ASB-888-ST1-REV1 Transport Statement20796790000.pdf 20/11 ...

....................................................................................................................................
LANDFORM HIGHWAY PLANNING CONSULTANTS
………………………………………………………………………………………………..
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF 64 AFFORDABLE HOMES
FOR KIRBY PARK LIMITED
LAND OFF CARR LANE
HOYLAKE
WIRRAL
TRAFFIC STATEMENT
PREPARED BY A.S.BOOTH AssocRICS
ASB/888/ST1.REV 1
November 2011
………………………………………………………………………………………………..
CALVELEY HALL COTTAGES, CALVELEY, TARPORLEY, CHESHIRE CW6 9LG
Tel & FAX: 01270 528204 - Email: stan@booth.ms
....................................................................................................................................

CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 SITE LOCATION AND EXISTING HIGHWAY CONDITIONS
3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC IMPACT
4.0 RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSING
5.0 SITE ACCESS
6.0 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS
7.0 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - PROPOSED LAYOUT
APPENDIX B - TRICS DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
APPENDIX C - SITE ACCESS DRAWING
APPENDIX D - ACCIDENT LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX E - 3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORDS

1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This Traffic Statement has been prepared on behalf of Kirby Park Limited to
support a planning application for residential development of 64 affordable
homes comprising apartments, terraced houses and semi-detached houses.
1.2 The report will consider the effect of the development on the existing highway
network and the availability of alternative forms of sustainable transport in line
with the objectives set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 (PPG 13).
1.4. Early discussions have taken place with Keith Rogers of Wirral Borough
Council highways department when the scope of the Traffic Statement was
established and the report is based on that.
2.0 SITE LOCATION AND EXISTING HIGHWAY CONDITIONS
2.1 The application site is located at the eastern end of Carr Lane, Hoylake,
approximately 800m south east of the roundabout junction of the A553 Market
Street and Station Road - see Appendix D. The route to the site from the
roundabout is firstly via Station Road up to the railway level crossing and then
Carr Lane. Both are unclassified roads, subject to a 30 mph speed limit with
street lighting and footways on each side. Carr Lane is a cul-de-sac from the
level crossing onwards and is the only vehicular route to and from the site.
There is a footway and cycle link to Melrose Avenue and Market Street via
Proctor Road.
2.2 Station Road is 125m in length from the roundabout to the level crossing and
serves shops, commercial and residential properties, as well as Hoylake
Railway Station, over that length. The road then continues as Carr Lane
which, for the first 575m of its length to Carsthorne Road, serves mainly
commercial and industrial properties in addition to the Hoylake Station car
park, Proctor Road - a residential road, Hoylake Municipal Golf Course, a
rugby field and a children’s playing field. For the remaining 100m of its length
it only serves residential properties and the agricultural land beyond the end
of the adopted highway. A public footpath continues on along a farm track at
the end of Carr Lane. The centre of the proposed development is some 120m
from the access.
2.3 Station Road has a 8.6m wide carriageway comprising two through lanes
totalling 6.6m wide and a 2m wide delineated parking area on the south west
side. Carr Lane has a 7m wide two lane carriageway for the first 350m of its
length from the level crossing to Proctor Road, which then reduces to 6.3m
wide for the remaining 325m to the site. The carriageway along the entire
route is in excess of the 5.5m width which Manual for Streets demonstrates in
[1]

Figure 7.1, page 79, is of sufficient width to allow two heavy goods vehicles
(HGV’s) to pass.
2.4 Observation indicates that, apart from the level crossing, which will be dealt
with later, there is no evidence of any significant highway safety issues that
need to be addressed.
3.0 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND TRAFFIC IMPACT
3.1 The proposed development will comprise a mix of 64 affordable apartments,
terraced houses and semi-detached houses. The proposed layout is shown
on a reduced scale copy of PDW Design application drawing no.1065L05 as
Appendix - A.
3.2 In order to assess the impact of the additional traffic from the proposal on the
local highway network, the national TRICS traffic database has been
analysed. The trips rates for 9 similar types of edge of town development,
ranging from 40 to 99 units, have been obtained and are set out in Appendix -
B. The peak hour trip rates derived from these shown in Table 3.1. The
TRICS PM peak hour is 19.00 to 20.00 which is outside the time when there
will be any significant traffic from the commercial uses, so the 17.00 to 18.00
rates, which are the next highest and will coincide with the industrial and
commercial peak, have been chosen as being more appropriate.
Time
period
Arrival
Trip rate
Departure
Trip Rate
Arrival
Nos.
Departure
Nos.
Total trips
2 way
AM peak 0.145 0.410 9 26 31
PM Peak 0.378 0.231 24 15 39
Table 3.1
3.3 The maximum increase in traffic flow resulting from the proposed
development in either direction will be 26 vehicles an hour which represents
an average directional flow of one additional vehicle every 2.3 minutes. The
heaviest peak hour traffic flows from the proposed development will generally
be in the opposite direction to those from the commercial and industrial
development, so the traffic from the proposed development will have an
insignificant effect on existing traffic flows.
3.4 The need to carry out a traffic count to examine vehicular capacity of Carr
Lane has been considered. However, as it’s a cul-de-sac with no through
traffic and observation at peak periods showed there are no existing vehicular
capacity problems, it isn’t considered necessary.
[2]

4.0 RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSING
4.1 Traffic delays due to the closure of the level crossing have been examined,
particularly with regard to its location close to the roundabout. When vehicles
from the south east (outbound) are queued, there is no restriction on the
length of the queue, but when vehicles queue from the north west (inbound),
queues back up towards the roundabout, so the effect of the additional
inbound traffic in that direction needs to be assessed.
4.2 Peak hour traffic delay counts have been carried out and are set out in Tables
4.1 and 4.2.
Time gates
close
Time closed
(minutes)
Queue length
(vehicle nos.)
08.03 5 17*
08.20 3 20*
08.34 4 26*
08.52 4 17*
Table 4.1
AM peak 08.00 to 09.00 - 2 nd August 2011
Gates closed for a total of 16 mins.
* Vehicle queue extends onto roundabout
Time gates
close
Time closed
(minutes)
Queue length
(vehicle nos.)
17.06 5 7**
17.20 5 8**
17.36 5 7**
17.50 5 4**
Table 4.2
PM peak 17.00 to 18.00 - 26 th July 2011
Gates closed for a total of 20 mins.
** Vehicle queue at least 4 vehicle lengths clear of roundabout
4.3 The proposed additional peak inbound traffic flows, as shown in Table 3.1 will
be 9 vehicles in the AM peak period and 24 vehicles in the PM peak period.
4.4 In the AM peak period, the gates are closed for a total of 16 minutes or
(16/60x100) 27% of the hour. Therefore, the number of vehicles from the
proposed site joining the queue in the AM peak period will be (9 x 27%) 2.4
vehicles in the 16 minutes or an average of 0.15 vehicles a minute. In the
[3]

longest period of closure - 5 minutes, the maximum number of additional
vehicles queuing will be (0.15 x 5) 0.75 (say 1) vehicle. This 1 additional
vehicle in any queue will not result in a material change to the current
situation where vehicles in the AM peak already queue onto the roundabout.
It should also be note that although the queue lengths extend onto the
roundabout in the AM peak, this is for a short time only, as the queues build
up slowly during the period when the gates are closed. Drivers also try to wait
on or at the roundabout in positions that allow some limited traffic flow in other
directions.
4.5 In the PM peak period, the gates are closed for a total of 20 minutes or
(20/60x100) 33% of the hour. Therefore, the number of vehicles from the
proposed site joining the queue in the PM peak period will be (24 x 33%) 7.9
vehicles in the 20 minutes or an average of 0.395 vehicles a minute. In the
longest period of closure - 5 minutes, the maximum number of additional
vehicles queuing will be (0.395 x 5) 1.975 (say 2) vehicles. As there are
currently at least 4 vehicles spaces between the end of any queue and the
roundabout, these 2 additional vehicles can be accommodated without
disruption of the traffic flow on the roundabout.
5.0 SITE ACCESS
5.1 The proposed access to the site shown in Appendix C is a continuation of
Carr Lane and forms a “T” junction with Yeoman Cottages. The highway
authority has advised that the proposed development would be subject to a
20 mph speed limit in line with the Council’s policy. The surfacing at the
junction will therefore be in contrasting material to the main carriageway and
constructed to provide traffic calming in order to reduce traffic speed.
6.0 PERSONAL INJURY ACCIDENTS
6.1 The latest 3 year personal injury accident records have been obtained from
the Council for the full length of Station Road, including the Station
Road/Market Street roundabout and Carr Lane. The location plan is attached
as Appendix D and the personal injury accident records as Appendix E.
6.2 Personal injury accident statistics are recorded according to severity in three
injury categories - fatal, serious or slight. In the standard 3 year assessment
period, there were no fatal or serious accidents and only 3 slight personal
injury accidents between the site and the roundabout on Market Street. These
were widely spaced and did not involve pedestrians. There is therefore no
pattern or significant numbers to indicate any highway safety issues that need
to be addressed either along the route to the site or at any of the highway
junctions.
[4]

7.0 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
7.1 PPG 13 – Transport requires the examination of alternative means of
transport other than the private car in order to provide sustainable
accessibility, such as on foot, by cycle, by bus or by rail.
Accessibility on foot
7.2. Hoylake is well served with shops and other services. Most are concentrated
along or close to Market Street which is 920m from the centre of the site via
Carr Lane and Station Road or 820m along a pedestrian and cycle link via
Proctor Street and Melrose Avenue. Even allowing for walking along Market
Street or the side roads, the main services are well within the 2km (1.25
miles) from the site that PPG13 considers as being an acceptable walking
distance.
Accessibility by cycle
7.3 PPG 13 suggests that journeys of up to 5km (3.1 miles) can be carried out by
cycle. This means that, not only are the local services in the Market Street
easily accessed by cycle, but West Kirby and Meols and the sea front in
between, with its recreation facilities, are also all within reach by cycle.
Accessibility by bus
7.4 There are two convenient bus local services that can be used by residents
with stops on Carr Lane and Market Street that allow convenient access to
local services and beyond.
7.5 The no.138 Meols - West Kirby - Newton circular service run by Super Travel
is routed along Carr Lane with a stop near Carsthorne Road, 220m from the
centre of the site. Buses operate on an hourly basis from 09.41 to 15.48 -
Monday to Friday and 08.41 to 17.41 on Saturday. There is no Sunday
service.
7.6 The nos.83 and 83A Birkenhead - West Kirby circular service is run by Avon
Buses and routed along Market Street with stops 1.2km from the centre of the
site and within walking distance. Buses operate on a 30 minute basis in each
direction from 07.47 to 17.47 - Monday to Friday and hourly from 08.41 to
18.35 on Saturday. There is no Sunday service.
Accessibility by rail
7.5 Hoylake Railway Station is 795m from the centre of the site. Services operate
[5]

etween West Kirby, Birkenhead and Liverpool at 15 minute intervals in both
directions from 7.30 am to 8.00 pm reducing to 30 minute intervals in early
morning and late evening. Reduced services operate on Saturdays and
Sundays.
7.6 The station is well within both walking and cycling distance of the site and has
secure cycle parking facilities on the platform.
School accessibility
7.7 There are numerous schools within a reasonable catchment area ranging
from day nurseries to secondary schools that can all be accessed either on
foot, by cycle or by bus.
Sustainability development conclusion
7.8 The site is therefore well served by numerous sustainable means of transport
other than the car and meets the criteria laid down in PPG 13 – Transport.
Indeed, the site is so well served that it will be possible to live there without
needing to use a car.
8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION
8.1 The report is provided to support a planning application for 64 affordable
homes.
8.2 The local highway network has been examined and described in detail and it
is suggested there are currently no highway safety issues that need to be
addressed.
8.3 The proposed development has been described and the potential traffic
generation has been analysed using the national TRICS database which
shows that there will only be a small increase in traffic even in peak periods.
8.4 The operation of the level crossing has been considered with peak hour
counts taken to establish queue length when the gates are closed. These
show that the only time when the queue backs up to the roundabout is
inbound in the morning peak when one additional vehicle will added to the
queue. It is suggest that this will not result in a material change to the current
situation.
8.5 The 3 year personal accident records have been obtained from the Council
and these show that there have been three slight accidents, but no fatal or
[6]

serious accident. There is nothing in the reports to indicate that any
improvements to the local highway network are required.
8.6 The site has been examined for sustainability in terms of alternative forms of
transport to the car and it has been demonstrated that there are a number of
other convenient ways of accessing the site on foot or by cycle, bus or train.
8.7 It is therefore concluded that, as the proposal would not be detrimental to
highway safety and meets the criteria for sustainable development set out in
PPG 13 – Transport, there is no highway reason to withhold planning
permission.
Ref: ASB/888/ST1.REV A
November 2011
[7]

APPENDICES
APPENDIX A - PROPOSED LAYOUT
APPENDIX B - TRICS DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
APPENDIX C - SITE ACCESS DRAWING
APPENDIX D - ACCIDENT LOCATION PLAN
APPENDIX E - 3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORDS

APPENDIX - A
PROPOSED LAYOUT

APPENDIX - B
TRICS DATA FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT

APPENDIX - C
SITE ACCESS DRAWING

APPENDIX - D
ACCIDENT LOCATION PLAN

APPENDIX - E
3 YEAR ACCIDENT RECORDS