I enclose 4 representation forms in respect of various representations that I have on your Policy BEX9, The Spindlewood Drive site. This site is also the subject of a current Planning Application with Reference RR/2017/1705/P.

My second representation concerns the Barnhorn road access to the Spindlewood Development. This is amplified in a letter of objection and figures a copy of which is enclosed.

1. The development of houses at land off Spindlewood Drive is shown with an access off Barnhorn road in addition to the Spindlewood Drive access. The development relies on this access off Barnhorn road to reduce traffic movements at the Little Common roundabout. There is insufficient space at the existing access off Barnhorn Road within the control of the present applicant to construct the required access to the required adoptable standard.
On the east side of the entrance there is a short fence to bring the side walls up to the back of footway. This fence is within the front garden of No 73 Barnhorn road. It appears that the designer may have measured from the low wall on the west side to the fence on the east side but even this measurement is not more than 12 metres. The geometry of the radius curve requires more than 12 metres width at 3 metres back from the Barnhorn Road kerb.
For the entrance to be of adaptable standard as required by ESCC, the access carriageway would require kerbing on both sides. The kerbs would require concrete haunching, the kerbed edge would normally require a safety strip behind the kerb face of at least 600mm. To construct this roadway with suitable excavation would require working space in addition. Land would be required from the front garden of No 73 to be able to construct the 6 metre radius curve required for this entrance not to impinge on the driveway and footway crossing at No 77 Barnhorn road.

2. The Safety Audit has paid attention to the Farm access road in relation to No 77 Barnhorn road ' s driveway but does not appear to have given similar consideration to the other 11 house drives that will be affected by the right turning lane and ghost island. There are a total of 12 houses with driveways affected by the right turning lane. All of these properties will find that it is considerably more difficult and dangerous to turn right on to Bamhorn road out of their driveways at various times on account of either vehicles standing in the right turning lane, or approaching the right turn lane or obstructing the view of the approaching traffic stream from the left and which they will be attempting to join.
It will only be possible to turn right out of these driveways with significantly increased hazard once this new 'unction to the development is established. It will be doubly dangerous on account of the sharp bend in the road to the west. At the prevailing traffic speed the oncoming traffic will be in a potential collision position with the turning traffic in less than 4 seconds. A very short time for a driver to appreciate the presence of a vehicle manoeuvring out of a driveway and to stop in time without risking a tail end collision with traffic behind.

Planning Application RR/2017/1705/P
Land off Spindlewood Drive - Access only

I have the following additional objections to the new proposals for access to this development off Bamhom road and the Safety Audit.

Moving the estate access eastwards to avoid the driveway of No 77 Barnhorn Road

The drawing T277_37A.DWG appears to show an overall entrance width of more than 12 metres. This is NOT accurate and it will not be possible to build the entrance road to the required standard and dimensions in the actual space available.

The space between the low side walls of the present entrance to Bamhorne Manor farm at their extremity nearest to Barnhorn road is only 11.2 metres between wall faces. The walls are 0.23 metres thick. Thus even if both the walls are demolished the space is no more than 1 1.66 metres. As it seems possible that the applicant's intention would be that only the wall on the east side would be demolished the space would be only 11.43 metres.

On the east side there is a short fence to bring the side walls up to the back of footway. This fence is within the front garden of No 73 Barnhorn road. The fence has also been partially pushed aside by badgers or foxes. It appears that EXIGO may have measured from the low wall on the west side to the fence on the east side but even this measurement is not more than 12 metres. The geometry of the radius curve requires more than 12 metres width at 3 metres back from the Barnhorn Road kerb.

The attached Figure 1 shows a measured drawing of the entrance. From this it can be seen that to get a 6 metre carriageway in the entrance flanked by 6 metre radius curves cannot be done on land within the applicants control as claimed in the Designers Response to the Safety Audit.

For the entrance to be of adaptable standard as required by ESCC, the access carriageway would require kerbing on both sides. The kerbs would require concrete haunching, the kerbed edge would normally require a safety strip behind the kerb face of at least 600mm. To construct this roadway with suitable excavation would require working space in addition. The total land requirement from the front garden of No 73 to be able to construct the 6 metre radius curve would be of the order of 2.8 metres width as shown on Figure 1.
(Figure 1 can be viewed here: http://www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=31075)

It is therefore incorrect for the designer or EXIGO to claim that the junction can remain entirely compliant with HE requirements as set out in TD42/95 and remain within land under the applicants control and for this reason I object to this plan.

Right turns from driveways on Barnhorn road

It appears that the Safety Audit consultant has paid attention to the Farm access road in relation to No 77 Barnhorn road's driveway but has ignored the other 11 house drives that will be affected by the right turning lane and ghost island. There are a total of 12 houses with driveways affected by the right turning lane. All of these properties will find that it is considerably more difficult and dangerous to turn right on to Barnhorn road out of their driveways at various times on account of either vehicles standing in the right turning lane, or approaching the right turn lane or obstructing the view of the approaching traffic stream from the left and which they will be attempting to join. I attach a drawing showing the driveways I am referring to (Figure 2).

(Figure 2 can be viewed here: http://www.rother.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=31062)

When turning right on a busy road which has a hatched out ghost lane in the middle, it is common practice for drivers to cross the traffic lanes as two individual operations separately and to wait in the hatched area for a gap in the traffic stream they want to join. It will only be possible to do this with significantly increased hazard once this junction to the development is established. It will be doubly dangerous on account of the sharp bend in the road to the west. The sight line for traffic approaching from the west will be only 45 metres from the back of the right turning traffic. At the prevailing speed this amounts to only 3.6 seconds in which to react. A very short time for a driver to appreciate the presence of a vehicle manoeuvring out of a driveway and to stop in time.

I am aware of several situations with right turning lanes and ghost markings but none with as many as 12 houses affected and without a signalised junction. All others that I know of are on straight sections of road with good visibility. The probability of an accident or incident increases substantially with the addition of random conflicting movements and short reaction tunes. I am bound to say that I think this situation is potentially very dangerous and for this reason I object to this plan.

The Rat-run

The situation at this junction will be dangerous more or less throughout the working day because of the use of the right turn by rat-running traffic to avoid congestion at Little Common roundabout.

ESCC GET have said in their response to the application that they would require the developer to install a 20mph zone through the estate backed up by speed control measures and that would be sufficient to deter rat-runners. Recent experience with a rat-run of very similar length, avoiding a congested junction in Saint Leonards only 6 Kilometres away does NOT confirm this view. Despite installation of a chicane and a total of 11 speed humps (some quite severe) on the rat- run, it continued to be used for prolonged peak periods by significant numbers of rat-runners for many years until the congestion at A259 Bexhill road /Harley Shute road junction was relieved by the Bexhill-Hastings link road. This rat run in Bulverhythe was 870 metres long, narrow and included several side turnings. For comparison the rat-run through the Spindlewood development would be 800 metres long. Even with a delay for the right turn at the Barnhorne entrance, an average of less than 17.5mph on the estate roads and additional time to negotiate the various turns the rat-run would still be very attractive relative to the queueing time on Barnhorn road at Little Common roundabout for much of the working day. The rat-run would save drivers between 45 seconds to 1 minute. An advantage that would attract many, for this reason I object to this plan.

Overall conclusion

The entrance cannot be constructed in accordance with Drawing No T277 37A.DWG Revision A as required by HE and on land under the applicants control if it is to remain entirely compliant with HE requirements as set out in TD42/95.

This entrance to the development off Barnhorn road is potentially dangerous, and not in a suitable location on Barnhorn road. This design opens up a rat-run that despite speed control measures will attract extraneous traffic on account of it being shorter that the equivalent main road route and that it avoids a junction congested with conflicting traffic at certain times of day.


Letter to Ms Jo Edwards follows:

Planning Application RR/2017/1705/P
Land Off Spindlewood Drive, Bexhill

I am writing concerning the proposed access to this development off Barnhorn road and the Architects drawings Nos 1743-P-005 and the artists impression drawing No 1743-P-006.

The actual width of the present farm access including grass verges is 11.3 metres between the dwarf walls 5 metres back from the existing roadway. This will be 6 metres back from the proposed stop line because they propose to push the kerb and roadway approx. l metre northwards.

With a 2 metre footway proposed on the east side and a 6metre carriageway there is only 3.3 metres for verge on the west side. The 6metre radius of turn proposed must therefore cut across the driveway of No 77 Barnhorn road immediately to the west to the extent of 2.7 metres.

I am sure that you will treat the Artist's impression with some caution and you would be right to do so. The Artist's Impression includes a great deal of artistic licence and has no place in a professional planning submission, in that this drawing seeks to give the impression that there is more than 6 metres of verge left on the west side after widening of the carriageway and that the curve radius would be well clear of No 77's driveway. This is completely erroneous and should be entirely disregarded.

Because of the relatively narrow 6metre wide access and the tight 6metre curve radii at the junction the swept path of a long rigid vehicle such as a refuse wagon or rigid furniture van when turning left will encroach at least 50% into the right turning lane or ghost island or overrun the footway on the left. This also will lead to unsafe situations.

I understand from the Transport Assessment that some 44 vehicles would be leaving from this access in the AM peak and turning left. (I also understand that this in itself is an underestimate and the true number would be over 50.) The flow westwards on Barnhorn road is forecast to be 1373 per hour in the AM peak plus the left turners from the development and the 18 vehicles seeking to turn right off Barnhorn road into the access road there will be a vehicle moving every 2.5 seconds! The result will be extremely unsafe for the 10 or so houses that have accesses on Barnhorn road in the stretch affected by the right turning lane and ghost island.

These unsafe aspects of the access contribute in no small way to the need to refuse this application and I urge you to refuse planning consent.