Technical Note

Technical note

Project: Subject:

Lynchford Road

To:

Richard Humphreys
Road Safety Audit - Designers Response

From:
Date:

10 Apr 2019

cc:

Phil Marshall, Steve Willoughby

1. Introduction

This report results from a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit carried out on proposed capacity improvements for Lynchford Road in Farnborough, between Queens roundabout and Park Road Roundabout. The audit has been carried out in accordance with the requirements specified

in Hampshire County Council’s Technical Guidance Note 18.

The Road Safety Audit Team membership was as follows: -

Audit Team Leader:

Steve Willoughby MCIHT MSoRSA

Hampshire County Council

Audit Team Member:

Ross Rawlings MCIHT MSoRSA

Hampshire County Council

The Road Safety Audit comprised an examination of the documents provided, as listed in the Road Safety Audit Brief. The Audit Team visited the site together, on 16^thJanuary 2019 at 2:30pm. During the visit the weather was overcast/raining and the road surface was wet. Traffic conditions were free flowing.

The Road safety Audit Team examined and reported only on the road safety implications of the scheme as presented and has not examined or verified the compliance of the design to any other criteria.

All problems described in this report are considered by the Audit Team to require action in order to improve the safety of the scheme. Section 2 contains the designer’s response to the issues described.

The location of the problems identified are shown on the annotated plan in the Road Safety Audit Report; Document reference: 03/163 DR. Client reference: R.J507253.01.

Lynchford Road - RSA - Designers Response Final

1

Technical note

2. Responses

2.1.

Problem 1

Location: The proposed Tiger crossing on Alexandra Road. Summary: The risk of cycle/vehicle collisions. Drivers turning left from the A3011 Lynchford Road onto Alexandra Road will be concentrating on negotiating the roundabout and may not notice an eastbound cyclist approaching the tiger crossing from old Lynchford Road. This may lead to a collision between a vehicle and a cyclist on the crossing, or a shunt collision on the approach to the crossing if vehicles break suddenly.

Recommendation: Retain the existing uncontrolled crossing where cyclists and pedestrians give way to vehicles.

Response: Not Accepted.

The crossing over Alexandra Road is part of an east-west cycle route and is a key link from the business districts around the airport and North Camp rail station. It is also a gateway to North Camp urban centre from the west. The overall design of the Lynchford Road scheme is based on Manual for Streets 2 and the HCC Companion Document and not just on DMRB. The Companion Document defines street types. The Old Lynchford Road, along with Camp Road, fulfils the role of a High Street for North Camp and the document offers the following bullet points on High Streets:

••••

The primary business (shopping and commercial) street of a town Often part of or close to the settlement core Generally high pedestrian and vehicle use Frequent links with adjoining networks of streets

The crossing has to support these activities in Old Lynchford Road by forming an attractive link to it

from the west and surveys indicate that this is the busiest crossing at St Alban’s Roundabout. It is

essential that a high-quality crossing facility is provided to minimise the severance of Alexandra Road on important east to west pedestrian and cycle movements. An uncontrolled crossing would not provide an appropriate level of service.

The issue of visibility has been considered and was also raised during the public consultations. It will be further assessed in the detailed design of the eastbound approach to the roundabout to ensure maximum visibility. In addition, the configuration as a tiger crossing will delver better conspicuity than an uncontrolled crossing. The detail design will also consider placing the crossing on a raised table, which would reduce traffic speeds and minimise the likelihood of a collision between cyclists and motor vehicles.

2.2.

Problem 2

Location: The west side of the proposed Tiger Crossing on Alexandra Road. Summary: The risk of cycle/pedestrian collisions.

2

Technical note

The narrowed footway and realigned cycle route, together with the restricted forward visibility around the corner of the NatWest bank, will increase the risk of collisions between cyclists and pedestrians approaching the west side of the proposed tiger crossing.

Recommendation: Widen the footway on the west side Alexandra Road in the vicinity of the crossing.

Response: Part Accepted

The footway width at on the west side of the crossing is constrained by the adjacent building. Moving the crossing north or south will provide more space. However, moving it south will increase the issue raised as Problem 1 and moving it north will take it away from the desire line and lead to jay walking/riding.

At detailed design the configuration of the crossing, including the size of the central refuge will be reviewed to ensure maximum space is available on the western footway.

2.3.

Problem 3

Location: The proposed Tiger Crossing on Alexandra Road. Summary: The risk of collisions between cyclists. The width of the cycle route across the tiger crossing is too narrow to accommodate two-way cycling and this may lead to collisions between cyclists.

Recommendation: Widen the cycle route across the Tiger crossing. Response: Accepted; the widths of the crossing elements will be reviewed and adjusted during detailed design.

2.4. Problem 4

Location: St. Alban’s roundabout.

Summary: A lack of pedestrian crossing facilities on the east side of the roundabout. There is an existing uncontrolled crossing point on Lynchford Road that utilizes the splitter island on the east side of the roundabout. This provides a direct route for pedestrians between Napier Gardens Car Park and Alexandra Road. There is no crossing point on the proposed dedicated left turn lane between Lynchford Road and Queens Avenue, and therefore this route has been severed. As a result, pedestrians may cross at inappropriate locations and this this may increase the risk of pedestrian/vehicle collisions.

Recommendation: Provide an appropriate crossing facility on the east side of the roundabout. Response: Accepted; A dropped kerbs and tactiles will be provided to guide pedestrians as to the best place to cross.

2.5.

Problem 5

3

Technical note

Location: St. Alban’s roundabout.

Summary: Inconsistent road marking will lead to confusion and increase the risk of collisions on the circulatory carriageway.

On the Alexandra Road approach to the roundabout there is straight ahead/left turn arrow in lane 1, but the lane markings on the circulatory carriageway only guides this traffic to the left. This may lead to sudden lane changing on the circulatory carriageway and result in side swipe or shunt type collisions.

Recommendation: Provide consistent road markings on the approaches and the circulatory carriageway.

Response: Accepted; the marking of the circulatory carriageway will be reviewed to ensure consistent and readable paths for drivers through the roundabout.

2.6.

Problem 6

Location: The Layby on the north side of Lynchford Road, between Peabody Road and Morris House.

Summary: The risk of collisions between eastbound vehicles and the driver/passengers of vehicles in the layby.

Due to the narrowness of the proposed layby, drivers/passengers will have difficulty getting in and out of their vehicle without themselves or their vehicle door encroaching into the carriageway. This will increase the risk of drivers/passengers being struck by passing vehicles. This problem is exacerbated by the narrow traffic lane widths that will result in lane 1 traffic driving closer to the parked vehicles.

Recommendation: Widen the layby to a minimum of 3 metres to provide additional space for drivers/passengers to get in and out of their vehicles.

Response: Not Accepted. The width of the street between the private land (including forecourts) on the northern side and the new highway boundary is limited by the operational constraints imposed on the land transfer by the MoD. The land to be acquired is 5m and more is not feasible given the need to manage the increase in consequential damage.

Given the need to maintain an appropriate 2-Way Cycle track and a footway and the lack of overall highway width the bays cannot be widened. Refer to the technical note on design standards and the consequence analysis for the MoD.

2.7.

Problem 7

Location: The Layby on the north side of Lynchford Road, between Peabody Road and Morris House.

Summary: The risk of collisions between eastbound traffic and vehicles exiting the layby in a westbound direction.

There is nothing to prevent westbound vehicles from crossing the carriageway to enter the layby on the north side of the road. This in itself may not cause a problem, but when drivers come to rejoin the carriageway, they may have difficulty finding an appropriate gap in the traffic to safely

4

Technical note

make this manoeuvre. This may result in a collision with eastbound vehicles. This problem is exacerbated by the narrowness of the layby which will not allow for the vehicles to edge out if their visibility is restricted by another vehicle in the layby.

Recommendation: Provide measures to prevent vehicles from entering the layby in a westbound direction or remove the layby.

Response: Not Accepted. The available width for the highway precludes any measures to prevent drivers accessing the loading bays the east or leaving them towards the west. The bays are essential to the operation of the businesses on the street and thus to the viability of North Camp.

Drivers waiting to access the bays from the east will be in the off side lane and other drivers will be able to pass them in the nearside lane. At present drivers waiting to access the bays from the east block westbound traffic.

2.8.

Problem 8

Location: The access to The Unit Gym and property numbers 213-215. Summary: The risk of collisions between right turning vehicles and cyclists. Drivers turning right into the gym car park or the driveways for property numbers 213 -215 will be concentrating on finding a gap in the two lanes of oncoming traffic and may fail to see fast moving cyclists riding along the footway/cycleway on the north side of the road. This may result in collisions between turning vehicles and cyclists.

Recommendation: Provide measures to prevent vehicles from turning right. Response: Not Accepted. As with problem 7 the available width for the highway precludes any measures to prevent drivers accessing the Unit Gym the east or leaving it towards the west.

Drivers waiting to access the Gym from the east will be in the off side lane and other drivers will be able to pass them in the nearside lane. At present drivers waiting to access the Gym from the east block westbound traffic.

Through the detail design process, we will consider drop kerb designs that reduce vehicle speeds to minimise the risk of collision between vehicles turning into and out of the Unit Gym site. Such designs are standard within the Netherlands across side road and access points, where vehicles need to cross an adjacent footway and segregated cycle route. An example from Amsterdam is illustrated below.

5

Technical note

Similar designs have been used in the UK. The example below near Southampton Central Station is just a footway crossing, but follows the same drop kerb design principles.

2.9.

Problem 9

6

Technical note

Location: The eastbound approach to Park Road roundabout. Summary: Inconsistent road markings will lead to confusion and increase the risk of collisions on the circulatory carriageway.

The existing lane destination markings on the eastbound approach to the roundabout are being changed, but there is no indication that the markings on the roundabout circulatory carriageway are also being amended to reflect these changes. This may lead to sudden lane changing on the circulatory carriageway and result in side swipe or shunt type collisions.

Recommendation: Amend the road markings on the circulatory carriageway so they are consistent with the proposed markings on the approaches.

Response: Accepted. The markings will be reviewed during detailed design including the advice on use of right turn arrows on the approaches to roundabouts.

7

Technical note

Appendix A

Technical Note on “Lynchford Road Area Character Assessment Design Criteria and Resultant Geometry”

8

Technical note

Project: Subject:

Lynchford Road

To:

Jamie Roan / Phil Marshall
Area Character Assessment Design Criteria and Resultant Geometry

From:
Date:

22 Mar 2019

cc:

David Jowsey, Richard Humphrey

Purpose

This technical note is to set out the areas in the design for the Lynchford Road improvements that have been constrained and sets out the rationale behind the criteria upon which the design is based and on the reasons for, and the consequences of, the geometry used. This is to aid in the technical approval of the current preliminary design before the scheme move forward to detailed design.

The first section of the note sets out the context of the street and the reasons why the design has followed the Manual for Street 2 guidance; the principal basis of design.

The second section sets out the consequences of this in terms of the highway geometry and any implications these have on the operational performance of the design.

The Principal Basis of Design

Street Context

There are a suite of design manuals and design guidance. The principal two national documents are:

••

The Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB), and The Manual for Streets (MfS1) and Manual for Streets 2 (MfS2)

All documents are guidance from the Department of Transport (DfT), however the DMRB is principally aimed trunk roads and is mandatory for these roads, In MfS1 the DfT states:

“The Department for Transport does not set design standards for highways – these are set by the relevant highway authority.

The Secretary of State for Transport is the highway authority for trunk roads in England and acts through the Highways Agency (HA). In Wales the Welsh Assembly Government is the highway authority for trunk roads.

The standard for trunk roads is the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB). Some trunk roads could

be described as ‘streets’ within the definition given in MfS, but their strategic nature means that traffic

movement is their primary function. MfS does not apply to trunk roads. The DMRB is not an appropriate design standard for most streets, particularly those in lightly-trafficked residential and mixed-use areas”

As a consequence, the DfT produced Manual for Streets but stated that:

“Although MfS provides guidance on technical matters, local standards and design guidance are important tools for designing in accordance with the local context. Many local highway authorities have developed their own standards and guidance.”

In April 2010 Hampshire County Council adopted its own design guidance as a Companion to MfS, with the Executive Member for the Environment stating:

Lynchford Road Area Character Assessment Design Criteria and Resultant Geometry

1

Technical note

“Three years after the Manual’s publication I am delighted to publish our ‘Companion Document to the Manual for Streets’. Some highway authorities have produced detailed guidance for applying the Manual for

Streets at a local level, but we have taken a different approach. Hampshire is characterised by the variety and diversity of its landscape and of its towns and villages. What is right in terms of design in a market town on the chalk may not be suitable in a settlement on the coast; each has different characteristics and qualities.

The Companion Document reﬂects this by providing designers and planners with the approach and

information they need to create places that are locally distinctive and have a clear sense of place.”

In the light of the Companion Document the question is thus what are the characteristics of the Blackwater Valley and of the towns and villages within it; and what are the is the appropriate street layout in the context of these characteristics.

The Blackwater Valley

The Blackwater Valley is made up of the towns of Camberley and Frimley in Surrey, Farnborough, and Aldershot in Hampshire and Farnham in Surrey, together with a number of smaller centres. One of these centres is North Camp between Farnborough and Aldershot.

Access to the Blackwater Valley is from the M3 in the north and the A31 in the south. The Blackwater Valley Spine Road, the A331, links from Junction 4 on the M3 south to the A31 at Tongham, west of the Hog’s Back.

Connections into the Blackwater Valley Towns are via the A331, with Junctions at Frimley, Farnborough, North Camp and Aldershot. Of these accesses, Frimley is onto the A325, a dual carriageway with limited frontage activity whereas those at Farnborough, North Camp and Aldershot are via local streets with houses and shops lining the streets.

While an additional access is being provided between Aldershot and North Camp, albeit a northbound on slip only, there are significant flows through North Camp and Aldershot.

North Camp

North Camp was assessed as part of the “Hampshire County Integrated Character Assessment - Aldershot and Farnborough Townscape Assessment” – see Appendix A.

http://documents.hants.gov.uk/landscape/HICATownscapeType-AldershotandFranborough- FinalAutumn2010.pdf

“Predominant Land Use - Camp Road and Lynchford Road (facing North Camp) are the shopping streets of the character area. There is a good mix of shops, all independent retailers. Surrounding these areas are residential streets of mostly private dwelling houses with some flats. There are some residential units above

shops, which add to the area’s vitality. There are two late -Victorian schools, a modern college, a number of

chapels, a church and a public house. These all contribute to the sense that this part of South Farnborough works as a self-contained community. There is a real sense of place as a result of this mix of uses.

Public Realm - To the residential areas within the character area, the public realm is functional and appears well maintained. There are tarmac roads and pavements with on-street parking. Street lighting is by standard lamp columns. There are some street trees but not to the extent of the adjacent Farnborough Park. There are some good-sized mature trees to rear gardens and lining public open spaces set into the grid of streets.

The wide Lynchford Road is lined, almost for its entire length, by mature trees on the south side of the road and these help enclose the side corresponding to the good enclosure from townscape on the north side.

Open Space - There is a series of planned open green spaces to this part of South Farnborough; within the character area there are recr eation grounds (now with children’s play areas) and sports facilities set within and to the edges of the grid of streets. They are tree lined with private gardens backing on to them. Schools still retain playgrounds and there are long narrow gardens to all houses.

Lynchford Road Area Character Assessment Design Criteria and Resultant Geometry

2

Technical note

Biodiversity - There is a good degree of space given over to mature linked gardens which form green corridors through the character area. These are often back-to-back or back onto further tree-lined open spaces providing potential wildlife habitats.

Access and Connectivity - Due to the grid layout and footpaths crossing this character area, it is considered to be well connected to adjacent areas (subject to the constraints of restricted access to parts of North Camp to the south)”