Highways Access Policy Paper

Private & Confidential

Department Of Transport

Request For A Decision By The Department Member With Delegated Powers

TO: Capt A C Douglas, MHK FROM: Mr K C Ashcroft, Planning Engineer DATE: 30 June 2004 SUBJECT: Policy regarding Access to the Highway Please find papers for your consideration and decision. DECISION: APPROVED/NOT APPROVED REFERRED BACK

COMMENTS:

Date: 22/03-08

Member:

By definition all planning applications with a highways involvement have at heart an access onto the highway network. It is hard to think of any development in the planning sense of the word which would take place without a means for accessing the site for people and goods by road.

The nature of the access - indeed, whether it is acceptable at all - is a function of the traffic likely to be generated by the development, together with the characteristics of the highway onto which the access would be built.

The policy which establishes a hierarchy for all highways on the Island provides a ready-made range of highway types, sorted by function, which provide the basis for a policy on access to the highway in planning applications.

The nature of the traffic generated by development is dependent on the nature of the development. TRICS data produced by JMP Consultants Ltd provides reliable data on vehicle trip generation, based on UK research. This data is commonly used for small applications such as single dwellings.

For larger developments, transport assessments and safety audits are now required. A transport assessment gives the developer the opportunity to estimate and justify the traffic likely to be generated, and then to put forward a methodology for dealing with that level of traffic (be it vehicular and/or pedestrian) on the local network. The local network includes rail as well as roads and footways. For reasons of sustainability, the transport assessment should make best use of non-car modes. Significant employment centres (more than 25 employees) should include a work travel plan. Similarly, schools should include a school travel plan.

The tables below set out general advice for new development on rural and urban roads. The tables show the criteria to be used in designing the access and sight lines.

In the event that the criteria cannot be met, the applicant should be invited to submit evidence to demonstrate circumstances affecting the application and the highway network in the locality such that the development would not adversely affect road safety or highway capacity. Any agreed variance from the policy on the basis of that submission will be made at Divisional level or by a suitable alternative decision making mechanism approved by the Minister.

Towns

	Primary Route	Secondary Route	(Local Road)	Local Access Road	Country Lane	Country Lane < 500 VPD
	Open Road	Built up	Open Road	Built up	Open Road	Built up
Speed Limit	70(TT)	60	30	50	30	40	30	30	20	20
Minor Frontage Access	Presumption against new	Restricted	Restricted	Restricted	Unrestricted	Unrestricted
Major Frontage Access	No.	Presumption against DMRB	DMRB	Presumption against DMRB	DMRB	DMRB	DMRB	DMRB or MR1	No	No
Sight Lines	-	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13, MR1 or SSD	SSD	SSD or mirror
Turning Feature on Site	-	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Normally No	Yes	Yes

Existing Single dealing

Rural

	Primary Distributor	District Distributor	Local Distributor	Residential Access	Rear Lane
Speed Limit	40	30	30	30	20	20
Minor Frontage Access	None	Presumption Against	Presumption Against	Restricted PPG13	MR1	Yes – if lane wide enough
Major Access	DMRB and Transport Assessment	DMRB and Transport Assessment	DMRB and Transport Assessment	DMRB or MR1 and Transport Assessment	No	No
Sight Lines	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13	PPG13	MR1/SSD	No
Turning feature on site	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No

DMR B UK Design Manual for Roads and Bridges PPG13 Planning Policy Guidance 13 (UK DoE, DoT 1994) – see appendix 1 MR1 Manx Roads 1 (Estate Roads Design Guide 1992) – see appendix 2 SSD Shortest Stopping Distance – see appendix 3

Planning Applications Involving Existing Accesses

Existing accesses are more difficult. Frequently existing accesses are constrained by land ownerships, or adjacent structures, or may be on the inside of a bend, making sight lines very onerous. Much will depend on the nature of the application. If the development proposed amounts to an intensification of the activity (e.g. a second house on a large plot, or holiday cottages on an existing farm), or if there is demonstrably more vehicular traffic, the application should be resisted.

In the circumstances defined in the tables, a new planning application can be acceptable with sight lines based on shortest stopping distances and mirror/mirrors to provide visibility for emerging vehicles. With existing accesses the only option to improve visibility could be mirror/s, dependent on circumstances.

Provided there is no hazard to passing traffic or pedestrians, it is permissible to locate the mirror pole within the highway. For this reason care should be exercised to locate the pole out of harms way, provided the mirrors are still effective.

The cost of providing and erecting mirrors is the responsibility of the property owner requiring the mirror. As at present, the property owner needs approval of DoT (Highways) either by way of written approval, or through the planning process.

Conclusion

Currently policy in this area is administered in ad hoc fashion using UK data, modified as thought appropriate to Island conditions, using judgement.

This leaves the Department in a position of weakness at appeal. Using judgement in road safety situations is undesirable.

If DoT Highways is to operate effectively, a well-reasoned policy in this area is needed.

It is recommended that:

1. This paper be accepted as policy for DoT Highways, and
2. Staff be instructed to use the policy in responding to planning applications and other planning issues, and
3. The operation of the policy is monitored in use, and any changes submitted for approval.