STAGE 2 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT - WordPress.com · STAGE 2 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT FOR ... 1.4 The Stage 2 Audit comprised of a site visit on Tuesday 7th February 2017 and examining the following

COLE EASDON CONSULTANTS LIMITED

C I V I L E N G I N E E R I N G ~ H I G H W A Y S ~ T R A N S P O R T A T I O N ~ F L O O D R I S K

B R I S T O L & S W I N D O N

Incorporated in UK as Cole Easdon Consultants Ltd No. 202 7005

Head Office:

Unit 2

York House

Edison Park

Dorcan Way

Swindon

Wiltshire

SN3 3RB

Tel. 01793 619965

Email: [email protected]

www.ColeEasdon.com

STAGE 2 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT FOR

SECTION 278 WORKS PROPOSED AS PART OF A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT MAYNARD TERRACE, CLUTTON

ON BEHALF OF CLUTTON PARISH COUNCIL

MARCH 2017

[ISSUE 1]

STAGE 2 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT SECTION 278 WORKS PROPOSED AS PART OF A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, MAYNARD TERRACE, CLUTTON

____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5

COLE EASDON CONSULTANTS (CEC) MARCH 2017

COLE EASDON CONSULTANTS (CEC)

DOCUMENT ISSUE RECORD

Client: Clutton Parish Council Project: Section 278 Works Proposed as Part of a Proposed Residential

Development, Maynard Terrace, Clutton Job Number: 5582 Document Title: Stage 2 Road Safety Audit Issuing Office: Swindon

Issue / Revision: Issue 1

Description / Status: Formal Issue

Date: March 2017

Prepared: P. Salmon MCIHT MSoRSA

Signature:

Document Check:

S. Coates BA (Hons)

Signature:

Technical Check:

C. D. Shakespeare BA (Hons) MCIHT

Signature:

Authorised: J. B. Farmery

MEng CEng MICE MCIHT ICE Safety Registered

Signature:

File Reference: 5582 - Junction in

Clutton, Chew Valley, Somerset - RSA2 - Issue 1


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5

COLE EASDON CONSULTANTS (CEC) MARCH 2017

CONTENTS

SECTION HEADING PAGE NO.

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 AUDIT BRIEF 2

3.0 VEHICULAR & HIGHWAY ASPECTS OF DESIGN 3

4.0 STREET LIGHTING 6

5.0 ROAD MARKINGS & SIGNAGE 7

6.0 SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE 8

7.0 EMERGENCY ACCESS 10

8.0 AUDIT STATEMENT 11

APPENDICES

Appendix 1 – Information Supplied to the Audit Team

Drawing No. WB03252/S/110(G) Section 278 Agreement Pavements, Signing & Lining &

Streetlighting (by Clarkebond)

Drawing No. WB03252/S/113(C) Section 278 Agreement Site Clearance (by Clarkebond)

Appendix 2 – Audit Reference Plan


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5

COLE EASDON CONSULTANTS (CEC) 1 MARCH 2017

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 This Report identifies safety concerns and recommendations arising from the Stage 2 Road

Safety Audit that has been undertaken with respect to the Section 278 Works proposed as

part of a residential development at Maynard Terrace, Clutton.

1.2 This Stage 2 Road Safety Audit has been prepared on behalf of Clutton Parish Council.

1.3 The Stage 2 Road Safety Audit has been carried out independently by Paul Salmon (Senior

Technician) and Caroline Shakespeare (Senior Transport Consultant), both of Cole Easdon

Consultants Limited. The Audit Team has had no involvement in the design of the scheme

being audited or discussed any safety concerns raised in the report with members of the

Design Team.

1.4 The Stage 2 Audit comprised of a site visit on Tuesday 7th February 2017 and examining the

following drawings by Clarkebond, (copies of all plans are included within Appendix 1 of this

report):

Drawing No. WB03252/S/110(G) [Section 278 Agreement Pavements, Signing & Lining &

Streetlighting]; and

Drawing No. WB03252/S/113(C) [Section 278 Agreement Site Clearance].

1.5 This Report comments only on issues raised in carrying out the Stage 2 Road Safety Audit.

The Auditors have examined and reported only on the road safety implications of the

scheme arising from the site visit and review of the drawings referred to above. The

Auditors have not examined or verified the compliance of the design with any other

criteria.

1.6 Personal injury accident data has not been provided for consideration within this Audit.

1.7 Copies of all Road Safety Audits must be retained. All comments and recommendations

must be investigated and subsequent decisions/actions must be logged and a formal record

kept of all responses.

1.8 It is the Project Sponsor’s responsibility to advise the Audit Team Leader if any Problem /

Recommendation is not accepted. The Project Sponsor should then supply a copy of each

signed Exception Report to the Audit Team Leader, for information.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


2.0 AUDIT BRIEF

2.1 The project relates to the proposed Section 278 Works proposed as part of a proposed

residential development at Maynard Terrace, Clutton.

2.2 The proposed works consist of a re-alignment of Maynard Terrace, change of junction

priority at the southern end of Clutton Hill, additional footways, street lighting and the

associated road markings, and highway signage.

2.3 This Audit has been undertaken at the request of Clutton Parish Council, independent of

the developer and Bath & North East Somerset Council.

2.4 A site visit was undertaken on Tuesday 7th February 2017 at 11am. The weather was dry

and bright during the visit.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


3.0 VEHICULAR & HIGHWAY ASPECTS OF DESIGN

Safety Concern

3.1 Location: Proposed pedestrian crossing point across junction of Clutton Hill, Station

Road and Maynard Terrace.

Summary: Risk of pedestrian injury

A pedestrian crossing point is proposed across the southern point of Clutton Hill at its

junction with Station Road / Maynard Terrace. Visibility splays from these crossing points

have not been indicated on the drawings available to the Audit Team. From the site visit,

it would appear that visibility is restricted to/from the western pedestrian area.

Pedestrians may be struck should they enter the carriageway unsighted by approaching

traffic.

Recommendation

3.1.1 Provide an alternative footway and pedestrian crossing point with appropriate visibility

splays. It was noted during the site visit, that the existing virtual footway to the west of

this junction is on the southern edge of Station Road, and therefore would not link with the

hatched area shown on the drawings available to the Audit Team which indicate a

‘Pedestrian link (by others)’. The annotation of this hatching would indicate that the

proposed footway at this junction is reliant on a third party / parties undertaking this work

to enable continuation of this pedestrian route. It is also noted that the existing retaining

wall to the south has been annotated as to be re-aligned. From observations made during

the site visit, there would not appear to be any obvious restriction that could not allow this

re-aligned retaining wall to be re-aligned further to the south / west to allow further

widening of this junction. Therefore, an alternative footway to that shown on the

drawings could be provided along the southern / western edge of Maynard Terrace that

would link the proposed development to the south with the existing informal footway along

the frontage of the properties south of Station Road. This informal footway leads to the

existing virtual footway that continues on to facilities in the village centre including the

local school. Provision of a footway along the western edge of Maynard Terrace may also

resolve issues raised in Safety Concern 3.3. below.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


Safety Concern 3.1: Photograph: Reduced visibility at pedestrian crossing point

Safety Concern

3.2 Location: Junction of Clutton Hill, Station Road and Maynard Terrace

Summary: Risk of vehicle collision

No swept path analysis of the junction of Clutton Hill, Station Road and Maynard Terrace

has been indicated on the drawings available to the Audit Team. During the site visit

difficulties were observed when vehicles arriving at the junction wishing to turn left into

Maynard Terrace from Clutton Hill were blocked from performing this manoeuvre by

vehicles waiting to turn right from Maynard Terrace. Indeed in one instance, the vehicle

blocking the left turn manoeuvre had to enter Station Road to clear the junction, then on

completion of the left turn by the other vehicle, the blocking vehicle had to reverse back

into Maynard Terrace prior to undertaking the intended right turn manoeuvre into Clutton

Hill. It is unclear from the drawings if it would be possible to turn right from Maynard

Terrace into Clutton Hill with a vehicle waiting at the give way lines at Clutton Hill. This

junction is a main through route and as such is used by large vehicles including the local

school bus that travels through this junction twice per day.

Recommendation

3.2.1 Undertake swept path analysis demonstrating how all turning manoeuvres can be

undertaken at this junction in a safe and efficient manner.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


3.2.2 Consideration should be given to widening the junction as recommended for Safety Concern

3.1 above.

Safety Concern

3.3 Location: Junction of Clutton Hill, Station Road and Maynard Terrace


Forward visibility splays have not been indicated on the drawings available to the Audit

Team. Vehicles traveling northbound on the re-aligned Maynard Terrace would appear to

have limited forward visibility, particularly at the left-hand bend, to any oncoming large

vehicles that may require to straddle the centreline markings i.e. refuse vehicles, large

delivery vehicles etc. Should insufficient intervisibility between opposing vehicles be

available, collisions may occur. Alternatively, onerous reversing manoeuvres may be

required to allow vehicles to reach a suitable location to pass.

Recommendation

3.3.1 Ensure adequate forward visibility is available.

3.3.2 Consideration should be given to widening the junction / providing a footway along the

western edge of Maynard Terrace as recommended for Safety Concern 3.1 above.

Safety Concern

3.4 Location: Proposed junctions

Summary: Risk of vehicle strike

No available visibility splays have been shown on the drawings available to the Audit Team

for any of the proposed junctions, although a note indicating an area to be kept clear of

obstruction is shown. Vehicles emerging from these junctions without adequate visibility of

approaching traffic may cause a collision, particularly if they are unable to perform their

turning manoeuvres without encroaching onto the oncoming traffic lane.

Recommendation

3.4.1 Ensure adequate visibility is available at all junctions for the vehicle approach speeds.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


4.0 STREET LIGHTING

Commentary

4.1 Proposed street lighting equipment has been shown on the plans available to the Audit

Team, however, no lux plans are available, and therefore lighting levels cannot be

commented on. It is noted that the proposed street lighting columns may not highlight /

illuminate the proposed junction sufficiently due to their offset positioning.

Recommendation

4.1.1 Ensure all proposed works, particularly the junctions, are adequately illuminated during the

hours of darkness.

Safety Concern

4.2 Location: Lighting column 3


Proposed lighting column 3 is shown immediately west of the junction of Clutton Hill,

Maynard Terrace and Station Road. There is currently vegetative growth and trees

adjacent to this proposed column location. Lighting levels may be affected by the nearby

trees / vegetative growth, thereby affecting approaching drivers ability to understand and

assess the highway alignment at this location. This is imperative, given that the intention is

to alter the existing junction priority arrangement.

Recommendation

4.2.1 Ensure that proposed lighting levels are not compromised by adjacent tree spread /

vegetative growth.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


5.0 ROAD MARKINGS & SIGNAGE

Commentary

5.1 The proposed road markings and highway signage for this scheme appear to be correct and

appear to have been the focus of the Road Safety Audit undertaken by Bath & North East

Somerset Council’s Road Safety Team.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


6.0 SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE

Commentary

6.1 Surface water drainage details have been indicated on the drawing available to the Audit

Team, however, no contour / level information is shown. Standing water poses a danger to

vulnerable road users, such as motorcyclists, and could be more hazardous during winter

months due to the risk of ice forming.

Recommendation

6.1.1 Ensure that a suitable drainage scheme is in place to adequately drain the proposed works

and that the proposed surface levels within this scheme do not create low spots / ponding

issues.

Safety Concern

6.2 Location: Junction of Clutton Hill, Station Road and Maynard Terrace.

Summary: Risk of vehicle loss of control

No surface treatment works appear to be proposed on the Station Road arm of the junction

of Clutton Hill, Station Road and Maynard Terrace. During the site visit, it was observed

that this area of carriageway is in a poor state of repair and is prone to ponding. This poor

state of repair will reduce vehicle braking effectiveness, which may lead to vehicle loss of

control / strike.

Recommendation

6.2.1 Repair / resurface the extent of the defective carriageway at this junction.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


Safety Concern 6.2: Photograph: Poor carriageway condition and ponding


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


7.0 EMERGENCY ACCESS

Commentary

7.1 Emergency vehicle access would appear to be adequate, however, no swept path analysis of

the junction has been provided to demonstrate how emergency vehicles can safely and

efficiently manoeuvre through the junction.

Recommendation

7.1.1 Undertake suitable swept path analysis of the proposed junction.


____________________________________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________________________ QMF 12.25

ISSUE 5


8.0 AUDIT STATEMENT

8.1 We certify that the drawings and other items listed have been examined with the objective

of identifying any features of the design at the Stage 2 Road Safety Audit stage that could

be removed or modified in order to improve the safety of the scheme. Issues identified

have been noted in this report together with any associated safety suggestions; these are

recommended for consideration and implementation. Prior to the request to carry out this

Audit, we have not been involved in the detailed design or construction of this scheme. This

Audit has been undertaken generally following guidance provided in HD 19/15.

Audit Team Leader:

Signed: Paul Salmon (Senior Technician)

Date: 2nd March 2017

Audit Team Member:

Signed: Caroline Shakespeare (Senior Transport Consultant)

Date: 2nd March 2017

Cole Easdon Consultants Limited

March 2017

Appendix 1

Asphalt

Asphalt

Asphalt

Grass

200mmPipe

Engineering & Management Consultantsclarkebond

Bristol Exeter London Abu Dhabi

GF Suite, Bickleigh House,Park Five Business Centre,Sowton, Exeter. EX2 7HU

tel +44 (0) 1392 369098fax +44 (0) 1392 369100e-mail [email protected] www.clarkebond.com

Appendix 2

Documents

STAGE 2 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT - WordPress.com · STAGE 2 ROAD SAFETY AUDIT FOR ... 1.4 The Stage 2 Audit comprised of a site visit on Tuesday 7th February 2017 and examining the following