Barrington Court Access Improvements Sa FAO: S106 Liaison Officer (TD/3587/S) 26/07/10

Transcription

1 Audit Report FOR LIFE Barrington Court Access Improvements Sa FAO: S106 Liaison Officer (TD/3587/S) 26/07/10 ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC

2 BARRINGTON COURT ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS ROAD SAFETY AND TECHNICAL AUDIT STAGE 2 AUDIT REPORT FAO S106 Liaison Officer DEPT S106/278 Liaison Transport Development Group Somerset County Council The Crescent Taunton Somerset TA1 4DY Reference: Sa Date: 26/07/10 roadsafetxxxxxx@xxxxxxxx.xxx.xx Tel: Fax: ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 2 of 11

3 Contents 1 INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN LAYOUT HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT VERTICAL ALIGNMENT SUMMARY 7 2 DRAINAGE AND LOCAL ISSUES DRAINAGE LOCAL ISSUES/CONCERNS SUMMARY 9 3 SOILS/MATERIALS COMMENTS SUMMARY 10 4 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STATEMENT 11 ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 3 of 11

4 1 INFRASTRUCTURE DESIGN LAYOUT Scheme: Barrington Court Access Improvements Ref: Engineer: Design Layout Ext: Instruction Received: 26/05/10 Sa Response Date: Response Deadline: 28/06/10 Response Time: 1.1 HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT A review has been carried out against the following drawings: B2027/H/000/01 Rev C General Arrangement Location Plan and Site Compound B2027/H/100/01 Rev G General Arrangement Sheet 1 of 2 B2027/H/100/02 Rev D General Arrangement Sheet 2 of 2 B2027/H/100/03 Rev A - Longitudinal Section B2027/H/100/04 Rev D General Arrangement Cross Sections B2027/H/100/05 Longitudinal Section Access Road B2027/H/100/06 General Arrangement Access Road B2027/H/150/01 Rev A Landscape Planting Sheet 1 of 2 B2027/H/150/02 Rev A Landscape Planting Sheet 2 of 2 B2027/H/500/01 Rev B Drainage B2027/H/700/01 Rev D Pavement Construction Layout Sheet 1 of 2 B2027/H/700/02 Rev D Pavement Construction Layout Sheet 2 of 2 B2027/H/1200/01 Rev E Traffic Signs & Road Markings Sheet 1 of 2 B2027/H/1200/02 Rev E Traffic Signs & Road Markings Sheet 2 of 2 B2027/H/SD/01 Rev D Carriageway Widening Detail B2027/H/SD/02 Rev D Bollard/Fence Detail (Wooden Post and 3 Rail Fence) B2027/H/SD/03 Rev A Kerb Types B2027/H/SD/04 Headwall Concrete Bagwork The Designer s response is noted. It would appear that the channel alignment on the inside of the bend between ch 0 and ch 20 is still not as good as it could be. As suggested in the previous report, a 200mR should be used. This new radius would require a gulley to be relocated. The other outstanding channel alignments appear to have been amended. (not noted in Drg. B2027/H/100/01 Rev G Amendment box) Exception response noted. See Item ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 4 of 11

5 1.1.5 Exception response noted. The West channel kerbs at the north end (ch. 90 and ch. 100 on drg. 100/04/C) will involve removal of newly installed decorative edging adjacent to Farthings which may have encroached into highway land. Verge indicated on sections extends beyond highway land. This newly installed edging may present a danger to passing vehicles and should be removed from the highway. It is recommended that tie in works at this interface be dealt with sympathetically in consultation with the owners The amendment has not been noted in Drg. B2027/H/100/01 Rev G Amendment box. Scale of cross section drawing B2027/H/100/04 Rev C does not appear to be 1;500 scale at A1 size as quoted. It appears to be 1:100 horizontal and vertical. As no offset dimensions are given on the sections the proposed batter of the slopes cannot be ascertained accurately. Most appear to be 1:6 but ch. 0 to 40 appear to be steeper. Please confirm that the batters will be suitably shallow to avoid adoption of the embankment as a highway support. Does this compromise any planning consent detail? Amendments not noted in Drg. B2027/H/700/01 Rev D Amendment box Exception response noted. Item addressed. Will extending the works into the adjacent field compromise any planning consent detail? Item addressed in drainage section. ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 5 of 11

6 Exception response noted. Item addressed Exception response noted. Item addressed No further action required Exception response noted. Item addressed Exception response noted. Item addressed Exception response noted. Item addressed It is accepted that flag direction signs to Barrington Court RS05 and RS05 handed will be adopted. The Main access legend is considered to be unnecessary and should be removed. Any existing signs along Water Street must also be removed. The sign must be on a brown background. The Designer should liaise with the Local Area Traffic Engineer. Post types and sizes and foundation details to be agreed. Please submit details for approval. Signs RS01 should be located on the private side of the adoption limit. Reflective Hazard Delineators are mentioned in the key (Drg B2027/H/1200/01 Rev E) but none appear to be indicated for the bend and junction. Are any proposed and if so where and how are they to be mounted? Any verge markers must be passively safe. Consideration should also be given to triangulating the junction with the use of white Admiral Junction Marker Bollards to help highlight the presence of the junction during the hours of darkness Item not addressed. The location of sign RS06 has not been shown on drawing B2027/H/1200/01 Rev E. The mounting height and post specifications are also still required. Proposed Diag sign for traffic from Yeovil direction will be obscured by nearside speed limit terminal sign. Suggest it be replaced with a handed RS06 and located offside at a distance of 40m from the junction It is noted from the swept path drawings that the bus will overrun the verges when entering and exiting the access road. In reality the driver will take the driving line that prevents this from happening but may require more road width in order to complete the manoeuvre. It is very important that all visibility envelopes are kept clear of any obstruction so that the driver can see approaching vehicles and position his vehicle appropriately. ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 6 of 11

7 1.2 VERTICAL ALIGNMENT Levels proposed appear workable. Details to be checked on site before construction commences Items addressed and accepted A revised contour plan would be of assistance in assessing the overall impact at tie-ins Drg. 100/03 - A has been amended to show gradient and existing levels. Super elevation added. Amendment box does not reflect changes. Items addressed and accepted General Item addressed in part. Dimensioned offsets, verge widths and boundaries still not indicated on sections. Stone filled trench indicated on Drg 500/01 B should extend to include all SW verge lengths sloping away from carriageway. Incorrect scale indicated on Drg 100/06/ -. Vertical and horizontal scales vary. No offset dimensions given. Unable to approve on this basis See All other drainage issues have been addressed elsewhere. 1.3 SUMMARY Please ensure an exception response is included with the next submission detailing points that have been addressed and reasons of departure for those that have not. ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 7 of 11

8 2 DRAINAGE AND LOCAL ISSUES Scheme: Barrington Court Access Improvements Ref: Engineer: Supervision Engineer Ext: Sa Instruction Received: 17/05/10 Response Date: 27 May 2010 Response Deadline: 08/06/10 Response Time: 2.1 DRAINAGE Numbers in brackets are previous audit references) (3.1.1) Item addressed (3.1.2) Item previously addressed (3.1.3) Item addressed (3.1.4) Item addressed (3.1.5) Item addressed (3.1.6) Item addressed (3.1.7) Drawing B2027/H/Sd/04 has now been provided whilst the headwall detail is sufficient, there are no gully or manhole construction details shown. SCC require standard concrete gully pots 900 deep x 450mm dia. with grade D400 gratings and 2-4 courses of engineering brickwork. All manholes should be constructed in accordance with Sewers for Adoption with D400 covers (new item) With the headwall and highway adoption limits accurately shown an the drawings, it is apparent SCC will need an easement from the highway adoption limit up to and including the headwall detail for future maintenance requirements (new item) The filter drain connection should be made as an oblique junction onto the main run of the adjacent gully to MH3, with the oblique spur raised to ensure the filter drain connection comes in ABOVE the main run this will ensure that if this runs backs up, it will not surcharge the filter drain and saturate the sub-grade. Please add this as a note to the drawing the final construction detail can be agreed on site. 2.2 LOCAL ISSUES/CONCERNS (3.2.1) Kerbline amended as discussed. It was agreed at the recent meeting at County Hall, that whilst this is the preferred arrangement, the fine- ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 8 of 11

9 tuning of this detail will be agreed on site, once the kerblines have been established. Otherwise, item addressed (3.2.2) Item addressed (3.2.3) Item addressed (3.2.4) Item previously addressed (3.2.5) Item addressed 2.3 SUMMARY Please ensure an exception response is included with the next submission detailing points that have been addressed and reasons of departure for those that have not. ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 9 of 11

10 3 SOILS/MATERIALS Scheme: Barrington Court Access Improvements Ref: Engineer: Supervision Engineer Ext: Sa Instruction Received: 17/05/10 Response Date: 22 May 2010 Response Deadline: 08/06/10 Response Time: 3.1 COMMENTS 3.1 (4.1) Item addressed 3.2 (4.2) Item previously addressed 3.3 (4.3) Item addressed 3.4 (4.4) Item addressed 3.5 (new item) Following the submission of drawing SD04 (See above) it needs to include gully and manhole construction details. 3.2 SUMMARY Please ensure an exception response is included with the next submission detailing points that have been addressed and reasons of departure for those that have not. ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 10 of 11

11 4 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Please be advised that any comments on the subject of environmental issues contained within this report are observations only that the client may wish to consider and that this report does not in anyway constitute as a formal environmental assessment of the proposals submitted. This document is also available in Braille, large print, on tape and on disc and we can translate it into different languages. We can provide a member of staff to discuss the details. We value diversity. We are committed to promoting equality of opportunity and fair access to services based on need. ETE-# v1-FOI_556_Ms_Brooke_-_Safety_Audit_sa DOC Page 11 of 11