Appendix I Extract A284 Lyminster Bypass Transport Assessment, WSP for West Sussex County Council, January 2019 (Excluding Appe

Appendix I

Extract A284 Lyminster Bypass Transport Assessment, WSP for West Sussex County Council, January 2019 (excluding Appendices D-E )

O REPORT N 836-TA03 A284 LYMINSTER BYPASS TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

A284 LYMINSTER BYPASS TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT West Sussex County Council

Project no: 70022836 Date: January 2019

– WSP 2 London Square Cross Lanes Guildford, Surrey GU1 1UN

Tel: +44 (0) 1483 528 400 www.wsp.com

QUALITY MANAGEMENT

Issue/revision First issue Revision 1 Revision 2 Revision 3 Revision 4 Revision 5 Remarks 1st Draft 2nd Draft – Issue Update to Minor Update to Collision following Section 2.2 updates to Section 5.8 Analysis Client all sections and updated Comment following Appendices Client Comment

Date September September October October November January 2017 2018 2018 2018 2018 2019

Prepared by Samantha Ed Hanks Ed Hanks Ed Hanks Ed Hanks Ed Hanks Morgan

Signature

Checked by Charles Dan Hyde Dan Hyde Dan Hyde Dan Hyde Dan Hyde Brisley

Signature

Authorised by Alex Alan Cowan Alan Cowan Alan Cowan Alan Cowan Alan Cowan Thompson

Signature

Project 70022836 70022836 70022836 70022836 70022836 70022836 number

Report 836-TA01 836-TA02 836-TA02 836-TA02 836-TA02 836-TA03 number

File reference \\uk.wspgroup.com\Central Data\Projects\700228xx\70022836 - WSCC Yr1 - A284 Lyminster\C Documents\Reports\Transport Assessment\Rev_5

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ...... 6

1.1 CONTEXT ...... 6

1.2 THE PROPOSED SCHEME ...... 6

1.3 INTERDEPENDENCIES ...... 8

1.4 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ...... 9

1.5 REPORT STRUCTURE ...... 9

2 TRANSPORT POLICY AND GUIDANCE ...... 11

2.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 11

2.2 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY ...... 11

2.3 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY ...... 12

2.4 SUMMARY ...... 14

3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ...... 15

3.1 EXISTING SITE INFORMATION ...... 15

3.2 EXISTING TRANSPORT PROVISION ...... 16

3.3 WALKING AND CYCLING APPRAISAL ...... 16

3.4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT ...... 18

3.5 ROAD NETWORK ASSESSMENT ...... 21

3.6 TRAFFIC SURVEYS ...... 24

3.7 TRAFFIC DATA...... 28

3.8 EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOWS ...... 29

3.9 COLLISION ANALYSIS ...... 33

4 THE PROPOSED SCHEME ...... 36

4.1 CONTEXT ...... 36

4.2 PROPOSED SCHEME DESCRIPTION ...... 36

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836 iii

5 ASSESSMENT OF TRANSPORT IMPACT...... 38

5.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 38

5.2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY ...... 38

5.3 ASSESSMENT YEARS ...... 39

5.4 JUNCTION ASSESSMENTS ...... 39

5.5 2017 BASE YEAR ASSESSMENTS...... 41

5.6 2019 OPENING YEAR ASSESSMENTS ...... 44

5.7 2034 FUTURE YEAR ASSESSMENTS ...... 48

5.8 CHANGE IN TRAFFIC FLOWS BY LINK ...... 52

6 CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC ...... 56

6.1 INTRODUCTION ...... 56

7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...... 57

7.1 SUMMARY ...... 57

7.2 CONCLUSION ...... 57

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

TABLES

TABLE 3-1 PLACES OF WORK FOR RESIDENTS OF ARUN ...... 15 TABLE 3-2 METHOD OF TRAVEL TO WORK ...... 16 TABLE 3-3 SUMMARY OF BUS SERVICES WITHIN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED SCHEME ...... 18 TABLE 3-4 DIRECT RAIL SERVICES FROM ARUNDEL RAILWAY STATION TO KEY DESTINATIONS ...... 20 TABLE 3-5 DIRECT RAIL SERVICES FROM LITTLEHAMPTON RAILWAY STATION TO KEY DESTINATIONS ...... 20 TABLE 3-6 PCU VALUES FOR VEHICLE TYPES ...... 28 TABLE 3-7 ANALYSIS OF ATC’S TO SHOW PEAK HOURS ...... 28 TABLE 3-8 PERSONAL INJURY COLLISIONS ...... 33 TABLE 5-1 LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS) DEFINITION ...... 41 TABLE 5-2 A27/A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION 2017 BASE MODELLING RESULTS ...... 42 TABLE 5-3 WICK ROUNDABOUT 2017 BASE MODELLING RESULTS ...... 43 TABLE 5-4 A284 LYMINSTER ROAD/ MILL LANE 2017 BASE MODELLING RESULTS ...... 43 TABLE 5-5 A259 BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT 2017 BASE MODELLING RESULTS ...... 44 TABLE 5-6 A27/A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION 2019 OPENING YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 45 TABLE 5-7 A259 WICK ROUNDABOUT 2019 OPENING YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 46 TABLE 5-8 A284 LYMINSTER ROAD/ MILL LANE 2019 OPENING YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 46 TABLE 5-9 BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT 2019 OPENING YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 47 TABLE 5-10 LYMINSTER BYPASS, LYMINSTER ROAD NEW JUNCTION 2019 OPENING YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 48 TABLE 5-11 A27/A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION 2034 FUTURE YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 49 TABLE 5-12 WICK ROUNDABOUT 2034 FUTURE YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 50 TABLE 5-13 A284 LYMINSTER ROAD/ MILL LANE 2034 FUTURE YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 50 TABLE 5-14 BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT 2034 FUTURE YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 51 TABLE 5-15 LYMINSTER BYPASS, LYMINSTER ROAD NEW JUNCTION 2034 FUTURE YEAR MODELLING RESULTS ...... 52

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

FIGURES

FIGURE 1-1 LOCATION PLAN ...... 7 FIGURE 1-2 A259 IMPROVEMENTS...... 9 FIGURE 3-1 FOOTPATHS AND BRIDLEWAYS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED SCHEME ...... 17 FIGURE 3-2 PUBLIC TRANSPORT PROVISION ...... 19 FIGURE 3-3 HIGHWAY NETWORK IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED SCHEME ...... 21 FIGURE 3-4 LOCATIONS OF ATC/MCTC SURVEYS AND ASSESSED JUNCTIONS ...... 25 FIGURE 3-5 SITE 1 A27/ A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION TWO WAY: DAILY ATC HOURLY TRAFFIC FLOWS WITH MCTC DATA ...... 26 FIGURE 3-6 SITE 2 A284 LYMINSTER ROAD/MILL LANE JUNCTION TWO WAY: DAILY ATC HOURLY TRAFFIC FLOWS WITH MCTC DATA27 FIGURE 3-7 SITE 3 WICK ROUNDABOUT TWO WAY: DAILY ATC HOURLY TRAFFIC FLOWS WITH MCTC DATA ...... 27 FIGURE 3-8 SITE 4 BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT TWO WAY: DAILY ATC HOURLY TRAFFIC FLOWS WITH MCTC DATA ...... 27 FIGURE 3-9 AM PEAK FLOWS ...... 31 FIGURE 3-10 PM PEAK FLOWS ...... 32 FIGURE 5-1 CHANGE IN TRAFFIC FLOW - AM PEAK HOUR ...... 54 FIGURE 5-2 CHANGE IN TRAFFIC FLOWS - PM PEAK HOUR ...... 55

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENT PLOT AND REPORT APPENDIX B OUTLINE SCHEME DESIGN APPENDIX C TECHNICAL NOTE: CHANGE IN FORECAST YEARS FOR THE EAST ARUN TRANSPORT MODEL APPENDIX D JUNCTIONS 9 MODELLING RESULTS APPENDIX D-1 2017 BASE YEAR APPENDIX D-2 2019 OPENING YEAR APPENDIX D-3 2034 FUTURE YEAR APPENDIX E LINSIG MODELLING RESULTS APPENDIX E-1 2017 BASE YEAR APPENDIX E-2 2019 OPENING YEAR APPENDIX E-3 2034 FUTURE YEAR

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 CONTEXT

1.1.1 This Transport Assessment (TA) has been prepared by WSP on behalf of West Sussex County Council (WSCC) in respect of a planning application for the A284 Lyminster Bypass Northern Section (The Proposed Scheme). The purpose of this TA is to determine the nature and extent of transport impacts arising from the Proposed Scheme.

1.1.2 The A284 is a north-south link road providing access between the towns of Arundel and Littlehampton via the A27 Crossbush junction. Currently, journey times are affected by the Wick level crossing, which causes delays to traffic in both directions and can impact on the A259 Wick Roundabout. The site location can be seen in Figure 1-1.

1.2 THE PROPOSED SCHEME

1.2.1 The proposed bypass will form the northern section of a new north-south road link between the A27 Crossbush Junction and the B2187 East Street / Fitzalan Link Road roundabout in Littlehampton. The northern section is being delivered by West Sussex County Council whilst the southern section is part of a larger private development.

1.2.2 The route of the link road has been safeguarded under Policy DEV15 of the Arun District Council Local Plan since 2003 and was previously adopted by West Sussex County Council as an approved highway line in September 1992. It continues to be safeguarded in the Arun Local Plan 2011-2031 (July 2018) which supersedes the Arun Local Plan 2003.

1.2.3 The proposed bypass construction extends from a point approximately 600m south of the A27 Crossbush junction. The proposed bypass would then connect to the southern section of the bypass which is being constructed as part of the mixed-use North Littlehampton development to the south.

1.2.4 The scheme would comprise a new 7.3m wide carriageway with 1.0m hard strips either side. The proposed bypass would have a speed limit of 50mph reducing to 40mph towards the northern end in order to match the existing 40mph speed limit in this location.

1.2.5 A 3m wide shared cycleway / footway would run from the northern end of the scheme along the west side of the carriageway to reach a signalised Pegasus crossing. From the crossing, the shared cycleway / footway would continue southwards down the east side of the proposed road to link to similar facilities further south and continuing on into Littlehampton.

1.2.6 The Proposed Scheme should provide a broad range of transportation, safety and accessibility benefits. It is also expected to support economic growth within West Sussex and locally the Proposed Scheme should be considered as a catalyst for further investment and regeneration in the Littlehampton and Bognor Regis areas.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 1-1 Location Plan

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

1.3 INTERDEPENDENCIES

1.3.1 There are several committed road schemes relating to the Proposed Scheme. Set out below is a summary of the schemes that are considered within the Proposed Scheme Transport Assessment: A284 Lyminster Bypass (Southern Section)

1.3.2 The safeguarded alignment includes A284 Lyminster Bypass (Southern Section) which crosses the railway line, south of Toddington and Holland Nurseries, and connects to the A259 Worthing Road. This link forms part of the masterplan for the North Littlehampton Strategic Development Area and will be delivered as part of the consented scheme ‘Land North of Toddington Lane’ (application reference: LU/47/11). The Southern Section does not form part of this scheme. New road capacity is required to support the provision of 1,260 new homes and creation of 700 new jobs at the Land North of Toddington Lane committed development site and further homes and jobs across the Littlehampton area, notably at Courtwick Lane.

HIGHWAYS ENGLAND A27 ARUNDEL BYPASS

1.3.3 The A27 is a strategic east-west corridor, north of the A284, which caters for both local journeys and long-distance traffic. The A27 is managed and maintained by Highways England. The Arundel section of the A27 lacks road and junction capacity; which results in significant congestion at the Crossbush, Causeway and Ford Road junctions. Also, the planned growth in the area is likely to exacerbate the problem. The scheme is intended to relieve congestion through Arundel, by means of a new dual carriageway bypass. This would link together the two existing dual carriageway sections of the A27 either side of Arundel. Currently, various options are being assessed including online junction improvements. A public consultation took place on three scheme options in Autumn 2017, and a Preferred Route Announcement was made in May 2018. Further non-statutory public consultation is to be carried out in 2019. Scheme construction dates are to be confirmed

WSCC A259 CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENTS

1.3.4 The A259 is an urban east-west route, south of the A284, which primarily serves traffic with an origin or destination within the local area. This road currently suffers from significant congestion, journey time and reliability issues. In the coming years, this is expected to worsen with the considerable amount of development planned north of Littlehampton. The Arun Local Plan recognises that in order to achieve the benefits of providing new homes and jobs, the A259 traffic problems need to be addressed by improving the performance of the road network. This scheme will widen approximately 2 km of the existing single carriageway on the A259 to a dual carriageway.

1.3.5 The scheme provides a continuous strategic corridor comprising approximately 5.1 km of dual carriageway between the new A259/A284 roundabout in the west and the A259/A280 roundabout in the east. It is expected that the improvements will be phased, with the first phase being between the Fitzalan Link road / Lyminster bypass roundabout, and the A280 roundabout.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 1-2 A259 Improvements

1.3.6 The section of the improvements most relevant to this TA are between the new junction east of Wick roundabout (where the Proposed Scheme and Fitzalan link road meet the A259 from the north and south) and the Body Shop Roundabout. A new pedestrian and cycling path will be installed to the south of the dual carriageway segregated from the road by a verge along much of the route. Minor alterations will be made to the Body Shop Roundabout to take into account the new wider approach. The existing controlled crossing point will be retained.

WICK LEVEL CROSSING

1.3.7 The A259 Corridor Improvements have been included in both the Without Scheme and With Scheme scenarios, the A27 Improvements and Wick Level Crossing closure have not been included as there was no committed scheme at the time of forecast development. It is noted that although a Preferred Route Announcement has been made for the A27 Arundel Bypass.

1.4 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

1.4.1 The assessment presented in this TA has been undertaken using best practice and is consistent with the guidance set out in the following documents:

Æ Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) Travel Plans, Transport Assessments and Statements in Decision-Taking guidance, Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) published 2014; and Æ The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB).

1.4.2 The scope of this assessment has been agreed with WSCC as highway authority for the scheme.

1.5 REPORT STRUCTURE

1.5.1 The report is formed of seven sections. Following the introduction, the remaining sections of the TA are as follows:

Æ Section 2 summarises national and local transport policy. This provides a background context to the TA and helps to define how the Proposed Scheme aligns with relevant policy; Æ Section 3 provides an overview of the location of the Proposed Scheme, the existing modal split and transport provision in relation to current opportunities for walking, cycling and public transport; and personal injury accidents; Æ Section 4 outlines the details of the Proposed Scheme; Æ Section 5 explains the approach taken to forecasting travel demand and the trip distribution associated with the Proposed Scheme in addition to summarising the junction modelling results for the future year assessments;

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Æ Section 6 details the phases of construction and the impact of the construction traffic on the highway network; and Æ Section 7 presents the conclusions of the TA.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

2 TRANSPORT POLICY AND GUIDANCE 2.1 INTRODUCTION

2.1.1 This section summarises the national and local transport policy as context for the following sections which assess the transport issues.

2.2 NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY

NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (NPPF) – JULY 2018

2.2.1 The revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)1 is a guidance document within which, local authorities in collaboration with their communities, may develop their own local and neighbourhood plans while meeting the Governments planning requirements. The NPPF places emphasis on supporting sustainable development where environmental conditions are considered alongside economic and social matters. The revised NPPF replaces the previous version published in March 2012 which replaced almost all of the previous Planning Policy Guidance Notes and Statements becoming the definitive national planning guidance.

2.2.2 Fundamental to the NPPF and its success is the following statement from Paragraph 10:

“At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development.”

2.2.3 For decision making, this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

2.2.4 Transport forms one of the core land use planning principles set out by the NPPF. This principle directs that locations which are sustainable or which can be made sustainable should become the focus of significant development. Opportunities to utilise sustainable modes to their fullest, such as public transport, walking and cycling should be actively taken, and these considerations are discussed in this TA. Paragraph 8 of the NPPF summaries three overarching objectives of sustainable development:

Æ Economic; Æ Social; and Æ Environmental.

2.2.5 To this end, transport is able to contribute significantly to a development’s adherence to these elements by providing the infrastructure which facilitates economic growth; enhancing accessibility to services and road safety; and supporting reductions in congestion and greenhouse gas emissions.

2.2.6 Paragraphs 102 and 103 recognise the contribution which rural areas can make to economic growth and that decisions affecting such areas should take account of individual circumstances.

1 NPPF, Department for Communities and Local Government (July 2018)

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

“The planning system should actively manage patterns of growth” and that “significant development should be focused on locations which are or can be made sustainable,”. It also notes that “opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary between urban and rural area.”

2.2.7 The NPPF also outlines in Paragraph 111 that all developments that generate significant amounts of movement should be supported by a Transport Statement or Transport Assessment. Local Plans and decisions should take account of whether:

Æ “give priority first to pedestrian and cycle movements, both within the scheme and with neighbouring areas; and second – so far as possible – to facilitating access to high quality public transport, with layouts that maximise the catchment area for bus or other public transport services, and appropriate facilities that encourage public transport use” Æ “address the needs of people with disabilities and reduced mobility in relation to all modes of transport” Æ “create places that are safe, secure and attractive – which minimise the scope for conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, avoid unnecessary street clutter, and respond to local character and design standards” Æ “allow for the efficient delivery of goods, and access by service and emergency vehicles” Æ “be designed to enable charging of plug-in and other ultra-low emission vehicles in safe, accessible and convenient locations.

NATIONAL PLANNING PRACTICE GUIDANCE (NPPG) (MARCH - 2014)

2.2.8 In March 2014, the Department for Communities and Local Government launched this web-based resource for planning practice guidance supporting the NPPF. It further reinforces the importance of Travel Plans, TA’s and Statements, including guidance on when they are required, and what they should contain.

2.2.9 In reinstating and reinforcing Paragraph 32 of the NPPF, NPPG states that “Transport Assessments and Statements can be used to establish whether the residual transport impacts of a proposed development are likely to be ‘severe’, which may be a reason for refusal, in accordance with the NPPF”.

2.3 LOCAL PLANNING POLICY

WEST SUSSEX COUNTY COUNCIL (WSCC) – LOCAL TRANSPORT PLAN 3 2011 – 2026

2.3.1 WSCC’s third Local Transport Plan (LTP3)2 was ratified in February 2011. It includes a strategy, objectives, targets and an implementation programme setting out transport improvements to be carried out from 2011 to 2026. The overall vision for LTP3 is:

“…to achieve efficient, safe and less congested transport networks, which contribute towards: Æ a more competitive and thriving economy Æ reductions in emissions Æ improved access to services Æ jobs and housing, especially for those in need

2 West Sussex Transport Plan 2011-26 (LTP3) https://www.westsussex.gov.uk/media/3042/west_sussex_transport_plan_2011-2026_low_res.pdf

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Æ improved quality of life for all those who live and work within our beautiful and unique County”

2.3.2 Relevant to the Proposed Scheme, LTP 3 makes a note of the issues with the A284, with the link considered as an important road which provides access to Littlehampton, and to a lesser extent Bognor Regis. LTP3 notes that the Wick level crossing causes delays for traffic in both directions, which can affect the operation of the junction with the A259.

2.3.3 LTP3, as part of its implementation plan for the Arun area, notes that “New development will be required to integrate into the existing transport network and deliver enhancements to the infrastructure, stimulating regeneration, improving connectivity and encouraging long-term sustainable travel behaviour.”

2.3.4 With respect to the Proposed Scheme, one of the key issues and aims in Arun is listed as follows;

“Generating opportunities through new development to secure the delivery of the Fitzalan Link Road Extension and Lyminster Bypass to improve safety, accessibility and contribute to regeneration in Littlehampton and Bognor Regis.” (LTP, page 51).”

ARUN DISTRICT COUNCIL (ADC) LOCAL PLAN – ADOPTED JULY 2018

2.3.5 The Local Plan was adopted on 18th July 2018, providing the framework for development over the period 2011 to 20313. This local plan replaces the Arun Local Plan (2003) and the saved policies within it.

2.3.6 Arun's Local Plan strategic objectives for Transport outlined in Chapter 15 are to:

Æ Reduce the need to travel and promote sustainable forms of transport; Æ Plan for climate change and protect the environment; Æ Create safe and accessible towns and villages; Æ Promote strong, well-integrated and cohesive communities, through the promotion of healthy lifestyles, accessible community facilities and a safe environment; and Æ Strengthen Arun's economic base and provide local job opportunities through the provision of better access to transport amongst other factors.

2.3.7 Policy T SP1 seeks to ensure that economic growth in Arun, “strengthens Arun’s economic base, reduces congestion, works to tackle climate change and promotes healthy lifestyles and that development: provides safe access on to the highway network; contributes to highway improvements and promotes sustainable transport, including the use of low emission fuels, public transport improvements and the cycle, pedestrian and bridleway network.”

2.3.8 Policy T DM1 outlines the importance of accessibility stating that “new developments prioritise safe pedestrian and cycle access to the green infrastructure network and access to public transport and community transport services where a need has been identified.”

2.3.9 Lastly, Policy T SP3 ensures that “improvements necessary to enhance the strategic and supporting road network within the District can be carried out by safeguarding the lines of major road schemes”, such as the A284 Lyminster Bypass (Southern and Northern Sections).

2.3.10 It should be noted that the forecasting completed as part of this TA has been based on the Arun Local Plan Main Modifications (July 2017) issue of the plan.

3 Arun Local Plan 2011 – 2031 (Adopted July 2018). https://www.arun.gov.uk/adopted-local-plan

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

COAST TO CAPITAL LOCAL ENTERPRISE PARTNERSHIP (LEP) STRATEGIC ECONOMIC PLAN (MARCH 2014)4

2.3.11 The LEP aims to create 5,100 homes and 79,238 sqm of employment space within the coastal corridor with particular focus in the areas of Chichester, Littlehampton and Worthing. One of the most important spatial issues to deliver this aspiration is improving transport infrastructure, which is currently considered to be holding back economic growth.

2.3.12 Therefore, in these areas, the LEP are supporting the A284 Lyminster Bypass, A27 roundabout (Crossbush) improvements and the A259 corridor enhancements. They consider the Lyminster Bypass will contribute directly to the delivery of 1,260 homes and 700 jobs, and have agreed to contribute £3 million Local Growth Funding to the Proposed Scheme.

2.4 SUMMARY

2.4.1 Based on the above review it is considered that the Proposed Scheme is consistent with the policies and objectives set out in the relevant policy frameworks at national and local level.

2.4.2 Transport policy at all levels acknowledges the influence that transport infrastructure can play in building well connected and cohesive communities. The Proposed Scheme has been developed to meet the needs of the policies discussed in regards to improved provisions for pedestrians and cyclists.

2.4.3 The policies accept that people will continue to travel by car and that accordingly, the effects of car travel on local communities needs to be minimised by providing new infrastructure away from existing settlements. The Proposed Scheme aims to alleviate traffic levels through Lyminster by means of the provision of an alternative route for local traffic travelling through the area and by providing walking/cycling facilities.

4 Coast to Capital Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) Strategic Economic Plan (March 2014) http://www.coast2capital.org.uk/storage/downloads/strategic_economic_plan_2014_without_annexes_- 1475571650.pdf

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

3 EXISTING CONDITIONS 3.1 EXISTING SITE INFORMATION

3.1.1 The site is located in a number of fields to the east of Lyminster village, near Littlehampton, on the south coast Table 3-1. The typical land uses in the vicinity of the site are: Æ Residential; Æ Agricultural land; Æ Retail, including public houses and Bed and Breakfasts; Æ Non- Food Retail, in the form of a large plant nursery; Æ Two caravan parks; Æ A local football club; and Æ A recycling centre.

3.1.2 The places of work for the residents of Arun have been summarised in Table 3-1 from the 2011 Census ‘WU03UK - Location of usual residence and place of work by method of travel to work’5. The data summarises that 51% of residents’ work and live in Arun. This illustrates that the majority of the traffic will be local with an origin or destination with the local area. The remaining Arun residents work at locations along the south coast, with Chichester (21%) and Worthing (11%) as popular destinations. A smaller 4% travel north to Horsham.

Table 3-1 Places of Work for residents of Arun6 PLACE OF WORK Arun 51% Chichester 21% Worthing 11% Horsham 4% Brighton and Hove 2% Crawley 2% Adur 2% Portsmouth 1% Havant 1% Mid Sussex 1%

3.1.3 Table 3-2 summarises the 2011 Census WP703EW method of travel to work (2001 specification)7 as percentages for Arun compared against workplaces zones (E02006542 and E02006545). As would be expected from a rural location, the dominant method of travel to work (60%) is driving a car or van.

5 Nomis Official Labour Market Statistics https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011 6 The percentages do not sum to 100%, as a number of destinations with between 0% and 1% have been excluded. These are rounded percentages to the nearest whole number. 7 Nomis Official Labour Market Statistics https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/census/2011

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Table 3-2 Method of Travel to Work AVERAGE OF METHOD OF TRAVEL TO WORK ARUN E02006542 E02006545 E02006542 AND E02006545 Driving a car or van 56% 56% 63% 60% Work mainly at or from home 17% 23% 8% 15% Passenger in a car or van 5% 5% 6% 5% On foot 11% 9% 12% 10% Bicycle 4% 2% 6% 4% Train 2% 2% 3% 3% Bus, minibus or coach 2% 1% 2% 2% Motorcycle, scooter or moped 1% 1% 1% 1% Taxi 0% 0% 0% 0% Underground, metro, light rail or tram 0% 0% 0% 0% Other method of travel to work 0% 1% 0% 1%

3.2 EXISTING TRANSPORT PROVISION

3.2.1 The following section outlines the existing transport provisions in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme; including the walking and cycling network, public transport provision, local highways network and an assessment of recent personal injury accident data.

3.3 WALKING AND CYCLING APPRAISAL

FOOTPATHS AND BRIDLEWAYS

3.3.1 A number of footpaths and one bridleway are located in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme. These are summarised in Figure 3-1.

3.3.2 The rural location of the Proposed Scheme results in the majority of the footpaths following rural routes through open land. As a consequence, the majority of the aforementioned footpaths feature no formal surfacing and offer little or no lighting provision.

CYCLE PATHS

3.3.3 National Cycle Network (NCN) Route 2 is a long-distance cycle route which, when complete, will link Dover in Kent with St. Austell in Cornwall via the south coast of England. Currently, the route runs through Littlehampton.

3.3.4 There is a lack of cycling infrastructure in the surrounding area of the Proposed Scheme.

3.3.5 Overall there are limited non-motorised user connections between Littlehampton and the villages further north of the A284.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 3-1 Footpaths and Bridleways in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

3.4 PUBLIC TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

BUS

3.4.1 The north-south public transport movements are presently served by the A284 Lyminster Road. The nearest northbound and southbound bus stops to the Proposed Scheme are located on A284 Lyminster Road, as seen in Table 3-3. At three of the stops, namely Wick, opposite Seaton Road (southbound), Lyminster Village (westbound) and Crossbush Lane (northbound) the facilities provided include a shelter, seating and provision of a timetable. The remaining bus stops do not have seating or shelters but do provide a timetable. At the Lyminster bus stop adjacent to Brookfield there is no bus stop post, although a stop is marked on the timetables. There is also a stop on Mill Lane, Wick, which is within walking distance of Lyminster village.

3.4.2 Stagecoach operates one bus service in Lyminster village, providing connections between Shoreham-by-Sea and Arundel, service number 9. It is an hourly service, running Monday to Sunday during the day.

3.4.3 Compass Travel operate a route 15 between Tesco and Littlehampton town centre, providing an hourly service in each direction, Monday to Saturday. Buses call at Mill Lane, which is within walking distance of Lyminster village.

Table 3-3 Summary of bus services within the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme AVERAGE FREQUENCY SERVICE BUS STOP HOURS OF OPERATOR ROUTE Monday - NUMBER LOCATIONS Sundays OPERATION Saturday

Wick adj Seaton Road; 0743-1853 Lyminster adj the Six (Mon-Fri) Bells; Lyminster adj Shoreham- Church; Lyminster opp by-Sea - The Old Vicarage; Every 0743-1853 Every hour Arundel Lyminster opp hour (Sat) (Northbound) Brookfield; Lyminster adj Broomhurst Cottages; Crossbush, 0853-1653 Crossbush Lane (Sun) 9 Crossbush, Crossbush 0706-1825 Lane; Lyminster opp (Mon-Fri) Stagecoach Broomhurst Cottages; Lyminster adj Arundel- Brookfield; Lyminster Shoreham- Every 0724-1819 The Old Vicarage; Every hour by-Sea hour (Sat) Lyminster Lyminster (Southbound) Village (W-bound); Lyminster opp the Six Bells; Wick opp 0919-1719 Seaton Road; (Sun) Kingley Gate – 0843 – 1743

Mill Lane, Wick Littlehampton (Mon-Sat) (Southbound) No Every Hour 15 Littlehampton Service

Travel – Kingley 0909 – 1809

Compass Mill Lane, Wick Gate (Mon-Sat) (Northbound)

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 3-2 Public Transport Provision

15 Bus

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

RAIL

3.4.4 The closest rail station to the Proposed Scheme is Arundel Station, located 2.3 km north of Lyminster village and accessible via the A284 Lyminster Road and A27 Crossbush junction, as seen in Figure 3-2. Littlehampton station is located approximately 3.2 km south of Lyminster village.

3.4.5 All services to/from Arundel are operated under the Southern branding by Govia Thameslink Railway (GTR). The regular pattern is two trains-per-hour between Bognor Regis and London Victoria, with services taking approximately 90 minutes. During the weekday there is a peak-only service direct to London Bridge departing at 07:16 with the return service from London Bridge at 17:49. Otherwise, during off-peak hours and at weekends a change of train is required, usually at East Croydon.

3.4.6 Additionally, there are two direct trains per day to Southampton at 06:47 and 08:50. At all other times, a change at Barnham is required because regular services to Southampton and Portsmouth pass through the station without calling. Furthermore, there are no direct services from Arundel to Worthing and Brighton, and a change at Ford (or Barnham) is required.

3.4.7 Facilities at Arundel railway station include the provision of sheltered bicycle parking storage with CCTV, car park (151 spaces with two accessible spaces) and refreshment facilities. There is also a taxi rank outside the station.

3.4.8 The details of direct service frequencies to respective destinations from Arundel Station are summarised in Table 3-4 below.

Table 3-4 Direct rail services from Arundel railway station to key destinations OFF-PEAK PEAK FREQUENCY DESTINATION JOURNEY TIME (MINUTES) FREQUENCY (TRAINS PER HOUR) (TRAINS PER HOUR) London Bridge 92-107 1 at 07:16 only 2 London Victoria 84-105 2 2 Gatwick Airport 50-54 2 2 1 at 06:47 and Southampton 72-130 2 1 at 08:50 only Bognor Regis 16-38 2 2 Barnham 9-20 2 2

3.4.9 Train services from Littlehampton are primarily operated by Southern, with peak time services also operated by Thameslink. The regular pattern is two trains-per-hour between Littlehampton and London Victoria, one train-per-hour to Portsmouth and Southsea and one train-per-hour to Bognor Regis.

3.4.10 The details of direct service frequencies to respective destinations from Littlehampton Station are summarised in Table 3-4 below.

Table 3-5 Direct rail services from Littlehampton railway station to key destinations OFF-PEAK JOURNEY TIME PEAK FREQUENCY DESTINATION FREQUENCY (MINUTES) (TRAINS PER HOUR) (TRAINS PER HOUR) London Bridge 101 2 (05:52 and 06:52) 0 London Victoria 105-115 2 2 Gatwick Airport 71-79 2 2 Portsmouth & Southsea 55-57 1 1 Bognor Regis 20-25 1 1 AM: 07:22 and 07:59 Brighton 53-54 0 PM: 2 per hour (15:51 - 18:27)

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

3.5 ROAD NETWORK ASSESSMENT

3.5.1 The main highway links and junctions identified in relation to the Proposed Scheme are shown in Figure 3-3 as follows:

Figure 3-3 Highway Network in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

LINKS A284 Lyminster Road

3.5.2 The A284 Lyminster Road starts in the centre of Littlehampton, near Littlehampton railway station, and then proceeds northwards along Arundel Road to cross the A259 at Wick Roundabout. The road then continues northward through Wick and crosses the South Coastway railway line at an automatic full barrier signal controlled level crossing. The horizontal road alignment through Lyminster replicates an ‘S’ shape with a series of tight radii bends and poor line of sight through this area. The vertical alignment is generally a flat profile grade. This route causes delays to those using the road from the level crossing itself, and the constraints of the current alignment including the tight bends and local accesses taken from the road are restricting future development in the area.

3.5.3 The A284 between Crossbush junction and Wick Roundabout is a 2.9 km section of rural two-way single carriageway. The majority of this section is subject to a 30mph speed limit in both directions. However, the road is subject to 40 mph approximately one kilometre from Crossbush junction.

3.5.4 No street lighting is provided through Lyminster Village on the A284 between the Crossbush junction and the Brookside Road junction. However, between the Brookside Road junction and Wick Roundabout lighting is provided on both sides of the carriageway.

3.5.5 A footway is provided on the western side of the carriageway from the A284 Wick Roundabout to the Crossbush junction. However, on the eastern side, there are two large sections of missing footway; the first is from Crossbush junction to the Lyminster Village bus stop (near Church Lane); while the second is from the junction with Orchard Lane to the Six Bells pub. Where footway is provided, this is generally at least two meters wide in most places. However, from Lyminster village to the A27 Crossbush junction the footway is overgrown with vegetation narrowing to approximately 1m and again on the bend with Mill Lane.

3.5.6 The road alignment reduces the available forward visibility for motorists. Solid white lines are provided in the centre of the carriageway on the bend near the junction with Mill Lane prohibiting overtaking in both directions. Similarly, between the junction with Church Lane and Brookfield solid white lines in the centre of the carriageway further, prevent overtaking in both directions. The road markings at both locations seem worn; indicating vehicles continue to overrun the centreline when negotiating these tight bends.

3.5.7 Network Rail could only provide data for the Ford level crossing, which is approximately 2.5 km west of the crossing at Wick with the A284 Lyminster Road. On Thursday 19 November 2015 the Ford level crossing was closed 11 times in the AM peak hour (08.00-09.00) and 11 in the PM peak hour (17.00-18.00); with total durations of approximately 35 minutes.

3.5.8 The assumption was made that the level crossing at Wick followed a similar pattern of operation to the one at Ford, with consideration for the differences in service frequency. The level crossing at Ford is much busier with 8tph per direction due to the rail junctions with the Arun Valley line and the Littlehampton branch. At Wick the regular service is 4tph per direction.

3.5.9 Overall this meant that the A284 Lyminster Road at the Wick level crossing, is closed for a total duration of 17 minutes 30 seconds; amounting to approximately 30% of both the AM and PM peak hours. Ultimately this represents a significant capacity constraint.

A284 Wick Street

3.5.10 The A284 becomes Wick Street, south of Wick Roundabout. This section is single carriageway and subject to a 30 mph speed limit until it approaches a school and local convenience shops, where the speed limit reduces to 20 mph. There is a pedestrian crossing approximately 600m from the Wick Roundabout. The road has footways and street lighting on both sides of the road.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

A259 Worthing Road

3.5.11 The A259 Worthing Road, between Wick Roundabout and the Body Shop Roundabout, is a 1.1 km section of urban two-way single carriageway; with single lane, dualling provided for the right turn into Olliver Acre. The whole section is subject to a 40 mph speed limit.

3.5.12 A wide raised central reserve is provided on the dual carriageway section with central white hatch road markings with traffic islands, keep-left bollards and solar-powered lighting on the single carriageway section. The traffic islands provide crossing points for pedestrians.

3.5.13 A footway is provided on both sides of the carriageway except the section between the allotment and the pedestrian cut-through to Toddington Lane (travelling eastbound). The footway from Toddington Lane on the eastbound side to the Body Shop Roundabout becomes a shared path for pedestrians and cyclists. The entire length of the road has street lighting on both sides.

3.5.14 There are two pedestrian crossing facilities provided on this section. The first is an uncontrolled crossing at Wick Roundabout serving a north-south movement, and the second is a Puffin pedestrian crossing, opposite a pedestrian cut-through to Toddington Lane and the wider residential area to the north of the A259.

JUNCTIONS A27 Crossbush junction

3.5.15 This junction is where the A284 Lyminster Road meets the A27 dual carriageway ramps. The junction has three approach roads; the A27 South East, A284 Lyminster Road South and A27 North. The A27 South East, A284 Lyminster Road South and Circulatory Arm (N) are signal controlled while the A27 North is priority controlled. The junction is subject to a 40 mph speed limit. The A27 South East is a dual carriageway approach, while the other two are single carriageway approaches with flares.

3.5.16 There is a footpath and street lighting for pedestrians wishing to travel northbound from Lyminster village towards Arundel.

3.5.17 This junction has a poor safety record and is known to experience congestion and journey time reliability issues. Consequently, it is being assessed as part of the A27 Arundel Bypass scheme identified in the DfT Road Investment Strategy8.

Mill Lane Junction

3.5.18 This priority junction has a flared approach, with poor line of sight in the northbound direction exiting the junction due to the horizontal alignment along A284 Lyminster Road. In addition, there is no street lighting at the junction. There are footways on both sides of the road, although the northbound footway narrows after the junction.

Wick Roundabout

3.5.19 Wick Roundabout is a five-arm junction of A284 Lyminster Road (North), A259 Worthing Road (East), A284 Lyminster Road (South), A259 Worthing Road (West) and Hawthorn Road. The A259 Worthing Road (West) arm heads towards Bognor Regis, and the A284 Lyminster Road (South) provides a north-south route into Littlehampton and towards Littlehampton station. The approach roads are all single lanes, which flare to two lanes at the entries to the roundabout. The

8 DfT Road Investment Strategy: for the 2015/16 – 2019/20 Road Period (March 2015)

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

speed limit on the approach to the roundabout is 30 mph.

3.5.20 There are footways and street lighting on the circulatory carriageway and the approaches to this roundabout. Puffin pedestrian crossings are provided on the A259 approaches, approximately 40m east and west of the roundabout. In addition, uncontrolled pedestrian crossings are provided at the junction on the A259 (west), Hawthorn Road and the A284 Lyminster Road (south) arms, where pedestrians can use the splitter islands for refuge.

Body Shop Roundabout

3.5.21 The Body Shop Roundabout is a large 80m ICD five arm junction which connects Norway Lane (leading to Watermead Business Park), A259 (E), B2187 Worthing Road, B2187 (S) Horsham Road and the A259 (W) Worthing Road. These roads are subject to 40 mph speed limit and are currently single carriageway, except for the A259 (E), which is a dual carriageway with two lanes in each direction, subject to the national speed limit. There is street lighting and a shared cycle/footway with dropped kerbs on the circulatory and all the approaches to this roundabout except A259 (E).

3.5.22 As part of the Persimmon Homes Lyminster Bypass (south) scheme it is proposed to construct a new 50m ICD roundabout at the new junction with the A259; this being in the vicinity of the existing Highdown Drive Junction. The roundabout will also provide access to a new link road leading south and connecting to Fitzalan Road, also being constructed by Persimmon Homes.

3.5.23 As part of the WSCC A259 Corridor Improvements scheme (detailed at section 1.3.4), it is proposed that the A259 Worthing Road between the Body Shop roundabout and the Persimmon Homes Roundabout mentioned above will be dualled. This road will have a 3m shared cycle/footway on the north side from its interface with the Persimmon Homes roundabout and the reconfigured signalised pedestrian crossing to its east.

3.6 TRAFFIC SURVEYS

3.6.1 In order to determine the existing traffic flow conditions in the vicinity of the A284 Lyminster Road, four Manual Classified Turning Counts (MCTC), and four Automatic Traffic Counts (ATC) were commissioned at various locations along the A284 and A259 routes. The survey locations are listed below and in Figure 3-4.

Æ Site 1 - A27/ A284 Crossbush Junction Æ Site 2 - A284 Lyminster Road / Mill Lane Æ Site 3 - A259 Worthing Road / A284 Wick Street / Hawthorn Road (Wick Roundabout) Æ Site 4 - A259 Worthing Road / Norway Lane / B2187 Horsham Road (Body Shop Roundabout)

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 3-4 Locations of ATC/MCTC Surveys and Assessed Junctions

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

3.6.2 The MCTC and queue length surveys were undertaken over a 12-hour survey period (0700 to 1900) on 13 June 2017. The survey was carried out using video recording devices attached to street lighting columns near the sites. All movements at the junctions and roundabouts were captured, with the results providing full vehicle classification in 15 minute intervals.

3.6.3 The ATC two-way daily traffic flow data was collected continuously over the two-week period using cameras from Sunday 11 June 2017 and Friday 21 June 2017. This recorded bi-directional vehicle volume and vehicle classification at the four sites on the A284 Lyminster Road and A259 Worthing Road. The ATC data was recorded to ensure the MCTC data collected was for a representative day of traffic flows and could be used reliably for scheme assessment.

3.6.4 The ATC data was compared to the 12-hour MCTC data, to establish whether the MCTC data can be considered as representative of typical conditions. The graphs presented in Figure 3-5 to 3-8 demonstrate that the MCTC data broadly follows that of the weekday ATC data, showing the dual peaks, representing the AM and PM peak traffic flow hours. There is a lower flow on Wednesdays at all sites, which could have been as a result of an accident or roadworks in the surrounding area. This data has therefore been excluded from this assessment.

3.6.5 In Figure 3-5, for Site 1 there was no ATC data recorded between 0700 on Wednesday 14 June until 1330 on Thursday 15 June as the camera malfunctioned. Therefore, no data has been included in the results for that time period.

3.6.6 Anecdotal evidence suggests that the difference between the MCTC and the ATC in Figure 3-5 is likely to be due to westbound A27 traffic using the left-hand lane to exit south onto A284, entering services and then turning back on to westbound A27 to avoid queuing in the right-hand lane on the approach to Crossbush. It was not possible to place the ATC between Crossbush junction and the services, which would have helped to capture these movements. Although the MCTC is higher than the ATC, the pattern of the MCTC broadly follows that of the ATC with the same crests and troughs in the morning and evening peak hours.

Figure 3-5 Site 1 A27/ A284 Crossbush Junction Two way: Daily ATC hourly traffic flows with MCTC data 1400 1200 1000 Mon 800 Tue 600 Wed 400 Thu

Number of vehicles 200 0 Fri MCC 00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 Time

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 3-6 Site 2 A284 Lyminster Road/Mill Lane junction Two Way: Daily ATC hourly traffic flows with MCTC data

1200 1000 Mon 800 600 Tue 400 Wed 200 Thu 0 Number of vehicles Fri

00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 MCC Time

Figure 3-7 Site 3 Wick Roundabout Two Way: Daily ATC hourly traffic flows with MCTC data

1200 1000 Mon 800 600 Tue 400 Wed 200 Thu 0 Number of vehicles Fri

00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 MCC Time

Figure 3-8 Site 4 Body Shop Roundabout Two Way: Daily ATC hourly traffic flows with MCTC data

1200 1000 Mon 800 600 Tue 400 Wed 200 Thu 0 Number of vehicles Fri

00:00 01:00 02:00 03:00 04:00 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 22:00 23:00 MCC Time

3.6.7 The results of the MCTC survey were converted to Passenger Car Units (PCUs) for use in the junction modelling software. A ‘PCU’ is a unit of measurement of traffic flow, or capacity, which is equivalent to a single car (with a length of 5.75m of road space occupied including the gap left to the preceding vehicle). For the purpose of traffic modelling, different sized vehicles are converted into representative PCU values for more convenient ways to compare and analyse results.

3.6.8 The conversion factors applied to the MCTC data are provided in Table 3-6.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Table 3-6 PCU values for vehicle types VEHICLE TYPE PCU VALUE

Pedal Cycle 0.2 Motorcycle 0.4 Car 1.0 Light Goods Vehicle 1.0 Heavy Goods Vehicle 2.0 Buses and Coaches 3.5

3.7 TRAFFIC DATA

3.7.1 The SATURN traffic model that is used as part of this assessment reflects typical morning (0800- 0900) and evening (1700-1800) peak hour traffic volumes. The Automatic Traffic Count (ATC) data from four sites in the vicinity of the scheme was reviewed in order to confirm the peak hours9. The ATC data captured is considered to represent a typical weekday during a neutral period, a summary of the average hourly counts for each hour are presented in Table 3-7. The table confirms that the peak hours for the Proposed Scheme are 0800 – 0900 and 1700 – 1800.

Table 3-7 Analysis of ATC’s to show Peak Hours TIME SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 00:00 66 70 52 51 01:00 42 43 28 30 02:00 32 30 20 19 03:00 35 37 19 22 04:00 71 71 46 43 05:00 218 234 164 170 06:00 592 587 408 428 07:00 855 903 720 757 08:00 892 945 860 908 09:00 863 961 825 841 10:00 840 920 802 829 11:00 737 902 823 851 12:00 744 886 852 872 13:00 807 900 851 887 14:00 862 898 882 921 15:00 954 999 1001 1037 16:00 1018 1070 990 1034 17:00 1057 1101 1033 1092 18:00 872 903 908 972 19:00 657 676 761 791 20:00 454 462 552 561 21:00 346 347 380 396 22:00 260 265 256 263

9 For site 1 the average was taken from only the days with data, as no data was recorded for between 0700 on Wednesday 14 June until 1330 on Thursday 15 June.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

TIME SITE 1 SITE 2 SITE 3 SITE 4 23:00 165 160 130 137

3.8 EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOWS

3.8.1 The traffic survey provided the existing traffic volumes at the four main junction sites in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme. A summary of the data for the AM and PM peak hours, including the percentages of HGV’s, are shown at Figure 3-9 AM Peak Flows, Figure 3-9 and Figure 3-10, with a summary description provided below for each junction.

SITE 1: A27/ A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION

3.8.2 In the AM peak, the highest flow was from the A27 East to the A27 North, showing the dominant movement. There are 317 and 281 vehicles turning onto the A284 from the A27 East and A27 North respectively. There are also 383 vehicles travelling from the A284 onto the A27 North arm. In total 16% of HGV’s travelling from the A27 East arm turn onto the A284.

3.8.3 In the PM peak, the highest flow was from the A27 North to the A27 East showing the dominant movement. There are 410 and 364 vehicles turning onto the A284 from the A27 East and A27 North respectively. There are also 316 and 257 vehicles travelling from the A284 onto the A27 North and A27 East arm. In total 20% of HGV’s from the A27 North arm using the roundabout to turn around and travel back onto the A27 North.

SITE 2: A284 LYMINSTER ROAD / MILL LANE

3.8.4 In the AM peak at the Mill Lane priority junction Site 2, 101 and 51 vehicles are travelling northbound and southbound onto the A284 respectively

3.8.5 In the PM peak, 148 and 50 vehicles are turning into the minor road from the A284 north and south respectively. The highest flow at this junction in both peaks is northbound and southbound along the A284.

SITE 3: A259 WORTHING ROAD / A284 WICK STREET / HAWTHORN ROAD (WICK ROUNDABOUT)

3.8.6 In the AM peak at Site 3 Wick Roundabout, the highest flows were eastbound and westbound along the A259 with 429 and 541 vehicles respectively. The main traffic flow from A284 Lyminster Road, comprises 110 vehicles turning onto the A259 East, 228 travelling straight across onto Wick Street and 235 vehicles turning onto the A259 West. There are a lower number of vehicles travelling onto the A284; from Wick Street 172 vehicles, from A259 East 154 vehicles and from A259 West 95 vehicles. The northbound and southbound flow at this roundabout is 172 and 228 vehicles respectively travelling in these directions.

3.8.7 In the PM peak, the highest flows were eastbound and westbound along the A259 with 649 and 520 vehicles respectively. The flow from the A284 consists of 160 vehicles turning onto the A259 East, 210 travelling straight across onto Wick Street and 219 vehicles turning onto the A259 West. There are a lower number of vehicles travelling onto the A284, from Wick Street 221 vehicles, from A259 East 164 vehicles and from A259 West 110 vehicles. The northbound and southbound movement is 221 and 210 respectively at this junction using Lyminster Road and Wick Street.

SITE 4: A259 WORTHING ROAD / NORWAY LANE / B2187 HORSHAM ROAD (BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT)

3.8.8 In the AM peak at Site 4 the Body Shop Roundabout, the highest flow is from the A259 North onto the A259 West with 608 vehicles and back in the other direction with 594 vehicles. The northbound and southbound flow at this roundabout is higher than at Wick Roundabout with 343

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

and 333 vehicles respectively travelling in these directions.

3.8.9 In the PM peak, the highest turning movement is from the A259 North onto the A259 West with 660 vehicles and back in the other direction with 644 vehicles. The northbound and southbound flow is still higher at this junction than at Wick Roundabout with 303 and 416 vehicles respectively travelling in these directions.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836 Figure 3-9 AM Peak Flows 32

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836 Figure 3-10 PM Peak Flows 33

3.9 COLLISION ANALYSIS

3.9.1 Personal Injury Collision (PIC) data has been obtained from WSCC for the wider adjoining highways network for the five-year period (1st January 2013 to 31st December 2017). A summary of the collisions is included in Table 3-8. A plot of the collisions in the study period is included in Appendix A.

3.9.2 A total of 83 collisions resulting in personal injury were recorded over the study period, two of which resulted in fatalities, 13 in serious injury and the remaining 68 in slight injury. Of the 83 collisions, five occurred during the Weekday AM peak (0800-0900) and five in the PM peak (1700-1800), which in total equates to 6% of the total respectively.

Table 3-8 Personal Injury Collisions

SEVERITY VULNERABLE ROAD USERS YEAR Slight Serious Fatal Pedestrians Pedal Cyclists Motorcyclists 2013 14 1 0 1 1 2 2014 14 2 0 0 2 2 2015 14 4 0 1 2 2 2016 12 2 2 2 2 6 2017 14 4 0 0 3 0 Total 68 13 2 4 10 12

3.9.3 In this review, the term vulnerable road user is taken to include pedestrians, pedal cyclists, and motorcyclists. There were no collisions involving equine users. Of the 83 collisions that occurred during the review period, 26 involved vulnerable road users; this equates to 31% of recorded incidents.

3.9.4 For ease of reference, the collision data analysis considers accidents that occurred on links and at junctions separately.

PERSONAL INJURY COLLISIONS OCCURRING ON LINKS A284 Lyminster Road Æ Two fatal (One pedestrian and one motorcyclist); Æ Six serious (One involving a motorcyclist); and Æ 27 slight (One pedal cycle and two pedestrians).

3.9.5 There were two collisions causing fatalities on the A284 as a result of alcohol impairment or driver error. The first was caused by a drunk pedestrian lying in the carriageway at night. The second collision was caused by a motorcyclist crossing onto the southbound carriageway on the approach to a slight bend, consequently colliding with an oncoming vehicle.

3.9.6 All of the six serious collisions on the A284 Lyminster Road were identified with contributory factors in the Driver/rider error or reaction grouping. Two of the collisions were caused by drivers pulling into their driveways; one accident occurred by failing to judge the gap properly when turning and the other was a rear end shunt while waiting. The third collision was a rear-end collision due to stationary vehicles waiting for the level crossing. The fourth collision was due to a driver being distracted by a spider, swerving into the opposing carriageway, colliding with an oncoming vehicle. The final two collisions occurred on the same day and in the same location. The first collision occurred when a southbound vehicle lost control on the left-hand bend and left the carriageway and collided with a tree. The second collision was a shunt at the scene of the earlier collision.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

3.9.7 There were three slight collisions on the A284 between the A27 and Lyminster. Two occurred in close proximity to the Crossbush Farm Shop; one was a shunt when a northbound vehicle failed to stop and collided with a stationary vehicle due to right turning vehicles ahead. For the other collision, it was recorded that a northbound van appeared to swerve towards a puddle and pedestrian, and collided with the pedestrian. The final collision occurred when a northbound vehicle lost control due to ice on the carriageway and collided with a wall.

3.9.8 There were 12 slight collisions recorded in the vicinity of the bends in Lyminster. Of these collisions, one was a shunt at temporary traffic signals, and two were single vehicle loss of control collisions. The remaining nine collisions involved vehicles crossing the centre line and colliding with approaching vehicles in the opposite direction on the bends. Six of the nine collisions occurred in wet/damp road surface conditions. Recorded contributory factors in these collisions were primarily in the Impairment / Distraction and Driver / Rider error or reaction categories.

3.9.9 The remaining 12 slight collisions occurred between Lyminster and the Wick Roundabout, with mini clusters at the Old Mead Road junction (three collisions), Mill Lane junction (two collisions) and the Coomes Way / Sandfield Avenue junction (five collisions). Overall, contributory factors in four collisions were failed to look properly and one where a pedestrian failed to look properly.

A284 Wick Street Æ Five slight (One involving a motorcyclist)

3.9.10 There were five slight collisions on Wick Street at the junction with Courtwick Road mainly caused by poor manoeuvres and failing to judge the other person’s path/speed. One occurred when a driver of a parked car opened their door, as a vehicle travelling eastbound on Courtwick Road drove past causing them to collide. Two separate collisions occurred when vehicles travelling southbound tried to overtake southbound vehicles turning into right into Courtwick Road. Another collision was caused by a driver travelling too close to the preceding vehicle and failing to slow for traffic causing a rear end shunt. The last slight collision occurred as a vehicle overtook two slow moving vehicles causing a shunt collision.

A259 Worthing Road Æ Two serious (One involving a pedestrian and one a pedal cyclist) Æ 14 slight (Including two pedal cycle, one pedestrian, one motorcycle)

3.9.11 One of the serious collisions occurred when a cyclist pulled out into the path of an approaching vehicle when crossing the road and one was due to a pedestrian running into the carriageway in front of a driver travelling eastbound.

3.9.12 There was a grouping of seven collisions at or in the vicinity of the Highdown Drive and Lansdowne Road junctions. Of these collisions, four collisions involved vehicles pulling out from the side roads into the path of approaching traffic. Two collisions were shunts, and one was a collision between pedal cyclist and vehicle at a pedestrian crossing. It was reported that there was a power failure at the time of the collision, resulting in the crossing not working.

3.9.13 There were three other collisions between the A284 and B2187 junctions; two were shunts involving eastbound vehicles in slow or stationary traffic. The final collision involved an eastbound vehicle turning right into Cornfield Close and colliding with a westbound vehicle.

3.9.14 Of the remaining collisions on the A259, three occurred to the west of Wick Roundabout. Two of these were shunts when vehicles failed to stop for the red traffic signal at the pedestrian crossing. The other collision to the west of Wick Roundabout was an eastbound shunt due to low sun. There was one collision to the east of the Body Shop roundabout, where it was recorded that an eastbound vehicle was travelling at excess speed and made a late decision to pull into the petrol station, and collided with street furniture. Impaired by alcohol was recorded as a contributory factor.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

PERSONAL INJURY COLLISIONS OCCURRING AT JUNCTIONS A27 Crossbush junction Æ One serious (One involving motorcyclist) Æ Six slight

3.9.15 The serious injury collision occurred as a motorcyclist impaired by alcohol turned off the A27 onto the A284 and overshot the bend striking a stationary vehicle waiting in traffic on the northbound carriageway.

3.9.16 There were six slight collisions. Three accidents were rear-end shunts, caused by vehicles failing to see vehicles ahead stopping or stationary. The last two collisions were caused by driver distraction one by the windscreen misting up inside the car and the other swerving to miss wildlife. The last collision involved a vehicle travelling north driving on the incorrect side of the central reservation into the path of oncoming southbound traffic colliding with another vehicle.

Wick Roundabout Æ One serious (Including one pedal cyclist) Æ Nine slight (Two involving pedal cyclists)

3.9.17 There was one serious collision at the Wick Roundabout, where a car pulled out into the path of a pedal cyclist on the circulatory. A contributory factor in this collision was recorded as failed to look properly.

3.9.18 There were nine slight collisions at the Wick Roundabout, five of these were shunts (one of which occurred on the circulatory carriageway), and four were sideswipes on the circulatory carriageway. Of all the collisions, failed to look properly was recorded as a contributory factor for six collisions, careless/reckless/in a hurry in two and poor turn or manoeuvre for one collision. Pedal cycles were involved in two collisions.

A259 Body Shop Roundabout Æ Two serious (Both involving pedal cyclists) Æ Six slight (One involving pedal cyclists and two involving motorcyclists)

3.9.19 There were two serious collisions on the Body Shop Roundabout, both involved vehicles pulling out and colliding with pedal cyclists on the circulatory carriageway.

3.9.20 There were six slight collisions at the Body Shop Roundabout. Pedal cycles and mopeds were involved in three collisions. Three of these occurred when vehicles pulled out into the path of a pedal cyclist or moped that was on the circulatory carriageway. Of the remaining three collisions, one was a shunt, one lost control in poor weather conditions and collided with a lighting column, and one was a sideswipe at the exit from the roundabout.

OVERALL SUMMARY

3.9.21 Analysis of collisions during the study period highlights that there have been a number of collisions at tight bends in Lyminster, particularly in bad weather or at night. It is anticipated that the proposed scheme will provide an alternative route for through traffic away from Lyminster, resulting in fewer collisions on this section. Moving through traffic away from the built-up areas should also result in fewer collisions on the A284 at the road junctions and at the level crossing.

3.9.22 Vulnerable road users were involved in a number of collisions in the study area, particularly at junctions and crossings. The proposed scheme seeks to improve connectivity through the provision of improved pedestrian and cycle facilities and by making the area safer and providing a higher standard of network away from the urban area.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

4 THE PROPOSED SCHEME 4.1 CONTEXT

4.1.1 The rationale for the Proposed Scheme has been influenced by a number of transportation factors comprising the need to resolve journey time, congestion and safety issues. The solution is to construct a new route around Lyminster village.

4.1.2 This Proposed Scheme has been devised following a conceptual design and safety audit process in which a number of alternative alignments and junction layouts have been considered and consequently dismissed. In addition, feedback from the September 2014 public consultation has informed the design.

4.1.3 The design stage confirmed that the route would be offline with the new road linking into the existing straighter section of the A284 road to the north. An offline scheme would minimise disruption to existing routes during construction in comparison to an online scheme which would have a considerable impact on journey times and traffic conditions. The scheme has been considered through an Environmental Assessment process with mitigation proposed to minimise any potential negative impacts.

4.1.4 The WSCC Lyminster Bypass will be delivered in two parts. The northern section is being delivered by West Sussex County Council whilst the southern section is part of a larger private development. The route of the link road has been safeguarded under Policy DEV15 of the Arun District Council Local Plan since 2003 and was previously adopted by West Sussex County Council as an approved highway line in September 1992. It continues to be safeguarded in the adopted Arun District Council Local Plan.

4.2 PROPOSED SCHEME DESCRIPTION

4.2.1 The Lyminster Bypass (North and South) Scheme (an outline scheme drawing is provided in Appendix B for reference) consists of the realignment of the A284 to the north of Littlehampton to provide a 1.8 km bypass to the east of Lyminster and Wick villages, between a new junction on the A259 and connecting with the existing A284 at a point 600m south of the A27 at Crossbush. The proposed alignment bridges the West Coastway railway line at Toddington.

The Proposed Scheme will be approximately 1.1 km in length and comprises a new 7.3m wide carriageway with 1.0m hard strips either side. The proposed bypass would have a speed limit of 50mph reducing to 40mph towards the northern end in order to match the existing 40mph speed limit in this location.

4.2.2 At its northern extent, the Proposed Scheme will incorporate a priority junction to serve the existing A284 Lyminster Road. The junction will branch off the proposed bypass, north of the residential property called ‘Wolstanton House’ on the eastern side of the A284. At the southern extent, the Proposed Scheme will tie into a junction with the Southern Bypass (designed and delivered by other parties).

4.2.3 There are two proposed points of access to the application site for the construction. North of Black Ditch, access is proposed via the PROW Bridleway off the A284 and to the south, it is intended to gain access via the North Littlehampton Development and the southern section of the Lyminster bypass.

4.2.4 A 3m wide shared cycleway / footway would run from the northern end of the scheme along the west side of the carriageway to reach a signalised Pegasus crossing. The Pegasus crossing would provide a safe crossing point for cyclists, pedestrians and equestrians in addition to ensuring the continuity of the existing bridleway between Lyminster and Poling. From the

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

crossing, the shared cycleway / footway would continue southwards down the east side of the proposed road to link to similar facilities further south and continuing on into Littlehampton.

4.2.5 There will be various crossing facilities provided for non-motorised users:

Æ A combined signallised Pegasus crossing provided to ensure the safety of equestrians, cyclists and pedestrians, as the existing public bridleway (2163 in Figure 3-1) will be maintained; Æ An access provided from the old A284 road stub to the Proposed Scheme footway for pedestrians and cyclists only; and Æ A new bridge over Black Ditch with the existing culvert to be extended at Brookfield Stream.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

5 ASSESSMENT OF TRANSPORT IMPACT 5.1 INTRODUCTION

5.1.1 This section details the existing and future traffic modelling results on the selected junctions. It also summarises the effect of the Proposed Scheme on key links within the Lyminster area.

5.2 ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

5.2.1 Scheme assessment has been undertaken using the strategic East Arun Traffic Model (EATM), with operational junction assessment undertaken using LinSig and Junctions 9.

5.2.2 It has been agreed with WSCC that the East Arun Traffic Model (EATM) be used as the basis for strategic assessment. EATM was developed to include the Arun Local Plan growth projections over the period 2011-2031. EATM was developed with a 2013 base year, representing the average weekday AM (0800 - 0900) and PM (1700 - 1800) peak hours, validated against observed data, and reviewed and accepted by both WSCC and the LEP’s independent assessor. The development and validation of the model is reported in the Local Model Validation Report (LMVR) February 201410.

5.2.3 The operational junction assessment models were developed from traffic surveys undertaken in July 2017, the results of which were presented earlier. More recent data was used to ensure the operational assessment closely reflected the latest traffic patterns and junction operation. Assessment of the future year impacts was undertaken using flows extracted from the strategic EATM model and the Arun local plan projections to 2031.

5.2.4 The assessment scope is based on the WSCC TA Methodology as agreed with WSCC. The EATM forecasts for this TA comprise of:

Æ Without Scheme and With Scheme Opening Year Scenarios (2019) Æ Without Scheme and With Scheme Design Year (+15-year) Scenarios (2034).

5.2.5 In all scenarios above, the proposed A259 Corridor Improvements have been included. However, the A27 Arundel improvements nor any potential closure of the Wick Level Crossing have not been included in any of the scenarios. At the time of assessment, neither of these schemes were confirmed, so the level of certainty was low. This was deemed the most robust approach. It is noted that since assessment, there has been a Preferred Route Announcement for the A27 Arundel Bypass, but no further assessment has been undertaken at this stage.

5.2.6 It is noted that the 2019 Opening Year differs from the current scheme opening year of 2021. A high-level review was undertaken to determine the high-level impact of changing the model forecast years from 2019 and 2034 to 2021 and 2036. It was determined that the change in traffic flow would be relatively low, and unlikely to materially change results, therefore considered reasonable and appropriate to continue to use these assessment years.

5.2.7 The outcomes of the high-level review are reported in the Technical Note: Change in Forecast Years for the East Arun Transport Model, included in Appendix C.

10 Lyminster Bypass and A259 Corridor Transport Business Case Deliverable D4 – Saturn Local Model Validation Report (February 2014)

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

5.2.8 The WSCC TA Methodology also states that capacity testing is required where the following increases in input flows are met:

Æ Junctions experiencing known congestion, an increase of 30 of more movements during any hour; and Æ All other junctions, an increase of 50 or more movements during any hour.

5.2.9 For the purposes of this TA ‘known congestion’ is assumed as volume/capacity (V/C) ratios greater than 0.85.

5.2.10 The opening year Without Scheme has been compared with the opening year With Scheme and determined where there is a difference of 30 PCUs or more, and a difference of 50 or more (some will be replicated in the 30 or more test). The V/C ratios for both scenarios were also extracted to determine the level of congestion.

5.2.11 In terms of other junctions where there is an increase of 50 movements or more, the results indicate there is very little effect on V/C ratios, and where it does, it relates to a junction which is being accessed as part of this Proposed Scheme.

5.2.12 The capacity assessment is informed by forecast traffic volumes from the EATM model. Four junctions have been identified for assessment on the basis of the methodology described above, and these are listed in section 5.4.2.

5.3 ASSESSMENT YEARS

5.3.1 The junction assessments have been undertaken using baseline flows from survey data and future year flows extracted from the EATM.

5.3.2 For the TA the following forecast scenarios are considered, as per the Scoping Report:

Æ 2019 Opening Year without the Proposed Scheme; Æ 2019 Opening Year with the Proposed Scheme; Æ 2034 Future Year without the Proposed Scheme; and Æ 2034 Future Year with the Proposed Scheme. 5.4 JUNCTION ASSESSMENTS

5.4.1 Operational assessments have been undertaken for several junctions in the area directly surrounding the Proposed Scheme. The scope of this assessment has been agreed with WSCC as highway authority for the scheme and focuses on a number of key local sensitive junctions as shown in Figure 3-4.

5.4.2 These models were developed with a 2017 base year to ensure the operational assessment closely reflected the latest traffic patterns and junction operation. Traffic data from the 2017 survey results presented earlier was used to build the models.

5.4.3 The assessed junctions are as follows:

Æ A27/ A284 (Crossbush Junction); Æ A259 Worthing Road / A284 Wick Street / Hawthorn Road (Wick Roundabout); Æ A284 Lyminster Road / Mill Lane; and Æ A259 Worthing Road / Norway Lane / B2187 Horsham Road (Body Shop Roundabout).

5.4.4 Furthermore, the impact assessment includes the introduction of one new priority junction at the

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

northern end, which is between the existing A284 Lyminster Road and the Proposed Scheme.

5.4.5 The performance of other committed schemes and junctions, such as the A259/Southern Bypass, has been tested and confirmed through TA work undertaken to support those schemes planning applications.

5.4.6 All the junctions have been assessed using junction modelling software, LinSig and Junctions 9, for signalised junctions and roundabouts/priority junctions respectively. These are industry standard software applications for the assessment of junction performance. The scenarios considered are the AM and PM peak time periods in 2019 Opening Year and 2034 Future Year with and without the Proposed Scheme.

5.4.7 When considering the extent of theoretical capacity within Junctions 9, it is recognised within the transport planning industry that a maximum Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) value of 0.85 is desirable for roundabouts, since this allows for a standard error of prediction of the entry capacity formula and demands in the modelling, by 15% for any site. If the RFC is below 1.00 (100%), this suggests that the flow is within the calculated capacity, and the junction is working within capacity.

5.4.8 Therefore, RFC values below 0.85 indicate that the junction is operating under capacity, between 0.85 and 1.00 the junction is approaching capacity, and an RFC value greater than 1.00, the junction is operating over capacity.

5.4.9 By setting the targeted maximum RFC at a value of 0.85 ensures that queuing will be generally avoided in the chosen design peak hour. In addition, the general use of designs with an RFC ratio of about 0.85 is likely to result in a level of provision which will be economically justified.

5.4.10 LinSig models provide an indication of the Degree of Saturation (DoS) as a percentage and the Mean Maximum Queue (MMQ) in Passenger Car Units (PCUs) for each junction approach, the average delay per vehicle on each approach recorded in seconds, and the Practical Reserve Capacity (PRC), which is a measure of the junctions total capacity (as a percentage). When reviewing the PRC of a junction the following is considered:

Æ A positive figure indicates the junction operates with reserve capacity; Æ A negative figure less than -10% suggests that the junction would be broadly at capacity; and Æ A negative figure more than -10% indicates that the junction cannot accommodate the demand.

5.4.11 For DoS the thresholds can be categorised as follows:

Æ Less than 80%: Any queues that have built up will be able to disperse during the relevant stage in each cycle; Æ 90-100%: Indicates that an arm is close to its theoretical capacity and any queue that has built up does not fully clear within each cycle; and More than 100%: Indicates that an arm is over its theoretical capacity and queues are likely to result.

5.4.12 To model roundabouts, the ARCADY module of Junctions 9 uses empirical models that relate the entry flow on a roundabout arm to the circulating flow past the arm. For a given circulating flow, the entry flow depends on various geometric aspects of the entry arm. One of the most important is the entry width. It was found that capacity increases continuously with entry width, and this was found to be a better indicator of capacity than the discrete number of lanes at the entry.

5.4.13 However, ARCADY assumes that the entire width of the entry is available to all vehicles for most of the time. In many cases, this assumption is valid, because a well-designed roundabout will encourage the use of the entry width to all vehicles. It is also perfectly valid if, for instance, there are lanes marked on the road, but vehicles can use any lane and do so frequently. However, the

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

assumption becomes less valid if there is significant unequal lane usage.

5.4.14 The Lane Simulation Mode in Junctions 9 is provided as a tool to investigate alternative lane configurations at roundabouts, the main advantage being that it models significant unequal lane usage, and this mode allows the definition of allowed movements from each lane based on lane markings. However, it should not be taken as forecasting junction performance to the same level of accuracy as the main ARCADY model.

5.4.15 Note that the Lane Simulation Mode has been used to model both the Wick and Body Shop Roundabouts as the survey data indicated significant unequal lane usage at this site. Furthermore, the lane markings at the Body Shop roundabout recommends which movements can be made from each approach lane, and therefore the use of the Lane Simulation Mode has been considered appropriate for the purposes of this TA.

5.4.16 The Level of Service (LOS) measure has been used to analyse the performance of the junctions. The method for calculating the LOS is based on Highway Capacity Manual guidance, where junctions are graded A to F based on delay experienced, where A represents the highest/best level of service and F the lowest/worst level of service. Table 5-1 shows the definitions of each grade of junction, where grades A to D are considered acceptable and grades E and F represent junctions exceeding capacity.

Table 5-1 Level of Service (LOS) Definition UNCONTROLLED JUNCTION GRADE DELAY (SECONDS) A d10 B 10-15 C 15-25 D 25-35 E 35-30 F t50

5.4.17 All junction models have been calibrated against known queue lengths, which were recorded on all arms of each junction during the same periods as the MCTCs.

5.5 2017 BASE YEAR ASSESSMENTS

5.5.1 This section sets out the junction modelling results for each of the key junctions assessed in the 2017 base scenario. These models were built using the 2017 traffic count data reported earlier.

5.5.2 The full Junctions 9 and LinSig modelling results for these are included in Appendix D-1 and Appendix E-1, respectively.

A27/ A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION

5.5.3 This is a junction is considered to be a signalised junction and therefore modelled using LinSig. Traffic signal cycle time and phasing plans were provided by Highways England. A summary of the modelling results for the 2017 Base Year scenario is provided in Table 5-2.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Table 5-2 A27/A284 Crossbush junction 2017 base modelling results

2017 BASE YEAR

LANE ROAD NAME SIDE AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) MODELLED MODELLED DoS (%) DoS (%) QUEUE (PCU) QUEUE (PCU)

A27 North 1 59.0 1 66.4

Circulatory Arm (S) 7 80.5 3 71.8

Circulatory Arm (SE) 9 81.9 10.1 76.3

Circulatory Arm (N) 6 50.6 7.2 63.4

Nearside 11 75.0 7.4 56.9 Lyminster Road South Offside 5 40.8 5.6 43.4 Nearside 3 23.2 5.2 33.7 A27 South East Offside 19.3 80.6 17.4 77.5

5.5.4 The modelling results show that the roundabout currently operates at its theoretical capacity during the AM Peak and within capacity in the PM peak. A maximum DoS of 81.9 is observed on the Circulatory Arm (SE) of the roundabout through the AM peak hour, with an associated queue length of 30 PCUs.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

5.5.5 A259 WORTHING ROAD / A284 WICK STREET / HAWTHORN ROAD (WICK ROUNDABOUT)

5.5.6 This is a five-arm approach priority controlled roundabout, where all five one lane approaches are provided with a flare. This junction was modelled using Junctions 9 ARCADY module. A summary of the results for the 2017 Base Year scenario is provided in Table 5-3.

Table 5-3 Wick Roundabout 2017 base modelling results

2017 BASE YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) ROAD NAME MODELLED MODELLED DELAY (s) LOS DELAY (s) LOS QUEUE (PCU) QUEUE (PCU) A259 (E) 6 21 C 4 14 B

A284 Wick Street (S) 3 18 C 2 14 B

A259 (W) 8 43 E 5 19 C

Hawthorn Road (N) 1 10 A 4 39 E

A284 (N) 11 60 F 9 43 E

5.5.7 The modelling results illustrate that the roundabout currently operates well within theoretical capacity during both the AM and PM peaks. A maximum LOS of F is observed on the A284 (N) approach during the AM peak, corresponding to a queue length of 11 PCUs and a total delay of approximately 60 seconds.

A284 LYMINSTER ROAD / MILL LANE

5.5.8 This is priority junction has been modelled using the Junction 9 PICADY module. A summary of the results for the 2017 Base Year scenario is provided in Table 5-4.

Table 5-4 A284 Lyminster Road/ Mill Lane 2017 base modelling results

2017 BASE YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) ROAD NAME MODELLED MODELLED DELAY DELAY (s) RFC RFC QUEUE QUEUE (s) Mill Lane (Nearside) 1 11 0.12 1 9 0.09 Mill Lane (Offside) 1 17 0.32 1 16 0.25 A284 1 6 0.07 1 6 0.17

5.5.9 The modelling results show that the junction currently operates well within the theoretical capacity in the AM and PM peak periods, with negligible queue formation and minimal delays.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

A259 WORTHING ROAD / NORWAY LANE / B2187 HORSHAM ROAD (BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT)

5.5.10 This is a five-arm priority controlled roundabout and has therefore been modelled within Junctions 9 ARCADY module. A summary of the results for the 2017 Base Year is given in Table 5-5.

Table 5-5 A259 Body Shop Roundabout 2017 base modelling results 2017 BASE YEAR

ROAD NAME AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) MODELLED DELAY MODELLED DELAY LOS LOS QUEUE (s) QUEUE (s) B2187 5 26 D 3 20 C

B2187(S) Horsham Road 8 39 E 3 18 C

A259 (W) Worthing Road 5 14 B 6 14 B

Norway Lane 1 15 B 5 52.05 F

A259 (N) 4 11 B 6 14 B

5.5.11 The modelling results demonstrate that the roundabout currently operates close to theoretical capacity in the AM Peak on the B2187(S) Horsham Road and in the PM peak on Norway Lane. A maximum LOS of E is observed on the B2187 Horsham Road (S) approach, with an associated queue length of approximately 8 PCUs and a total delay of 39 seconds.

5.6 2019 OPENING YEAR ASSESSMENTS

5.6.1 This section provides the summary of results for the 2019 Opening Year junction modelling, using Without Scheme and With Scheme traffic movement scenarios. The forecast traffic flows used in assessing the opening year impacts were extracted from the 2019 EATM model.

5.6.2 Full Junctions 9 and LinSig modelling results for the 2019 Opening Year assessments are included in Appendix D-2 and Appendix E-2.

A27/ A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION

5.6.3 Provided in Table 5-6 is a summary of the 2019 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results for Crossbush junction.

5.6.4 The junction modelling results forecast the junction to exceed its theoretical capacity across the two scenarios and both peak periods. In the without scheme scenario, a maximum DoS of 89.8% is expected corresponding to a queue of approximately 11 PCUs. Alternatively, in the with scheme scenario, a maximum DoS of 85.6% is observed with an associated queue of approximately 8 PCUs. Overall there is little difference between the two scenarios.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Table 5-6 A27/A284 Crossbush Junction 2019 opening year modelling results AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) LANE ROAD NAME SIDE QUEUE (PCU) DOS (%) QUEUE (PCU) DOS (%)

WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

A27 North 1 1 55% 55% 2 2 70% 70% Circulatory 6 7 83% 84% 5 7 80% 82% Arm (S) Circulatory 11 11 90% 85% 10 11 85% 86% Arm (SE) Circulatory 7 10 54% 72% 7 8 58% 67% Arm (N) Offside 9 12 74% 78% 9 10 74% 73% Lyminster Road South Nearside 7 8 58% 54% 6 6 53% 48%

Offside 3 5 19% 35% 4 8 29% 45% A27 South East Nearside 27 22 90% 84% 25 22 88% 85%

A259 WORTHING ROAD / A284 WICK STREET / HAWTHORN ROAD (WICK ROUNDABOUT)

5.6.5 The 2019 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results for Wick Roundabout are summarised in Table 5-7.

5.6.6 The modelling results show that, overall, Wick Roundabout operates with a reduced level of delay in the With Scheme scenario. In the AM peak queues and delays reduce on the A259 (E) and the A284 (N) while in the PM, peak improvements are observed on all arms except the A259 (E) Wick. A maximum delay of approximately 402 seconds is predicted in the AM peak with scheme scenario with a corresponding queue of 103 PCU.

5.6.7 Note that, in comparison to the base scenario, the performance of the A259 (W) arm worsens considerably, particularly in the AM peak. This is a result of a significant increase in demand in eastbound traffic travelling along the A259. Therefore, once capacity is reached or exceeded on a particular entry arm, the queue length calculated by Junctions 9 becomes unreliable. A queue can be expected, but it is not possible to accurately predict the length.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Table 5-7 A259 Wick Roundabout 2019 opening year modelling results

2019 OPENING YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800)

ROAD QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (S) LOS QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (S) LOS NAME

WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

A259 (E) 15 14 41 37 E E 15 8 37 22 E C

A284 Wick 1 2 13 14 B B 2 1 13 11 B B Street (S)

A259 (W) 97 103 394 402 F F 9 9 28 27 D D

Hawthorn 0 0 9 10 A A 2 2 28 22 D C Road (N)

A284 (N) 25 1 124 13 F B 18 1 84 11 F B

A284 LYMINSTER ROAD / MILL LANE

5.6.8 Set out at Table 5-8 is a summary of the 2019 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the priority junction.

5.6.9 The modelling results forecast the junction to operate within theoretical capacity for the Without Scheme and With Scheme scenarios. The maximum RFC is 0.24 on the Mill Lane (offside) approach of the junction during the AM peak in the Without Scheme scenario, and in the With Scheme scenario, the RFC decreases with no significant change in associated queues. Overall in the With Scheme scenario, there is no significant impact, and queue lengths are minimal.

Table 5-8 A284 Lyminster Road/ Mill Lane 2019 opening year modelling results

2019 OPENING YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800)

ROAD QUEUE QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (s) RFC DELAY (s) RFC NAME (PCU)

WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

Mill Lane 0 0 10 7 0.02 0.02 0 0 9 6 0.02 0.04 (Nearside) Mill Lane 1 0 14 0 0.24 0 1 0 14 0 0.2 0 (Offside)

A284 1 1 6 7 0.05 0.04 1 1 6 7 0.08 0.07

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

A259 WORTHING ROAD / NORWAY LANE / B2187 HORSHAM ROAD (BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT)

5.6.10 Table 5-9 summarises the 2019 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the Body Shop Roundabout.

Table 5-9 Body Shop Roundabout 2019 opening year modelling results

2019 OPENING YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800)

QUEUE QUEUE ROAD NAME DELAY (S) LOS DELAY (S) LOS (PCU) (PCU)

WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

B2187 4 4 20 20 C C 3 3 20 19 C C

B2187 (S) 2 2 13 18 B C 1 2 12 15 B B Horsham Road A259 (W) 128 101 232 175 F F 39 78 68 127 F F Worthing Road

Norway Lane 1 1 20 22 C C 9 11 102 127 F F

A259 (N) 9 14 21 36 C E 19 42 37 85 E F

5.6.11 The modelling results show that in the 2019 With Scheme scenario in the AM and PM peak on the B2187 (S) and B2187 the queues and delays remain similar to the Without Scheme scenario. In the AM peak on Norway Lane, the queues and delays remain the same, and they reduce marginally on the A259 (W) and A259 (N).

5.6.12 In the PM peak, the queues and delays increase on the A259 (W), Norway Lane and A259 (N). Overall there is a balance of positive and negative effects associated with changes in traffic volume that result from the scheme.

5.6.13 The delay experienced on the A259 (W) could be attributable to two factors. Firstly, there is disequilibrium in traffic movements at the junction. A high proportion of right turn movements from the B2187 Horsham Road contrasts with the low volume of opposing right turn traffic from Norway Lane. The consequence is a lack of available gaps for traffic from the A259 (W) to enter the junction causing long delays. Secondly, the model assumes a bell-shaped distribution of arrivals in the peak hour. In reality, this is not the case, and traffic can arrive unevenly at a junction in platoons as a result of the propagation of upstream or downstream traffic conditions.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

LYMINSTER BYPASS, LYMINSTER ROAD – NEW JUNCTION

5.6.14 Table 5-10 summarises the 2019 With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the new priority junction.

Table 5-10 Lyminster Bypass, Lyminster Road New Junction 2019 opening year modelling results

2019 OPENING YEAR

AM Peak (0800-0900) PM Peak (1700-1800) ROAD QUEUE QUEUE DELAY (s) RFC DELAY (s) RFC NAME (PCU) (PCU) WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS Lyminster - 1 - 8 - 0.16 - 1 - 7 - 0.17 Bypass (S) Lyminster - 1 - 17 - 0.12 - 1 - 16 - 0.05 Road Lyminster - 1 - 8 - 0.14 - 1 - 8 - 0.23 Bypass (N)

5.6.15 The modelling results forecast the new priority junction to operate well within the theoretical capacity for the With Scheme scenario. The maximum observed RFC is 0.44 in the PM peak hour on the Lyminster Bypass (N) approach with a queue of 1 PCU and a delay of 10 seconds.

5.7 2034 FUTURE YEAR ASSESSMENTS

5.7.1 This section provides the results of the junction modelling undertaken for the 2034 Without Scheme and With Scheme scenarios. The forecast traffic flows used in assessing the opening year impacts were extracted from the 2034 EATM model.

5.7.2 Full Junctions 9 and LinSig modelling results for the 2034 future year assessments are included in Appendix D-3 and Appendix E-3

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

A27/ A284 CROSSBUSH JUNCTION

5.7.3 The 2034 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) scenario modelling results for the junction are summarised in Table 5-11.

Table 5-11 A27/A284 Crossbush Junction 2034 future year modelling results

2034 FUTURE YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800)

ROAD LANE QUEUE (PCU) DOS (%) QUEUE (PCU) DOS (%) NAME SIDE

WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

A27 North 1 1 64% 65% 2 2 70% 71%

Circulatory 18 19 93% 94% 8 8 88% 88% Arm (S) Circulatory 15 15 96% 94% 11 11 92% 88% Arm (SE) Circulatory 12 13 85% 88% 9 9 75% 76% Arm (N)

Offside 14 16 88% 89% 9 11 77% 80% Lyminster Road South Nearside 10 9 71% 59% 8 8 68% 59%

Offside 3.5 5.4 27% 36% 5 8 37% 45% A27 South East Nearside 42 31 99% 94% 31 29 93% 92%

5.7.4 The 2034 future year assessment forecast the junction to operate over theoretical capacity during both the AM and PM peaks for both scenarios considered. A maximum DoS of 98.1% is anticipated on the A27 South East nearside with an associated queue length of 42 PCUs in the AM peak. In the With Scheme scenario three arms experience reduced delays in the AM peak, but only one arm in the PM peak sees any improvement. Although the results indicate that the junction will fail in 2034, the Proposed Scheme is not forecast to have any significant impact on the operation of the roundabout.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

A259 WORTHING ROAD / A284 WICK STREET / HAWTHORN ROAD (WICK ROUNDABOUT)

5.7.5 Table 5-12 summarises the 2034 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the roundabout.

Table 5-12 Wick Roundabout 2034 future year modelling results

2034 FUTURE YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) QUEUE QUEUE DELAY (s) LOS DELAY (s) LOS ROAD NAME (PCU) (PCU) WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

A259 (E) 114 46 268 101 F F 50 19 102 48 F E

A284 Wick 3 2 19 14 C B 2 1 16 12 C B Street (S)

A259 (W) 326 264 1249 979 F F 67 47 158 112 F F

Hawthorn 0 0 10 10 A A 9 5 83 45 F E Road (N)

A284 (N) 74 2 348 20 F C 63 6 328 38 F E

5.7.6 Overall the modelling results show that in the 2034 With Scheme scenario there is a positive impact on Wick Roundabout as a result of the implementation of the Proposed Scheme, with similar or reduced levels of queuing and delays on all arms in the AM and PM peak. The level of service either improves or remains the same with the implementation of the Proposed Scheme.

A284 LYMINSTER ROAD/ MILL LANE JUNCTION

5.7.7 Table 5-13 summarises the 2034 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the junction.

Table 5-13 A284 Lyminster Road/ Mill Lane 2034 future year modelling results

2034 FUTURE YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) QUEUE QUEUE ROAD NAME DELAY (s) RFC DELAY (s) RFC (PCU) (PCU) WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS Mill Lane 0 1 13 8 0.03 0.14 1 1 10 9 0.07 0.32 (Nearside) Mill Lane 2 0 26 0 0.53 0 1 0 20 0 0.37 0 (Offside)

A284 1 1 6 7 0.05 0.05 1 1 6 7 0.16 0.13

5.7.8 The 2034 future year assessment forecast the junction to operate within theoretical capacity during both the AM and PM peaks for both scenarios considered. In the 2034 With Scheme scenario, the RFC is reduced to 0.05, with little or no queueing. This is a result of traffic re-routing

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

from A284 Lyminster Road to the Proposed Scheme. Overall the Proposed Scheme has no effect on the junction with no queuing in the With and Without Scheme scenarios.

A259 WORTHING ROAD / NORWAY LANE / B2187 HORSHAM ROAD (BODY SHOP ROUNDABOUT)

5.7.9 Table 5-14 summarises the 2034 Without Scheme (WOS) and With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the roundabout.

Table 5-14 Body Shop Roundabout 2034 future year modelling results

2034 FUTURE YEAR

AM PEAK (0800-0900) PM PEAK (1700-1800) ROAD QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (s) LOS QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (s) LOS NAME WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS

B2187 6 5 29 26 D D 4 4 26 29 D D B2187 (S) Horsham 6 22 40 108 E F 4 4 28 28 D D Road A259 (W) Worthing 241 192 518 425 F F 106 136 178 248 F F Road Norway 1 1 22 23 C C 33 33 392 404 F F Lane A259 (N) 20 23 42 52 E F 59 64 111 127 F F

5.7.10 The modelling results show a number of increases and reductions in the level of queuing and delay on each arm. During the AM peak, there are improvements to the B2187 and the A259 (W) but increases in delay on the B1287 (S) and the A259 (N) The most marked effect is the improvement in performance on the A259 (W). During the PM peak, there is a worsening of performance on the B2187, A259 (W), Norway Lane and A259 (N). Overall there is a balance of positive and negative impacts resulting from the scheme.

5.7.11 The delay experienced on the A259 (W) could be attributable to two factors. Firstly, there is disequilibrium in traffic movements at the junction. A high proportion of right turn movements from the B2187 and B2187 Horsham Road contrasts with the low volume of opposing right turn traffic from Norway lane. The consequence is a lack of available gaps for traffic from the A259 (W) to enter the junction causing long delays. Secondly, the model assumes a bell-shaped distribution of arrivals in the peak hour. In reality, this is not the case, and traffic can arrive unevenly at a junction in platoons as a result of the propagation of upstream or downstream traffic conditions.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

LYMINSTER BYPASS, LYMINSTER ROAD – NEW JUNCTION

5.7.12 Table 5-15 summarises the 2034 With Scheme (WS) modelling results at the junction.

Table 5-15 Lyminster Bypass, Lyminster Road New Junction 2034 future year modelling results

2034 FUTURE YEAR

AM PEAK (08:00-09:00) PM PEAK (17:00-18:00) ROAD NAME QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (s) RFC QUEUE (PCU) DELAY (s) RFC WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS WOS WS Lyminster - 1 - 8 - 0.2 - 1 - 8 - 0.22 Bypass (S) Lyminster - 1 - 19 - 0.08 - 0 - 18 - 0.02 Road Lyminster - 1 - 9 - 0.26 - 1 - 12 - 0.49 Bypass (N)

5.7.13 The 2034 future year assessment forecast the new junction to operate well within theoretical capacity during both the AM and PM peaks, with significant spare capacity. A maximum RFC of 0.49 is observed on the Lyminster Bypass (N) with an associated queue of 1 PCU and an 11- second delay in the PM peak hour.

5.8 CHANGE IN TRAFFIC FLOWS BY LINK

5.8.1 Link flows for a number of locations within the study area have been extracted from the traffic model for each scenario in the AM and PM peak periods in order to highlight the impact of the Proposed Scheme on the local highway network. A full breakdown of the traffic flows on various links in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme for the AM and PM peak hours are shown in Figure 5-1 and Figure 5-2, respectively.

A284 LYMINSTER ROAD - NORTH OF TIE IN WITH PROPOSED SCHEME (LINK A284-1)

5.8.2 The link flows on the A284 at link A284-1 (i.e. north of the tie-in with the Proposed Scheme) indicate that in the 2019 Opening Year, the implementation of the Proposed Scheme will lead to an increased vehicle flow of 481 vehicles in the AM peak, and 337 in the PM peak.

5.8.3 In the 2034 Future Year, the implementation of the Proposed Scheme will lead to an increase in vehicle flow of 246 vehicles in the AM peak, and 202 in the PM peak.

A284 LYMINSTER ROAD- SOUTH OF TIE-IN WITH PROPOSED SCHEME (LINK A284-2)

5.8.4 The link flows on the A284 at link A284-2 (i.e. south of the tie-in with the Proposed Scheme) show that the introduction of the Proposed Scheme will lead to a decrease in vehicle flow of 893 vehicles in the AM peak and 977 vehicles in the PM peak in the 2019 opening year.

5.8.5 In the 2034 future year, the implementation of the Proposed Scheme will lead to a decrease in vehicle flow of 1,181 vehicles in the AM peak, and 960 vehicles in the PM peak.

A259 WORTHING ROAD (LINK A259-2 AND A259-3)

5.8.6 The link flows show on the A259 at link A259-2 in the 2019 Opening Year AM and PM peak hours there are differences of -20 and -50 vehicles between the With and Without scheme scenarios respectively.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

5.8.7 In the 2034 Future Year AM and PM peak hour, there are differences of -85 and -205 vehicles between the with and without scheme scenarios, respectively.

5.8.8 On link A259-3 on the A259, the flows show that in the 2019 Opening Year AM and PM peak hour there are differences of -39 and 136 vehicles between the With and Without scheme scenarios, respectively.

5.8.9 In the 2034 Future Year AM and PM peak hour, there are differences of -87 and 105 vehicles between the With and Without scheme scenarios, respectively.

5.8.10 This shows that overall there are reductions in the AM peak hour for both 2019 and 2034. However, there are increases in traffic in the PM peak hour in both 2019 and 2034. This increase may be attributed to the Proposed Scheme and the dualling of this section of the A259 as part of the WSCC A259 Improvement Schemes.

THE PROPOSED SCHEME (LINK N BYPASS)

5.8.11 The Proposed Scheme on link N Bypass in the 2019 Opening Year during the AM and PM peak hours there will be 1,433 and 1,347 vehicles with the scheme respectively. While in the 2034 Future Year AM and PM peak hours there will be 1,454 and 1,201 vehicles with the scheme, respectively.

5.8.12 Overall the link flow analysis indicates that a significant volume of traffic has been reassigned from the A284 route onto the Proposed Scheme, significantly relieving Lyminster village of traffic and sections of the A259 during both peak hours.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 5-1 Change in traffic flow - AM peak hour

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Figure 5-2 Change in traffic flows - PM peak hour

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

6 CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC

6.1 INTRODUCTION The scheme will be constructed off-line from the existing road network to minimise disruption to road users during the works. A detailed Construction Traffic Management Plan will be prepared to manage the impacts of construction traffic at a later stage.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

7 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 7.1 SUMMARY

7.1.1 The Proposed Scheme comprises the construction of a single carriageway bypass road, and accompanying footways and cycle ways. The Proposed Scheme will tie in with the existing A284 at the northern extent with a new priority junction and will connect with the southern section at Mill Lane Toddington Nurseries.

7.1.2 The Proposed Scheme is necessary to provide an alternative north-south route for traffic that currently directs through the village of Lyminster and is delayed at the Level Crossing. The new bypass will improve safety and the reliability of journey times between the A27 and the A259.

7.1.3 Junction modelling for future year assessments has been undertaken for four existing junctions in the area in the vicinity of the Proposed Scheme. The priority junction proposed at the northern end of the Proposed Scheme has also been assessed. Forecast traffic flows for both 2019 and 2034 were extracted from the EATM for use in these assessments.

7.1.4 The results of the junction modelling undertaken in this assessment demonstrated that for the 2019 and 2034 scenario, there was an overall decrease in delay at Wick Roundabout as a result of the Proposed Scheme. There are significant reductions in queues and delays on the A259 (E) and A284 (N) arms in both peaks. There is an overall minimal impact at the A284 / Mill Lane and A284 Crossbush roundabout.

7.1.5 However, the Proposed Scheme negatively impacts on some already over capacity arms of the Body Shop Roundabout in the 2019 Opening Year and the 2034 Future Year:

x In 2019 increased queues and delays are experienced in the PM peak on the A259 (N);

x In 2034 increased queues and delays are experienced in the AM peak on the B2187 (S) and in the PM peak on Norway Lane

7.1.6 Overall, there is a balance of positive and negative effects at this junction as a result of changes in traffic volume. It should be noted that the modelling undertaken includes the proposed improvements to the A259 corridor, but does not include the A27 Arundel bypass or other non- committed schemes.

7.1.7 The junction modelling shows that the proposed junction at the northern end of the Proposed Scheme operates well within theoretical capacity in the AM and PM peaks in both the 2019 and 2034 scenarios.

7.1.8 The improved cyclist and pedestrian facilities and shared use path will encourage local residents to undertake local trips on foot or by bike. The reliability of the existing bus service should improve with the Proposed Scheme with fewer queues and delays on the existing A284 Lyminster Road.

7.2 CONCLUSION

7.2.1 This report concludes that the construction of the Proposed Scheme would be beneficial to the highway network in both Lyminster and the wider Littlehampton area. Modelling for both 2019 and 2034 future year assessments show that the Proposed Scheme would have a minimal or beneficial impact on the assessed junctions. However some residual issues would remain at the Body Shop roundabout as a result of re-routed traffic.

7.2.2 The TA sets out that the Proposed Scheme is consistent with policy and aligns with local, regional

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

and national objectives to support sustainable development and economic growth through improved transport provision. The scheme would provide a new primary route which would limit the effects of a significant constraint at the Wick Level Crossing and overcome issues relating to the alignment of the existing route.

A284 Lyminster Bypass WSP West Sussex County Council Project No 70022836

Appendix A

PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENT PLOT AND REPORT

Ref: 1506246 Ref: 1300250 Collision Severity Ref: 1405853 Ref: 1500831 *# !( Ref: 1404705 Fatal Ref: 1502314 )"!(!(!( Ref: 1401560 )" Ref: 1505374 Serious !(!( Ref: 1301342 !( Ref: 1406165 Slight

Ref: 1602837 Ref: 1604609

Drawn By: Date Modified: )" Ref: 1303088 !()" Ref: 1407401 Ref: 1704959 Ref: 1707305 Ref: 1504452 Ref: 1707368

Ref: 1400948 Ref: 1705188 *#)" Ref: 1704757 Ref: 1701601 )" !(!( Ref: 1504153 Ref: 1605878 !(!( !( !( !( Ref: 1306707 Ref: 1507405 Ref: 1602224 Ref: 1704314 Ref: 1705258 Ref: 1607554 Ref: 1601769 Ref: 1601814 !( Ref: 1307084 Ref: 1601366 !(!(*# Ref: 1500917 Ref: 1705833 Ref: 1704797 !( Ref: 1506209 !( Ref: 1404255 Ref: 1301125 Ref: 1603929 )" Ref: 1501895 !(!(!( Ref: 1304558 Ref: 1306105 !( Ref: 1403474 Ref: 1704633 Ref: 1505560 Ref: 1706709 Ref: 1701769 Ref: 1601294 !(!(!(!(!( Ref: 1406566 Ref: 1705381 !(!(!()" !( )"!( !(!(!( )" Ref: 1701263 !( !( !( !( Ref: 1503317 !( !( !(!()" Ref: 1307079 !(!( )"!(!(!( Ref: 1607152 )" Ref: 1505264 Ref: 1406454 Ref: 1701594 Ref: 1305675 Ref: 1407342 Ref: 1404276 Ref: 1500265 Ref: 1604849 Ref: 1302605 Ref: 1700486 Ref: 1406954 Ref: 1604293 Ref: 1406279 Ref: 1707332 Ref: 1507603 Ref: 1301184 Ref: 1405923 Ref: 1500827 Ref: 1601704 TITLE: Ref: 1303747 Ref: 1303114 LyminsterPROJECT Bypass TITLE Ref: 1604850 Ref: 1304691

Ref: 1604000 FIGURE No: Ref: 1503824 PersonalFIGURE Injucy Collisions X

! "! ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' # $% / 0 1! . & '3 2.- ' ! 3 4 5' / 0 6 .'* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) / 0 6 .'* & '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% 0 7, +. 8 5 )% 0 +. 8 5 #9 /5 1 . # -- "! 5 2 : 15 * ;5 -- 6*

1! $ # ' # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0&* ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # # / 0 1! . & '3 2.- ' +. 4 5) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5 ) / 6;); 6 .' '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/00(2'6=1:2':&/1,++20*'' +/>7&12(='?'*':6/@(1,/&((2'6=1:;/21&,+(:&721 :&7(1/*:20:*1,/&((2'6'2',7A4=12'72012'611=,',26:1>&@;/=((&70,2'+,'1+//1,1&71 00(&1'' ;/&&,6&72'+,'1+/*:1,2&74,?2'64=1:21,&,' 7,'7*2'6'/;((,12&1&7 &B0:'6&77&12(;/=++&,&72',2'"=,2&;

# 1! # $ ' $(211(&:1'%*&1+4# ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' % / / 6C; 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 * 8! !- .* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5 ) / 0 * 8! !- .* & '3 2.- 4 3 ! 3 4 5' 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:1,/&((2'6&0((27&7*21:112',/&:20(&*:20:0((27&7*21:112',/&:20(&;

# # 1! # ' # ( . , !' =0 ( ( ( )* +), ! 5)-(. .- & ' #%$ / / 6C; 6 . ' '3 2.- ' ! 3 4 5' 0 8 5 )%

0 ! 5 * 3 ( . , ' 7 15 1 ( 08!; / >0. . .7 @-- 515 :.78 71! ! 05 0 ! .A0 ! ; 7 / ! *!5*5 32 0 ! 5 3;75 . * ! &D 7 0 ! 7' 1 3' /, ;

% $ # # *3 ( .- "! =0! 53, ! '!.8 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % # / E 1. .' '3 2.- + 4 5)% / 0 -- .' '3 2.- ' 4 5%) / 0 -- .' '3 2.- ' +. 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )%

/1 ! 40 5*1 5 ;/ 3/A!4 3 ! 8!0 5 0 5 , /; 0 5 /;

% ## ! 1! # % # # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'%.! =0(0&1('& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. %.- & ' $ $ / 0 6 (:8 .* ' '3 2.- + +. 4 5%) / 0 6 ,:8 .' * '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% 0 7, ! +. 8 5 %) 0 7, +. 8 5 )% 1:&7,2/&,+/&:20(&*721,01&7427&,2':&,/&:20(&A1:20=&7:&,1/&&,2'11:&2'60,,26&* 0((272'6*21:/&:;

* $ % # $ $*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:26:7*'7,2/& ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' $ $$

# # / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5 ) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) /&:20(&1*1:,&&'7+=,2'(*/2'61,++20;/&:20(&'&0((27&7*21:/&:20(&1*A1*2'11:,&&A1:,&&2'1+=,; 7,2/&,1:,&&(26:12'"=,2&;

# $ $*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:26:7*'7,2/& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % $ / 0 1! . * '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&1,/&((&7*&1('6$ *,1:2'6,7'7/&:20(&=((&7=1+,:26:7*'7,2/&2'11:&1:+/&:20(& *:20:,&=(1&72'0((22';1:&7,2/&,+/&:20(&11&71:1/&:20(&*2'72012'611=,'++'7(*&77*'2+ 11=,'++;'2'7&&'7&'1&&*21'&0,,4,1&71:&00='1+7,2/&,+,/&:20(&:*&/&,'1:&,2'7&&'7&'1 &&*21'&0,,4,1&71:&00='1+7,2/&,+,/&:20(&1:11:&,&*'2'7201,'/&:20(&'721727'1(*; 210''14&

$ # + # $ # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+='7+2&(7/&'=& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # # / 0 1! .* '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / E 6 . ' 3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:20(&&&,62'6+,'7+2&(7/&1:,=6:112',1,++20;/&:20(&+2(1&,2'61112',1,++20=2'621& 0,,26&*A*:&'/&:=((&7=12'11:+/&:;

%$ + % $ $ $*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:26:7*'7,2/& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # $$ / 0 1! . & '3 2.- 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/1,/&((2'6+,&11*&1'$*:&'/=((&7=1+('7*'7,2/&'1$*:&,&/0((27&7*21:/

# # % 1! $ $ $*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#:,:,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / 0 0 .* & '3 2.- +. 4 5 ) / 0 6 .* '& '3 2.- ' 4 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&'741:1,/&((2'6*&11&1'*,1:2'6,7;1, /&:=&71:&(&+1:'7('&'7/&:=&71:&277(& ('&;41:/&:20(&7&,6,&,='71:&, /&:*&'111?&1:&'7&B2110'12'=&('61:&$;21727/&: A*:20:*2'1:&('&1(1?&1:&'7&B21A0,,2&7',='71:&, '72'11:&1:+/&:;41:0,='1&71:& 0&'1,(,&&,/12'"=1+1&,1:&'7&B21'7/&:0((27&7*21:26'1'7(1;

% ! $ ' $*,1:2'6,7*20?1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %%% / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5%) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- ' +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

7,2/&,/&:20(&<=&=&2'62'1,++20+,&7&1,2'0,2'6;7,2/&,/&:20(&&&,6&7+,,='74=10((272'6*21: /&:20(&;

% 1! # # ' # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'&1+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' ## # / 0 6 (:8 .* ' '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% 0 7, +. 8 5 )%

/1,/&((2'6&1',7'&6121&(&+1:'74&'7(&0'1,('70,&0&'1,((27*:21&(2'&'70((27&*21: /*:20:*1,/&((2'62'1:&2172,&012'

# 1! % = ' =0=,1*20?,7*20?*&1+# *20?1,&&1=127&1"='012' ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' % / 0 6 . ' '3 2.- + +. 4 5%) / 8 6 .& 1! 2.- 4 3 4 5#9 0 7, 8 5 #9

/1,/&((2'6&1'0=,1*20?,7*:&'7,2/&,+2(&71&&142(2101&,2',7*;/0((27&72'1,&,+ 01&,0=2'60='11+((=1'7=12'2',2'"=,;

# # $ ! $ $ # =*20?1,&&1(211(&:1'1"='012'+$*,1:2'6,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / 0 * 8! !- . ' '3 2.- + 4 5#9 / 0 * 8! !- . ' '3 2.- 4 3 4 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 )

/112',1, *212'6+,6;/(112',4&:2'7/;7,2/&,+1(2++4,?&>=1@'70,"&,?+,*,7 2'1,&,+/0=2'62',2'"=,>40?2'@1B+/;

% # ! $ # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=2((('&=127&'"'0 ( 7 3 )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' % / 0 6 (:8 . '* '3 2.- + 4 5) F 0 7, 8 5 ) FG 4 1

/1,/&((2'6'4(10'1,('(&+1:'74&'7A(&+10,,26&*1++27&2'1:&76&;

$ # # # # (2'1&,(2'1&,1"='012'+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' / 0 6 (:8 .& '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 ,:8 . & '3 2.- + +. 4 5) 0 +. 8 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) /&:20(&*1,/&((2'6=1:4='71*,7(2'1&,'7/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6',1:4='71*,7,='7&(;1:& 7,2/&,+/&:20(&*:2'1+2(2,+1:&,&A+2(1&&1:&,74&'72'6:&7'76&1,26:10,2'11:&1: +/&:20(&;

# % $ # # (2'1&,,70,4=:',1:+=0(0&1('&=127&0,4=:+,: ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. %.- & ' ## %$$

# # / 0 6 . ' '3 2.- + 4 5%) / 0 -- . ' '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5)% / 0 * ! . ' '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )% 0 8 5 ) /*1,/&((2'6',1:4='7('6#(2'1&,,7A*:2(1/*1,/&((2'64&:2'7'7/4&:2'71:1;/(*&7'7 2'7201&711=,',26:12'11:&+,:;/1&7;/+2(&711'70((27&7*21:1:&,&,+/A0=2'61:116 2'11:&,&,+/

$ $ 1! % # 0,4=:1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $# #% / 0 1! .& '3 2.- +. 4 5) / 0 6 ,:8 . '& '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 )% 1:&7,2/&,+/((&6&1:17,2/&,+/1,/&((2'6*&1:0'1,/&'&7,&710=2'61:&0((22';

! % # $ $(2'1&,1"='012'+# ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %%$ / 0 6 .' '3 2.- 4 5%) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:20(&1,/&((2'6',1:1=1:;/&:20(&>&7(00(&@1,/&((2'6*&11&1(,&7'1:&,='74=1;/&:20(& +2(&71&&00(21'1:&,='74=17=&11:&=''70(2&7:20=2'6:22',2'"=,;

# 1! % $ ' $:*1:,',7(211(&:1'1"='012'+# *20?1,&&1=127&,='74=1 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %% $ / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- 4 3 4 5)% 0 +. 8 5 )%

/&:20(&1&72'1,++20;/&:20(&,'2'1,&,+/&:20(&;,12&1&7'7?&;2'212((1:&,&727'1&,1 4&'76&;76&*(1&,+='71/&:20(&;2'77212'A&'6&,2'/&:20(&=++&,&72'"=,;'7&12(*&,& &B0:'6&7;

# # % % # # (211(&:1'1"='012'+=0&,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % # / 0 1! . & '3 2.- + 4 5) / CG 6 . ' '3 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:*:&72'6',1:'(2'1&,,7A*:2(1/&:>1,00(&@*1,/&((2'6=1:'1:&&,7A/&:1=,'&7 2'10&*=((2'60,1:&1:+/&:;,&=(1+1:2/&::0((27&7*21:/&:;

% ! 4# 4#*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#:,:,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ ## / 0 * 8! !- .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 * 8! !- .& * '3 2.- 4 3 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:'71,/&((2'6*&14='7'11:&,='74=10'(?'*'1:&47:,='74=1;/&:(*7*'+, /&:20(&(,&7'1:&,='74=1'7/&:6&2'11:&,&,+/&:0=2'6(26:12'"=,1:2&(+;

1! # % ,='7&(1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ #% / 6E; -- .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 -- .& * '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&*&14='72'('&+(*'711,&71,++20(26:1;/&:20(&4&:2'7/&:20(&+2(1(*2'12&'7 +,*,7/&,:'62'60,'&,1+/&:20(&0((27&*21:,&,+/&:20(&;

# 1! ' ,='7&(1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' #$ #% / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / / 6C; * 8! !- .& * '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:112','7/&:+2(&711'7:21,&,+/&:;41:7,2/&,1&7'7&B0:'6&7,12(7&12(;7,2/&,+ /&::(26:12'"=,140?

# # % $ + $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0,'+2&(70(& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % % / / 6C; 1! .* '3 2.- + 4 5)% / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5%) 0 7, +. 8 5 %)

/&:20(&'&1,/&((2'6&1A1"='012'*21:0,'+2&(70(&A7&,26:11=,''70((27&7*21:/&:20(&1*1,/&((2'6*&1 '$;

%% ! 1! # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+=4,?(*'7,2/&*&'1,'0& ( ( )* , ), ! * )-(. %.- & ' #% $ / 0 1! .' * '3 2.- ' +. 4 5 ) / ) 6 . ' '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6=1:'1:&(2'1&,,7;/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6',1:'1:&(2'1&,,7;/&:20(&: 7&,26:11=,'2'14,?(*'7,2/&*&'1,'0&'72'11:&1:+/&:20(&0=2'6/&:20(&10((27&*21:21;

# %$ $ # # *20?1,&&1(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0=,1*20?,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %%# / 0 1. .' * '3 2.- ' +. 4 5)% / 4!0 1! .* '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )% 0 +. 8 5 %) /4==1:4='72'72012'6,26:1A'74=111=,',26:12'10=,1*20?,7;/0,(=1:4='7/&,1?&4=21 4&62'11=,',26:1;0((22'00=,'7/1:&'0((27&*21:*((+:=&''&,27&;

$ % ! * $ $ ' $(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#*,1:2'6,7 ( 7 3 )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' # / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- ' 4 5 ) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

2'+,'1>/&:20(&)00(21@*1,/&((2'6,='71:&,='74=1;/&:20(&0((27&7*21:/&:20(&0=2'600(211+(( ++:242?&;'4=('0&*0((&7>07 %$ @;&/&,(&(&1&74=111:212&1:&,&,&'7&12(+' *21'&&,+,1:&7,2/&,+/&:20(&;00(21*(1&,720/&,&71:/&4,?&'*,21;

# # # %%% + $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:26:7*'7,2/& ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' $ / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5)% / 0 * 8! !- .* & '3 2.- 4 3 4 5 ) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 ) /0,1,/&((2'62'(2'&+1,++20&14='7'2'6(&0,,26&*,7(221&71 +2(11*:&'1,++202'+,'1 (*'712'+,'10((27&*21:/2'+,'1

% = =0=,1*20?,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=&(*'/& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # % / 0 1! . & '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 8 5 )%

/=((2'6=1+&(*'/&A:+2(&7162/&*1/;0((27&7*21:,&,'&,27&+/;/7&++;

%$ 1! # ' # *20?1,&&1*20?(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0=,1*20?,7 ( ( )* =35), ! * )-(. .- & ' %% / 0 1! .' * '3 2.- 4 5 ) / 0 6 . ' '3 2.- 4 5) / 0 * ! .& ' '3 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/*7,2/2'6('62''&1&,(72,&012'*:&'7,2/&,+,?&7/&:20(&>/@A&'&77,2/&,H7,;/0((27&7*21: 7,A0=2'676&;7&12(*&,&&B0:'6&711:&0&'&4=11:&'7,2/&,+/,&,1&7'2'"=,1/2'=,'0& 0';

$ # # *20?1,&&1(211(&:1'1"='012'+=4&0'+2&(7,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %%$

# # $ / 0 1! .& ' '3 2.- + +. 4 5 ) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 %) 0 7, 8 5 ) /&:20(&=1:4='7'*20?1,&&1+,1:&,='74=1"='012'*21:1:&$;/&:20(&1=,'&7,26:1=1+4&0'+2&(7 ,711,/&(',1:'*20?1,&&1'72'72'60((27&*21:/&:20(&;

! $ # # (2'1&,,7,='7&( =1:+=127&4,?+2&(7(76& ( ( )* +), ! 2)-(. %.- & ' # / 0 6 (:8 . '* '3 2.- + +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 ) /1,/&((2'6',1::,0:&7(&+1:'74&'7'7(10'1,(7=&120&'0,,26&*;;/:1:&'0'12'=&7('6 ,7',1:'7:21*((;

% 1! # ' # *20?1,&&1*20? ',1:+=0=,1*20?,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / / 6C; 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 -- .' '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

7,2/&:(*&7+,1,++20;7,2/&:,'2'1,&,+/&:0=2'676&10,'7'&0?2'"=,17,2;7,2/&:6/&'& '742(&'727:&*=(77/2&2'=,'0&7&12((1&,;

% # ! $ # $ $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:(&* ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% 0 ! 8 5 )

/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6*&11&1('61:&$*:&'&7&1,2'11:&12&+*,212'62((&76&71:/&,='=1 7&(24&,1(2'+,'1+/&:20(&A62/2'61:&7,2/&,'12&1,&01;1:&&7&1,2'*1,=0?41:&+,'1'&,27&+1:& 0,'72124&(2&/&7:&:+,01=,&70((,4'&A(*&,(&6+,01=,&A0,&2'2'27&:2?=((A(&6(0&,12''7 0'0=2';

# # # $ % ,='7&(1"='012'+'(21,='7&(,7=127&'"='012' ( 7 3 )* +), ! 2)-(. %.- & ' #% $ / 0 6 (:8 .' & '3 2.- + 4 5#9 0 8 5 #9

/1,/&((2'6=1:('6;*2'7*=77&'(21='7//0((27&*21:7&/1212',?&,;

# $ ! + # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'$=1:+=2((('& ( 7 3 !35)* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' #$# / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / 0 -- .' '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5 ) / 0 -- .' '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, ! +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&1*'7/&:20(&1:,&&11202'1,++20*212'61(&/&(0,2'6/&:20(&'&:+2(&71&&1:11:&1:&,/&:20(& :/&1&7'7:211:&,&,+/&:20(&1*1:1:1:&',((&7+,*,7'7:21/&:20(&1:,&&;0=2'62',2'"=,11:& 7,2/&,+/&:20(&1*;

$ % 1! % # ' ,='7&(,7,='7&(1"='012'+0,4=:,='74=1 ( 7 3 !35)* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ #%$ / 0 * ! .' * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 * ! .' * '3 2.- ' 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )%

/112','0,4=:,='74=1*212'61,&71,++20(26:11,0&&70(0?*2&'11:&# (2'1&,,7;/ *:20::74&&'112',4&:2'7:21:&'=77&'(7,/&2'11:&,&,+/;

! * % $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+# *20?1,&&1 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %$ / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- ' 4 5 ) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6=1:'1:&# '70,2'61:&,='74=1"='12'*21:1:&$;/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6*&1 '1:&$'7:4&&'*212'61=((=1'11:&,='74=1;/&:20(&*27,='74=1/&:20(&:=((&7=1 0((272'6*21:/&:20(&;

# # #$ % # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+$*,1:2'6,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %%$ % / 0 -- .' '3 2.- + 4 5 ) / 0 1! .' & '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&0&1:(11,='74=111=,'(&+1*:&'/&:20(&,&,)&'7&7/&:20(&0=2'676&141+/&:20(&;

$ # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+,='7&(,7=127&1"='012' ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' #% #% / 6;); 6 ,:8 . '& '3 2.- + 4 5) / / 6C; 6 (:8 .'& '3 2.- + 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )%

/1,/&((2'6',1:7,/&'2'0,,&0127&+0&'1,(,&&,/12'2'11:+'02'6=1:4='71,++200((272'6 *21:/&:20(&;7,2/&,/=++&,&7&,2=2'"=,>4,?&'1&,'=@

+ % $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#:,:,7 ( ( )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' # / 0 6 .* '& 3 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:20(&1,/&((2'6&14='7(&+1,='74=1'71?1:&&B21'11:&$;7=&1,*&1:&,'71:&,74&2'6 (2&,:&0((27&7*21:(1:2112'6:2:&7;

# ! % $ $*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+# *20?1,&&1 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %% / 0 1! .& '3 2.- ' 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

00(21*/&,1?&'4/A00(21,0:2'6,='74=14&:2'7/'(&+1:'727&A00(21(*&77*'*10:2'6 *:1/*72'6A*/*:&72'61,26:1'A00(210,,2&7'A1:&'/1=,'&7(&+1:2112'642?&'1=2'6' 2'7201,

# # # # # (2'1&,&1+=0:=,0:,7 ( ( )* , ), ! * )-(. %.- & ' ### # / 0 6 (:8 . '* 3I 1! 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

2'6(&/&:20(&0((2'*:&,&7=&1/&,,*&1:&,'7(&/&'1:&,7A/&:20(&:(2&7'71:&7,2/&,1,2'6 11&&,2'11:&?27:=',='71+,'70,:&72'11,&&;

% # % # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'&1+=0:=,0:,7 ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' %# / / 6C; 6 ,:8 .' * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 (:8 .* ' '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 ) /&:20(&1,/&((2'6=1:2'1++27&4&'7A/&:20(&1,/&((2'6',1:1*,7&;/&:20(&=++&,(+0'1,('7 0,&'12'60,,26&*;/&:20(&1?&/272'6012'4=1/&:20(&0((27&+,'1'&,27&1+,'1'&,27&;

%$ 1! # % ,='7&(&1+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' $ # / 6;); 6 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 7, 8 5 ) /A'7/1,/&((2'6*&12'('&(*2'6+,1,++202'+,'1;/:+2(&71,&0111:&(*2'6/&:20(&'7::21/A *:20:2'1=,'::21/

# $ 1! $ = ' =:(&*(211(&:1'1"='012'+=(2/&,0,& ( 7 3 )* +), ! * )-(. .- & '

# # / 0 6 . & '3 2.- + 4 5) / CG 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/1,/&((2'6',1:2',7+((*2'6,71&1;/1,/&((2'6&11*&1;/1=,'&711:&,26:1+((*2'6,7;1:&,71 1:22'1',,*7=&1,?&7/&:20(&'1:&',1:27&;/&,1:/&1,1&710,',1:4='7('&,272'6 2'1+ 4=&,+/A'7+((2'6++;/7,2/&,11&7/,27&,&(1+(0:(;7&12(&B0:'6&7;=4&<=&'1(2'"=,2& ,&,1&71/,27&,;

$ % 1! $ % $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+# *20?1,&&1 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) / 6E; 1! .' * '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 ) /&:20(&*&14='7'$&'1&,4/&,='74=12'1&'72'610'12'=&,='7'71,/&(',1:'# ;/&:20(& &'1&,,='74=1+,*20?1,&&1'70((27&*21:/&:20(&*:20:*(,&7',='74=1;

! ! $ # # (2'1&,,7,='7&(1"='012'+ ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # # # / ) 1! .& '3 2.- + 4 5 ) F / 0 * 8! !- . ' '3 2.- +. 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) FG 4 1 0 ! 8 5 )% 0 7, +. 8 5 ) /:(&+11=,'2'6(&+1'*&&2'6(&+1:'74&'72'1# ;,27&,/:4(('&71:&4&'7'71,=0?112', /&:20(&*212'62'1,++20'',1:4='70,,26&*;

% * $ $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+=6(4&(0& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ $ / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% 0 8 5 )

/&:20(&A'7*&,&1,/&((2'6&1'1:&$1*20?;/&:20(&:1&7+,<=2'61,++20;/&:20(&:1:&'0((27&7 *21:1:&,&,+/&:20(&;/&:20(&:1:&'0((27&7*21:1:&,&,+/&:20(&;

# # %$ * % # # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+='7+2&(7/&'=& ( 7 3 )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' # / 0 1! .* '3 2.- + 4 5 ) / ) 1 . ' '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/1=,'2'6,26:1=1+"='012'"2'2'62',7+,'7+2&(7/&'=&0((27&*21:/1,00(&*:20:*/&,1?2'6 112',1,++20

% % ! 0,4=:1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' #% #% / 1 D 1! .& '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 8 5 )

/&:20(&1,/&((2'6*&14='7'A'1=,'2'6(&+1'1(2,710,4=:2'1#A(2'1&,,7A1:&7,2/&, *&,/&712+B'70,:&72'1*&1=&B0='10='02(26'1;

% # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0:=,0:,7=127&1"='012'*21:0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 !35)* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' % % / 0 6 (:8 .& '3 2.- +. 4 5) / 0 6 ,:8 . & '3 2.- +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 )$ /&:20(&1,/&((2'6=1:4='7'# 2'7,2JJ(2'6,2'*21:*&1,7A'26:12&A:1?&'$7&6,&&4&'7'77,2+1&7 0,1:&0,,26&*2'11:&1:+',1:4='71,++201,2?2'6''02'60,*21:++27&62'1++27&;

% 1! # # *20?1,&&1(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0=,1*20?,7 ( 7 3 )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' %%$

# # / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 1! .' * '3 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 8 5 )$ 0 +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 )$ 0 7, 8 5 ) /&:20(&'&:&72'6=1:',7;/&:20(&1*1=,'2'6,26:12'72012'6;/&:20(&'&4(=&(26:1012/&;/&:20(&1*1=,'&7 2'11:+/&:20(&'&;0((22'00=,&7;

% %$ 1! % # $ $:,:,7(211(&:1'*&1+# (2'1&,,7=127&,2,1&'1,'0&1&'1&,,2&0&'1,& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ % / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 * 8! !- .* & '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/1,/&((2'6&14='72'1(*='A727'1&&/:&7:7(*&7 1&7'71,=0?1:&40?+/;

%%% % # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=(7&7,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # / / 6C; 6 . ' '3 2.- ' ! 3 4 5' 0 8 5 )

1:&2'"=,&7,1A&7&1,2'*,&72'626''1:&6,/&,6&*:&':&*1,=0?'1:&,26:1,4/&:20(&;1:& /&:20(&727'11;

# % % $ $*20?&1+=:26:7*'7,2/& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $# / 0 . ' '3 2.- 4 5)% / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )%

/0:2(7&7(00(210,&,71&7&1,2'0,2'6+,=1:1',1:2'11:&1:+/*:20:*1,/&((2'6 +,&11*&1;1:&0,2'6:71&,,*&,+2(=,&'7*'1*,?2'611:&12&+1:&2'027&'1;

$ %%$ + + % $ # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+=*701&('&=127&"=1,2,12B4&((=4 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % # # % / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5)# / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + +. 4 5%) 0 + 8 5 )%

/1,/&((2'6=1:+2(1&&&,'(2'62'0,,26&*'7,='/&,&;/+((*2'672,&01(4&:2'7/(+2( 1&&&,'(2'62'0,,26&*'7,='/&,&A='*,&21*&,''70'12'=&7'"=,'&;

% %# # % # # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=(7&7,7=127&1:&2B4&(( ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ / 0 =1! .& & '3 2.- +. 4 5) F / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5)% 0 7, +. 8 5 ) FG 4 1

/1=,'2'62'1:&&'1,'0&11:&2B4&((:A&B212'+,'1+/1,/&((2'6=1:('6(2'1&,,7;/&:20(&0((27&; 7,2/&,+/+2(,727&4,&1:1&1'72,,&1&7;

% %$ ! % # ,='7&(1"='012'+# ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ # / 0 6 .& * 3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 * 8! !- .& * '3 2.- ' 4 5 ) / 0 * 8! !- .& * '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 8 5 )% /&:20(&1,/&((2'6*&1''7,0:2'611201,++201,&7(26:1+2(112'12&;/&:20(&:21,&,+27&+ /&:20(&2'('&1:&':211120/&:20(&2'('&;

% % ! % $ # ' # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,&1+=0:=,0:,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' #$ / 0 6 (:8 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&+2(&71'&6211&(&+1:'74&'70,&70,,26&*'70((27&7*21:+(2'1*(('71,++204((,7 0=2'676&'72',2'"=,

% %# + % # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,%#=1:+=0(0&1('& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ $#$

# # / E 6 (:8 .* ' '3 2.- + 4 5 ) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5 ) 0 7, + 8 5 ) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 ! +. 8 5 ) /1,/&((2'6',1:4='7'1:&,0:1/&,(26:1(&+1:'74&'7A:0,&71:&(27*:21&0&'1,&(2'&2'11:& =1:4='70,,26&*'7201&7*21:1:&+,'1+/1:1*1,/&((2'6=1:4='7;+1(2'"=,2&0=&711:& ,27&,+/;

% %$$ + % # # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=&1'0(& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / 0 1! .* '3 2.- + 4 5) / E 1 . ' 3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 )% /&:*212'61=((=1+&1'0(&'(2'1&,,7A112',1,++20*212'6+,(&/&(0,2'6;4=1?&&0(&, ,?((*2'6/&:1=((=1;/&:1,/&((2'6',1:'(2'1&,,7/&,1?2'6(2'&+112',1,++20;/&:: =((&7=12'11:&1:+/&:0=2'6,27&,'72((2'&'6&,10((2&7*21:/&:'7+((++;

% % % $ $*,1:2'6,7*20?1"='012'+=('77*',7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ / 0 1! . & '3 2.- +. 4 5) / E 6 .& * '3 2.- + +. 4 5)% 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 )% /:=((&7=1+27&,72'1&'72'611=,',26:1/,0:&7;/:(&+1:'72'7201,''7/:'12021&7 1:1/21=,'2'6(&+1;/:'11=,'&7(&+1'7/:=((&7=12'+,'1+/'71:&0((22':00=,,&7;

%% % $ ! # % % $ ' $(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:,:,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # $ / 0 .& * '3 2.- 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

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

%# % # $ # % $ ' $(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#=127&47: ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. %.- & ' # # / 4!0 .& * '3 2.- ' 4 5) / ) 6 .'* 3 2.- ' 4 5 ) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:20(&4=&&,62'6+,"=012'+1:&4#'7"2'2'61:&$+2(1&&&7/&:20(&,0:2'6"='012' 021&7','7/&:20(&2''11&11'1?&2014,?&:,7+((2'6+,42?&4&+,&201

%$ % # + # % # # $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+=:26:7*'7,2/& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # $% / 0 . * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .& * 3 2.- ' +. 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 ) /&:20(&1,/&((2'6*&1'1:&$'7,0:2'6"='012'*21::26:7*'7,2/&;/&:20(&=((&7+,:26:7*'7,2/& 2'11:&1:+/&:2(0&:2112'61:&+,'1'&,27&;

%## 1! $ $ % $ % # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & '

# # $ / 0 6 (:8 .& '3 2.- + +. 4 5)# / 0 6 ,:8 . & '3 2.- + +. 4 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/:&72'6*&1('6,7+2(1'&6121&(&+1:'74&'70,&0,,26&*2'11:&1:+/0=2'6201

% ! % $ ' $'&*,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+4# ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # / 0 1! .'& & '3 2.- + +. 4 5) / CG 6 .* & '3 2.- ' 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )%

/>1,00(21@1,/&((2'6,='71:&,='74=1;7,2/&,/:=((&7=1+,1:&"='012'0((272'6*21:/;7* ?'0?&7++:242?&0=2'6(26:12'"=,2&'776&11:&42?&;

% * % $ # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=1:,'(&,?=127&1:,'(&,? ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / 0 1! .* '3 2.- 4 5#9 / ) 6 . ' '3 2.- + 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )%

/)&(7&,(7,2/&,&B212'6+,1:,'(&0,/',?:1=,'&7,26:172,&01(2'11:&1:+/*:20:*1,/&((2'6 ',1:'# ;7,2/&,/:4&&'1:,*'+,1:&1,00(&'7=12'&72',2'"=,2&;

% ! * % = =&(*'/&'=&(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0=,1*20?,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / 0 1! .* '3 2.- ' +. 4 5%) / 8 6 .& * 1! 2.- +. 4 5)% 0 7, ! +. 8 5 )%

/&:20(&*212'611=,',26:1+,0=,1*20?,72'1&(*'/&'=&;/&:20(&7,/&2'1&(*'/&'=&A/&:20(& 7,2/&,0,&71:&,72'42(2101&,+,&1/&&'10,&(*'/&'=&*:&,&4/&:20(&1,=0?/&:20(&; 24(&+01,0=2'61:&0027&'1*1:&&B1,&&='(26:111:&12&+1:&0((22'

#% 1! $ ' $(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#*,1:2'6,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % $

# # / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/>00(21@*2'('&+,='74=1*21:1:&2'1&'12'+62'61,26:1:&72'*&1&,(72,&012';/:=((&72'1 ,='74=1'7:21,&,+00(21;7&12(*&,&&B0:'6&711:&0&'&;

% % # $ $(211(&:1'4)(211(&:1'1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/1,/&((2'6&14='7&'1&,&7'11:&, '70((27&7*21:/*:20:*(,&7'1:&, ;

% $ * $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'+# ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / 0 1! . * '3 2.- + 4 5%) / 0 -- . ' '3 2.- 4 3 4 5%) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- ' ! 3 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 %)

/=((&7=1+# 2'1,='74=1A1:&'1&72',='74=17,2/&,*'='?'*'/&:20(&02'6+,:2,26:1 27&>/@1&7;/4&:2'7/0'12'=&7='12(217&0'101*21:/;76&0=&71,&,+/'71:&+,'1+/; 7,2/&,7&12(0:&0?&7*21:,&=(11:1/:7'2'=,'0&;/7,2/&,0'+=&71*:&1:&,:&:72'=,'0&;41: 7,2/&,&(7&,(;

% * # # (211(&:1'1"='012'+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* , *), ! * )-(. .- & ' % / 0 6 (:8 .& 3 2.- + 4 5) / 6E; 6 ,:8 . & '3 2.- + 4 5%) 0 7, 8 5 %)

/*1,/&(2'61*,7(211(&:1''1:&(2'1&,,7;/*1,/&(2'61:&21&72,&012'1*,70,4=:; /&,1:/&(10'1,(*:2(&1?2'61:&0,'&,A1?&'1:&0,'&,*27&'70((27&7*21:1:&+,'1+,27&+/; &B1&'2/&76&*0=&711:&+,'1'&,27&+1:&+/'7/;1:&:&/,2''7*&1,70'7212'(2?&((&7 '72,1'1+01,2'/(2'60'1,('1:&0,'&,;70(2'&7+'&0?2'+1&,0((22'A4=('0&'1 ,&<=&1&7;

# # # %$ ! 1! # $ $ $(211(&:1'*&1+=('7*'&,7=127&*,1:2'6,7,? ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ $ / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5)% / 0 6 .* & 3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, ! 8 5 )%

&7(00(210,2'6+,',1:1=1:A+,/&&'117&26'1&7,&A*:&',27&,,7&=12'11:&27&+' ,0:2'6/&:20(&;

$ 1! # # ' # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'=1:+=0:=,0:,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / / 6C; 6 .' '3 2.- + ! 3 4 5' / 0 * 8! !- .' '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 ) 0 +. 8 5 )$ 0 +. 8 5 )$ /*+02'62'=1:&,(72,&012''7:71&711&,,1,++20(26:1;/:0((27&7*21:1:&,&,+/;/ =((&7/&,1&B0:'6&7&12(4=17,2/&,+/7,/&*+,1:&0&'&;

# % * % # $ ' $*,1:2'6,7(211(&:1'$*&1+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %% / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 -- .* & '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5%) 0 7, +. 8 5 %)

/1,/&((2'6&1A(*2'67*'11,++20(26:1A/+2(&71"=76&&&7 721'0&'71,=0?,&,+/*21:&+,0&;

# * % # # # (2'1&,#&1+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' #$ # / / 6C; 6 (:8 .* ' 1! 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:20(&'&:&72'6',1:&B0&&&7(10'1,('70((27&7*21:+&'0&/&:20(&,((&7'12127&;(26:12'"=,2&;

# # # $ 1! # # ' # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+=2((,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / 0 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- ' +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/7,2/2'6=1:'2',7;/&&,62'6+,27&,7 &1;&76&7=1:2112'6/0=2'676&1/;/1:&'7,/&++ ',1:*,7*21:=112'6;/7,2/&,=++&,&72',*:2(:2'"=,2&;

# $$ ! $ % # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,#&1+=0:=,0:,7=127&+2,+2&(7 ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' #$ # / 0 6 (:8 .* ' '3 2.- + 4 5 ) F / 0 6 ,:8 .' * '3 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) FG 4 1 0 7, 8 5 ) /*1,/&((2'6',1:'(&+1:'74&'7;/7,2+1&711:&++27&A2'11:&'02'6('&*:&,&210((27&7*21:/ >1,/&((2'6=1:@'7(&+11:&0,,26&*11:&++27&'71:&'0((27&7*21:4,20?*((;

# ## 1! $ % # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'$&1+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' #$ # / 0 6 (:8 .* ' '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 ,:8 .' * '3 2.- + 4 5 ) 0 7, 8 5 )

/:4&&'1,/&((2'6'&('61:&# ;/1,/&((2'62'1:&21&72,&012';1:&*&1:&,0'7212'*&,&7,&7+=(A*21: :26:*2'7'7:&/,2';/:&'1&,&7(&+1:'74&'7'7(10'1,(0((272'6:&7'*21:/;&B1&'2/&76&1 41:/&:20(&;

# # % $ $ # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=(7&7,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ %

# # / 0 6 .* & '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )% 0 +. 8 5 )% /4&2'67,2/&'&1'(7&7,7+2(&71111"='012'*21:(2'1&,,7'70'12'=&7+,*,70((272'6*21: +,'1++27&+/*:20:*4&2'67,2/&'=1:'(2'1&,,7;

#% # + $ $ $,=12'61'4)(211(&:1'1"='012'+=&'1,'0&1:&((6,6&=127&:&((6,6& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. %.- & ' #% # / 0 0 .& 1! 2.- + +. 4 5) F 0 7, +. 8 5 ) FG 4 1

/&:20(&1,/&((2'61&B0&&&77*'('&7,2/&,1(12'=1&7&027&7162'1&1,(112'A0:'6&7('&1 <=20?('70((27&7*21::&((6,6&26'0=&776&1&;

# # % # # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0&* ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # # / 0 -- .& * '3 2.- + 4 5 ) / 0 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5)% 0 7, 8 5 )%

/1,/&((2'61(*&&7*&1&,(('60&*1"='012'*21:(2'1&,,7/0,&71:+/+,',1: '70((27&70=2'6(26:176&14=&,2'"=,&7,1&'7&7=',7*21:(26:12'"=,

## %$ ! % $ $(211(&:1' *&1+# ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' / 8! 6 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5%) 0 7, +. 8 5 %)

/'7/*&,&41:1,/&((2'6*&1'$A/*2'0,,&01('&16:&7*21:/2'*,'6('&A212'&72++, ,26:11=,';41:/&:20(&:/&0,&7,='74=11"01+$'7# A/:1&72'6712&+,,&71,++2026'( 21=1&74&'7,='74=1;/7,2/&,*'1+2(,*21:,7(=1;:+2(&71&&/1+,,&71,++2026'(A 11&1&711?&&/2/&012'4=10=(7'17;/0((27&7*21:,&,+/0=2'676&;

#$ ! # # # (2'1&, ',1:+=0:=,0:('& ( 7 3 )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' $ $

# # / 0 6 .' '3 2.- 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 ! 8 5 ) /&:1,/&((2'6=1:4='7'(2'1&,,7;/&:'&6121&7(&+1:'74&'7A1:&'7,2/&,(10'1,(;/&:&B21&70, ',1:4='7('&'7++1:&0,,26&*;/&::211,&&''&,27&+0,0=2'6&,2=(2+&1:,&1&'2'62'"=,2&1 &'6&,;

$ ! 1! % 4# 4#:,:,7(211(&:1'1"='012'=1:+$ ( 7 3 )* , *), ! * )-(. .- & ' / 0 6 (:8 .& '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 . * '3 2.- 4 5 ) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

/02'6++,='74=1+,$'14#1,/&((2'62'=1:&,(72,&012'(10'1,(/&&,&7/&,121&27& +,7*:&,&0((22'*21:/00=,,&7A1,=0?++27&,&,B(&/&:20(&0&111(012'

$ %# ! # # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1' ',1:+=0:=,0:,7 ( 7 3 )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' $ $ / 1 D 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 3 .33 '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

/&:20(&,,2/2'610&'&+1'+,7:7/&:20(&7,2/&2'11:&40?+1:&*:2(17,2/&,+/&:20(&*"=1 6&112'6=1+:2/&:20(&;

$ #$ + # 4# 4#:,:,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+$,=12'61'4=127&=1:+, ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' % / 0 6 .' '3 2.- ' +. 4 5) 0 8 5 )

/*1,/&((2'6=1:('6:,:,7;&7&1,2'1&&7=12'11:&,7'70((27&7*21:+,'1'&,27&+/ >*2'70,&&'@

$ #%$ ! # # # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+=2((('&=127&1"='012' ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & '

# # / 0 6 (:8 . '* '3 2.- ' +. 4 5)% / 6E; 6 ,:8 .'* '3 2.- 4 5)% / 0 6 (:8 . '* '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, ! +. 8 5 )%

/1,/&((2'6',1:('6(2'1&,,7;/0(2&7'&,27&?&,4'7/&&,&72'1++27&+/1,/&((2'6=1:4='7A 0=2'6/12'*1:7&4,2:2112'6/A*:20:*1,/&((2'64&:2'7/;

$ # + $ # $ $ $47:,='74=1(211(&:1'1"='012'+4#*,1:2'6,7=127&:&((&1,(6,6& ( ( )* +), ! * )-(. .- & ' # / 0 .'& * '3 2.- +. 4 5) / 0 1! .* '3 2.- ' 4 5)# 0 7, 8 5 )#

/&:20(&*:*:&72'6*&14='7'$=((&7=1'147:,='74=1'70((27&727&'*21:/&:20(&*: *1,/&((2'6&14='7>$@'7:&72'6=1:'1:&,='74=12'1:,:,7;+1&,1:&0((22'*21:/&:20(&A /&:20(&1:&'*&'1++,7:211:&26'1'1:&"='012'1*,1:2'6,7;

$ #$ ! + % # # # (2'1&,,7(211(&:1'1"='012'+=0=,1*20?('& ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %$ % / / 6C; 1! .* '3 2.- + 4 5) / E -- .* '3 2.- 4 3 4 5) 0 7, ! 8 5 )

/=((&7=1+"='012'4=1+,='?'*',&'1:&2,1:*41,=01&7;/=((&7=14&:2'7/4=1+2(&714&,/&7 /*112',;/1,=0?1:&,&,+/0=2'62',76&'72',2'"=,1,27&,+/;

$% ###$ $ # # # (2'1&,,7(2'1&,1"='012'+=&'1,'0&11:,'(&,? ( ( )* , ), ! * )-(. .- & ' / 0 6 . ' '3 2.- ' 4 5)% / / 6C; 6 .' '3 2.- + 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 )

/&:20(&*:20:*1*2'60,/'*1,/&((2'6',1:'1:&(2'1&,,7;/&:20(&*1,/&((2'6=1:'1:& (2'1&,,7;1:&0,/':4&0&7&10:&7+,/&:20(&62'6'11:&21&27&+1:&,7;/&:20(&:1?&' &/2/&012'1/27A(&/2'61:&,711:&'&,27&0((272'6*21:+&'0&;

# # % $ #$ * # # $ ,='7&(,70,4=:1"='012'+# (2'1&,,7 ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' $ #% / 0 6 .& * '3 2.- + 4 5)% / 0 * 8! !- .& * '3 2.- 4 3 +. 4 5 ) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&2112'64&:2'7/&:20(&11,++20(26:1A(26:10:'6&7'77=&111,11,++20/&:20(&:2140?+/&:20(& 0=2'62',76&'72'"=,;41:/&:20(&1&7'7&B0:'6&77&12(A00='1+/&:20(&&&'4&04'7 62/&'7/20&+,*:2(:;

$# # # ! 1! # # 0,4=:$=1:+=0,4=:('& ( 7 3 )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # $ / ) 6 (:8 .' & 3 2.- ' 4 5) 0 7, 8 5 ) 0 ! +. 8 5 )% /1,/&((2'6=1:'2'6(&0,,26&*,7;/,0:&7(&+1:'74&'71+1;,27&,(2&74,?2'60=2'6/1 :26:27&;,27&,1:,*'+,/'7,&0&2/&72',2'"=,2&;,&,&'6&,(1:,*'+,/'7,&0&2/&7&,2=2'"=,;

$$ #$ 1! # % $ ' $(211(&:1'%$&1+$ ( ( )* =35), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' # #$ / 0 6 .* '& '3 2.- + 4 5) / 0 6 .* '& '3 2.- +. 4 5)% 0 7, +. 8 5 )%

/:7"=1(&+1,='74=12'('&'7*:&72'62''&1&,(72,&012';/A*:20:*2'('&A:(&+11:& ,='74=11&&7A(10'1,('7:21,&,++27&+/A0=2'676&;7,2/&,+/727'1&B0:'6&+=((7&12(1 1:&0&'&;

# # % # # $ $(211(&:1'1"='012'&1+$ ( ( )* +), ! 7 )-(. .- & ' %# % / 0 0 .* '& '3 2.- + 4 5%) / 0 1! .& '& '3 2.- +. 4 5) 0 7, +. 8 5 )

/&:20(&'7*&,&'&61212'6,='74=1;/&:20(&*2'('&'7/&:20(&*2'('&;/&:20(&:0:'6&7('& 2'11:&1:+/&:20(&0=2'60((22';

# #

Appendix B

OUTLINE SCHEME DESIGN

Appendix C

TECHNICAL NOTE: CHANGE IN FORECAST YEARS FOR THE EAST ARUN TRANSPORT MODEL

TECHNICAL NOTE

TO Guy Parfect - WSCC FROM David Heard - WSP

DATE 03 July 2018 CONFIDENTIALITY Public

SUBJECT Change in Forecast Years for the East Arun Transport Model

CHECKED BY Dan Hyde AUTHORISED BY Dan Hyde

PROJECT NUMBER TBC REPORT NUMBER TN-001

FILE REFERENCE \\uk.wspgroup.com\central data\Projects\700228xx\70022836 - WSCC Yr1 - A284 Lyminster\C Documents\Reports\Tech note -

Change of Forecast Years\20180702_TN-ForecastYearChangeAnalysis_v0-1.docx

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1. WSP have been commissioned to use the East Arun Transport Model to provide evidence to the planning application for the proposed Lyminster Bypass.

1.2. Previous work undertaken on this had assumed an opening year of 2019 and a design year of 2034. These assumptions informed the Lyminster Bypass Traffic Forecasting Report (Issued August 2017, Report No 70022836-D7-TFR-V2.0)

1.3. Subsequent developments in the scheme have identified a risk that the opening year for the Lyminster Bypass may be pushed back by two years, to 2021, with the design year also pushed back to 2036.

1.4. This note is intended to provide high-level guidance for WSCC on the likely impacts of pushing back the forecast years two years will have on the predicted levels of traffic in and around the Lyminster Bypass area. It, therefore, aims to confirm if the current forecasts are suitable for use in environmental assessment or if it is appropriate for new forecasts to be drawn up for the change in forecast years.

1.5. This note contains the following sections: Introduction (This section) Forecast Data Analysis Predicted impacts on the forecast networks Conclusions

www.wsp.com

2. FORECAST DATA ANALYSIS

2.1. Several sources of data were used to generate the forecasts presented in the Traffic Forecasting Report. These include: Data from local authorities on the expected completion of new residential and employment sites within Arun and Worthing. This was compiled into an uncertainty log and reported in the Traffic Forecasting Report. Expected levels of growth from the National Trip End Model, a Department for Transport tool that uses data taken from local authorities to predict the expected number of trip origins and destinations within a given local area through the analysis software TEMPRO. Expected levels of growth in trips from Light Goods Vehicles and Heavy Goods Vehicles. This is taken from national trends as part of the National Transport Model. Adjustment factors on the number of trips expected to be taken per person, based on the expected changes in costs of fuel and the levels of income in the country as a whole.

2.2. Each of these elements has been analysed in turn with the resultant change to the forecast demand expressed in terms of a percentage.

Expected Completions and Uncertainty Log

2.3. Due to the high-level nature of this assessment, reviewing and updating the Uncertainty Log was not deemed required as part of this technical note. This is because this exercise requires information that is not readily available (such as development quanta held by local planning authorities) and as such it was determined that it would not be appropriate at this stage to seek this type of information.

National Trip End Model (TEMPRO)

2.4. National Trip End Model data for 2019, 2021, 2034 and 2036 is shown in Table 2.1 and Table 2.2: Table 2.1: NTEM Development Totals (2019 + 2021)

2019 2021 Percentage Increase LA Area Households Jobs Households Jobs Households Jobs Adur 29,269.2 26,624.8 29,984.0 26,776.0 2.4% 0.6% Arun 73,412.6 59,367.8 75,113.0 59,773.0 2.3% 0.7% Chichester 55,324.0 73,832.4 56,842.0 74,314.0 2.7% 0.7% Worthing 50,200.2 59,458.8 50,903.0 59,860.0 1.4% 0.7%

Table 2.2: NTEM Development Totals (2034 + 2036)

2034 2036 Percentage Increase LA Area Households Jobs Households Jobs Households Jobs Adur 31,528.8 27,759.8 31,736.0 27,927.0 0.7% 0.6% Arun 83,498.0 61,966.6 84,698.0 62,339.0 1.4% 0.6% Chichester 63,831.4 77,042.6 64,847.0 77,507.0 1.6% 0.6% Worthing 54,104.8 62,057.0 54,566.0 62,431.0 0.9% 0.6%

2.5. This translates into the following trip end totals for each forecast year, as shown in Table 2.3 and Table 2.4: Table 2.3: NTEM Trip Ends (2019 + 2021)

AM Peak Inter Peak PM Peak 2019 Origins Destinations Origins Destinations Origins Destinations Adur 14,972 13,235 24,208 24,690 14,611 15,840 Arun 36,818 31,490 63,922 64,796 37,097 40,749 Chichester 33,177 36,440 61,781 61,542 38,969 36,745 Worthing 26,163 27,277 46,744 46,972 29,369 28,118 2021 Adur 15,367 13,540 24,900 25,395 14,936 16,231 Arun 37,681 32,237 65,704 66,590 37,945 41,672 Chichester 33,996 37,280 63,482 63,244 39,850 37,620 Worthing 26,700 27,899 47,942 48,160 29,983 28,667 % Increase Adur 2.6% 2.3% 2.9% 2.9% 2.2% 2.5% Arun 2.3% 2.4% 2.8% 2.8% 2.3% 2.3% Chichester 2.5% 2.3% 2.8% 2.8% 2.3% 2.4% Worthing 2.1% 2.3% 2.6% 2.5% 2.1% 2.0%

Table 2.4: NTEM Trip Ends (2034 + 2036)

AM Peak Inter Peak PM Peak 2019 Origins Destinations Origins Destinations Origins Destinations Adur 16,281 14,742 27,456 27,935 16,166 17,275 Arun 41,119 35,359 73,880 74,781 41,678 45,620 Chichester 36,794 40,746 70,809 70,581 43,571 40,881 Worthing 28,759 30,497 53,680 53,788 32,733 31,012 2021 Adur 16,412 14,922 27,839 28,314 16,349 17,428 Arun 41,624 35,826 75,095 75,995 42,235 46,203 Chichester 37,218 41,262 71,883 71,658 44,124 41,371 Worthing 29,064 30,887 54,545 54,634 33,144 31,361 % Increase Adur 0.8% 1.2% 1.4% 1.4% 1.1% 0.9% Arun 1.2% 1.3% 1.6% 1.6% 1.3% 1.3% Chichester 1.2% 1.3% 1.5% 1.5% 1.3% 1.2% Worthing 1.1% 1.3% 1.6% 1.6% 1.3% 1.1%

2.6. Table 2.1 to Table 2.4 indicate that changing the opening year from 2019 to 2021 is likely to result in a 2.0 - 2.9% increase in car traffic across the network for the opening year forecast model.

2.7. It can also be determined that changing the design year from 2034 to 2036 is likely to result in a 0.8 – 1.6% increase in car traffic across the network for the design year forecast model.

National Transport Model (NTM)

2.8. Table 2.5 shows the increase in traffic levels for Light Goods Vehicles and Heavy Goods Vehicles that will result from changing the opening year and design year respectively: Table 2.5: National Transport Model Growth Factors

Growth between 2019 to 2021 Growth between 2034 to 2036 LA Area AM IP PM AM IP PM Adur 3.1% 3.5% 3.0% 1.1% 1.5% 1.1% Arun 3.0% 3.4% 2.9% 1.4% 1.8% 1.4% Chichester 3.0% 3.4% 2.9% 1.3% 1.7% 1.4% Worthing 2.8% 3.2% 2.6% 1.3% 1.7% 1.3%

Page 3

2.9. Table 2.5 indicates there is likely to be an increase in LGV and HGV traffic across the network by 2.6 – 3.5% if the opening year is changed from 2019 to 2021. Furthermore, it is likely there would be a 1.1 – 1.8% increase in LGV and HGV traffic if the design year is changed from 2034 to 2036.

Fuel and Income Factors

2.10. Fuel and Income factors are published by the Department for Transport through the WebTAG databook. As the previous forecast model was developed in 2017, it was appropriate to use the same, July 2017 version of the databook. Since then there have been several revisions to the databook, with the most recent version published in May 2018. If the model was to be re-forecast, it would be appropriate to use the latest version of the databook, currently May 2018, in the development of fuel and income factors for 2021 and 2036 respectively. Table 2.6 compares both sets of factors along with the resultant change should the new factors be applied.

Table 2.6: Fuel and Income Factors

Fuel and Income factors for 2019, 2021 Fuel and Income factors for 2034, 2036 Summary Income Fuel Combined Income Fuel Combined Old Factors 1.4% 8.3% 9.7% 5.5% 9.6% 15.1% (2019, 2034) New Factors 1.4% 8.8% 10.2% 4.6% 9.9% 14.5% (2021, 2036) Percentage 0.0% 0.4% 0.5% -0.8% -0.3% -0.5% Change

2.11. As shown in Table 2.6 changing the opening year to 2021 would result in an additional factor of 0.5% to car traffic across the network, but would result in a reduction by 0.5% of traffic if the design year is changed to 2036.

Summary

2.12. Table 2.7 shows a summary of potential traffic growth across a 12-hour period in the network should the forecast years change from 2019 and 2034 to 2021 and 2036 respectively; considering the factors described above. Table 2.7: Summary of Expected Traffic Growth

Traffic growth from 2019 to 2021 Traffic growth from 2034 to 2036 LA Area Car Traffic LGV + HGV Traffic Car Traffic LGV + HGV Traffic Adur 2.6% 3.2% 1.2% 1.3% Arun 2.6% 3.2% 1.5% 1.6% Chichester 2.6% 3.2% 1.4% 1.5% Worthing 2.3% 2.9% 1.4% 1.5%

3. EXPECTED IMPACTS ON THE FORECAST NETWORK

3.1. As part of this assessment, the factors shown in Table 2.7 have been applied to the previously derived forecast AADT values for the following key links: The proposed Lyminster Bypass The existing A284 The A27 east and west of the A284 The A259 east and west of the A284 and proposed bypass.

3.2. Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2 show the difference between the forecast years for the Do Minimum and Do Something scenarios.

Page 5

Figure 3.1: Difference in AADT flows between proposed opening years (2019 + 2021)

Figure 3.2: Difference in AADT flows between proposed design years (2034 + 2036)

Page 7

3.3. Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2 show the increases on the A27 and A259 are approximately 1,000 additional vehicles across a typical 24-hour period between the two opening years, and approximately 600 additional vehicles across a typical 24-hour period between the two design years.

3.4. For the actual bypass and adjoining roads, the increase in both the opening years and design years is approximately 500 vehicles over a typical 24-hour period. This is considered a relatively low percentage of the overall flow.

4. CONCLUSIONS

4.1. This Technical Note set out to provide information on the high-level potential impact of changing the model forecast years from 2019 to 2021 for the opening year and from 2034 to 2036 for the design year.

4.2. It has been demonstrated that the change would be approximately 2.5% in the opening year and 1.5% in the design year. This translates to an approximate increase of 500 vehicles on the proposed Lyminster bypass over a typical 24-hour period and is considered to be a relatively low percentage of the overall flow.

4.3. Given the low levels of traffic increases, from a traffic modelling perspective it is considered unlikely that this level of change would result in a noticeable change in the performance of the road network, and thus undertaking a full re-forecasting exercise is deemed to be unnecessary at this stage and unlikely to materially change the results.

4.4. It should be noted that no additional models have been run as part of this analysis, and so the potential impact in terms of congestion, queueing and journey times has not been assessed. The impact of any potential developments that have come on stream since 2017 will also not be known as the uncertainly log has not been reviewed as part of this exercise.

Page 9