Highways Agency - Safe roads, Reliable journeys, Informed travellers

Related pages

• Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Description of the Route
• Policy Objectives
• Route Functions
• Land Use & Development Control Policy
• Route Problems & Performance
• Route Outcomes
• Strategy Impact Statement

Land Use & Development Control Policy

Initial Draft Strategy - July 2004

5 Land Use & Development Control Policy

5.1 Introduction

This chapter examines the significance of new development in relation to possible route outcomes for the A259 / A2070 between Hastings and Ashford. The impact of both committed and proposed development needs to be assessed as part of the creation of the programme of route improvement measures over the period of the RMS Study. Major developments that could impact upon traffic conditions along the corridor, and potentially influence the scale and timing of highway improvements, are identified.

Section 5.2 outlines the existing planning context by providing an overview of transport policy in terms of national, regional and local influences.

Section 5.3 reviews policy and development commitments at the regional and local planning authority levels and identifies developments significant in traffic terms that are likely to come on stream in the next ten years as a consequence of the implementation of these policies.

Section 5.4 briefly reports on the relationship between land-use planning and development control as it relates to Highways Agency policy, and introduces the Land Use & Development Control statement produced in accordance with RMS Guidance.

5.2 The existing planning context

5.2.1 Overview

Transport policy is defined in a series of documents that reflect the structure of central and local government in this country. In this study, reference is made to:

• National policy (in the form of studies carried out for DfT and its Agencies, and for development control),
• Regional policy documents (e.g. RPG9),
• County and Unitary Authority documents (the various Structure Plans and Local Transport Plans), and District documents (Local Plans).

Each of these sources defines policy in its sphere of interest, and identifies, to a varying degree, desirable geographical locations for development. It is the latter element that is important for this RMS study, as the location of committed or planned major development will influence the highway infrastructure improvements required in the short /medium term.

National Policy stems from two key documents: the Government's White Paper 'A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone', and the Roads Review report 'A New Deal for Trunk Roads in England'. Following on from these, 'Transport 2010 The 10 Year Plan', published in July 2000, set out the Government's commitment to a high level of transport investment, including roads, for the next 10 years. The 10 Year Plan contains as a target, the reduction of road congestion on the inter-urban network and in large urban areas of England below current levels by 2010 with investment in infrastructure and capacity.

Regional Policy for this area is stated in RPG9 (Final Regional Planning Guidance for the South East, March 2001). A number of organisations have contributed to the development of regional policy, most recently the South East England Regional Assembly, which has produced a Regional Transport Strategy, 'From Crisis to Cutting Edge, January 2003'. In September 2003, a Panel report was published, proposing modifications to this document. Key regional planning policies are identified in section 5.3.

Development Plans in a variety of forms set out land use policy and its relationship to transport provision. Structure Plans set out strategic policies on development and transport. Local Plans operate under the umbrella of Structure Plans and provide more geographic detail at the District Level, in terms of allocations and transport infrastructure. Unitary Development Plans combine the functions of Structure Plans and Local plans as befits their status.

However, following the issue of the Planning Green Paper 'Planning: Delivering a Fundamental Change' the government have proposed a number of changes to the planning system, written into a new Planning Bill, that aim to shorten the time taken to examine development proposals. The Planning Bill proposes to replace existing RPG with Regional Spatial Strategies (RSS); abolish Structure Plans and replace them with a range of sub-regional strategies; and replace Local Plans and Unitary Development Plans with Local Development Frameworks (LDFs).

In accordance with DfT guidance, County Councils are also required to produce five-year Local Transport Plans (LTPs) and Annual Reviews that set out specific transport policies and programmes of work for the period. Amongst other things, these documents identify local transport proposals that could impact on the trunk road network. A new round of LTPs is currently being prepared by local authorities.

5.2.2 The relationship between planning and transport

In providing for development it is important to draw attention to difficulties that can occur in transport provision where policies from various government departments are not always co-incident. A particular issue is that surrounding the requirement, as identified by the ODPM, to provide 3 million new houses in England over the period 2002 to 2021. This requirement is taken on board by the Government Regional Offices in production of revised Regional Planning Guidance and new Regional Spatial Strategies, and may involve other bodies such as the Regional Development Agencies. These strategies set targets for the required level of housing build for Counties and Unitary authorities that then need to be accommodated in Structure Plans or Unitary Development Plans. At this stage, firm spatial allocations are not normally made, this being the role of Local Plans produced by Districts. Local Plans may identify specific sites for development based on the development strategies contained in Structure Plans.

It is at this level that conflicts between land-use and transport policies can occur. To meet their housing allocations it may be necessary to identify areas for major development on greenfield sites (e.g. as in the Kent Structure Plan). This is particularly true if sites previously used for primary or manufacturing industry ('brownfield') are not available. Frequently, these demands are highest where economic growth is strong and demand for affordable housing is greatest (i.e. in south-east England). However, the planning system, through the Examination in Public of statutory development plans does provide an opportunity for the Highways Agency to express a view on issues such as land-use allocations and build rates and their impact on transport provision.

Thus, in the latter years of the 10-year timescale of the RMS, and certainly beyond 2014, the demand for new development in the Ashford area will put considerable pressure on key accesses onto A2070 Bad Munstereifel Way towards M20 J10. This is recognised by the HA in the development of a longer term strategy for highways that includes schemes to relieve M20 J10 and the encouragement of sustainable modes of transport.

Whilst national, regional and local government policies and targets on transport all stress, to a considerable degree, the need to implement sustainable policies to reduce reliance on the private car, it is in areas where major development is planned to occur that new or improved highway capacity is almost always likely to be needed. The Highways Agency recognises these issues and aims to accommodate them through policies contained in the Land Use & Development Control Statement (Appendix F to this report).

5.3 Future planning aspirations

5.3.1 Regional Planning Guidance

Regional policy for this area is set out in Regional Planning Guidance for the South East (RPG9), and the subsequent regional transport strategy. One of the key features is that policy should be developed to minimise the distance people need to travel (T1). It is already established that in general the proportion of long distance through traffic on this route originating west of Hastings is very small, and therefore any proposals should recognise this. However, this may not always be the case in future, as parts of the M20, M26 and M25 increasingly suffer from regular daily congestion.

A regional economic strategy for the south-east is set out by the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA), in its Draft Corporate Plan 2002-04. One of the features of this plan is the identification of five Area Investment Frameworks (AIFs) in the south east, two of which lie close to the study area (Hastings and the East Sussex coastal area, and Northeast Kent). Work is funded through the Single Regeneration Budget programme. Transport has a key part to play in the implementation of economic strategies.

The South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA) has reviewed the transport elements of RPG9 in the light of latest developments in government policy. The Regional Transport Strategy, 'From Crisis to Cutting Edge' (January 2003) identified regional priorities for transport investment and management across all modes, including the development of the concept of 'hubs' and 'spokes' as one of the essential building blocks of the regional network (policies T5 and T6).

Ashford is identified as a major hub in the study area, whilst the A259 / A2070 between Hastings and Ashford is identified as a spoke. The M20 acts as the main spoke linking the Channel Tunnel with London and the rest of the national highway network.

Following a report into Ashford's Future (Halcrow, December 2002), SEERA produced in July 2003 Proposed Alterations to RPG, South East - Ashford Growth Area. It is proposed that the Ashford Growth Areas should seek to deliver 13,100 dwellings over the period 2001 - 2016, through urban intensification and the development of new sustainable urban extensions integrated with the provision of new and enhanced bus based public transport. Key elements of local transport infrastructure include M20 J10 upgrade; Park and Ride; and a south Ashford orbital road linking the A2070 to the A28.

5.3.2 Other Regional Aspirations

The ODPM has also recently issued 'Sustainable communities in the South East'. This document makes it clear that there is a desire to accelerate development of new communities in the Ashford growth area with the completion of the high-speed rail link to London in 2007. The study indicates substantial scope for further growth in the Ashford area through diversifying its employment base, redeveloping its town centre and increasing the annual rate of new housing to provide at least 31,000 new homes and 28,000 new jobs by 2031. This document also emphases that of the key network improvements to achieve effective local delivery arrangements is the provision of a new junction on M20.

Mention should be made of the South Coast Multi-Modal Study (SoCoMMS) whose Draft Final Report was issued in September 2002. This RMS study falls within the area of influence of SoCoMMS, which has reported on a geographically wider corridor that includes the area covered by this study. It considers a longer, 30 year time-frame rather than the 10 year time-span associated with RMS studies; looks at all modes of transport; and develops medium and long term strategies to overcome the many challenges associated with road, public transport and other sustainable modes of travel. The difference in emphasis between SoCoMMS and this study is that this RMS is roads-based and is looking over a shorter timescale. RMS is considering only low-cost (under £5 million) short-term highway solutions and so developments are significant only in terms of their readiness, size, proximity and impact on the route.

As far as SoCoMMS is concerned, the Secretary of State's response was confined to a statement asking the Highways Agency to review safety and other local issues between Hastings and Brenzett. A number of remedial measures were recommended including maintenance; traffic management measures in Winchelsea and Rye; pedestrian and cyclist measures; and improved signing. The one area perhaps more directly related to development is the need for some local junction improvements (e.g Rye Harbour), where contributions may be sought from associated development.

Because of the long timescale over which regional policies are implemented, many regional initiatives have yet to work their way through the statutory planning process. Consequently major regional policy initiatives are unlikely to manifest themselves on the ground in the near future. Nevertheless, where areas of key development are identified, the granting of planning permission will depend heavily upon provision of the requisite sustainable transport infrastructure.

5.3.3 Local Planning Policies and Proposals

Many existing Structure Plans and Local Plans have gone through the time-consuming process of deposit, review and public inquiry before reaching the stage of formal adoption. Consequently, there may be to some extent a policy vacuum where these plans lack weight in policy terms, or are not regarded as material to particular applications.

Furthermore it is likely that the time-span of their validity may be influenced by proposals contained in the new Planning Bill. However, the government's current thinking suggests that there will still be a need for a similar approach in respect of the need for site-specific policies and a proposals map.

A review of existing County and District policy documents has been undertaken, and a summary of developments that are significant in terms of their size or proximity to the route is provided, working west to east along the route.

The East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Structure Plan contains transport policies (T20) that looked forward to the provision of the Bexhill and Western Hastings and Eastern Hastings Bypasses. However, since then, The A21 Access to Hastings Study and SoCoMMS have reported, and consequently these bypass proposals have been deleted. In response, a task force of local and regional bodies has commissioned a Master Plan for Bexhill and Hastings which is consulting on alternative approaches to policy in this area.

East of Hastings, the route passes through protected landscape areas of the High Weald AONB (Structure Plan policies S4, EN2, EN3, TR43) and Areas of International Importance for Nature Conservation (Structure Plan policies S1, EN17), effectively prohibiting any large scale development. Even so, policy TR23 urges the government "…to implement, at the earliest opportunity, appropriate solutions to transport problems along … the A259 corridor east of Hastings…".

The Rother District Local Plan applies to the whole of the route in East Sussex east of Hastings. Key policies relate to housing in Bexhill, where most of the district allocation is to be provided. These developments are closely linked to the Masterplan for Hastings and Bexhill, which, with the rejection of the Hastings Bypass is seen as the focus for developing an alternative approach to traffic problems on A259 in the two towns, through the creation of 'country avenues' to assist local access to development. A number of developments are also proposed in the Hastings Local Plan, some of which may impact to a small extent on A259 east of the town.

Reuse of brownfield sites at Rye Harbour and in the town will impact on the A259 and improvements to junctions will need to be considered even where nothing is currently programmed (see Rother Local Plan policies RY4 to RY8). East Sussex CC has produced a 'Rye Local Area Transport Strategy' that sets out a programme of works in the area. It is expected that developers would provide contributions towards junction improvements.

From Guldeford Lane Corner eastward, strategic policy is set by Kent and Medway Structure Plan. Major development is identified at Ashford in the immediate vicinity of A2070, which provides a direct link onto M20 at J10. The impact of Ashford developments will be felt mainly around Ashford and the M20. Access to the south from Shepway District is facilitated by the existence of a good quality link at least as far as Brenzett, and provides sufficient capacity over the period of the RMS.

Ashford Local Plan identifies a number of major residential and industrial development sites (S13 to S17 inclusive on the proposals map) in a southern arc around Ashford, and serviced by A2070. Additional junctions will be required to complete these developments, and longer-term measures, requiring a new junction on M20, will be needed to reduce congestion at the existing J10.

5.4 Development control strategy

5.4.1 Land Use Planning & Development Control

Highways Agency policy on land use planning and development control is set out in the Land Use & Development Control Statement, produced in accordance with RMS Guidance, and forming Appendix H to this report.

The Statement summarises national planning policy on transport, set out in Planning Policy Guidance Note 13. In accordance with Annex B of this guidance note, the Highways Agency encourages local planning authorities to consider sustainable transport alternatives to use of the car in devising access to new developments through Travel Plans.

The relationship between Regional Planning Guidance, local authority development plans, and the processes culminating in the consideration of planning applications is reviewed. Attention is drawn to the need for local planning authorities to liaise with the Highways Agency in considering the transport implications of development proposals on or adjacent to trunk roads.

Reference is also made to DTLR Circular 4/2001, which sets out national development control policy for the trunk road and motorway network. The policy has generally been to discourage the formation of new accesses to trunk roads.

The Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) order 1995 requires county councils and lpas to consult the HA about planning applications that may affect the operation of the Trunk Road network and or that may result in a material increase in the volume of traffic entering or leaving the trunk road.

The HA will also expect developers to provide a Transport Assessment in cases where the development will have significant transport implications. These will include, as appropriate, indications of how sustainable transport modes will be used to mitigate the affects of the development on the trunk road.

Measures required to accommodate development, including measures on trunk roads, may be delivered more effectively if they are funded on a joint basis by a number of developers in an area. The HA encourages lpas to draw up development briefs or supplementary planning guidance, as appropriate, to identify these measures. The HA will help lpas to incorporate any measures on trunk roads into these briefs. The HA will also seek to facilitate mechanisms to collect and distribute payments for the measures neededThe HA also encourages developers to discuss development proposals with the HA at an early stage. This will help both parties to understand the full implications of the proposals and avoid unnecessary cost, delay and disappointment.

5.4.2 Local Development Plans and their impact on A259/A2070

The Land Use & Development Control Statement (LU&DCS) contains, as annexes, details of the development plans that have been reviewed, along with a table of key sites (see Annex 1 to LU&DCS. The sites identified all involve proposed development that is of sufficient scale to generate additional traffic on the A259 / A2070 and its junctions. The majority of these sites are concentrated on an arc to the south of Ashford.

A plan showing the locations of these sites is provided in Annex 2 of the LU&DCS, and is also included as drawing TH/RMSC/E/002 in this Report.

Finally, the LU&DCS contains as Annex 3 the HA response to planning applications, reviews of development plans and Local Transport Plans in relation to the strategy elements set out in the main text of that document.