2.3 Strategic Model Flow Outputs - A421 to Milton Keynes

Further assessment of impact of development of local traffic= to recognise the financial pressure this will have on Highway Authority in the future
Reduction of size of development to reduce impact on local infrastructure.
Consideration of alternative sites NLP 190 in particular has capacity for 13,000 houses and is west of Cranfield and would be ideally placed to take advantage of the Government’s investment of £95m to build a new road bridge over the M1 and a mass public transport hub to access Milton Keynes as part of the now committed development of East Milton Keynes on this side of the M1.

Pare 2.3.11 Strategic Model Outputs
The estimate of 262 additional PCUs in the morning peak and 107 in the evening peak for a development of 5000 properties when main employment centres will be MK, Bedford, Luton is undoubtedly an underestimate.
The modelling is strategic yet fails to mention consideration of proposed East West Expressway nor the impact of delay in construction. The impact of the east West Rail improvement and upgrade and impact upon North South transit across rail line has again been ignored which will have a significant impact on local traffic.

The Local Plan fails to give details of necessary improvements to the local road network to safely accommodate the level of extra traffic likely to result from the proposed development in the Marston Vale.

1. Mitigation measures including physical traffic restrictions as recommended in Stomor report section 2.
2. Timetable for implementation of these measures.
3. Robust funding structure to ensure delivery.

1. Millbrook Parish Meeting (MPM) presented a detailed submission to the Examination of CBC’s Local Plan in 2019 in response to the following Question.
Examination of CBC’s Local Plan – Policy SA-2 as it affects Millbrook Parish.
Matter 6 / Issue 6 / Question 6/ page 13
Conclusion.
• Millbrook Parish Meeting considers that proposed developments within the Local Plan, especially the “Marston Vale Villages”, as well as proposed developments in neighbouring Bedford Borough will have a severe effect on the local highway network within Millbrook parish.
• It is not clear to the community of Millbrook what the necessary highway improvements consist of, who will be responsible for delivering them and when.
Despite changes to the Local Plan having been made as a result of that Examination process, MPM considers this vital question not to have been satisfactorily answered.
2. The 2019 MPM submission contained the caveat that MPM had no empirical data and that the submission was based on subjective assessment. Whilst that remains the case regarding the safety of pedestrians walking through the village, an FOI request revealed data from a traffic survey conducted in November 2019 which measured vehicle movements on Sandhill Close (between Station Lane and the A507). Thirty eight thousand vehicles passed over the census point in a period of seven days. On the weekdays, this averaged just over six thousand four hundred each day. This is clear evidence that this narrow, winding lane through this small village is already being used as a major “rat run”.
Anecdotal evidence suggests that this traffic comes from a wide area. From the north, this includes Cranfield, Marston, Wooton, Houghton Conquest and The Wixams. Any further future development within the Marston Vale would be expected to generate additional traffic through Millbrook. However, the Local Plan seems to make the assumption that this would not be the likely route for traffic to access services in Ampthill and Flitwick. Such services might not be available within the “Millbrook Villages” until the project had reached a certain maturity, which could be many years hence.
Millbrook residents already consider the current level of traffic using the village to be unacceptable and object to any development likely to cause further increase.
3. Whilst necessary for safety reasons to have the speed humps on the road through the village, these exacerbate the effect of the current level of traffic. Medium and heavy vehicles especially create vibration which shakes the adjacent houses.
The Traffic Restriction Order, introduced in 1980, which prohibits transit of vehicles exceeding 6ft 6 in (2m) width through the main village road except for “loading” is disregarded with impunity.
The November traffic survey counted one thousand, seven hundred movements of vehicles larger than cars and light vans during the seven day survey period.
There are only 29 premises on this road to which legitimate deliveries or collections can be made with vehicles exceeding 2m width.
Millbrook residents are already seeking measures to reduce traffic movements from current levels as well as a resolution of the existing HGV problem. Any further increase would be intolerable.
4. At the instigation of Lidlington Action Group and supported by the surrounding parishes of Marston, Brogborough, Cranfield, Salford & Hulcote, Ridgemont and Millbrook., Stomor Civil Engineering Consultants prepared a document review of the Environment Statement and Related Material (Transport).
Transport Technical Paper (Exam 114) appears to assume that traffic from the “Millbrook Villages” needing to access services in Ampthill and Flitwick would predominantly use the A421 and A507 route. The Stomor report challenges that assumption. MPM concurs.
The report cites the expectation that traffic flows through Millbrook would eventually be limited by the capacity of the A507 roundabout. MPM considers a strategy reliant on “self limitation” of traffic to be wholly inadequate.
The level of traffic through the village necessary to achieve this would be totally unacceptable.
MPM agrees with the conclusions and recommendations of the Stomor report and especially the recommendation (No. 5) that mitigation measures should be implemented at the outset of the development.
5. Based on 20 years experience with the expansion of Millbrook Proving Ground and more recently Center Parcs, MPM considers Schedule 106 agreements alone would be inadequate to fund the necessary improvements to the road network surrounding this proposed development.
MPM considers that the Local Plan fails to provide an adequate funding structure for offsite measures necessary to support the proposed development in this location.