Tev-p-4 Kirkby Proof Of Evidence - Transport Final

TEV/P/4

PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE 08/00001/HYB PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE PNW/5090/219/21

VOLUME 1

MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING NEW FOOTBALL STADIUM, CONVENIENCE AND COMPARISON RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL AND LEISURE USES, KIRKBY TOWN CENTRE AND LAND TO THE SOUTH OF CHERRYFIELD DRIVE, KIRKBY

PROOF OF EVIDENCE of JOSEPH JOHN ELLIS BSc MSc CEng MICE MIHT

On behalf of

TESCO STORES LIMTED & EVERTON FOOTBALL CLUB

JJE/207473 24 October 2008

Page 2 of 50

Volume 1 Contents 1. Introduction

3

2. Transport Assessment

6

3. Stadium Management Plan

15

4. Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West

23

5. Unitary Development Plan

27

6. Planning Policy Statement 1

30

7. Planning Policy Statement 6

32

8. Planning Policy Guidance 13

37

9. Planning Policy Guidance 17

45

10. Conclusions

48

Volume 2 Appendices 1. Site Location Plans 2. Masterplan 3. Development Floor Area Summary 4. 85th Percentile Assessment 5. Railway Station Location Plan 6. Bus Operator Confirmation Letters 7. Valley Road Closure Plan 8. Controlled Parking Zone 9. Secure Station Status 10. Sunderland Railway Station 11. Aintree Railway Station 12. Public Transport for Major Events 13. Kirkby Bus Station and Stops 14. Retail Travel Distance Savings 15. Stadium Travel Distance Savings 16. Parking Assessment

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 3 of 50

1.

INTRODUCTION

1.1

My name is Joseph John Ellis. I am a Chartered Engineer, a Member of the Institution of Civil Engineers and a Member of the Institution of Highways and Transportation.

1.2

I am an Associate at Steer Davies Gleave (SDG) advising clients in both the private and public sectors on transport matters relating to proposed and existing developments. In addition to over eleven years within the private development planning sector, my experience includes seven years in the employment of a major Highway Authority dealing with matters relating to transport planning, traffic management and traffic engineering, parking control and enforcement, highway maintenance, and civil engineering. Prior to this I was employed in the engineering contracting industry for a period of two years.

1.3

SDG is an international transport planning consultancy advising by Governments,

financial

institutions,

transport

operators

and

developers. Our extensive portfolio of major development projects include, the 2010 World Cup, London 2012, Emirates, Wembley, Croke Park and Lansdowne Road. My firm has been advising Tesco Stores Limited and Everton Football Club on transportation issues relating to the proposed development since July 2006. 1.4

I have extensive experience in the transport assessment of major developments, including stadia, major food stores, comparison shopping, employment and residential schemes and presenting transport evidence on such developments at public inquiries. Over the last two years I have gained a considerable understanding of transport issues within the Kirkby area through compiling the applications’

Transport

Assessment,

Travel

Plans

and

other

supporting documents. As well as assessing a significant volume of transport data and technical analysis I have spent time travelling on local trains and buses, walking and driving in the town, meeting with Merseyside’s transport authorities, and by listening to the views of

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 4 of 50

local Members, residents and Everton supporters at public meetings and exhibitions. 1.5

The planning application, the subject of this Inquiry, relates to Tesco Stores Limited’s proposals for a mixed use development, including a new football stadium, convenience and comparison retail, residential and leisure uses, within Kirkby town centre and land to the south of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby.

Attached at Appendix 1 are two plans

showing the location of the site in a regional and local context. 1.6

This Inquiry is being held following the decision of the Secretary of State (SoS) to direct Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council (KMBC) to refer the application to her for determination. The Direction being issued because the SoS is of the opinion that the application is one which she ought to decide herself as the proposals may conflict with national planning policies on important matters, could have significant effects beyond their immediate locality, and give rise to substantial regional controversy.

1.7

In preparing this evidence I have reviewed the issues raised in the Government Office for the North West’s (GONW) letter dated 6 August 2008. In particular I have considered the matters about which the SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, from a transport perspective, namely: 1.

Whether the proposed development accords with the development plan for the area (in this instance the emerging replacement RSS for the North West, and the Unitary Development Plan), having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.

The extent to which the proposed development is consistent with Government policies in Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres, particularly with regard to, the accessibility of the site by all means of transport and the promotion of linked shopping trips between the development to the south of Cherryfield Drive and the existing town centre.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 5 of 50

3.

Whether the application would deliver a sustainable form of development, as outlined in PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development.

4.

Whether the application promotes sustainable transport choices and reduces the need to travel by private transport as identified in PPG13: Transport.

5.

Whether the application has fully taken into consideration the requirements of PPG17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation.

6.

Whether the permission which may be granted should be subject to any conditions and, if so, the form they should take.

7. 1.8

Any other relevant matters.

In the following chapters of this Proof I will first summarise the key findings of the Transport Assessment (chapter 2), followed by a similar summary of the key aspects of the draft Stadium Management Plan Strategy (chapter 3). Within both chapters I will seek to provide clarification on a number of important matters, particularly those raised by local residents and Everton supporters, with regard to transport operations on matchdays, such as public transport and car parking availability.

1.9

I will then explain how the development proposals accord with current planning policies in respect of transport, answering the specific questions raised by the SoS (chapters 4 to 9). In chapter 10 I will bring together my conclusions.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 6 of 50

2.

THE TRANSPORT ASSESSMENT

Introduction 2.1

The Transport Assessment (TA) consists of 15 documents and is an Inquiry Core Document. In this chapter I will provide a brief summary of the TA, providing clarification on a number of important matters raised by consultees, particularly with respect to the stadium. This chapter should be read alongside the TA.

2.2

The 15 documents which form the TA consist of an initial seven documents, these being (with Core Document numbers listed):

2.3

1.

Volume 1 – Summary (November 2007) – CD1.5.1

2.

Volume 2 – Retail (November 2007) – CD1.5.2

3.

Volume 3 – Stadium (November 2007) – CD1.5.3

4.

Volume 4 – Cumulative Impact (November 2007) – CD1.5.4

5.

Volume 5 –Design (November 2007) – CD1.5.5

6.

Volume 6 – Construction Impact (November 2007) – CD1.5.6

7.

Volume 7 – Crowd Movement (November 2007) – CD1.5.7

Following various consultations, and subsequent changes to the Masterplan (including changes to proposed uses, floor areas and layout), the initial TA documents were supplemented by the following addendums and additional documents: 1.

Retail Addendum (March 2008) –CD1.5.10

2.

Stadium Addendum (April 2008) – CD1.5.11

3.

Cumulative Impact Addendum (April 2008) – CD1.5.12

4.

Design Addendum (April 2008) – CD1.5.13

5.

Crowd Movement 1st Addendum (March 2008) – CD1.5.14

6.

Crowd Movement 2nd Addendum (March 2008) – CD1.5.15

7.

Other Matters report (April 2008) – CD1.5.16

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 7 of 50

8.

Technical Note 1 (April 2008) – CD1.5.17

The Development Proposals 2.4

The proposed development consists of a new football stadium (for Everton Football Club), a convenience store (Tesco Extra), other comparison retail, offices, hotel, residential units, library and various ancillary uses.

2.5

There have been a number of changes to the Masterplan over the course of the planning application with the final version showing a significant reduction in retail floor area compared to the original application. The final Masterplan is attached at Appendix 2.

2.6

It is important to note that the TA assessed the transport implications of a development with a retail trip generating floor area of 82,251m2 which is substantially larger than the retail trip generating floor area of 50,000m2 now sought. A floor area summary showing the varying development floor area transport assessments is attached at Appendix 3,

2.7

The TA was supported by three Travel Plans: 1.

Travel Plan Framework Volume 1: Town Centre Plan (November 2007) – CD1.5.8

2.

Travel Plan Framework Volume 2: Stadium Non Matchday Travel Plan (November 2007) – CD1.5.9

3.

Match Day Stadium Travel Plan Framework (May 2008) – CD1.5.18

2.8

These Travel Plans provide a strong commitment from the applicant (and Everton Football Club) to encourage the use of sustainable means of transport

2.9

As the TA was supported by Travel Plans with strong commitments to sustainable travel the transport authorities agreed it was appropriate to use average trip rates when considering the transport implications of the proposed development.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 8 of 50

2.10

The TA included a number of assumptions which resulted in a robust assessment, including: 1.

An assumption that all trips generated by the proposed development would be new to the network, whereas the Institution of Highways and Transportation: Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessments (IHT-TIA) summarises research which shows that up to 95 per cent of shopping trips are already on the network, being transferred from other shopping locations.

2.

Sensitivity testing carried out which assumed that the development attracts no pass-by or diverted trips (i.e. existing trips occurring in close vicinity of the site), whereas the IHTTIA summarises research which shows that during the week 30 per cent, and at the weekend 10 per cent, of trips can be of this nature.

3.

An horizon year for assessment of 2021 when under Department

for

Transport’s

Guidance

on

Transport

Assessment (March 200) the horizon year would normally be 10 years post planning application registration, i.e. 2017. 2.11

To provide an even more robust assessment I have also considered the 85th percentile trip generation (i.e. the trip rate exceeded by only 15 per cent of the sample) from the proposed development.

My

consideration is set out at Appendix 4. This shows that the higher 85th percentile trip rates, coupled with the current development schedule for which planning permission is sought, results in a total trip generation 2 per cent less than that assessed within the submitted TA. 2.12

It is therefore my view that the submitted TA contains a robust assessment document and depicts the worst case scenario for the traffic impact of the proposed development.

2.13

The following paragraphs summarise that TA.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 9 of 50

Existing Transport Conditions 2.14

Kirkby has a railway station and a bus station. The railway station is located 1 km (10 – 15 minutes walk) from the existing town centre, and a few hundred metres further from the centre of the proposed development to the south of Cherryfield Drive. The station is well used with frequent services to Liverpool Central (trains to Wigan run hourly) which is located in Liverpool City Centre, a 5 minutes train journey, or walk to the mainline Liverpool Lime Street railway station. The bus station is located centrally within the town centre where a large number of buses provide an important means of travel for many Kirkby residents.

2.15

Although not referred to within the TA there is also a railway station at Fazakerley which is approximately 5 kms to the west of Kirkby, on the same line as Kirkby railway station. Further there are two stations, Prescot and Huyton, approximately 10 kms and 11 kms respectively to the south of Kirkby, from which one can travel by train to Liverpool Lime Street, which offers mainline services to other parts of the UK. There is easy access to these stations by bus , taxi and car. A plan showing the locations of these other railway stations is attached at Appendix 5.

2.16

The other important public mode of travel in this area are taxis. There are a significant number of taxis operating in the area, and they are well used by local residents.

2.17

The pedestrian network in Kirkby is extensive. Although segregated facilities for cyclists are limited, the traffic flows in the town are relatively light, which enables cyclists to travel along the town’s local roads, many of which have traffic calming features in particular ‘speed cushions’.

2.18

There are two motorways close to Kirkby. The M57 directly to the west and M58 slightly further to the north. To the south of the town lies the A580 East Lancashire Road which provides the third main access to Kirkby. These roads, and Kirkby’s local roads, generally

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 10 of 50

operate well within their design capacities although there is some congestion at peak times at a number of junctions. However, this congestion is limited in both coverage and duration. 2.19

Kirkby town centre currently has approximately 1,198 car parking spaces (including approximately 30 spaces for use by disabled drivers) in eleven car parking areas. The car parks are well used but there is spare capacity on most days, especially at weekends.

2.20

Based on the evidence, it is my view that Kirkby is well served by a choice of transport modes, and that these modes operate well within their respective capacities.

The Transport Strategy 2.21

Included within the TA is a Transport Strategy. This strategy seeks to provide the town’s residents and future visitors with a choice of means of transport, with a particular focus on public transport.

2.22

Full consideration has been given to the needs of the disabled. The on site car parking, both for the stadium, retail and other proposed uses, will include designated car parking spaces for disabled drivers, whilst access to the stadium’s podium (the external concourse of the stadium) is either at-grade or via ramps with gradients suitable for wheelchair users.

2.23

For other users, in the case of the proposed stadium the emphasis has been to minimise the number of cars entering the town by providing improvements to the train, coach and bus services and infrastructure, complemented by the provision of edge-of-town car parking and out-of-town Park & Ride sites.

2.24

The various transport authorities have approved the transport strategy as

one

which

is

sustainable,

pragmatic

and

deliverable.

Nevertheless, understandably there is concern amongst parties (particularly some local residents and Everton supporters) that certain transport improvements may not be deliverable. There is particular concern with respect to the capacity of trains, availability of buses, and car parking. Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 11 of 50

2.25

With respect to train availability, Merseytravel and its partners have approved the capacity analysis set out in the TA, confirming that it will be possible to run six carriage trains at a 15 minute frequency to and from Kirkby on matchdays. The TA uses the term ‘crush loading’ which is a technical term used by train operators. It equates to all seats being occupied with other passengers standing at a acceptable density. It is alternatively termed the planning capacity for a train, and represents a busy but an acceptable level of loading. The actual passenger loadings on the train would be governed by the train operator, and there is no intention on behalf of the operator, or Everton Football Club, to crush their passengers / supporters onto trains.

2.26

Nevertheless, the good train service from Liverpool Central to Kirkby will be a very attractive means of transport for supporters.

The

conditions being similar to those on many other trains (and trams) transporting football supporters to stadia in other parts of the UK. 2.27

As mentioned earlier the TA focused on spectator travel by rail at Kirkby railway station. My view is that this will be the main route by which supporters who travel by rail arrive at Kirkby. However, there are frequent train services available at Prescot and Huyton railway stations. Indeed these may be attractive stations for a minority of people who reside further afield (London, Manchester, Leeds, York etc.) particularly as there are scheduled bus services between Huyton and Kirkby. My view is that these options should be considered as part of the Stadium Match Day Travel Plan as they could further enhance the sustainability credentials of the proposed development. Of course, any such promotion would need to be agreed with the relevant authorities and other stakeholders, and it should be noted that the Transport Strategy does not rely on such a provision.

2.28

Bus availability has also been a discussion topic amongst Everton supporters on various Web sites and at public meetings. It should be noted that the applicant has had a number of meetings with national bus operators and both Stagecoach and Arriva have confirmed that

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 12 of 50

they have sufficient vehicles available to deliver the transport strategy (Appendix 6). 2.29

Many Everton supporters (72 per cent) currently drive to matches at Goodison Park.

They either park their vehicles in one of the

numerous privately operated off street car parks, or park on-street beyond the matchday Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) that operates in and around Goodison Park. 2.30

Although the Transport Strategy for the new stadium at Kirkby seeks to implement a CPZ covering most of the town it is still highly likely that third parties, as at Goodison Park, will make land available within the CPZ for spectators to park their vehicles off street. The Transport Strategy has allowed for this in the modal share predictions, and the consequential road safety and capacity implications have been assessed within the TA.

2.31

For those spectators who wish to park on-street (at no charge) there will also be areas available within a walk of between 20 to 40 minutes. Alternatively, there will be new Park & Ride sites which would allow spectators to park their cars outside Kirkby and take a shuttle bus to the stadium bus park.

2.32

This approach has been fully endorsed by the authorities, and is a sustainable, pragmatic and a deliverable approach to accommodate those spectators who either have no viable choice (due to excessive journey times) than to drive to the new stadium at Kirkby, or who decide to drive for other personal reasons.

Transport Impact Analysis 2.33

It is important to note that for the busiest period (the weekday evening peak hour) the transport impact analysis covered most of Merseyside, in particular all the main highway and public transport links in the region by utilising the region wide SATURN highway, and TRIPS public transport, models.

2.34

In determining the impact of the development proposals a traditional four stage transport modelling exercise was undertaken.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

This

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 13 of 50

consisted of determining the proposed development’s trip generation, then mode share, followed by trip distribution and finally trip assignment.

The modelling made use of data obtained from the

Retail Impact Assessment, Everton Football Club season ticket database, and the industry standard databases TRICS, NRTF and TEMPRO. 2.35

The transport networks were then tested in terms of safety and capacity using standard computer modelling techniques, including, at the strategic level, SATURN (roads), TRIPS (public transport), and then fine-tuned using TRANSYT, LINSIG, ARCADY and PICADY (specific junction and link analysis).

2.36

Where the transport modelling indicated that parts of the network was experiencing capacity or safety issues, improvements were designed, followed by a re-assessment to determine their effectiveness.

All

improvements were designed to the Highways Agency’s Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) and other appropriate standards and guidance.

All highway improvements have been

subjected to Road Safety Audits (Stage 1) and technical checks by the relevant authorities. 2.37

The transport impact analysis clearly demonstrated that the transport networks were capable of working safely within capacity for the non stadium development flows for the horizon year of 2021. Even though the scale of retail development assessed was considerably larger than that which planning permission is now sought.

2.38

The transport impact analysis also showed that, although there would be some congestion, the cumulative impact of traffic from the stadium and non stadium uses, could be safely accommodated within the transport networks, in an horizon year of 2021; again even with the larger retail element.

This cumulative development scenario was

subject to extensive sensitivity testing. The final conclusion drawn by the various transport authorities, and Police, was that the situation could be safely managed.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 14 of 50

2.39

It is important to note that there is bound to be congestion in the buildup to, and immediately after, a major event attended by 50,000 people.

The most important question for the authorities in these

situations is, can the congestion be managed safely and the TA proved that it could. Other Matters 2.40

Merseyside Police has stated that if necessary it will close Valley Road on match days, as currently is the case with Walton Lane at Goodison Park. The purpose of the closure is to allow spectators to cross Valley Road unhindered, to either access the stadium bus park, or walk onwards to Kirkby railway station along Kirkby Row. The closure will either be the entire length of Valley Road from M57 Junction 6 to Cherryfield Drive; or from Bewley Drive to Cherryfield Drive. The road would be closed for a short period just before an event commences at the stadium, and immediately after the event finishes. The duration of closure would be variable but it would be normally no more than 30 minutes, as for Walton Lane at Goodison Park.

2.41

During the Valley Road closure access for emergency and public service vehicles will be maintained, but non emergency traffic would need to use other routes to gain access to certain parts of Kirkby close to the stadium. At Appendix 7 I have provided a plan which shows how access to Kirkby via the M57 Junction 4, and other local routes to the south, west, and north would be achieved.

2.42

As previously stated, during the closure of Valley Road, and indeed for the hour before and after a major event at the stadium, there will be some inconvenience, but this will be of short duration, occurring on average no more than 20 to 25 times a year. This scenario was modelled by the TA using SATURN (full and partial closure of Valley Road) and there was no significant adverse effects on the highway network. Further, there has been no objection from any of the emergency services to the short term road closure.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 15 of 50

3.

THE STADIUM MANAGEMENT PLAN

Introduction 3.1

The TA established the transport strategy, and analysed the transport capacity and safety implications of locating a football stadium at Kirkby. The Stadium Management Plan (SMP - CD1.6.4) details how the stadium is to be managed and operated on a matchday; in particular this includes traffic and crowd management issues.

3.2

3.3

The SMP consists of the following: 1.

Event Management Plan

2.

Operations Plan

3.

Local Area Management Plan

4.

The Stadium Travel Plan

5.

The Monitoring Programme

Everton Football Club will be responsible for implementing and managing the SMP in consultation with KMBC, the Police and other members of the Transport Forum.

3.4

There has been a great deal of interest from various parties about the SMP. It is important to stress that the final SMP must be flexible because every football game will place different demands upon the transport systems depending on the location of the opposition team and the number of travelling supporters.

3.5

It is quite understandable that people have concerns, and within this chapter I will provide further clarification on the transport related aspects of the submitted draft SMP Strategy. These being the match day parking scheme otherwise known as the Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ), coach and bus parking, railway station operation, and the Park & Walk and Park & Ride sites.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 16 of 50

Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) 3.6

Most English Premiership football clubs have matchday controlled parking zones in the vicinity of their stadia, including Everton Football Club’s current stadium at Goodison Park.

3.7

The Matchday CPZ for Kirkby will be designed, implemented and enforced by KBMC as the Local Highway Authority. There are two main purposes for the CPZ.

The first is to deter spectators from

driving into the town and parking along residential streets to the detriment of local residents’ amenity. The second is to minimise the number of vehicles entering the town on match days to prevent undue congestion which would be detrimental to residents and non stadium visitors to the town. 3.8

The implementation of the CPZ will only occur after consultation with local residents, businesses and the emergency services. As with all restricted parking measures various traffic orders will need to be made before the CPZ can be implemented.

3.9

The TA and draft SMP provide preliminary details as to the potential nature of the CPZ, but in essence the purpose of the scheme is to minimise the number of stadium visitors entering the town by car. .

3.10

At Appendix 8 I have provided details of the CPZ currently operating at Goodison Park and that which could be implemented at Kirkby. From this comparison one can see that the average distance covered by the Goodison Park CPZ is currently 1.54 miles from the stadium, increasing to 1.76 miles in 2009. The Kirkby CPZ is likely to cover an area extending on average to 1.7 miles from the new stadium, a very similar distance to that which Everton supporters will be subject to at Goodison Park in early 2009.

3.11

Liverpool City Council (LCC) enforces the Goodison Park CPZ. In Kirkby the enforcement will be the responsibility of KMBC.

LCC

operates its Goodison Park (Match Day) CPZ Monday to Friday, 5pm to 10pm, and at the weekend, 10am to 6pm. The CPZ is in place on match days from August to May. Penalty charge notices (PCNs) vary Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 17 of 50

between £50 to £70, with a reduction for prompt payment. It is likely that KMBC will operate a Kirkby Matchday CPZ in a similar manner. 3.12

From a supporters point of view, it is important to be aware that there is likely to be off street parking available within the limits of the Kirkby CPZ, operated by third parties, just as is the case for the Goodison Park CPZ, and as for many football stadia across the UK.

Coach & Bus Park Management 3.13

The TA sets out a strategy for the management and operation of the stadium’s coach and bus parks. The management of both facilities will be very important in delivering the sustainable transport strategy.

3.14

In the case of the coach park, coaches will probably need to pre-book a space, arriving at least one hour before the start of the game, and only be permitted to leave once crowds have cleared, approximately 30 minutes after the final whistle.

3.15

In the case of the bus park, the facility would act as a terminus for ‘football specials’ and Park & Ride shuttles.

The capacity of the

facility has been carefully designed to accord with the crowd flow egress from the stadium to ensure that the facility does not become overloaded. 3.16

There will be extensive stewarding, signage and pedestrian guard railing to assist and direct drivers and spectators, to ensure the safety of all those who use the facilities.

Railway Station Management 3.17

The management of Kirkby railway station on matchdays has been subject to extensive discussions with Merseytravel and its partners, including Network Rail and the British Transport Police.

3.18

The applicant is providing a financial contribution to Merseytravel to implement significant improvements to the railway station. improvements

will

include,

platform

widening

and

These

improved

pedestrian access. The improvements will significantly improve the

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 18 of 50

safety and capacity of the station for the benefit of all rail users, particularly on match days, but also at all other times. 3.19

The matchday management plan agreed with the authorities is that there will be separation of alighting and boarding passengers. The TA sets out one method of achieving this separation, which seeks to hold boarding passengers in queues on the access ways to the platform, whilst alighting passengers disembark. Depending on the eventual spectator demand for travel by rail, the authorities may adopt this method or another depending on the individual matchday circumstances.

3.20

Although there will be significant improvements at Kirkby railway station it should also be noted that the station does currently have accredited Secure Station status. Details of this scheme, which is directed by the Department for Transport and British Transport Police are attached at Appendix 9. The four criteria for accreditation are: 1.

A design which prevents and reduces crime and improves passenger perceptions.

2.

Management to prevent crime, responds to incidents, and communicates effectively with passengers.

3.21

3.

Crime statistics which show that crime is being managed.

4.

Surveys that show that passengers feel secure.

Of the two stations currently serving Goodison Park. Kirkdale has a similar accredited status but Sandhills is not accredited.

3.22

There are a number of examples of crowd management at railway (as well as tube and tram) stations both for football matches and other major events in the UK. The level of control at each station varies from significant Police control at the London stations, and more lowkey management at the smaller, and less intensively used stations outside the large cities.

3.23

I have reviewed two non London stations, these being Sunderland’s Stadium of Light railway station, and Aintree railway station, a short

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 19 of 50

distance from Kirkby.

The former to understand football crowd

movement in terms of size and how busy it can be; the latter to understand the level of management which is undertaken locally by Merseytravel and the British Transport Police at railway stations for major events. I have also visited both Kirkdale and Sandhills railway stations, both of which serve supporters visiting Goodison Park, although neither stations are as busy on matchdays, as is likely to be the case for Kirkby railway station, if a new stadium is located at Kirkby. 3.24

At Appendix 10 I have provided three photographs showing Sunderland railway station following the final whistle at the 49,000 seat football stadium. against Arsenal.

The match was this season’s home fixture

The first photograph is before the arrival of

supporters and shows that there are no additional crowd management measures utilised at the station. The second photograph shows the first arrivals, with supporters walking across the adjacent car park, in between parked and moving vehicles, and joining the queue to enter the station in an orderly manner, with little stewarding or policing. Photograph three shows queuing on the station platform with a stationary train waiting to be boarded, and a queue now extending some distance from the station entrance; again with no obvious Police attendance but there are now two stewards visible at the station entrance and one on the platform. 3.25

At Appendix 11 I have provided three photographs showing Aintree railway station following this year’s Grand National.

The first

photograph is before the arrival of race goers and shows that there are significant crowd management measures, Police officers and station staff engaged at the station. The second photograph shows a large congregation of race goers in a queue entering the station in an orderly manner, controlled by stewards and or police officers. Photograph three shows queuing on the station platform waiting for a train to arrive, with a number of station staff and a police officer on the platform. Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 20 of 50

3.26

Clearly there are differences between Sunderland and Aintree, and football

supporters

and

Grand

National

spectators,

but

the

photographs show that large crowds can be managed at railway stations, and in different ways. In my view, the key to successful crowd management at railway stations (indeed at any transport interchange) is liaison between the various policing and operating authorities, effective communication with the travellers, and flexibility within the operating plan to accommodate unforeseen events. This is exactly the approach promoted by the Kirkby TA and draft SMP. Park & Walk and Park & Ride 3.27

Park & Walk sites are conveniently located car parks within walking distance of an attraction, in this case the new stadium. Most, if not all, of these sites will be operated by third parties, as currently is the case at Goodison Park and therefore the Club will have no control over their operation. Those car parks which the Club will operate will be managed by stewards and all spaces are likely to be pre-booked with match tickets to avoid money handling on matchdays.

3.28

Park & Ride sites will permit supporters to park outside Kirkby, and board a shuttle bus which will transfer them to the stadium’s bus park. It is likely that the shuttle buses will start operating three hours before the start of the game and terminate two hours after the final whistle. It will probably be possible to pre-book parking and shuttle bus tickets at the same time as purchasing a match ticket or as an add on to season ticket. The location of these facilities will be assessed on their transport benefits (for example, close to junctions/trunk roads), availability of land, and planning regulations in force.

3.29

The TA identified potential Park & Ride sites which could accommodate approximately 10,000 car parking spaces (the transport strategy requires 3,300 spaces) across 6 sites.

3.30

Of the sites identified by the TA, Aintree Racecourse has confirmed that it may be a viable option, as has Merseytravel with respect to their proposed Merseytram Park & Ride site at Croxteth. Sefton and

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 21 of 50

Liverpool councils have also suggested sites (as set out in the TA) which may prove suitable for Park & Ride. 3.31

It is important to recognise that the availability of Park & Ride sites will vary, for differing reasons, over the many years that the stadium will operate.

This is why the TA has identified enough spaces to

accommodate three times the transport strategy Park & Ride requirement, which together with the initial positive responses from landowners, gives a good deal of confidence about the deliverability of this aspect of the transport strategy. Other UK Stadia Examples 3.32

In the preceding paragraphs within this chapter of my Proof I have shown how the principles set out in the Transport Strategy can be delivered via a Stadium Management Plan.

3.33

At Appendix 12 I have attached a report titled, ‘Public Transport for Major Events’. This report provides examples of how other major UK stadia, and other major sporting events, address matters relating to travel by bus and coach.

Other Matters 3.34

Concern has been raised by some supporters about transport contingency plans for events such as extra time, for matches played during the weekday evenings.

Such situations do occur for ‘Cup’

games but they are very rare.

Having reviewed Everton Football

Club’s five seasons from 2003, the Club has never had such an occurrence for a first team competitive match.

In the case of

Liverpool Football Club, during the same period there have been two such occurrences. 3.35

Notwithstanding the unlikelihood of extended play on a weekday match it will be for the SMP to include appropriate contingencies. At this stage the two main bus operators would hold their buses until the end of the game. Trains currently run until 11.18pm, which sufficiently allows for supporters to watch the whole game (including extended time) and walk to Kirkby railway station assuming an 8pm start.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 22 of 50

3.36

Stagecoach, a national bus operator has also confirmed that, if required it would be able to provide additional buses to cover disruptions or works to the railway.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 23 of 50

4.

REGIONAL SPATIAL STRATEGY (RSS) FOR THE NORTH WEST

4.1

The SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, whether the proposed development accords with the emerging replacement RSS for the North West, having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

4.2

Since the GONW’s letter dated 6 August 2008, the final version of the RSS has now been published (30 September 2008). Therefore, I will explain how the proposed development accords with the adopted RSS rather than the previous drafts of the RSS.

4.3

The RSS’ transport objectives (page 70) of particular relevance to the proposed development are to: 1.

Maintain existing transport infrastructure in good order.

2.

Secure a shift towards the use of more sustainable modes of transport.

3.

Secure safe and efficient access between residential areas and key destinations, including centres of employment, schools, shops and other services.

4.

Reduce the adverse impacts of transport, in terms of safety hazards,

climate

change,

environmental

degradation,

residential amenity and social exclusion. 4.4

Policy RT2 specially refers to proposals which may affect the trunk road network, advocating early consultation with the Highways Agency, and stating, inter alia, that, 1.

major new developments should be ‘located where there is good access to public transport, backed by effective provision for pedestrians and cyclists to minimise the need to travel by private car.’

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 24 of 50

2.

Plans should ‘seek to reduce private car use through the introduction of ‘smarter choices’….and other incentives to change

travel

behaviour

which

should

be

developed

alongside public transport, cycling and pedestrian network and service improvements’. 3.

‘Make greater use of on-street parking controls and enforcement’.

4.

‘Incorporate maximum parking standards that are in line with, or more restrictive than’, those set out in the RSS.

4.5

The development proposals accord with Policy RT2 requirements, in that: 1.

Early consultation was undertaken, and continued, with the Highways Agency, the Local Highway Authority, Merseytravel (and its partners) and Merseyside Police (and other emergency services).

2.

From a transport perspective the development lies within, and on the edge of Kirkby town centre, with the town centre itself being centrally located within Kirkby and within a reasonable walking distance for the whole community.

3.

Kirkby bus station is an integral part of the town centre and the proposed development. The bus station offers numerous frequent services to all of the surrounding communities including Liverpool City centre.

4.

The development lies within 1 km to 1.2 km (10 to 15 minutes walk) of Kirkby railway station.

The station is served by

frequent trains to Liverpool City centre and communities between the City and Kirkby. Further the station provides for an hourly train service to Wigan, and beyond to Manchester. 5.

The development proposals include a number of ‘smarter choices’ initiatives.

These include some of the measures

suggested in the RSS including, Travel Plans for the Town

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 25 of 50

Centre, Stadium Matchday Use, and Stadium Non-Matchday Use; Park & Ride, and possibly integrated ticketing. 6.

There will be a comprehensive Matchday Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) to discourage car use and encourage public transport use, cycling and walking. The CPZ will also reduce the impact of vehicle emissions and noise, and the severance, and loss of amenity on the local community within Kirkby which can happen with increased traffic levels.

7.

The development will only provide additional on site car parking in accordance with the RSS standards, with a suitable provision for the disabled, reflecting the urban location and its good accessibility by public transport, walking and cycling. This matter is covered in chapter 8 of this Proof.

4.6

Based on the evidence it is my view that the development proposals accord with RSS Policy RT2.

4.7

Policy RT9 is also relevant in that, ‘…..schemes for new developments should incorporate high quality pedestrian and cycle facilities, including secure parking. Routes should connect with those in nearby developments, and the provision of all facilities should take into consideration integration with the likely future development.’

4.8

The development proposals accord with Policy RT9 requirements, in that: 1.

The Masterplan has been devised to ensure full pedestrian permeability, both within the new part of the town centre, and with the existing town centre.

2.

These pedestrian routes have been designed to a high standard, being of good width, illuminated and with scope to locate street furniture such as pedestrian signage and benches.

3.

Cyclists have been accommodated within the Masterplan, with secure cycle stands located outside the individual retail

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 26 of 50

units. For the existing town centre it is intended to improve the public realm which will include new secure facilities for cyclists. 4.

The proposed development has been designed to allow full integration with the surrounding areas for pedestrians and cyclists.

4.9

Based on the evidence it is my view that the development proposals accord with RSS Policy RT9.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 27 of 50

5.

UNITARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (UDP)

5.1

The SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, whether the proposed development accords with the UDP, having regard to the provisions of Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

5.2

The UDP was adopted in 2006, and there are a number of policies contained within the document which cover Kirkby town centre and transport.

5.3

At UDP Policy S4 ‘Kirkby town centre is designated as an Action Area within which comprehensive development or redevelopment shall be permitted…’. The policy lists a range of permitted development uses including a, 9,000m2 food store, comparison retailing, professional and financial services, food and drink uses, offices, hotel, residential institution, residential uses, non residential institutions, assembly and leisure uses, and a petrol filling station. Also referenced within the policy are Merseytram Line 1, improvements to Kirkby bus station and public

transport

interchange

facilities,

and

public

transport

improvements. 5.4

In terms of transport: 1.

Merseytram Line 1 is not supported by the Government, however, the route safeguarding remains.

The proposed

Masterplan recognises and maintains the safeguarding but seeks to enhance the area through selective public realm improvements. 2.

The Masterplan includes public realm improvements which include measures to be introduced in the vicinity of the Kirkby bus station. These improvements should greatly enhance the public transport and interchange with the town centre.

5.5

Based on the evidence it is my view that the development proposals accord with UDP Policy S4.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 28 of 50

5.6

Policy T5 sets out certain matters relating to the location of major traffic generating new development, including: 1.

Major developments ….should be or be capable of being located within safe and convenient walking distance of public transport facilities [defined as being no more than 400 metres from a bus stop and/or 800 metres from a rail station or Merseytram stop].’

2.

‘Developments

that

are

likely

to

generate

significant

movement of freight or other vehicular traffic should be located at sites, which have good access to, and which will not cause an unacceptable amount of congestion on the rail network or the Strategic Road Network…’ 5.7

The proposed development includes the existing Kirkby bus station and is easily within 400m of bus stops (Appendix 13). Kirkby railway station is approximately 1 km to 1.2 kms to the north west, whilst the M57 is few minutes drive from the site.

Although the proposed

development will generate a significant number of new trips to Kirkby, the complementary transport improvements will ensure that there will not be an unacceptable amount of congestion on either the rail or bus networks, or Strategic Road Network. 5.8

Based on the evidence it is my view that the development proposals accord with UDP Policy T5.

5.9

Policy T6 sets out matters which seek to ensure that there is a choice of travel to serve new developments, stating that, ‘proposals for new developments should provide or be served by a good choice of modes of travel which is appropriate to the scale and nature of the development, as follows: 1.

Well lit, safe, convenient and clearly sign-posted footways and cycle routes both within the site and linking to the surrounding area and to public transport facilities;

2.

Cycle parking facilities in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards;

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 29 of 50

3.

Car parking facilities which do not exceed the Council’s maximum standards;

4.

Parking facilities for the less mobile, delivery and other service vehicles within the site in accordance with the Council’s minimum standards;

5.

Safe and convenient vehicular access to and from the highway and within the site; and

6.

Good provision of public transport to the site. In the case of major developments, and any other development likely to generate a significant amount of travel demand, the provision of additional public transport facilities such as bus stops, bus layover bays, taxi bays or other facilities may be required within or adjacent to the site.’

5.10

The proposed development provides good footway and cycleway links, cycle and car parking in accordance with the standards; well designed service yards; and new vehicular entrances which have been subject to successful technical and safety audits.

Being

centrally located the site includes Kirkby bus station, with other bus stops within close proximity. 5.11

Based on the evidence it is my view that the development proposals accord with UDP Policy T6.

5.12

Policies T8 and T9 deal with the need for major developments to prepare Transport Assessments and, prepare and implement Travel Plans.

A comprehensive Transport Assessment and draft Travel

Plans have been submitted as supporting documents to the planning application. The Travel Plans will be subject to a planning condition which requires their implementation prior to occupation. 5.13

Based on the evidence it is my view that the development proposals accord completely with UDP Policies T8 and T9.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 30 of 50

6.

PLANNING POLICY STATEMENT 1

6.1

In relation to PPS1, the SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, whether, inter alia, the application would deliver a sustainable form of development.

6.2

Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) sets out the Government’s overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system.

6.3

Sustainable

development

is

the

underpinning

planning,

being

Government’s most

commonly

core

principle

defined

as

‘development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’, (World Commission on Environment and development, 1987). 6.4

One of the key PPS1 principles for the delivery of sustainable development is that local authorities seek, through policies, reductions in energy use and emissions, for example encouraging patterns of development which reduce the need to travel by private car (paragraph 13(ii)).

6.5

From a transport perspective the proposed development is located within, and on the edge of, the existing town centre, which is centrally located within Kirkby. The town centre includes a bus terminus, and lies within 1 Km to 1.2 Kms (10 – 15 minutes walk) of Kirkby railway station. Therefore, those wishing to use the town centre’s facilities have the opportunity to use trains, buses, cycle or walk, and reduces the need to travel by private car in accordance with PPS1.

6.6

Developments should also create socially inclusive communities, with policies which provide access for all members of the community to jobs, health, housing, education, shops, leisure and community facilities (paragraph 16, third bullet point).

6.7

The proposed development has been designed to allow easy and ready access to all facilities for all members of the community. The

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 31 of 50

development has a number of uses including convenience shopping, comparison shopping, employment and housing, whilst the existing town centre has good access to schools and colleges, sports, and other community uses, all in accordance with PPS1. 6.8

Developments should also ensure that infrastructure and services are provided to support new and existing economic development and housing (paragraph 23 (viii)).

6.9

The proposed development includes significant enhancements to the transport networks secured through the S106 Agreement.

This

includes enhancements to Kirkby railway station. There will also be a substantial new provision of coaches and buses on match days, enhancements to highway safety and capacity, and a major investment in traffic management for the motorways and local roads. This new infrastructure will ensure that the transport networks will still continue to operate even on the busiest days in accordance with PPS1. 6.10

In summary, it is my view that the location, mix and transport infrastructure

improvements

will

ensure

that

the

proposed

development is a sustainable form of development in accordance with Government policy set out in PPS1.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 32 of 50

7.

PLANNING POLICY STATEMENT 6

7.1

Planning Policy Statement 6 (PPS6) sets out the Government’s planning policies in respect of planning for the future of town centres to ensure vital and viable town centres.

7.2

The SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, the extent to which the proposed development is consistent with PPS6 particularly with regard to, inter alia, the accessibility of the site by all means of transport and the promotion of linked shopping trips between the development to the south of Cherryfield Drive and the existing town centre.

7.3

The Government’s key objective for town centres is to promote the vitality and viability of town centres by, inter alia, ‘…..by focusing development in such centres and encouraging a wide range of services in a good environment, accessible to all.’ (paragraph 1.3, second bullet point).

7.4

From a transport perspective the proposed development is located within, and on the edge of, Kirkby town centre. The proposed uses include convenience shopping, comparison shopping, leisure, housing and community uses. In my view the Masterplan has been formulated to ensure that all facilities are accessible to all, in accordance with PPS6.

7.5

Another Government objective in PPS6 is, ‘improving accessibility, ensuring that existing or new development is, or will be, accessible and well served by a choice of means of transport’, (paragraph 1.4, third bullet point).

7.6

The proposed development includes significant enhancements to the railway station. There will be substantial new provision of coach and bus services on match days, enhancements to highway safety and capacity, and a major investment in traffic management for the motorways and local roads. This new infrastructure will ensure that

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 33 of 50

Kirkby town centre and land to the south of Cherryfield Drive will be accessible and well served by a choice of modes of transport, all in accordance with PPS6. 7.7

The theme of choice is repeated at paragraph 1.5 (fourth bullet point), ‘…..promoting sustainable choices, including reducing the need to travel and providing alternatives to car use’. As previously shown, the proposed development will offer sustainable transport choices.

In

terms of reducing the need to travel, the proposed development greatly enhances the consumer choice within Kirkby and will as a consequence

allow

Kirkby

residents,

and

those

from

other

neighbouring communities, to shop for different goods all in one location, rather than having to travel to different shops in different locations. Therefore, in my view the proposed development should reduce the need to travel. I return to this matter at paragraph 7.14. 7.8

The proposed development consists of improvements to the existing town centre and land to the south of Cherryfield Drive. As required by PPS6 paragraph 2.6, connections have been provided between the existing and new parts of the town centre to allow easy access by foot. These connections would be enhanced by public realm improvements to the town centre.

7.9

Chapter 3 of PPS6 sets out the considerations which should be taken into account by local planning authorities in determining planning applications for all proposals relating to main town centre uses.

7.10

The key consideration from a transport perspective is that applicants are required to demonstrate, ‘that locations are accessible’, (paragraph 3.4e).

7.11

PPS6 paragraphs 3.24 to 3.27 expand upon this key consideration requiring applicants to consider: 1.

The need for accessibility by a choice of means of transport

2.

The impact on car use, traffic and congestion

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 34 of 50

7.12

The supporting TA for the proposed development provides sound evidence the development is accessible by public transport, walking, cycling, and the car, in that: 1.

It includes Kirkby bus station.

2.

It is within 1 km to 1.2 kms (10 – 15 minutes walk) of Kirkby railway station.

3.

There are frequent bus and rail services providing good links to neighbouring communities (taking account, as PPS6 suggests, of the Retail Impact Assessment which gives evidence as to the likely travel patterns of customers).

4.

Those

public

transport

links

(with

the

proposed

improvements) have sufficient capacity to accommodate the trip generation likely from the proposed development by public transport. 5.

Easy, safe and convenient access for pedestrians, cyclists and the disabled are provided both within the Masterplan and in gaining access to the development site, north and south of Cherryfield Drive.

7.13

The supporting TA also provided sound evidence that the development would: 1.

Significantly reduce the overall travel distance by car for residents of Kirkby, with a neutral effect overall when the assessment included those attracted to the development from surrounding communities (I explore this matter in paragraph 7.14 onwards of this Proof).

2.

Provide significant enhancements to the transport networks which

would

mitigate

the

impact

of

the

proposed

development, and also address current congestion issues, and very importantly that congestion which is likely to arise by 2021 even without the proposed development.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 35 of 50

Travel Distance 7.14

At paragraph 7.7 I stated that the proposed development should reduce the need to travel based on the greatly enhanced consumer choice within Kirkby. This was a qualitative response and I shall now consider the matter quantitatively.

7.15

The traditional method of quantifying the need to travel as a consequence of new developments is to calculate existing and future travel distances of those visiting the development as against their current travel distances to similar attractions. Then, using standard factors, one converts the travel distance change into vehicle carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions.

7.16

The calculation, and comparison of travel distances is not an accurate tool as individuals’ reasons for travel vary greatly, nevertheless it does provide a guide to the travel distance characteristics of new developments, particularly convenience retailing. It should be noted that its use for comparison retailing is questionable, as unlike convenience retailing, where the majority of shoppers undertake one weekly shop, by car, and to their nearest store, comparison shopping can be undertaken daily, by different modes, and to many different stores depending on the goods sought.

7.17

In particular, to calculate vehicle emissions accurately one needs to be confident as to the mode of travel, which again will vary greatly depending on the reason for travel and destination.

7.18

To provide a guide to the local authority on the proposed development’s ‘reducing the need to travel’ credentials, the TA included a travel distance calculation. This showed that the proposed development could potentially lead to a small increase in travel distance of 3 per cent for retail traffic and a 9.5 per cent increase for stadium traffic.

Importantly, it was recognised that there would be a

substantial reduction in the need for Kirkby residents to travel to other areas for retailing purposes. Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 36 of 50

7.19

To assist the SoS in further understanding the sustainability credentials of the proposed development I have carried out two additional exercises on travel distance, including CO2 vehicle emission calculations. The first relates to the proposed retail uses, the second to the new stadium.

7.20

At Appendix 14 I have recalculated the mileage assessment for the retail uses, updating a few assumptions in the TA. The results show that overall there will be a slight decrease in weekly travel distance of 30,534 Kms or 0.3 per cent, equating to a weekly reduction of 6,336 Kgs of CO2. The latter assuming all travel is made by car.

7.21

As I have previously stated these results must be interpreted cautiously, particularly for comparison retailing. My view, based on the results of this travel distance calculation, is that overall the proposed retailing elements of the development will be neutral with respect to reducing the need to travel by private car.

7.22

At Appendix 15 I have recalculated the mileage assessment for the stadium use assuming a 50,000 seat occupancy and introducing mode choice to allow a CO2 deduction. The results show that CO2 emissions would decrease from the current 0.60 Kgs per seat at the 40,000 seat Goodison Park stadium, to 0.53 Kgs per seat at the 50,000 seat Kirkby stadium, a significant 12 per cent reduction in CO2 emissions per seat.

7.23

It is my view that the proposed development is in, and on the edge of, an existing town centre, accessible by a choice of means of transport, provides significant enhancements to the accessibility of the location, reduces the need to travel by car, and significantly reduces the travel distance by car for Kirkby residents, all in accordance with Government policy set out in PPS6.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 37 of 50

8.

PLANNING POLICY GUIDANCE 13 (PPG13)

8.1

In relation to PPG13, the SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, whether the application promotes sustainable transport choices and reduces the need to travel by private transport.

8.2

PPG13 objectives are to integrate planning and transport at the national, regional, strategic and local level and to promote more sustainable transport choices for carrying people and for moving freight.

8.3

Drafted in 2001 the current version of PPG13 is slightly outdated by PPS1, PPS6 and other policy statements, but the objectives (paragraph 4) remain valid, being to: 1.

Promote more sustainable transport choices for both people and for moving freight;

2.

Promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling; and

3. 8.4

Reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

PPG13, paragraph 6 sets out matters which local authorities should consider, of particular relevance to the proposed development are: 1.

Focus major generators of travel demand in city, town and district

centres,

and

near

to

major

public

transport

interchanges. 2.

Ensure that development comprising jobs, shopping, leisure and services offers a realistic choice of access by public transport, walking, and cycling.

3.

Use parking policies, alongside other planning and transport measures, to promote sustainable transport choices and reduce reliance on the car for work and other journeys.

4.

Give priority to people over ease of traffic movement.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 38 of 50

5.

Ensure that the needs of disabled people are taken into account.

8.5

For most developments PPG13 requires Transport Assessments to be prepared, which ‘for major proposals should illustrate accessibility to the site by all modes and the likely modal split of journeys to and fro the site’ (paragraph 23).

8.6

The planning application has been supported by a comprehensive TA, and three Travel Plans, dealing with those matters (and more) that I have set out in my paragraph 8.4.

In particular these documents

address all matters raised by the various transport authorities and show a clear commitment from the applicant to deliver a sustainable development. 8.7

Further

PPG13

requires

that

developments

comprising

jobs,

shopping, leisure and services should offer a realistic choice of access by public transport, walking and cycling. This being assessed ‘in terms of how easy it is to get to the site comparing the different modes, taking into account journey times, public transport frequency, quality, safety, and access for disabled people’, (paragraph 26). 8.8

For office developments these should be ‘as far as possible highly accessible by public transport, walking and cycling’, with businesses ‘adopting travel plans’ (paragraph 32).

8.9

For leisure, tourism and recreation developments, particular attention should

be

paid

to

the

‘scale,

layout,

parking

and

access

arrangements’, and there should be ‘measures to increase access to the site by sustainable transport modes, and the use of traffic management and appropriate parking policies near to the site’ (paragraph 37). 8.10

Kirkby town centre is highly accessible. It is very easy to travel by public transport with a bus station forming an integral part of the town centre, together with bus stops along Cherryfield Drive.

Kirkby

railway station is 1 km from the town centre, with the centre of the new retail proposed to the south of Cherryfield Drive a few hundred Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 39 of 50

metres further. Monday to Sunday the railway station has 4 trains per hour to Liverpool city centre, with 2 trains per hour during the evening and on Sundays.

There are also train links to Wigan, and onto

Manchester. 8.11

The majority of Kirkby is within 1.5 kms of the town centre and easily accessible by foot and on cycle. Access for the disabled is afforded by the generally wide footways and by wheelchair accessible buses.

8.12

Notwithstanding the existing accessible nature of Kirkby town centre it is my view that the proposed development provides a package of new measures to increase the use of sustainable transport for those visiting the site, in accordance with paragraphs 32 and 37 of PPG13.

Parking 8.13

‘The availability of car parking has a major influence on the means of transport people choose for their journeys’, (paragraph 49). Further at paragraph 50, PPG13 explains that ‘policies on parking should be coordinated with parking controls…and should complement planning policies on the location of development’.

8.14

At paragraph 51, PPG13 states that local authorities should, inter alia: 1.

Ensure that, as part of a package of planning and transport measures, levels of parking provided in association with development will promote sustainable transport choices.

2.

Encourage the shared use of parking, particularly in town centres and as part of major proposals.

3.

Require developers to provide designated parking spaces for disabled people in accordance with current good practice.

4.

Where appropriate, introduce on-street parking controls in areas adjacent to major travel generating developments to minimise the potential displacement of parking where on site parking is being limited.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 40 of 50

5.

Require convenient safe and secure cycle parking in development at least at levels consistent with the cycle strategy in the local transport plan.

8.15

PPG13 sets out maximum standards for car parking, although local authorities may adopt more rigorous standards. However, the policy guidance is clear, at paragraph 52 that, ‘maximum parking standards should be designed to be used as part of a package of measures to promote sustainable transport choices, reduce the land-take of development, enable schemes to fit into central urban sites, promote linked-trips and access to development for those without use of a car and to tackle congestion’.

8.16

This matter is very important for town centre locations where linked trips are the norm and duration of stays are longer than stand-alone developments. PPG13 addresses this matter at paragraph 56 stating, ‘A balance has to be struck between encouraging new investment in town centres by providing adequate levels of parking, and potentially increasing traffic congestion caused by too many cars. Where retail and leisure developments are located in town centres, or on an edge of centre site as defined by PPG6, local planning authorities should consider allowing parking additional to the relevant maximum standards…’.

8.17

Paragraphs 50, 51, 52 and 56 of PPG13 are clear that although local authorities should adopt maximum parking standards, they should also be flexible in applying those standards to retail and leisure developments in town centres. Where there is a need for additional parking to accommodate people’s expectations of the town centre ‘offer’, there is no reason why that additional parking, clearly within reason, should not be permitted.

8.18

The package approach is given further weight by paragraph 57, ‘as part of an overall approach on parking….local authorities should adopt on-street measures [parking controls and charges] to complement land use policies’.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 41 of 50

8.19

The proposed development takes all of the above matters into account and seeks to provide car parking in accordance with the local authority adopted standards. These are currently set out in the RSS.

8.20

At Appendix 16 I have set out the maximum levels of car parking permissible under PPG13 and the RSS, and that proposed by the development. This shows that for the non stadium uses the proposed net increase in car parking for the development is 3,269 spaces which is within the more restrictive RSS (Urban) maximum provision of 3,348 spaces. The proposed provision of car parking for disabled drivers is 183 spaces, which exceeds the minimum RSS requirements of 145 spaces.

8.21

In the case of the stadium, the on site parking provision is below the maximum permitted by policy.

8.22

The proposed development includes the introduction of an extensive matchday Controlled Parking Zone to deter visitors to the town from parking on-street to the detriment of local residents’ amenity and road safety. This form of parking control is common at other UK stadia, and shows the applicant’s commitment to implement a sustainable development, offering a choice of means of transport.

8.23

It is my view that the proposed development accords with appropriate policy with respect to car parking provision.

8.24

PPG13 is also very supportive of park and ride schemes, which it considers, ‘can help promote more sustainable travel patterns….and improve the attractiveness of town centres’, (paragraph 59). Indeed the policy guidance continues, ‘well designed and well-conceived schemes – which accord with the advice in this guidance – should be given favourable treatment through the planning system’.

8.25

The proposed development includes a commitment to provide Park & Ride sites (up to 3,300) for the stadium.

These facilities will be

strategically located to avoid safety concerns and potential congestion on local roads, close to the Trunk road network to aid rapid dispersion

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 42 of 50

of traffic.

Clearly the development proposals accord entirely with

paragraph 59 of PPG13. 8.26

As for parking, PPG13 is very supportive of traffic management schemes (paragraphs 64 to 69). In particular, the guidance states that well designed traffic management measures can contribute to planning objectives in a number of ways, including: 1.

Promoting safe walking, cycling and public transport across the whole journey.

2.

Helping to avoid or manage congestion pressures which might arise in central areas from locational policies.

3.

Resident parking schemes and other controls to avoid onstreet parking in areas adjacent to developments with limited on-site parking.

8.27

The proposed development includes a substantial transport package which provides improvements to travel by rail, coach, bus, taxi, cycling and walking. Also included are significant highway safety and capacity improvements, which along with traffic management measures will help to avoid and manage congestion which may arise in the town centre (and elsewhere).

In my view the proposed

development accords with paragraphs 64 to 69 of PPG13. 8.28

Underpinning current transport policy is the improvement to, and encouragement of public transport. Paragraphs 72 to 74 sets out the Government’s drive to increase public transport use.

Particularly

relevant to the proposed development is that local authorities should: 1.

Identify the key routes for bus improvements and priority measures, and the measures that will be taken.

2.

Identify proposals for improving rail travel.

3.

Negotiate improvements to public transport as part of development proposals, in order to reduce the need to travel by car.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 43 of 50

8.29

The proposed development includes significant improvements to Kirkby railway station, public realm (including Kirkby bus station), substantial capacity increases on matchdays for rail, coach and bus travel.

In my view the proposed development accords with

paragraphs 72 to 74 of PPG13. 8.30

Notwithstanding the need to improve and promote public transport, PPG13 is also very supportive of measures that will encourage the ‘slow modes’ of walking and cycling. Indeed, of the various modes of transport, cycling and walking offer the greatest potential in providing for sustainable developments for distances up to 2 km for walking, and 5 km for cycling. In particular local authorities should: 1.

Identify areas where the needs and safety of pedestrians and cyclists will be given priority, and the measures that will be taken to support this objective.

2.

Pay

attention

to

the

design,

location

and

access

arrangements of new developments to help promote walking and cycling. 3.

Seek the provision of convenient, safe and secure cycle parking in developments and town centres.

8.31

The proposed development includes significant improvements to the local highway environment with a number of junction improvements, pedestrian crossings and traffic management measures.

All these

improvements will improve the needs and safety of pedestrians in accordance with PPG13. 8.32

The proposed development includes three main new vehicular entrances all of which have successfully passed independent technical and safety audits. These entrances have been designed in full knowledge of the needs of cyclists and pedestrians, and their access to the proposed development.

8.33

The Masterplan includes a significant increase upon the existing parking facilities for bicycles, with convenient, safe and secure cycle parking across the development area.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 44 of 50

8.34

Based on the evidence in my view the proposal accord with PPG13.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 45 of 50

9.

PLANNING POLICY GUIDANCE 17 (PPG17)

9.1

In relation to PPG17, the SoS particularly wishes to be informed for the purposes of her consideration of the application, whether the application has fully taken into consideration the requirements of PPG17: Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation, with particular regard to the loss of open space and playing fields.

9.2

PPG17 is the Government’s policy guidance for the planning for open space, sport and recreation.

There are five main objectives

(Foreword – page 4), one being, ‘promoting more sustainable development by ensuring that open space, sports and recreational facilities (particularly in urban areas) are easily accessible by walking and cycling and that more heavily used or intensive sports and recreational facilities are planned for locations well served by public transport.’ 9.3

At paragraph 13, PPG17 states that in replacing a facility that, ‘the new land and facility should be at least as accessible to current and potential new users’, as the current land and facility.

9.4

Currently Everton Football Club’s stadium is Goodison Park. This stadium is located in an urban community, with a number of bus routes passing nearby; lies within a 20 minutes walk of Kirkdale railway station (same line as the trains which run to Kirkby), slightly further from Sandhills railway station, and has good access to the local road network.

9.5

The proposed location at Kirkby is located in a town centre, a few minutes walk from bus routes, and 1 km to 1.2 kms (10 -15 minutes walk) from Kirkby railway station.

The stadium will have new

dedicated bus and coach parks. The proposals also include Park & Walk and Park & Ride sites, located in areas with excellent links to strategic road network.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 46 of 50

9.6

Based on the evidence it is my view that a new stadium for Everton Football Club at Kirkby will be as accessible as that at Goodison Park. As such it accords with paragraph 13 of PPG17.

9.7

In identifying where to locate new sports facilities local authorities should (paragraph 20), inter alia: 1.

Promote accessibility by walking, cycling and public transport, and ensure that facilities are accessible for people with disabilities.

2.

Locate more intensive recreational uses in sites where they can contribute to town centre vitality and viability.

3. 9.8

Improve the quality of the public realm through good design.

The proposed stadium includes a commitment to sustainable travel planning with separate (but linked) Travel Plans for matchday and non-matchday operations. The S106 includes a financial commitment to delivering further initiatives and also a commitment to providing significant levels of public transport for the stadium.

9.9

From a transport perspective the proposed stadium is located on the edge of a town centre and the many visitors will only contribute to the town centre’s vitality and viability. The public realm improvements will further contribute to the town centre’s attractiveness.

9.10

Based on the evidence it is my view that the proposed development accords with paragraph 20 of PPG17.

9.11

At paragraph 21, PPG17 states that, ‘many sporting and recreational facilities will be similar in their land use characteristics to some forms of leisure – by making intensive use of land and attracting a large number of visits. Indeed, some will be mixed with significant elements of entertainment, retail or leisure uses and will function for many hours of the day. Planning permission for such developments should only be granted where they are located in highly accessible locations in or adjacent to town centres…’

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 47 of 50

9.12

Stadia are covered by PPG17 at paragraph 22, stating that, ‘planning permission for stadia and major sports developments which will accommodate large numbers of spectators, or which will also function as a facility for community based sports and recreation, should only be granted when they are to be located in areas with good access to public transport.’

9.13

In my view the proposed development is accessible by a choice of means of transport, and provides significant enhancements to the accessibility of the location, in accordance with paragraphs 21 and 22 of PPG17.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 48 of 50

10.

CONCLUSIONS

10.1

It is my view that the transport impact of the proposed development has

been

robustly

assessed;

the

methodology,

results

and

conclusions of that assessment being set out in the comprehensive TA. 10.2

The TA has been audited by the Highways Agency and Local Highway Authority. The conclusions of those audits by the authorities being that the proposed development’s transport impact can be accommodated by the transport networks as enhanced by the significant improvements to which the applicant is committed.

10.3

It is my view that the TA shows that the development site is fully accessible by train, coach, bus, on cycle and by foot. The proposed improvements, which include new transport infrastructure and additional public transport capacity, greatly enhances the choice of sustainable transport modes for residents and visitors to the town.

10.4

The proposed development includes a major new stadium for Everton Football Club. The applicant has provided a SMP which details how the stadium will be managed and operated on match days.

10.5

The SMP consists of an Event Management Plan, Operations Plan, Local Area Management Plan, Stadium Travel Plan and Monitoring Programme.

The responsibility for these documents rests with

Everton Football Club in partnership with KMBC, the Police and other members of the Transport Forum. 10.6

Key matters within the SMP include those associated with the match day CPZ, stadium coach and bus parks, Kirkby railway station and car parking for visitors to the stadium. In my view the TA and SMP show that these issues have been addressed to the satisfaction of the transport and regulatory authorities.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 49 of 50

10.7

The RSS for the North West seeks a shift towards sustainable modes of transport, with safe and efficient access, and a reduction in the adverse impacts of transport.

10.8

In my view the proposed development strongly promotes the use of trains, coaches, buses, and cycling and walking – all highly sustainable modes of transport. The preferred development includes new entrances which have successfully passed safety and technical audits, whilst the stadium’s transport strategy is focused at minimising unnecessary car use by those visiting the new stadium. Overall, it is clear in my view that the proposal accords with the RSS.

10.9

The UDP sets out a number of transport policies all of which in my view are addressed by the proposed development, including those associated with access to public transport facilities, impact on the strategic road network, car and cycle parking, and the need for a comprehensive TA and Travel Plans.

10.10

PPS1 is focused at the need for sustainable developments, and reducing the need to travel by private car.

The proposed

development from a transport perspective is located within or on the edge of Kirkby town centre, which itself is centrally located within Kirkby. With a bus station within the town centre, a railway station 1 Km to 1.2 Kms away, it is clear in my view that the location of the proposed development is highly accessible by modes of travel other than the private car. 10.11

PPS6 concerns itself with planning for town centres, with the SoS seeking further information as to the accessibility of the site and linked trips. As previously mentioned, the TA in my view shows that the proposed development is fully accessible to a full range of surface transport modes. In terms of linkage, there are planned public realm improvements for Cherryfield Drive which will in my view strongly encourage visitors to Kirkby to frequent shops and other existing and proposed town centre facilities both sides of Cherryfield Drive.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave

Page 50 of 50

10.12

A further key aspect of town centre planning is the need to reduce the need to travel. The TA and my additional evidence clearly shows that Kirkby residents’ need to travel for retail goods is greatly reduced. With respect to the proposed stadium, the sustainable transport strategy, with a strong focus on public transport, results in a significant CO2 reduction per seat.

10.13

PPG13 is the principal national transport planning policy document. Its three objectives of promoting sustainable transport choices, accessibility and reducing the need to travel, are now embedded within many transport policy documents. The proposed development in my view promotes sustainable transport via the travel plan initiatives, offers transport choices with its strong commitments to enhancing the availability of public transport, and reduces the need to travel by private car by being located within an accessible town centre.

10.14

With respect to PPG17, the key policy requirements are in my view met by the proposed development. The site for the stadium is at least as accessible as Goodison Park; further the site is adjacent to a town centre, which in the case of Kirkby, is fully accessible by a choice of transport modes.

10.15

Overall, it is my view that the proposed development is in accordance with national, regional and local transport policy, and that there is no transport reason why the development should not be permitted.

Kirkby Town Centre and Land to the South of Cherryfield Drive, Kirkby Proof of Evidence of Joseph John Ellis

Steer Davies Gleave