Report a hazardous queuing incident

Thursday, April 23, 2020

Email correspondence regarding response letter from Highways England

To be read alongside the main reply letter

Email reply received 23.3.2020 from Highways in response to the March letter sent
to HE and ERYC.
‘’Dear Mr & Mrs Goode
Thank you for your enquiry of 14/03/2020 concerning a Freedom of Information
Request. The information you have requested is not data we hold, and answering
questions is a service available to the public on a regular basis. I believe your
previous FOI request from 2019 was dealt with jointly between Highways England
and East Riding of Yorkshire Council.
Your request has been handled under normal business practices and not in
accordance with the Freedom of Information Act/Environmental Information
I have written a formal response to your questions in the letter attached this email.
If you feel the information supplied is not sufficient or has not been answered within
the 15-day period, you may wish to complain. The complaints procedure is available
via our website at:
If you require a print copy, please phone the Information Line on 0300 123 5000; or
Yours sincerely XXXXX’’
Our email reply dated 24th March 2020
Many thanks XXXX for the letter and reply.
Just a couple of things I wanted to ask:
1. Can this response be shared in our campaign group as is?
2. Point 1. Kevin never received the email from Simon about the petition access. This is
a shame, however the password is with ERYC and can be and was able to be
accessed by ERYC in 2019.
3. Minutes of the stakeholder meetings. These stand as the only minutes/record of the
meeting as advised by our contacts in legal/previous experience.
4. Re Point 3. Re Fatality would have to occur - this was said in the meeting and you did
acknowledge this in the meeting to Kevin Goode witnessed by all Brough
5. Re Point 3 - traffic queues on the A63. You refer to no further issues since the
original contacts made. This is not actually the case: a number of posts and logs
on have been made. It has been less so since the lights have
been adjusted but it still happens at peak times and of course will only get worse
with more houses.
Kind Regards Amanda & Kevin Goode
Highways reply to the above: Received 22/04/20
With regards to your points below:
1. I’m happy for the attached letter to be shared with your group. Personal
information has been redacted in the attached version as per the Data
Protection Act (I’ve not redacted yours or Mr Goode’s details as it’s obviously
your own decision as to if you want to share those).
2. Noted.
3. I reiterate the fact that that neither Highways England nor East Riding of
Yorkshire Council accept these as an accurate representation of the meeting
and do not agree that these can be classed as the minutes.
4. The potential safety schemes referenced in the attached letter are evidence in
themselves that this is not the case.
5. Noted and passed to my colleague who deals with safety scheme
development at Highways England. However, as I explained at the meeting,
this data cannot be used by Highways England in the development of safety
schemes as we are obliged to use STATS19 data. The statistics that we use
relate to personal injury accidents on public roads, are reported to the police,
and are subsequently recorded using the STATS19 accident reporting form.
Many thanks XXXX

Response from Highways to our letter March 2020

Reply now received and permission granted for redacted version from Highways England to the letter we sent March 14th 2020.
There is the original response letter followed by a the next blog post, which are copies of my initial email reply and their final reply.

23rd March 2020 
Dear Mr & Mrs Goode, 
Letter Regarding Development in Brough I write this letter is in response to your undated letter with four points for East Riding of Yorkshire Council and Highways England to consider regarding development in Brough. Although your letter was sent by way of a Freedom of Information request, given that there is no information for Highways England to provide, I believe it is more appropriate to write this letter. I shall deal with each of your four points in turn below.
Point 1: “We are deeply disappointed that our positive petition to halt development until road safety concerns received no formal acknowledgement by ERYC.” 
Although you do not mention Highways England here, I should point out that Highways England were unable to access the petition, though not through lack of trying. I understand that you originally sent the petition to XXXX. Encryption issues meant that the petition expired. My colleague XXXX managed to source another copy through the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), though he was unable to access the content due to it being password protected. XXXX emailed Mr Goode to ask for the password on 8th August 2019 but received no response. 
“The thorough data analysis that was carried out independently by Dr Kevin Goode was not taken seriously. 
The report…demonstrated major failings in the data analysis.” I appreciate that you have undertaken your own independent critical analysis of the situation. Please be assured that each time Highways England are consulted on planning application, we employ specialist transport consultants to undertake thorough technical checks on the analysis we are provided with. It is unfortunate that the decisions that have been made are not those which you would have liked to have seen. 
However, please be advised that we work within the formal planning system and all conclusions drawn are in accordance with the following: 
• National Planning Policy Framework 
• DfT Circular 02/2013: The Strategic Road Network and the Delivery of Sustainable Development
 “The stakeholder meeting in July 2019 was unproductive. We do hold the minutes from this meeting”.
 I strongly dispute that this document is an accurate reflection of the meeting due to a number of inaccuracies. They were not accepted as minutes by the Council or Highways England and should not be referred to as such. 
“We hear from Cllr. Terry Gill that the more recent traffic survey data conducted in 2019 has not been released for independent data analysis/review. We would therefore like to make a freedom of information request for details on the matters”.
 I am not aware of such data collection and I would advise this may be a question for the Council. 
Point 2: With regards to a road scheme that would connect Moor Road to Melton, this is a local road scheme and thus I would advise that you discuss this with the Council. 
Point 3: “We also would like to ask for plans to address the A63 road safety concerns especially when the new roundabout works begin in December 2020. These issues have been comprehensively described in our letter dated 27.4.19” 
From the perspective of Highways England, the local road scheme is expected to have a positive impact on the Strategic Road Network. However, I do appreciate that the construction period has potential to temporarily disrupt traffic flows. As plans for works on the new roundabout progress we will work with the Council to understand the traffic management and the implications for the A63 so that the impacts of the works can be managed in order to maintain the safe operation of the network.
 “We have made several suggestions that could be trialled and are disappointed to hear from Highways England that a fatality would have to occur before anything can ‘’be done’’.This is unacceptable. What solutions can be sought to improve the safety at the A63 junction? Have ERYC lobbied Highways England about this?” 
I do not agree with the assertion that you were told that a fatality would have to occur before action is taken. Highways England are currently developing a safety improvement scheme for the Welton junction to address a number of issues. The scheme will provide better advanced direction signing on the A63 approaches to the junction, improve the directional road marking and clear areas of vegetation around the junction all to reduce driver confusion and improve the junction sight lines. We are also looking at the provision of some queue warning message signing to be included if this is required. This scheme is currently in the feasibility stages of its development and we will look to move it into the detailed design stage during the financial year 2021/22 once funding has been confirmed. From discussions with the Council late last year we understand that the queuing on the westbound slip road had been reduced with a change to the timing on the signals at the top of the slip road. We are not aware that there have been any further issues with queuing back on to the A63 at this location since then. 
Point 4: With regards to your concern about the safety of pedestrians crossing Moor Rd to Ruskin way during the peak times associated with Hunsley Primary School, this is a local road issue and should therefore be discussed with the Council. I trust this letter answers all of your points. 
Yours sincerely Redacted name HE

Tuesday, April 21, 2020

Your letter/comments needed on the ERYC portal! From Cllr. Terry Gill

I note that there is only 5 residents that have commented on the Planning Portal for the Phase 4 Barratt development. If you feel strongly either way on these plans the best way to make you voice heard by the Council Planning Department is either send in a letter by post or register to comment via the Web Portal. There is small blue icon with 'Register' alongside at the top of the page of each application. It only takes a few minutes. Cllr. Terry Gill

These are the ONLY comments under 'The Public'' tab on the ERYC planning portal for the phase 4 houses. Gill Hunter you do have one on here. Jennifer Hallas was an objection as she has spoken at the meetings but they mark as neutral! If you are sending a letter in please ensure you use the right planning numbers (see our letter March 2020 on this page) and that you are OBJECTING. You can also add comments online which is why I think some the below are in different formats.
'' Mrs SF (Objects)


I am shocked that yet another housing estate has been planned for here. Although on the original plan this area was deemed residential it was also reserved for other buildings which would bring more services to Brough. It makes me concerned that these won't be built.

Already there is work being carried out on land East to the current building site being prepared for houses. So why not utilise that for houses as agreed. What concerns me is that Brough will be left with another large housing estate and nothing else. Brough has continued to grow at a large rate and does not have the infrastructure to cope with any more houses. The surrounding villages have also expanded putting more and more pressure on the town.

It was agreed to review and improve access to and from Brough at the site of the 4 way lights which provide the only way in and out of Brough for all Brough, Elloughton and Welton residents. I don't believe there has been an update or a plan agreed on this and therefore object to this proposed development as infrastructure has not even been signed off yet or built.

Every morning there is a traffic jam to get out of Brough between 7.30 and 8.30am and as campaigners have shown a real danger to those trying to enter the village at 4-6pm due to queues on the slip road and speeding cars and lorries getting dangerously close to a crash. We need a another way to leave the village and the sensible approach would be to link to the infrastructure at Melton which is thriving and continuing to grow. This has the infrastructure and the safe slipways to join the a63. It would relive Brough town. I do not believe the current relief road would relive Brough nor Elloughton as it couldn't be used to get to the otherside of the town due to the small bridge over the railway near the ferry inn. The only thing it would do would do is provide a link to the ever growing housing estate.

As residents we were promised big things with the Brough south development. Increase in local jobs and amenties and a high street for local residents. The school wasn't even considered when the first plan went out and was an after thought. But now it just seems as though we will end up with 750 or more homes (each with 1-2 cars), an aldi and a school.

Another concern is the flood risk. I have been a resident the past 12 years and have seen that area flood from a high tide and more recently heavy rain. Flooding is becoming ever more frequent and especially with the situation over in Snaith area that was only down the road from us. I don't believe we should build this close to the humber on a known flood plain.

This is evident in the new school. The playground is saturated and the field boggy. The new roads in the housing estate have flooded also with huge puddles at the side of the road.

I strongly object to this housing estate at this moment in time. Infrastructure is required first and must be tested to ensure it can meet the current demand at this time.



See Document



See Documents



See Document



The current site has permanent standing water on it, not just on the areas waiting development but also on the land which has been raised and built on; this has been the case all winter, and the school's playing field is practically unusable. This area is a flood plain, and all objections raised for the initial development still stand. The Government has recently discussed the validity of continuing to build on flood plains, and the East Riding has itself suffered from flooding on several occasions, so expanding building work even further along this plain does not make any sense whatsoever. People buying the houses will have permanently flooded gardens, and the area will suffer as a whole if flood water can no longer soak away.''


Cllr. Terry Gill - Update re planning phase 3

Brough South Update: Latest...for your information. Planning Permission is officially being sought as expected for Phase 3 for 320 houses on the pre-designated total of 750 houses (the 320 is part of this) by Bellway Homes on the Brough South Development has just been published on the East Riding Planning Portal.
This is separate to the 225 houses (still part of the 750) that Barratt wish to build on Phase 4 of the development as previously a few weeks ago. The whole site had already gained Outline Planning Permission some years ago for 750 houses. These plans are to get the actual site layouts approved.
All the plans and information can be viewed on the Planning Portal. Here you will find the facility for you to make comments. The reference number is: 20/01027/STREM
When I last spoke to the overall developers Horncastle’s they informed me that Bellway would likely be starting work on Phase 3 before Barratts start on Phase 4.
In the meantime, as most are probably aware, lorry loads of earth and hardcore are being trucked in to raise the land levels for the sites as well as for the ‘short’ Brough Relief Road. After much complaining to the developers on your behalf about noise and speed of the trucks I understand the issues have subsided a little.
Do let me know if you have any comments or questions.

Thursday, April 9, 2020

Re Request fro pedestrian crossing Moor Rood/Ruskin Way Juncion - re near miss

Re Letter earlier in March 14th 2020.
Thank you for your correspondence, which was passed to Traffic and Parking in respect to the request :where you request a pedestrian crossing.
The council appreciates all communications from stakeholders and your correspondence has been placed on file and will be assigned to an Officer to review at a future date.
In respect to the current world pandemic and the guidance issued by the government, there is still an expectation that Councils make robust, evidence based decisions. Evidence gathered today or based on historic data, would not meet this criteria for decision making. Therefore the Council will review your correspondence when the future environment is established.
Traffic and Parking, and Civil Parking Enforcement departments are still operational and those Officers who can are working from home or are out in the Community supporting the Government’s objectives and enabling key workers and business sectors to safely fulfil their duties.

Just a quick update on the construction traffic going up and down Moor Road.

I have had many reports about trucks appearing to be going to fast and drivers starting work as early as 6:15am
I have been in communications with Horncastle’s the developers of Brough South calling for the trucks to slow down. Ideally 20mph and investigate why their contractors Stoneledge are starting so early.
Apparently, a serious virtual meeting was had last week between Horncastle’s and Stoneledge about these issues and it was again reiterated on Monday after I escalated more reports of truck speeds.
I have now been assured that all the drivers have been warned about their speed when travelling along Moor Road. The early starting should also be addressed. If they don’t adhere then the drivers, who are self-employed, risk the job being stopped and they will end up being at home and reduced income.
In the meantime, I have made up and placed some very unofficial signs on lampposts along Moor Road to act as a reminder to drivers.
Up to now my own observations have witnessed the trucks travelling much slower.
However, if anyone see things speeding up again or see any mud build up on the road please get in touch with me.
Also, I am concerned that while more people are out taking exercise because of the lockdown I have witnessed on several occasions people walking on the road over Moor Road bridge, as opposed to the using the pavement. Some walkers are listening to music on their headphones. This is not good safety especially with the extra construction traffic activity going on. So please take care out there.
Thank you.

March 25th 2020 - Quick update

I have got a reply from Highways England re my recent letter and objection to phase 4 to ERYC.
**I am awaiting approval to share the letter verbatim **
We have four residents who have sent their own letter in.
If you want this to be logged as an objection rather than neutral please ensure you use the right terminology - please use the numbers on our letter submitted this March.
Any questions 👍