|
Report to:
|
Lead Member for
Transport and Environment
|
|
Date of
meeting:
|
5 June 2023
|
|
By:
|
Director of
Communities, Economy and Transport
|
|
Title:
|
Notice of Motion:
Bishopstone Junction, Seaford
|
|
Purpose:
|
To consider a Notice
of Motion requesting:
·
temporary traffic
lights at the Bishopstone junction to assess the effectiveness of
this as a traffic management solution. The County Council is
reminded that, despite initial resistance from the local authority,
temporary traffic lights have worked well at Exceat and have been
well received by residents;
·
a safe route for
pedestrians and cyclists over the A259 at Bishopstone by bidding
for funding for a footbridge using the £750k still in the
County Council’s Active Travel Fund
|
RECOMMENDATION:
The Lead Member is
recommended to recommend that the County Council rejects the Notice
of Motion, as set out in paragraph 1.1 for the reasons set out in
Section 3 of the report.
1.
Background Information
1.1
The following Notice of Motion has been submitted by Councillor
Lambert and Councillor MacCleary:
On 15 February 2021, Cllr Darren
Grover and Cllr Carolyn Lambert submitted a Notice of Motion (NOM)
to the Lead Member for Transport and Environment. The NOM called
attention to two accidents in two days that closed the A259 in
Seaford, the biggest town in Lewes District.
The NOM requested the Cabinet to
undertake a proper survey of the whole town, not just the Buckle
by-pass, with particular focus on all the junctions with the A259,
to identify the areas of greatest risk to both car users, cyclists
and pedestrians, and to come up with some concrete proposals to
enhance road safety. The NOM recognised that the County
Council was already undertaking a review of the A259 from Seaford
to Brighton in terms of congestion and argued that the safety of
both car users, pedestrians and cyclists should form part of that
study. The Cabinet was asked to:
·impose lower speed limits on the
approaches to Seaford and to work with partners to ensure these are
enforced;
·provide safe pedestrian crossings
at key points of the A259 including at the Bishopstone
junctions.
These requests were refused on the
grounds that:
-
a study was already
being carried out;
-
reducing the speed
limit would require a significant level of engineering
work;
-
the request for a
pedestrian crossing at Bishopstone needed to be considered
holistically as part of the study and in any event, funding was not
available.
At the County Council meeting of 7
February 2023, Cllr Carolyn Lambert submitted a further written
question to the Lead Member, pointing out that the situation with
the A259 was now critical and that Seaford, in particular, was
suffering. The A259 continues to be regularly gridlocked and there
have been further serious accidents. The outcome of the study has
been delayed and any practical proposals are still awaited leaving
residents still regularly facing dangers and delays on this
difficult road.
Given the further delay to the
study, and the length of time residents have been waiting for
improvements, this NOM calls on Cabinet to:
-
Provide temporary
traffic lights at the Bishopstone junction to assess the
effectiveness of this as a traffic management solution. The
County Council is reminded that, despite initial resistance from
the local authority, temporary traffic lights have worked well at
Exceat and have been well received by residents;
-
Seek to provide a
safe route for pedestrians and cyclists over the A259 at
Bishopstone by bidding for funding for a footbridge using the
£750k still in the County Council’s Active Travel
Fund.
1.2
In line with County Council practice, the matter has been referred
by the Chairman to the Lead Member for Transport and Environment
for consideration to provide information and inform debate on the
Motion. The Lead Member’s recommendation on this Notice of
Motion will be reported to the Council at its meeting on 11 July
2023.
2
Supporting Information
Context
2.1
The A259 is a primary coastal route that runs between the County
boundary at Telscombe Cliffs and Pevensey Roundabout where it
becomes trunk road and part of the Strategic Road Network. The
Average Annual Daily Traffic (AADT) flow on the section between
Newhaven and Seaford is approximately 25,950 vehicles per day (2019
figures).
2.2
The road is multi-functional and accommodates local intra-urban
journeys along the sections in Eastbourne and through the coastal
towns of Seaford, Newhaven, Peacehaven and Telscombe Cliffs as well
as longer distance inter urban journeys between these settlements.
The inconsistent quality of the A27 corridor, particularly between
Lewes and Polegate, means that traffic uses the A259 coastal
corridor as an alternative route.
2.3
ESCC works closely with partners and stakeholders to improve road
safety across East Sussex. In addition, each year the County
Council develops and implements numerous local transport
improvements funded through its capital programme of local
transport improvements. In 2022/23 total funding of £11,776m
was allocated (a combination of funding from the County Council,
Local Growth Fund secured via the South East Enterprise Partnership
and development contributions) which delivered over 50 schemes and
studies across the county which include a number of road safety and
active travel improvements.
Major Road
Network
2.4
In December 2018, the A259 was identified as part of the
Government’s Major Road Network (MRN) of economically
important local authority maintained A class roads. The MRN sits
between the Strategic Road Network, managed by National Highways
(formerly Highways England), and the local network managed by the
County Council as highway authority.
2.5
In establishing the MRN, Government made funding of between
£20m and £50m available for MRN schemes through the
National Roads Fund, with an expectation of a minimum 15% local
contribution. Department for Transport (DfT) guidance identifies
the types of schemes that are eligible for MRN funding include
packages of improvements which may include elements of reducing
congestion, supporting economic growth and rebalancing, supporting
housing delivery, supporting all road users and supporting the
Strategic Road Network.
2.6 In 2019, Transport for the
South East (TfSE) was asked to coordinate with its constituent
local transport authorities on potential MRN schemes across their
geography. TfSE assessed all the schemes put forward against the
MRN criteria as set out by DfT, as well as TfSE’s strategic
objectives for the region which focus on sustainable economic
growth, improved quality of life and the environment. Following
this assessment TfSE identified the A259 South Coast Road Corridor
between Pevensey and Brighton & Hove as one of their ten
priority MRN schemes for submission to Government.
Transport for the
South East’s Strategic Investment Plan and A259 MRN Corridor
Study
2.7 Following the adoption of
their Transport Strategy in July 2020, TfSE undertook their Outer
Orbital Corridor Study which included the A259. The study
considered strategic and regional significant interventions that
could be delivered to support the delivery of the Transport
Strategy vision and objectives by 2050. The outcomes of the Outer
Orbital Study informed the content of TfSE’s Strategic
Investment Plan which was endorsed by the County Council at its
Cabinet meeting on 7 March 2023.
2.8 In addition, the County
Council commissioned an A259 MRN South Coast Road corridor study in
2021 focussed on the corridor between Eastbourne and Brighton.
Complementing the work undertaken by TfSE, the A259 corridor study
is multi-modal and uses an appropriate evidence base to seek to
identify localised interventions for public transport, improvements
to enable people to cycle or walk for all or part of their
journeys, alongside localised road and junction capacity
improvements and the potential use of smart technology along and
around the hinterland of this corridor. The outcomes arising from
the study have already been used to help inform and support the
successful bid for Government funding through the County
Council’s Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) to deliver bus
priority measures on the A259 corridor.
2.9 The outcomes of the A259
corridor study and the TfSE SIP are informing the development of a
Strategic Outline Business Case (SOBC) to Government to make the
case for MRN funding. Work on the study and the SOBC is expected to
be completed in Summer 2023.
2.10 Subject to the approval of the SOBC by
Government, further work will be required to progress to the
Outline Business Case and then Final Business Case stages which can
take up to a further two to three years to complete. Therefore, it
is expected it will be 2025/26 at the earliest before any MRN
funding would be available for delivering the preferred package of
interventions. In addition, a local contribution of at least 15%
would need to be provided as part of any funding submission to
Government.
Road Safety
2.11 The County Council has a finite amount
of funding to develop local transport improvements and needs to
ensure that resources are targeted towards schemes which will be of
greatest benefit to local communities. All requested road safety
and local transport improvements, including requests to change the
speed limits are assessed against the established Local Transport
Plan (LTP). The content of the capital programme is considered by
the Lead Member for Transport and Environment on an annual
basis.
2.12 Local authorities have a statutory
duty to assess and review crashes involving vehicles on the roads
within their area and take such measures as appropriate to prevent
such crashes. This informs an annual road safety assessment
programme of identified areas of concern and where further
investigation may be required. Sites are then treated on a priority
basis within the funding available.
2.13 Each
year the Road Safety Team identify sites that have the most crashes
that result in injury and put in place a programme of works to
reduce the number of casualties on these roads. East Sussex define
a crash site as one where there have been four or more crashes in a
three year period. In 2022 (looking at the period between
01/01/2020 and 31/12/2022) 49 sites were identified. The A259 at
its junctions with Marine Parade and Bishopstone Road were not
identified and are therefore not a priority for the Road Safety
Team. The A259 junction with Hill Rise
has been identified and is ranked as number 47 of the 49 sites. An
assessment of this site and the identified crashes will be carried
out in the 2023/24 financial year.
Introduction of
traffic signals at the Bishopstone Junction
Assessment and impact
of introducing permanent traffic signals
2.14 In response to previous concerns
raised about road safety and community severance at the Bishopstone
Road, Marine Parade and Hill Rise junctions with the A259, a
feasibility study was commissioned in 2018/19 to consider potential
improvements. These options included the introduction of traffic
signals and standard roundabouts at the Bishopstone Road, Marine
Parade and Hill Rise junctions as well as a gyratory incorporating
the Marine Parade and Hill Rise junctions.
2.15 The findings of the junction study
showed that, apart from the introduction of a gyratory, it would
not be possible to formalise the current situation without creating
significant and potentially unacceptable delays on the A259.
However, the introduction of a gyratory would potentially require
land acquisition and be prohibitively expensive to implement.
Consequently, the outcomes of the Bishopstone junction study have
been fed into the wider A259 South Coast Road corridor study for
further consideration.
2.16 As part of the current A259 MRN study,
the A259/Hill Rise junction to A259/Bishopstone Road junction area
have been considered as part of the potential package of schemes to
be put forward for funding as part of the SOBC. To support this
work, fixed signalisation of the A259/Hill Rise/Marine Parade
junction was initially tested using local junction modelling
software. The modelling demonstrated that the addition of traffic
signals at the junction, whilst assisting the side road movements,
resulted in significant and a likely unacceptable length of vehicle
queues occurring along the A259. This reaffirms the modelling
outcomes from the previous Bishopstone junction study.
2.17 The A259 MRN corridor study and the
County Council’s BSIP are looking at alternative options to
encourage active travel and reduce congestion on the A259. As the
A259 is a high priority bus corridor, the impact on bus operators
and passenger journeys are being taken into account in relation to
any transport interventions taking place on this corridor. Delays
on the A259, as a result of introducing traffic signals at this
junction, would have a detrimental impact on bus journey times
where significant BSIP investment is planned on bus priority
measures to improve overall reliability on journeys using the high
frequency bus service serving Telscombe, Peacehaven, Newhaven,
Seaford and Eastbourne.
Use of temporary traffic signals
2.18 As the Notice of Motion highlights,
temporary traffic lights have been implemented at Exceat Bridge.
However, the operation at this site is predominantly two way
traffic but also allows for exit movements out of The Cuckmere Inn
access/egress at the western end of Exceat Bridge.
2.19 The simple systems that temporary
traffic signals run on with set run time for traffic movements on
each arm mean that they are not able to operate in the same, more
dynamic and complex way that permanent traffic signal systems can.
As highlighted above, the modelling assessment undertaken both as
part of the Bishopstone junction study and more recently as part of
the A259 study has identified that the introduction of permanent
traffic signals at this junction would create significant delay and
likely unacceptable queues on the A259 corridor.
2.20 Given that temporary traffic signals
would run more slowly and be less efficiently than permanent signal
systems, their introduction at this location would result even
greater delay and queuing on the A259 corridor. In addition,
running temporary traffic signals at all three junctions
(Bishopstone Road, Marine Parade and Hill Rise Junction) on the
A259, would be difficult to implement, and add further to the
inefficiency of movements on the network particularly on the A259
arms where the efficient and expedient movement of traffic is a
priority.
Request to seek funding for a footbridge over A259
2.21 It is recognised that the A259 creates
a barrier for pedestrian and cycle movements. However, the
available data on pedestrian and cycle numbers and road safety data
suggests that there is currently low demand and priority for
pedestrian and cycle crossing in the area.
2.22 The Local Cycling and Walking
Investment Plan (LCWIP) incorporates the A259 as part of the East
West corridor route between Seaford and Newhaven. The plan includes
recommendations for crossing points along the route and
improvements to walking and cycling infrastructure in the
Bishopstone Area. However, the recommendations are not prioritised
in the LCWIP, are at concept level and are unfunded.
2.23 When considering the practicalities of
providing a footbridge as a safe route for pedestrians and
cyclists, there are a number of factors to take into consideration.
In order for the footbridge to be usable for both pedestrians and
cyclists, it would need to be fully compliant with the Equality Act
2010. This would mean that ramps would need to be provided at
the required gradients and, depending on the design, potential
return areas at the end of each ramp in order to achieve
appropriate height over the road. Because of the potential scale of
the structure over the A259, there may be a need to purchase third
party land outside the highway boundary to accommodate a footbridge
and its footings. In addition, any bridge would be on the edge of
South Downs National Park, and the Park Authority would need to be
consulted to ensure that any design and its visual impact was in
keeping with the adjacent landscape and setting. Finally, the
A259 is an abnormal load route given its proximity to Newhaven Port
therefore any bridge would also need to be high enough to
accommodate any abnormal vehicles.
2.24 An Equalities Impact Assessment has
been conducted and is included as Appendix 1.
2.25
In relation to the costs of providing a
footbridge, based on estimates taken from similar bridges, this
would be between £3-6 million.
2.26 The Notice of Motion also asks that
the £750,000 underspend from the Active Travel Fund be
allocated to deliver the footbridge over the A259. The County
Council submitted a project change request to Active Travel
England, who are now administering active travel funding on behalf
of the Department for Transport, in December 2021 requesting the
reallocation of this funding to develop and deliver the three
school streets schemes in Lewes, Sidley and Eastbourne. ESCC
has received an in principle approval from Active Travel England to
use this underspend on developing and delivery the school streets
projects and therefore it is not available to be reallocated to
fund a footbridge at Bishopstone.
3 Conclusion
and Reasons for Recommendations
3.1. The Notice of Motion requests
that temporary traffic signals are introduced at the Bishopstone
junction to assess their effectiveness as a traffic management
solution, and that a bid be submitted for the introduction of a
footbridge over the A259 for pedestrians and cyclists near the
Bishopstone junction, which is part-funded using the £750,000
Active Travel Fund underspend. As set out in Section 2 of this
report, previous traffic modelling to assess the benefits and
impacts of introducing traffic signals at the junctions in
Bishopstone demonstrates that whilst signalisation would benefit
movements from side roads, it would generate extensive queuing and
potentially unacceptable delays on the A259. Section 2 of this
report also sets out that the introduction of a footbridge in this
location is seen as not affordable or practicable, but that
signalised surface crossing options, being considered as part of
the A259 MRN study are more likely to demonstrate value for money.
Moreover the £750,000 Active Travel Fund underspend as
highlighted in section 2.23 of this report has subsequently been
reallocated to develop and deliver three school street schemes in
the county. It is therefore recommended that both elements of the
Notice of Motion are not supported.
3.2
It is therefore recommended that the Lead Member recommends that
the County Council rejects the Notice of Motion as set out in paragraph 1.1 for
the reasons set out in Section 3 of the report.
Director of Communities, Economy
and Transport
Contact Officer:
Isobel Kellett
Tel. No.
07513
833903
Email:
Isobel.kellett@eastsussex.gov.uk
LOCAL
MEMBERS
Councillors Lambert
and MacCleary
BACKGROUND
DOCUMENTS
None