension; new extraction beneath existing lagoons and progressive restoration for a period of 6 years” which would allow supplies to be maintained to the existing, established markets for an additional period of 6 years based on an average output of 150,000 tonnes per annum with a further year to complete restoration (planning application ref: 20/01373/MAW).

1.1.3 Planning application ref: 20/01373/MAW proposes that the material would be extracted, processed and distributed in accordance with the existing, ongoing activities via the established access and the northern route through Condover to / from the A49 unless making a local delivery to the south.

1.1.4 A review of the existing traffic related situation has revealed, highway capacity and safety are not matters that suggest planning permission should be refused, as the network currently accommodates comparable activity without resulting in unacceptable impacts when assessed against current guidance. However, noting the concerns of residents regarding the impact of HGVs running through the village and the additional road space taken by articulated HGVs on the bends, the operator has identified a potential alternative arrangement whereby it would operate a ‘much smaller’ rigid HGV (or two) running material extracted from Gonsal Quarry to Norton Farm.

1.1.5 The rigid vehicle would place its load at Norton Farm before returning to collect another, running on a ‘turnaround’ basis. HGVs associated with Gonsal Quarry travelling through the village would then be limited only to the one or two rigid HGVs making the return journey between the sites to supply a stockpile at Norton Farm.

1.1.6 Norton Farm would then become the main distribution point from which the existing customers are served by a variety of vehicle types, including the articulated HGVs that currently run through the village.

1.1.7 It is proposed that this would be a temporary development would be for a period of 5 years.

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

1.1.8 A further detailed description of the proposed development is set out in section 4 of this statement.

1.2 Content of Statement

1.2.1 This Statement provides details of the site, it’s planning context, the proposed development (and its need/justification), and how the proposals may impact the local environment and community.

1.2.2 A technical report have been prepared in respect of landscape and visual impact (Landscape and Visual Assessment) and the findings are summarised in section 7 of this report with the full report accompanying the planning application. A transport statement prepared for planning application ref: 20/01373/MAW also accompanies this planning application. Furthermore, potential impacts in terms of the following are also considered in section 7:

• Ecology;

• Flood risk and drainage; and

• Potential impacts on amenity.

1.2.3 The report is accompanied by the following plans:

• Site Location Plan - Drawing No. KD.GSL.D.010;

• Current Situation - Drawing No. KD.GSL.D.014;

• Proposed Satellite Stocking Area Layout - Drawing No. KD.GSL.D.009;

• Proposed Satellite Stocking Area Sections - KD.GSL.D.016; and

• Concept Restoration - Drawing No. KD.GSL.D.015.

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

2 Site Context

2.1 Application Site

2.1.1 Norton Farm is located approximately 5 miles to the south of Shrewsbury and to the north of the village of Condover. It is accessed via a dedicated track which terminates at the farm, turning from a C road to Condover off the A49.

2.1.2 Norton Farm comprises a number of existing buildings including purpose built cattle sheds, a grain store, a range of traditional brick buildings with slate roofing, a stockyard and the farmhouse itself.

2.1.3 The proposed development would be situated immediately west of two existing agricultural barns. Two planning applications and an application for a lawful development certificate are currently under consideration by Shropshire Council at Norton Farm relating to the agricultural barns:

• Application under Section 73A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 for erection of an agricultural grain store (retrospective) – ref: 20/02112/FUL;

• Installation of a ground source heat pump array and erection of drying shed – ref: 20/00349/FUL; and

• Application for a Lawful Development Certificate for existing agricultural grain store not built in compliance with condition no.2 (11/01608/FUL) – ref: 20/02110/CPE.

2.1.4 Land to the north, west and south is in agricultural use. The boundary of Condover Quarry lies on the other side of the agricultural barns to the east, beyond a high bund. A southern extension to Condover Quarry was recently approved at committee on 28 July 2020 (ref: 19/01261/MAW). Other than the farmhouse, the nearest residential property is approximately 380 metres to the south.

2.1.5 The villages of Condover and Bayston Hill are the next nearest main residential areas at distances of over 1km from the proposal.

2.1.6 A public footpath (Route Code: 0413/53/1) runs adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site and proposals to temporarily divert this route are discussed further in section 4 of this statement and outlined on accompanying drawing no. KD.GSL.D.009.

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

3 Planning Policy

3.1 Introduction

3.1.1 Section 38(6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 states that determination must be made in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

3.1.2 In reaching a decision on this application the first consideration is therefore whether the proposals accord with the Development Plan. Having done this it is then necessary to have regard to all other material considerations, which include all relevant policy considerations contained in the emerging Development Plan as well as National Planning Policy Guidance.

3.1.3 A revised version of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in February 2019. The NPPF outlines the principle of a presumption in favour of sustainable development which runs through the planning system. For decision taking, this means that where a proposal satisfies the requirement of NPPF i.e. being sustainable and in accordance with the Development Plan, planning authorities are directed to grant planning permission without delay unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

3.1.4 This chapter focuses on the key planning policy considerations including the need for the acceptability of the development within the environment. The consideration of the relevant planning policies provides the reasoned justification for granting planning permission.

3.1.5 The main Planning Policy documents of relevance are considered to be:

• Shropshire Council Core Strategy 2006‐2026; and

• Shropshire’s Site Allocations and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan 2006‐ 2026.

3.1.6 Other Material Planning Policy Considerations include:

• The National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019.

3.2 Development Plan

3.2.1 Minerals Policy for Shropshire is contained within the adopted Core Strategy (2011) and the Shropshire Council Site Allocations and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan (2015).

Shropshire Core Strategy DPD (2011)

3.2.2 The Core Strategy was formally adopted on the 24th February 2011, setting out the strategic planning policy, spatial vision and objectives for Shropshire up until 2026. Assessment of the

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

strategy against the NPPF found the document to be in conformity.

3.2.3 A summary of the policies relevant to this application is provided below:

Policy CS5: Countryside and Green Belt

3.2.4 This policy in relation to the countryside states that new development will be strictly controlled in accordance with national planning policies protecting the countryside and Green Belt.

3.2.5 Mineral related development will be permitted where it improves the sustainability of rural communities by bringing local economic and community benefits. Proposals for large scale new development will be required to demonstrate that there are no unacceptable adverse environmental impacts.

3.2.6 Permission will be granted for the retention and appropriate expansion of an existing established business, unless relocation to a suitable site within a settlement would be more appropriate.

3.2.7 The application site is situated outside of any development boundary and in an area classed as countryside for planning policy purposes, where new development will be strictly controlled. However, the proposal is considered to have economic as well as community benefits to Condover through the removal of articulated HGV movements through Condover associated with Gonsal Quarry and is therefore considered to be in accordance with paragraphs paragraph CS5.

3.2.8 Core Strategy Policy CS6 requires that development is appropriate in scale and design taking into account local context and character. The application demonstrates that the proposal would not have any significant, adverse impact on the local context and character and on public amenity or health.

CS18: Sustainable Water Management

3.2.9 Core Strategy policy CS18 requires that development incorporates suitable measures for sustainable water management to reduce flood risk. The proposal includes surface water drainage measures to ensure that surface water will be managed in a sustainable and coordinated way.

Shropshire Council Site Allocations and Management of Development (SAMDev) Plan (2015)

3.2.10 The Site Allocations and Development Management (SAMDev) Plan sets out proposals for the use of land and policies to guide future development in order to help to deliver the Vision and Objectives of the Core Strategy for the period up to 2026. Complementing the Core Strategy,

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

the SAMDev Plan provides a greater level of detail with regard to a number of planning issues.

MD16: Mineral Safeguarding

3.2.11 Guidance is provided on applications for non-mineral development which fall within Mineral Safeguarding Areas (MSA) and which could have the effect of sterilising mineral resources. These applications will not be granted unless it can be demonstrated that:

i. The mineral resource concerned is not of economic value; and

ii. The mineral can be extracted to prevent the unnecessary sterilisation of the resource prior to the development taking place without causing unacceptable adverse impacts on the environment and local community.

3.2.12 The site is located within a sand and gravel safeguarding area, however, the temporary nature of the development will ensure that any potential mineral resources could potentially be worked in the future.

MD17: Managing the Development and Operation of Mineral Sites

3.2.13 Sets out the measures required for an application for mineral development to be supported. The application must demonstrate that potential adverse impacts on the local community and Shropshire’s natural and historic environment can be satisfactorily controlled. Particular consideration will be given (where relevant) to:

i. Measures to protect people and the environment from adverse effects, including visual, noise, dust, vibration and traffic impacts;

ii. The site access and traffic movements, including the impact of heavy lorry traffic on the transport network and the potential to transport minerals by rail. Where opportunities to transport minerals by rail are not feasible there will be a preference for new mineral sites to be located where they can obtain satisfactory access to the Primary Route Network;

iii. The cumulative impact of mineral working, including the concurrent impact of more than one working in a specific area and the impact of sustained working in a specific area;

iv. Impacts on the stability of the site and adjoining land and opportunities to reclaim derelict, contaminated or degraded land (Policy CS6);

v. Effects on surface waters or groundwater and from the risk of flooding (Policy CS18);

vi. Effects on ecology and the potential to enhance biodiversity;

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

vii. The method, phasing and management of the working proposals;

viii. Evidence of the quantity and quality of mineral and the extent to which the proposed development contributes to the comprehensive working of mineral resources and appropriate use of high-quality materials; and

ix. Protecting, conserving and enhancing the significance of heritage assets including archaeology. Where necessary, output restrictions may be agreed with the operator to make a development proposal environmentally acceptable.

3.2.14 The site is enclosed on all sides and is considered to be located a significant distance from neighbouring dwellings and other sensitive receptors. The application demonstrates that the proposal would not have any significant, adverse impact on public amenity or health, and will remove the articulated HGV movements through Condover associated with Gonsal Quarry, therefore helping to ease the issue of quarry traffic issues within Condover.

3.3 National Policy Guidance

National Planning Policy Framework (2019)

3.3.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) came into force in July 2018, replacing the first National Planning Policy Framework published in 2012. Subsequent amendments were made in February and June 2019.

3.3.2 The NPPF sets out the principle of a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Where a proposal satisfies the requirement of NPPF i.e. being sustainable and in accordance with the development plan, planning authorities are directed to grant planning permission without delay unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

3.3.3 Paragraph 80 of the NPPF states that planning decisions should help create the conditions in which businesses can invest, expand and adapt and that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth and productivity.

3.3.4 Paragraph 81 states that planning should positively and proactively encourage sustainable economic growth and be flexible enough to accommodate needs not anticipated in the plan. In addition, paragraph 205 (Economic impact, criteria for proposals) states that when determining planning applications, great weight should be given to the benefits of mineral extraction, including to the economy.

3.3.5 The proposal is considered to have economic as well as amenity benefits for Shropshire and Condover and is therefore considered to be in accordance with paragraphs 80, 81 and 205 of the NPPF.

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

3.4 Emerging Policy Guidance

Shropshire Local Plan Review: Strategic Sites

3.4.1 Shropshire Council are currently preparing a Local Plan Partial Review, which identifies a draft vision and draft framework for the future development of Shropshire to 2038, addressing such issues as the needs and opportunities in relation to housing, the local economy, community facilities and infrastructure; and seeks to safeguard the environment, enable adaptation to climate change and helps to secure high-quality and accessible design.

3.5 Key Development Plan and other Policy Considerations

3.5.1 A review of the development plan for the site and other policy documents/guidance has indicated the need to ensure continued acceptability of the at Nea Farm Quarry.

3.5.2 Having regard to the location, nature, scale and extent of the proposed development, it is considered that the main issues of relevance to the determination of this application are as follows:

• Reasoning and justification for the development; and

• Environmental Considerations and potential impacts of the development.

3.5.3 These considerations together with other relevant matters are examined in the following section.

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

4 Proposed Development

4.1 Reasoning and Justification

4.1.1 Salop Sand & Gravel Supply Co. Ltd operates Gonsal Quarry, which lies approximately 1.6km to the south-southwest of Condover village in Shropshire. Gonsal Quarry has provided high quality building, plastering and concreting sand and gravel to the local construction industry since the 1950s and is currently worked under planning permission 13/00336/EIA, which was granted by Shropshire Council on 24 April 2018.

4.1.2 The existing planning permission requires all HGV traffic travelling to / from the site to pass through Condover village unless making local deliveries to sites to the south of the Quarry, between its access and the A49. All HGV traffic accessing the A49 is required to travel through the village via the approved haul route to the north.

4.1.3 A planning application is currently under consideration for the “Formation of southern extension; new extraction beneath existing lagoons and progressive restoration for a period of 6 years” which would allow supplies to be maintained to the existing, established markets for an additional period of 6 years with a further year to complete restoration (planning application ref: 20/01373/MAW).

4.1.4 A review of the existing traffic related situation has revealed, highway capacity and safety are not matters that suggest planning permission should be refused, as the network currently accommodates comparable activity without resulting in unacceptable impacts when assessed against current guidance. However, noting the concerns of residents regarding the impact of HGVs running through the village and the additional road space taken by articulated HGVs on the bends, the operator has identified a potential alternative arrangement whereby it would operate a rigid HGV (or two) running material extracted from Gonsal Quarry to Norton Farm.

4.1.5 The rigid vehicle would tip its load at Norton Farm before returning to collect another, running on a ‘turnaround’ basis. HGVs associated with Gonsal Quarry travelling through the village would then be limited only to the one or two rigid HGVs making the return journey between the sites to supply a stockpile at Norton Farm.

4.1.6 Norton Farm would then become the main distribution point from which the existing customers are served by a variety of vehicle types, including the articulated HGVs that currently run through the village.

Norton Farm December 2020 Planning Statement

4.2 Description of Operations

4.2.1 The proposed development comprises the storage of bulk aggregates, bulk bagging and midi bagging of aggregates, together with weighbridge, ancillary office, welfare facilities and car parking.

4.2.2 This would be supplemented (including for blending purposes) with other bulk product, required by the customer base purchasing the sand and gravel, which will negate the need for these materials travelling through Condover village into Gonsal Quarry (MOT, Dust, Decorative Agg, Bark, Salt).

4.2.3 Bagging operations to comprise:

i. 1No. 12.5m long bulk bagging trailer containing 2no. hoppers (~ 5m in height);

ii. 2No. 12.5m long midi bagging trailers together with 15m feed hopper and conveyor (~ 5m in height);

iii. Aggregate storage bays;

iv. Bagged aggregate storage; and

v. Pallet storage.

4.2.4 A 3.5m screening bund is to be stablished to the eastern and northern boundaries, with tree and shrub planting to take place, managed and maintained.

4.2.5 Furthermore, as part of the development, it is proposed to divert public footpath 0413/53/1, which runs adjacent to the eastern boundary of the site. Proposals to divert this route are outlined on accompanying drawing no. KD.GSL.D.009. This shows that it is proposed to create a new line for the path to the west of the access road to minimise disruption from traffic and divert the route around the southern, eastern and northern perimeter of the proposed development to rejoin its legal route to the north of the site.

4.2.6 Following the completion of operations, it is proposed to restore the land back to its current agricultural use.

5 Environmental Considerations of the Development

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 In terms of environmental considerations of the proposed development, a review of the main considerations is set out below:

5.2 Landscape and Visual Assessment

5.2.1 A Landscape and Visual Assessment has been prepared by Kedd Limited Landscape Architects, and Environmental Design Consultants. The report accompanies this statement and the main findings are summarised below:

5.2.2 The landscape and visual assessment has considered the baseline landscape and visual aspects of the local area and the potential change(s) the proposed temporary satellite stocking yard operations could have on landscape and visual receptors. It is considered that the size and scale of both the site area/operations and elements are small. The site being set within a medium scale agricultural landscape which contains individual small-scale developments including farmsteads and barns.

5.2.3 It is concluded that the proposed development will not result in any adverse significant effects on either Landscape Character or Visual Receptors. It is a small-scale temporary development which can be assimilated into its local setting by the proposed mitigation of both landscape bunding, seeding and quick establishment planting. The planting as well as providing landscape benefits also offers potential for ecological corridors and native biodiversity.

5.2.4 It is considered that the proposed mitigation measures associated with this application scheme will also aid in the screening and landscape integration of the existing barns adjacent to the site.

5.2.5 It is therefore considered that the proposed temporary development is acceptable on landscape and visual grounds and is in accordance with landscape orientated designations and planning policies.

5.3 Transport

5.3.1 The findings in terms of transport are based on the Transport Statement submitted to the Council for the current Gonsal Quarry application (planning application ref: 20/01373/MAW). This transport statement included a section considering transporting mineral from Gonsal Quarry to Norton Farm and the findings are summarised below.

5.3.2 A review of the existing traffic related situation has revealed, highway capacity and safety are

not matters that suggest that the network currently accommodates comparable activity without resulting in unacceptable impacts when assessed against current guidance. However, noting the concerns of residents regarding the impact of HGVs running through the village and the additional road space taken by articulated HGVs on the bends, the operator has identified a potential alternative arrangement whereby it would operate a rigid HGV (or two) running material extracted from Gonsal Quarry to Norton Farm.

5.3.3 All HGVs would use the established access to Norton Farm / Condover Quarry. The access is oriented so that vehicles approaching and leaving Condover Quarry do so via the north, by way of a left turn in and right turn out.

5.3.4 In order to facilitate the right turn into the access by the laden rigid HGV arriving from Gonsal Quarry, the existing access would be revised by re-shaping the central triangle to increase the width of the inbound traffic lane to the site, in order to ensure that the right turn by the rigid HGV can occur should another HGV be waiting to turn right out of the access. This would prevent the potential for delays to through-traffic on the priority route that could occur should the arriving HGV be forced to wait for another to leave.

5.3.5 The outbound movement for the return journey of the empty rigid vehicle would use the southern, single lane section of the access, which is controlled by a barrier. This route would become a one-way exit lane as the revisions to the northern part of the access would facilitate the inbound movements that use the southern link from time to time.

5.3.6 The use of the northern part of the access for inbound right turn movements would improve safety by increasing the distance between the right-turning vehicle and the bend to the southeast, affording northbound traffic with improved visibility towards a potentially stationary vehicle waiting to turn right by approximately 20m when compared with the existing situation.

5.3.7 In terms of traffic movements, depending upon the payload of the vehicles used to transport the 150,000 tonnes of sand and gravel supplied by Gonsal Quarry from Norton Farm, the average daily HGV activity would vary between 20 loads / 40 movements based on a 30 tonne payload and 30 loads / 60 rigid movements based on a 20 tonne payload.

5.3.8 Based on the current operating hours at Gonsal Quarry, which, in terms of permitted vehicle movements would remain as 07:30 – 17:00 Monday to Friday, based on the higher level of activity (60 movements per day) the average hourly flow is established to be 6.3 (say 7) movements per hour.

5.3.9 Analysis of recent weighbridge data undertaken as part of the assessment of the proposed extension to Gonsal Quarry revealed an average of 24 loads / 48 HGV movements per day, which falls within the above range and is consistent when taking into account the different

types of vehicles visiting the site and their respective payloads.

5.3.10 Based on the turnaround time for loading and the journey time between the sites, two HGVs would probably be required to achieve this rate. This would allow one to be loaded whilst another transports and tips. The HGVs could be managed so they do not pass each other on the road network or travel in tandem along the haul route.

5.3.11 Using 2 HGVs would also allow the operator to cease transport between the sites during 30 minutes in the morning and afternoon to avoid the school drop-off and pick-up times respectively, as each vehicle would only need to make 2 trips each per hour during the remainder of the day to maintain supplies at Norton Farm.

5.3.12 Although this would require the double-handling of materials (being loaded once at Gonsal Quarry then reloaded for onward distribution at Norton Farm), the operator has confirmed that this could be a viable option which would remove its articulated HGVs from Condover, village, which represent approximately 26 – 29% of the articulated HGVs recorded village. The articulated HGV activity associated with Gonsal Quarry would then be restricted to the route to the north between Norton Farm and the A49.

5.3.13 Whilst it was found that the continuation of existing activities at Gonsal Quarry could be accommodated on the road network, the use of Norton Farm as a satellite stocking yard would provide a degree of betterment for the village.

5.3.14 Having considered the above, it is concluded that in accordance with national policy, planning permission for the proposed development should not be refused on highway / transport grounds.

5.4 Ecology

5.4.1 A desk top study of the site was undertaken, which has included reviewing previous ecological work undertaken in relation to applications currently under consideration at Norton Farm along with previous documentation submitted in relation to Condover Quarry. Furthermore, a site walk over was carried out on 18th November 2020.

5.4.2 The proposed site is an intensively managed arable field and is considered to be of very low/negligible ecological value.

5.4.3 There is one designated wildlife site within 1km of the site – Bomere, Shomere and Betton Pools site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), which is located to the north east of the site beyond the existing agricultural barns and Condover Quarry.

5.4.4 Considering the nature and scale of the proposed development, it is not considered that the proposed development would impact on the status of the SSSI.

5.4.5 In terms of protected species, there is a record of Great Crested Newt (GCN) within 1km of the site with 3 mapped waterbodies within 500m of the site, all of which are located within Condover Quarry.

5.4.6 Although there are 3 mapped waterbodies within 500m of the site boundary, there are no areas of suitable terrestrial habitat for Great Crested Newts present within the site boundary. The habitats present within the site include open areas of arable fields which are assessed as unsuitable to provide terrestrial habitat for Great crested newts. In addition, the adjacent hedgerow which is assessed to provide terrestrial habitat for Great Crested Newts is to be retained during the extent of the works. Subsequently it is assessed that the proposed development will have no impact on Great Crested Newts.

5.4.7 With regards bats, the hedgerow adjacent to the south east corner of the site may be used for bats for commuting purposes. The hedgerows will not be disturbed.

5.4.8 During the site walkover, no evidence of badger was found on site. However, considering the habitat of the site, badger may occasionally use the site for commuting and foraging purposes.

5.4.9 It is not considered that the proposed development will impact on any other fauna of significant value and/or protected species.

Recommendations

Badgers

5.4.10 Mitigation measures include a pre - commencement check being undertaken in order to ensure no new badger setts have been created before works onsite begin.

Bats

5.4.11 The arable fields within the site are considered to provide sub-optimal habitat for foraging and commuting bats. In addition, the adjacent hedgerow is to be retained during the extent of the works. It is recommended that no additional lighting will be created within close proximity of the adjacent hedgerow.

5.5 Flood Risk and Drainage Considerations

Flood Risk

5.5.1 Review of online flood risk mapping indicates that the site is located in Flood Zone 1 (representing land at lowest risk of flooding from fluvial sources – a less than a 0.1 per cent (1 in 1000) chance of flooding occurring each year) and not in an area with critical drainage problems as notified by the Environment Agency.

5.5.2 Consequently, and in the context of proposed water management provisions, a detailed flood risk assessment is not deemed necessary.

Site Drainage

5.5.3 In terms of surface drainage, with the implementation of the drainage feature as outlined on drawing no. KD.GSL.D.009, the proposal can be operated safely without increasing flood risk within the site or elsewhere.

5.5.4 With respect to potential pollution sources and pathways, possible sources of pollution include fuels and oils emanating from fixed and mobile plant. Mitigation measures include:

• Inspection of vehicles entering and leaving the site on a daily basis – including checks for leaks on hydraulic pipes, fuel pipes etc;

• Fuels, hydraulic oils and other hydrocarbons to only be kept in the prescribed area within the site. Such fluids to be kept on an area of hardstanding and the fuel store to kept within a bunded area. The bund must be of sufficient volume to contain 110% of the fuel store volume;

• Inspection of the structural integrity of the fuel store and bunding on a regular basis; and

• Emergency, spillage clean up procedures (and relevant equipment) in place within the site to contain and recover spillages should they occur.

5.6 Potential Impacts on Amenity

5.6.1 The Applicant proposes to operate the site in a manner which minimises impacts upon the environment and local community. The measures to mitigate for, and wherever possible, to avoid the generation of any potential ‘bad neighbour’ impacts as a result of the site’s proposed operation will be implemented.

Noise

5.6.2 The proposed development has the potential to generate noise through:

• noise emanating from the bagging operations – trailer, conveyor and hoppers;

• the movement of HGVs associated with the import of sand and gravel via road; and

• movement of vehicles internally around the site.

5.6.3 The site is situated within the context of Norton Farm and apart from Norton farmhouse, the site is not bordered by land uses that are considered to be sensitive to noise such as other residential property.

5.6.4 Despite the above, in order to ensure site equipment reduces the potential for noise, the following means of noise mitigation are proposed:

• all on-site plant will be regularly maintained to operate in good working order;

• Engine idling will be avoided whenever possible and engines turned off where practicable. Unnecessary revving of engines will be avoided and reducing speed of vehicle movement will be encouraged;

• All vehicles operating on-site requiring audible reversing alarms will be fitted with white noise systems; and

• Soil bunds of 3.5m in height will be put in place around the northern, southern and western boundaries of the site, whilst an existing bund is already in place to the eastern boundary associated with Condover Quarry.

Dust

5.6.5 The NPPF makes it clear that unavoidable dust emissions should be controlled, mitigated or, preferably, removed at source. The NPPF is accompanied by technical guidance that includes specific guidance on the management of dust and air quality from mineral operations. The planning application will incorporate a dust mitigation scheme to minimise the generation of airborne dust.

5.6.6 Dust suppression measures including the dampening of areas of hardstanding when required will ensure that dust is not generated by on-site vehicle movements.

5.6.7 In addition, delivery vehicles will be sheeted when transporting materials at all times. Vehicle cleanliness will also be maintained at all times.

6 Cumulative Impact Considerations

6.1.1 In terms of potential cumulative impacts, the main consideration is in terms of transport movements between the proposed development, Norton Farm and the adjacent Condover Quarry.

6.1.2 The proposed development would result in increased traffic movements at the existing shared access to Condover Quarry and Norton Farm, due to the transfer of materials from Gonsal Quarry to Norton Farm and also the distribution of the stockpiled / transferred sand and gravel imported from Gonsal Quarry.

6.1.3 Depending upon the payload of the vehicles used to transport the 150,000 tonnes of sand and gravel supplied by Gonsal Quarry from Norton Farm, the average daily HGV activity would vary between 20 loads / 40 articulated movements based on a 30 tonne payload and 30 loads / 60 rigid movements based on a 20 tonne payload.

6.1.4 Analysis of recent weighbridge data undertaken as part of the assessment of the proposed extension to Gonsal Quarry revealed an average of 24 loads / 48 HGV movements per day, which falls within the above range and is consistent when taking into account the different types of vehicles visiting the site and their respective payloads.

6.1.5 The same types of vehicles currently attracted to Gonsal Quarry would divert to Norton Farm in order to avoid travelling through Condover village.

6.1.6 All vehicles involved in the distribution of the 150,000 tonnes of sand and gravel supplied by Gonsal Quarry would travel to from the access to Norton Farm via a left in turn to collect a load followed by a right turn out when leaving the satellite quarry.

6.1.7 Based on the current operating hours at Gonsal Quarry, which, in terms of permitted vehicle movements would remain as 07:30 – 17:00 Monday to Friday, based on the higher level of activity (60 movements per day) the average hourly flow is established to be 6.3 (say 7) movements per hour.

6.1.8 Based on 8 (higher than the anticipated 7 above) movements per hour (2 vehicles making 2 round trips each hour), there will be around 5.5 – 6 minutes of HGVs travelling through Condover per hour.

6.1.9 As all sales traffic would turn left into the access, in order to represent the worst-case in terms of potential impact on the operational capacity of the access, it has been assumed that the 7 movements per hour would comprise 3 left in and 4 right out movements per hour.

6.1.10 Beyond the Norton Farm access to the north, these vehicles transporting the sold material would have no detrimental impact when compared with the current situation, as the vehicles

are already on the network. The difference would be that they would no longer continue through Condover village in order to access the sand and gravel supplies being distributed to the markets.

6.1.11 However, whilst the existing HGV traffic associated with transporting sold material would not travel through the village, the existing activity would be replaced by rigid HGVs running on a turnaround basis between Gonsal Quarry and Norton Farm, in order to replenish supplies at the satellite quarry proposed. This would reduce the number of large, articulated HGVs passing through the village by removing those currently travelling to / from Gonsal Quarry.

6.1.12 As previously established, to supply the proposed satellite quarry with 150,000 tonnes par annum there would be 6 – 8 HGV movements through the village per hour (up to 4 in / 4 out) during the day, excluding the 30 minute periods at school drop-off / pick up times in the morning and afternoon respectively.

6.1.13 These vehicles would access Norton Farm via a right turn when delivering material, then leave via a left turn out to return to Gonsal Quarry to collect another load.

6.1.14 In order to establish the cumulative impact at the Norton Farm access, its capacity has been assessed by re-allocating the Gonsal Quarry traffic through the access junction.

6.1.15 The capacity of the Norton Farm / Condover Quarry access was assessed when determining the recent application for an extension to the quarry, as set out in the White Young Green Transport Statement dated 10 October 2018 (Ref: RT109366-1). The results in Table 2 of the report (page 19) confirm that the access would operate well within capacity in the 2023 design year assessed. Appendix G of the report contained traffic flow diagrams for the peak hour periods, whilst Appendix H contained the junction capacity assessments.

6.1.16 The traffic flow diagrams were depicted in terms of Passenger Car Units (PCUs) by converting the observed HGVs to PCUs by multiplying the HGVs recorded during the traffic surveys by 2.3, on the basis that in terms of capacity analysis, 1 HGV is the equivalent of 2.3 passenger cars.

6.1.17 To allow direct comparison, the capacity assessments undertaken by WYG have been repeated with the additional turning movements associated with Gonsal Quarry (3 HGVs left in, 4 right out (sales), 4 right in and 4 left out (supply)) added to the 2023 baseline flows. When corrected to PCUs, the additional traffic movements become 7 left in, 10 right out, 10 right in and 10 right out (all rounded up to integer values) respectively.

6.1.18 Technically, the movements to / from the north of the Norton Farm access associated with the distribution of Gonsal Quarry mineral from the new satellite quarry should be discounted from the through-movements to the north and south, as they would have been included in

the observed traffic surveys as established movements on the network. However, no reduction has been made and therefore an element of double-counting has occurred, which represents a worst-case scenario for the assessment undertaken.

6.1.19 Similarly, it is proposed to have a 30 minute stand-off when no vehicles would transport material to Norton Farm from Gonsal Quarry, or return back through the village during the AM peak hour as this coincides with the school drop-off time. However, again, no reduction has been made to account for this in the capacity assessment undertaken.

6.1.20 The capacity assessment was undertaken using PICADY, the standard priority junction modelling software.

6.1.21 The results of the PICADY analyses in 2023 during the AM peak hour periods are tabulated below:

Norton Farm Access 2023 Cumulative (With Development) PICADY Results Maximum RFC Maximum Queue Inclusive Delay Movement (Vehicles) (Minutes/Vehicle) AM PM AM PM AM PM B – AC 0.058 0.069 0.1 0.1 0.11 0.11 C – AB 0.016 0.016 0.0 0.0 0.08 0.09 A = Condover Road (N) B = Norton Farm C = Condover Road (S)

6.1.22 The PICADY results demonstrate that even under the onerous conditions assessed, with the double-counting of Gonsall Quarry traffic through the junction, it continues to operate efficiently and well within the normal acceptable capacity criteria. The Maximum Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.069 may be compared with the desirable maximum of 0.85 and the theoretical saturation of the junction of 1.0; although many existing junctions operate at RFCs of above 1.0. Similarly, the Maximum vehicle queues and inclusive delays are insignificant.

6.1.23 Given that the flows to the north of the Norton Farm access would not change when compared with the current situation and that those to the south are comparable with the existing activities but would comprise smaller HGVs passing through the village, whilst avoiding school drop-off and pick-up times, having established that the Norton Farm access can readily accommodate the proposed additional turning movements whilst retaining significant levels of reserve / spare capacity, it is apparent that there are no highway grounds for preventing or refusing planning permission.

6.1.24 Paragraph 109 of NPPF confirms “Development should only be prevented or refused on highway grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe”

6.1.25 Based on the benefits offered by the proposed development in terms of highway impact within Condover, it can only be reasonably concluded that the thresholds set out in paragraph 109 of NPPF are not breached.

7 Conclusion

7.1.1 This Statement has been prepared to accompany a planning application submitted to Shropshire Council for the creation of a satellite stocking yard at Norton Farm to serve operations at Gonsal Quarry.

7.1.2 It is proposed that Norton Farm would serve as a storage / distribution facility which would accommodate the sales to customers and collections / deliveries in the larger articulated vehicles, which would no longer pass through Condover in order to access the sand reserves.

7.1.3 This arrangement also offers the opportunity to avoid HGVs associated with Gonsal Quarry from passing through the village during school pick-up and drop-off times.

7.1.4 The application demonstrates that the proposal would not have any significant, adverse impact on public amenity or health, and will remove the articulated HGV movements through Condover associated with Gonsal Quarry, therefore providing a degree of betterment for the village.

7.1.5 The environmental impacts of the proposal have been considered against the tests established within national policy/guidance and the local development plan. No unacceptable environmental impacts have been identified.

7.1.6 In overall conclusion, the proposals would not give rise to any significant adverse impacts on the environment or amenity of local residents and would not contravene polices in the Development Plan or National Planning Policy Framework. It is therefore considered that the proposals strike the correct planning balance.

7.1.7 Accordingly, the applicant respectfully asks that planning permission be granted.

Appendix 1 - PICADY Outputs

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 AM.vpo - Page 1 ------

TRL LIMITED

CAPACITIES, QUEUES, AND DELAYS AT 3 OR 4-ARM MAJOR/MINOR PRIORITY JUNCTIONS

PICADY 4.1 ANALYSIS PROGRAM RELEASE 3.0 (MAR 2001)

ADAPTED FROM PICADY/3 WHICH IS CROWN COPYRIGHT BY PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HMSO ------

THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION

Run with file:- "C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 AM.vpi" at 22:09:16 on Thursday, 10 December 2020

RUN TITLE ********* Gonsal Quarry - Norton Farm Access 2023 AM with Satellite Quarry

.MAJOR/MINOR JUNCTION CAPACITY AND DELAY ***************************************

INPUT DATA ------

MAJOR ROAD (ARM C) ------MAJOR ROAD (ARM A) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD (ARM B)

ARM A IS Condover Road (North to A49) ARM B IS Site Access ARM C IS Condover Road (South to Village)

STREAM LABELLING CONVENTION ------

STREAM A-B CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM A TO ARM B

STREAM B-AC CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM B TO ARM A AND TO ARM C

ETC.

GEOMETRIC DATA ------

------I DATA ITEM I MINOR ROAD B I ------I TOTAL MAJOR ROAD CARRIAGEWAY WIDTH I ( W ) 6.00 M. I I CENTRAL RESERVE WIDTH I (WCR ) 0.00 M. I I I I I MAJOR ROAD RIGHT TURN - WIDTH I (WC-B) 3.00 M. I I - VISIBILITY I (VC-B) 250.0 M. I I - BLOCKS TRAFFIC I YES I I I I I MINOR ROAD - VISIBILITY TO LEFT I (VB-C) 51.0 M. I I - VISIBILITY TO RIGHT I (VB-A) 46.0 M. I I - LANE 1 WIDTH I (WB-C) 4.50 M. I I - LANE 2 WIDTH I (WB-A) 0.00 M. I ------

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 AM.vpo - Page 2 ------

TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------

TIME PERIOD BEGINS 07.45 AND ENDS 09.15

LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD - 90 MINUTES. LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - 15 MINUTES.

DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA

------I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I ------I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 1.81 I 2.72 I 1.81 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 0.31 I 0.47 I 0.31 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 2.06 I 3.09 I 2.06 I ------

------I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS (VEH/HR) I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I I ------I TIME I FROM/TO I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I ------I 07.45 - 09.15 I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.000 I 0.124 I 0.876 I I I I 0.0 I 18.0 I 127.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.1)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.800 I 0.000 I 0.200 I I I I 20.0 I 0.0 I 5.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.970 I 0.030 I 0.000 I I I I 160.0 I 5.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I ------

TURNING PROPORTIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA

THE PERCENTAGE OF HEAVY VEHICLES VARIES OVER TURNING MOVEMENTS

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 07.45-08.00 I I B-AC 0.31 9.55 0.033 0.0 0.0 0.5 I I C-AB 0.07 13.64 0.005 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 1.99 I I A-B 0.22 I I A-C 1.59 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 08.00-08.15 I I B-AC 0.37 9.39 0.040 0.0 0.0 0.6 I I C-AB 0.09 13.76 0.007 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 2.37 I I A-B 0.27 I I A-C 1.90 I I I ------

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 AM.vpo - Page 3 ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 08.15-08.30 I I B-AC 0.46 9.18 0.050 0.0 0.1 0.8 I I C-AB 0.11 13.94 0.008 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 2.90 I I A-B 0.33 I I A-C 2.32 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 08.30-08.45 I I B-AC 0.46 9.18 0.050 0.1 0.1 0.8 I I C-AB 0.11 13.94 0.008 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 2.90 I I A-B 0.33 I I A-C 2.32 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 08.45-09.00 I I B-AC 0.37 9.39 0.040 0.1 0.0 0.6 I I C-AB 0.09 13.76 0.007 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 2.37 I I A-B 0.27 I I A-C 1.90 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 09.00-09.15 I I B-AC 0.31 9.55 0.033 0.0 0.0 0.5 I I C-AB 0.07 13.64 0.005 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 1.99 I I A-B 0.22 I I A-C 1.59 I I I ------

*WARNING* NO MARGINAL ANALYSIS OF CAPACITIES AS MAJOR ROAD BLOCKING MAY OCCUR

QUEUE FOR STREAM B-AC ------TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 08.00 0.0 08.15 0.0 08.30 0.1 08.45 0.1 09.00 0.0 09.15 0.0

QUEUE FOR STREAM C-AB ------TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 08.00 0.0 08.15 0.0 08.30 0.0 08.45 0.0 09.00 0.0 09.15 0.0

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 AM.vpo - Page 4 ------

QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD ------

------I STREAM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I ------I B-AC I 34.3 I 22.9 I 3.8 I 0.11 I 3.8 I 0.11 I I C-AB I 8.3 I 5.5 I 0.6 I 0.08 I 0.6 I 0.08 I I C-A I 217.9 I 145.3 I I I I I I A-B I 24.7 I 16.5 I I I I I I A-C I 174.1 I 116.1 I I I I I ------I ALL I 459.4 I 306.2 I 4.4 I 0.01 I 4.4 I 0.01 I ------

* DELAY IS THAT OCCURRING ONLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD . * INCLUSIVE DELAY INCLUDES DELAY SUFFERED BY VEHICLES WHICH ARE STILL QUEUEING AFTER THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. * THESE WILL ONLY BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IF THERE IS A LARGE QUEUE REMAINING AT THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD.

END OF JOB

****** PICADY 4 run completed. ======end of file ======

[Printed at 22:42:48 on 10/12/2020]

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 PM.vpo - Page 1 ------

TRL LIMITED

CAPACITIES, QUEUES, AND DELAYS AT 3 OR 4-ARM MAJOR/MINOR PRIORITY JUNCTIONS

PICADY 4.1 ANALYSIS PROGRAM RELEASE 3.0 (MAR 2001)

ADAPTED FROM PICADY/3 WHICH IS CROWN COPYRIGHT BY PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HMSO ------

THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF HIS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION

Run with file:- "C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 PM.vpi" at 22:11:43 on Thursday, 10 December 2020

RUN TITLE ********* Gonsal Quarry - Norton Farm Access 2023 PM with Satellite Quarry

.MAJOR/MINOR JUNCTION CAPACITY AND DELAY ***************************************

INPUT DATA ------

MAJOR ROAD (ARM C) ------MAJOR ROAD (ARM A) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD (ARM B)

ARM A IS Condover Road (North to A49) ARM B IS Site Access ARM C IS Condover Road (South to Village)

STREAM LABELLING CONVENTION ------

STREAM A-B CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM A TO ARM B

STREAM B-AC CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM B TO ARM A AND TO ARM C

ETC.

GEOMETRIC DATA ------

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 PM.vpo - Page 2 ------

TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------

TIME PERIOD BEGINS 16.15 AND ENDS 17.45

LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD - 90 MINUTES. LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - 15 MINUTES.

DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA

------I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I ------I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 2.30 I 3.45 I 2.30 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 0.39 I 0.58 I 0.39 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 1.52 I 2.29 I 1.52 I ------

------I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS (VEH/HR) I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I I ------I TIME I FROM/TO I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I ------I 16.15 - 17.45 I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.000 I 0.092 I 0.908 I I I I 0.0 I 17.0 I 167.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.1)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.806 I 0.000 I 0.194 I I I I 25.0 I 0.0 I 6.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.959 I 0.041 I 0.000 I I I I 117.0 I 5.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I ------

TURNING PROPORTIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA

THE PERCENTAGE OF HEAVY VEHICLES VARIES OVER TURNING MOVEMENTS

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 16.15-16.30 I I B-AC 0.39 9.48 0.041 0.0 0.0 0.6 I I C-AB 0.07 13.19 0.005 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 1.45 I I A-B 0.21 I I A-C 2.09 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 16.30-16.45 I I B-AC 0.46 9.31 0.050 0.0 0.1 0.8 I I C-AB 0.09 13.22 0.006 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 1.74 I I A-B 0.25 I I A-C 2.49 I I I ------

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 PM.vpo - Page 3 ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 16.45-17.00 I I B-AC 0.57 9.08 0.062 0.1 0.1 1.0 I I C-AB 0.11 13.28 0.008 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 2.12 I I A-B 0.31 I I A-C 3.05 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 17.00-17.15 I I B-AC 0.57 9.08 0.062 0.1 0.1 1.0 I I C-AB 0.11 13.28 0.008 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 2.12 I I A-B 0.31 I I A-C 3.05 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 17.15-17.30 I I B-AC 0.46 9.31 0.050 0.1 0.1 0.8 I I C-AB 0.09 13.22 0.006 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 1.74 I I A-B 0.25 I I A-C 2.49 I I I ------

------I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAYI I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) I I 17.30-17.45 I I B-AC 0.39 9.48 0.041 0.1 0.0 0.7 I I C-AB 0.07 13.19 0.005 0.0 0.0 0.1 I I C-A 1.45 I I A-B 0.21 I I A-C 2.09 I I I ------

*WARNING* NO MARGINAL ANALYSIS OF CAPACITIES AS MAJOR ROAD BLOCKING MAY OCCUR

QUEUE FOR STREAM B-AC ------TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 16.30 0.0 16.45 0.1 17.00 0.1 17.15 0.1 17.30 0.1 17.45 0.0

QUEUE FOR STREAM C-AB ------TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 16.30 0.0 16.45 0.0 17.00 0.0 17.15 0.0 17.30 0.0 17.45 0.0

------TRL TRL VIEWER 2.0 AB C:\Jez Work\190502 - Gonsal Quarry, Condover\Norton 2023 PM.vpo - Page 4 ------

QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD ------

------I STREAM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I ------I B-AC I 42.5 I 28.3 I 4.8 I 0.11 I 4.8 I 0.11 I I C-AB I 7.9 I 5.3 I 0.6 I 0.08 I 0.6 I 0.08 I I C-A I 159.4 I 106.2 I I I I I I A-B I 23.3 I 15.5 I I I I I I A-C I 229.0 I 152.7 I I I I I ------I ALL I 462.1 I 308.1 I 5.4 I 0.01 I 5.4 I 0.01 I ------

END OF JOB

****** PICADY 4 run completed. ======end of file ======

[Printed at 22:43:31 on 10/12/2020]