Traffic (Operational Phase)

 

Control of Transport Impacts

Although good operators will always seek to voluntarily remove or at least minimise the impacts of transporting minerals, controls are still require to set the minimum standards required and to enable enforcement where required. A full discussion of planning and legislation with respect to minerals is given elsewhere in this website (with reference to the key documents), but a brief summary relating to transport is given below.

An Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is required for most mineral sites in order to ensure that the likely significant environmental effects of a proposed development are fully understood and taken into account before development is allowed to go ahead. If permission is granted, then the EIA can also contribute to the discussion that then takes place between MPAs, operators and other parties, to determine what controls and limits should be applied in order to minimise the impact. With respect to traffic, this will include the Highway Authorities.

Controls and limits in the form of Planning Conditions are set as part of the Planning Permission. These can either be concerned with performance requirements (e.g. hours of operation) or precautionary amelioration measures (e.g. wheel and body washing).

A planning obligation is a legal agreement (known as a Section 106 agreement) between the planning authority and the mineral operator. An obligation either requires the operator to do something or restricts what can be done with land following the granting of planning permission. An example may be the upgrading of a highway at the point of site access (see later section).
Control may also be enforced through some aspects of Statutory Nuisance provisions which are related to traffic and transport (e.g. dust, fumes and noise). Environmental permits are required for mining waste operations and a number of water activities, but these are not directly related to transport issues.

Acceptable Levels

There are no generally agreed levels of traffic along any specific road that are considered to be environmentally acceptable. Whilst some attempts have been made to develop the concept of 'environmental capacity' for urban areas, the only readily available yardstick remains the purely technical one of road capacity. In practice, statistics of road damage, repair costs and accidents, etc are an indication of physical limitations, but there is no useful quantitative information about environmental limitations on road use.

A significant increase in the flow of heavy vehicles can be given as one of the main reasons for the refusal for a planning application, which is why operators should seriously consider adopting the measures outlined in the Good Practice section. In one case 84, although the additional flow was within the physical capacity of a B-road, it was described by the Inspector as representing a serious and unacceptable impact on the environment and amenities of the affected villages. The vehicles were described as large and intimidating and the road conditions as sub-standard in terms of alignment and visibility. The problems were exacerbated by on-street parking, narrow pavements and property directly fronting the highway.

Although problems of spillage, etc are covered in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the associated Motor Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations 1986, MPAs usually insist that operators undertake to sheet their vehicles. There has been a tendency to say that what happens on a public road is entirely a matter for the police 85, but there are a growing number of conditions being set that no mud should be deposited on public highways (Photograph 1).

Although problems of spillage, etc are covered in the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 and the associated Motor Vehicle Construction and Use Regulations 1986, MPAs usually insist that operators undertake to sheet their vehicles. There has been a tendency to say that what happens on a public road is entirely a matter for the police85, but there are a growing number of conditions being set that no mud should be deposited on public highways (Photograph 1).
		Photograph 1. Sweeping mud off the road is too late.

 

Given that there are no specific levels of traffic which could be considered acceptable, then the objective must be to have an agreement on the number, route, condition and timing of vehicles which are used. It might also be necessary to improve the condition of roads or junctions, before transportation commences, and the site entrance should be well laid out so as not to cause problems on the road (Photographs 2 & 3).

 

Photograph 2. A good quality site entrance, from the road.		Photograph 3. A good quality site entrance, from the site.

 

		In some circumstances it may be advantageous to build a new road to avoid sensitive areas. This can sometimes be done within a site boundary (Photograph 4), but it is rare to build a new public highway specifically for the transport from a site.
Photograph 4. Site entrance onto internal site bypass, thus avoiding local village.

 

The public's expectation of the standard of driving from freight vehicles is increasing, as is the general requirement for vehicles to be driven efficiently to reduce carbon emissions and reduce costs.

 

Continued with Monitoring and Good Practice.

TOP

Return to Introduction and Potential Effects.