Evaluating Morrisons Plans for Sustainable Travel

Reading Time: 18 minutes

Back in November, Morrisons Supermarkets announced their intention to open a new supermarket in Nuneaton. The new store would be located on Midland Road to the west of the town centre and would be the retailer’s first for the town bringing welcome competition, choice, and job opportunities. However, as a new development from a retailer that sells itself on sustainability, the pre-application plans fell short for walking and cycling. Now, formal plans have been submitted and are open for consultation until 7 January 2022. Let’s have a look and see how they stack up for sustainable travel.

The full plans are available from Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council’s Planning Portal and can be found using reference 038512. Comments can be submitted through the portal.

Morrisons makes a point about its sustainability not just in regard to the proposed store but as a business more broadly. This is clearly evident from its statement below which includes a reference to “cycle faciltiies”. That sounds promising, but after delving into the plans it becomes all too clear that cycling and walking are not given the consideration that a truly sustainable development requires.

“The way we build new stores will play a significant role in meeting our commitment to Net Zero greenhouse gas emissions in our own operations by 2035. We’re looking at a whole range of features to make our stores truly sustainable including solar panels, heat pumps, electric vehicle charging, rainwater harvesting and cycle facilities. We’re also reducing electricity use in heating, ventilation, lighting and refrigeration.”

Morrisons Supermarkets. Nuneaton Design and Access Statement: Sustainability (Pg.23), 06 December 2021.

Having reviewed the plans, there are a number of issues and inconsistencies which will be drawn out in detail below, but in summary, the extent of cycling facilities is to provide “cycle hoops” parking. There is no easy access; cyclists will be expected to route through or around the car park mixing with traffic. The cycle parking that will be provided is located away from the main entrance, not on the desire line, and may pose accessibility issues given access may be obstructed from the car park, or riders will have to presumably push cycles through pedestrian space. In the case of the latter, bollards separate pedestrian space from the cycle parking and it is not clear what gaps will be provided between those bollards. There does not appear to be any consideration for inclusive cycling where non-standard cycles might be accommodated.

When it comes to walking, provided routes do not follow direct lines of access and indeed one pavement ends abruptly where it meets the car park forcing pedestrians to mix with vehicles. There is no access provided to the store from the north where linking to a nearby alley could provide a quicker route for some local residents. There is no provision for pedestrians crossing the busy Midland Road making access to and from nearby residential properties to the south of the road difficult, as well as hindering public transport access with regard to bus services travelling west bound.

With the plans as submitted then, it is clear that Morrisons Supermarkets or its contracted developer has failed to consider sustainable travel with anything more than lipservice and this development very much focuses around visiting by car. To be clear, it is obvious and understandable that cars will remain the dominant form of transport for a supermarket like this, but to almost entirely fail to properly accommodate alternative means of travel shows the retailer is not putting full effort into supporting other transport options.

Looking more broadly, this area of Nuneaton has no cycling accommodation. There are nearby streets that the borough council considers “advisory cycle routes”, but they do nothing to actively enable people to use cycles. There is a nearby National Cycle Network route with a poor quality link through to the north-east of Nuneaton (Weddington) which otherwise requires people to travel into and around the town to cross the railway line – a significant diversion. With this development there is an opportunity to improve that link and other connections but at this stage, that opportunity has not been taken. There is a risk of losing the chance to improve cross-town access and to make cycling safer on Midland Road.

It is important that Morrisons Supermarkets revisits these plans if it has any serious intent regarding sustainable travel options. Equally as important is for Nuneaton and Bedworth Borough Council to insist on the development supporting broader cycling connections through the site, and for Warwickshire County Council to insist on improvements being made to Midland Road to support walking and cycling access across it, but also linking in to the National Cycle Network at the nearby Coventry Canal.

For those who wish to delve further into these plans, the above issues are broken down in more detail below including looking at the plans and statements and evaluating them in terms of sustainability and provision for walking, cycling, and public transport. This breakdown is divided up into the following sections:

Walking and Public Transport
Cycling
– Cycle Network Connections
– Cycle Parking
– Midland Road Junctions Complexity
Induced Traffic
Improvements for Walking and Cycling
Conclusion
Referenced Documents

Detailed Issues – Walking and Public Transport

Getting into the specifics then, let’s take a look at the issues with regard first to walking and public transport. Both are included together here given the location of bus stops on the main road which means walking is an integral part of public transport access.

Firstly, if public transport is to be properly enabled as a choice method of accessing the supermarket, in my opinion it should route into the site with a stop near to the main entrance. Although bus stops are located roughly 250m from the entrance, that can still be a significant distance to lug heavy bags of shopping. Therefore reducing this distance as much as possible would be beneficial to many bus users. Doing this also lessens the impact of walking infrastructure choices on public transport users where they would not need to find a route through a car park and potentially cross a busy road to catch their bus.

The plan makes use of the existing bus stops on Midland Road itself. The west bound bus stop is on the opposite side of the carriageway to the supermarket meaning bus users will need to cross that road yet there is no facility in place either now nor in the published plans that enables safe crossing. The east bound bus stop is relocated eastwards from its existing position and puts it opposite a side-road (Stanley Road). This is easier to access with regard to the supermarket, though the footpath on the eastern side of the supermarket junction does not provide a full route to the supermarket entrance. For this pavement, users will be either walking through the car park on the desire line, or taking a longer route crossing the access road where no supporting infrastructure is provided, joining the west side pavement before crossing again into the pedestrian space through the car park using the provided zebra crossing – hardly easy, direct, or safe.

Focusing specifically on the east bound bus stop itself, locating it opposite the side road just past the right-turn filter lane risks conflict with drivers attempting to overtake a stationary bus with oncoming west bound vehicles wanting to turn into the supermarket.

Looking at walking, we have similar issues – there is no safe crossing point to connect with residential properties to the south side of Midland Road, nor is safe crossing enabled over the supermarket junction. Walking routes from the main road to the store entrance are indirect with (as noted) one pavement ending where it meets the car park. This contradicts the Framework Travel Plan which notes pedestrian access is on desire lines from the north and south. There is no site access indicated from the north.

The proposed development is accessed directly from Midland Road via an improved junction arrangement. Pedestrians and cyclists can also access the site directly from the proposed footway cycleway via a variety of dedicated links to the north and south of the site, located on desire lines.

Framework Travel Plan: Executive Summary, Paragraph 1.4 (Pg.2), 06 December 2021

To better accommodate pedestrian access on the desire line, it would seem to make sense to route the pavement running through the car park between the right central pairings of parking bays rather the left and inverting the building layout to provide the entrance on the right in line with the repositioned pavement, rather than to the left as at present (all with associated car park layout changes as necessary).

Finally, for those wishing to walk along Midland Road using the north side pavement but who are not accessing the supermarket site, the access road maintains a crossing width of 17-18 metres. This is a significant distance involving moving across three lanes of traffic (two exit lanes and one entrance lane). While the geometry of the road appears to remain as it is now, increased traffic flow will make crossing this road more difficult and hazardous particularly for slower pedestrians. However, not even so much as a central refuge has been provided to assist crossing.

Detailed Issues – Cycling

As noted in the summary above, beyond cycle parking the plans make no accommodation for accessing the supermarket by cycle despite the wording of the company sustainability statement and the comment in the Framework Travel Plan. Instead, it is intended that cyclists must access the site following main or secondary general traffic routes. Again in the quote above (Executive Summary, Paragraph 1.4, shown above), the Framework Travel Plan makes reference to a cycleway and access from the north of the site, neither of which exist on the design.

With this being the case, cyclists will be required to ride on Midland Road, a busy and key route for all traffic that will be offputting to many wanting to ride. There is no cycling infrastructure on Midland Road at all and the road will be required for a short distance even when connecting with Stanley Road almost immediately south of the site access. Cycling through or around the car park also presents its own hazards where people will mix not only with customer traffic but larger vehicles including fuel tankers and large delivery vehicles (noted potentially up to 18.5 metres in length). This is not conducive to safe, comfortable cycling.

“At present, cyclists would access the site via the main vehicular entrance points.”

Transport Assessment: Cycling, Paragraph 2.22 (Pg.9), 06 December 2021

“Morrisons are part of the successful trial using longer trailers, making the combination 18.5m long. This site has been designed to accommodate the largest vehicle likely to deliver to this unit.”

Transport Assessment: Proposed Development: Internal Layout, Paragraph 5.16 (Pg.22), 06 December 2021

Cycle Network Connections

Nuneaton does not have significant cycle infrastructure. The nearest route is National Cycle Network Route 52 which runs along the canal to the south, or along a very poor and steep unadopted road (Stoney Road) to the north. While access to this route is nearby, it is not possible to connect to NCN52 in either direction from the proposed site without riding on Midland Road or pushing a cycle on a pedestrian-only pavement.

Despite this, the plan’s Transport Assessment states the following:

“In the immediate vicinity, National Cycle Network (NCN) Route 52 is accessible from the Coventry Canal via the site side footpath of the B4114. Route 52 continues along the towpath in a south east direction heading towards Bedworth and Coventry. Heading north, Route 52 runs along Stoney Road and connects to an off-road route Weddington Walk heading towards the A5.”

Transport Assessment: Cycling, paragraph 2.24 (Pg.9), 06 December 2021

Access with the Coventry Canal towpath is via a steep ramp at a far greater gradient than many would be able to ride without dismounting. The towpath itself is obstructed by closed barriers. The surface is not suitable for all-weather riding and is an isolated space particularly when used at quiet times or after dark. It is at best a leisure route and in its current form should not be considered as a key everyday cycling route. Similarly for the connection between Midland Road and Weddington Walk to the north, Stoney Road is not suitable for everyday cycling. It frequently floods with standing water during wetter months, is littered with potholes and uneven tarmac in part, and moves to a loose gravel surface on a fairly steep hill which offers poor traction. In its current form, it is not suitable for everyday cycling and is even poor as a leisure route.

The plans also make reference to cycling connections more broadly. They refer to an extract of Nuneaton’s Cycle Map and various features of the broader infrastructure in the town, painting a more attractive picture of active travel than is actually the case.

“NBC (sic) identify Aston Road, Stanley Road, Jordrell Street (sic), Manor Court Road, and Upper Abbey Street as ‘Advisory Cycle Routes’ on the intermediate highway network. These routes are all accessible from the B4114 Midland Road”.

Transport Assessment: Cycling, paragraph 2.24 (Pg.9), 06 December 2021

“NCN 524 is a key cycle route and provides a route towards the Town Centre using ‘Advisory Cycle Routes’ on the local highway network. Route 524 can be accessed via Stanley Road and Manor Court Drive when travelling along the B4114. Route 524 can also be accessed from the towpath near Vernons Lane”.

Transport Assessment: Cycling, paragraph 2.26 (Pg.9), 06 December 2021

While the Borough Council may have historically identified the named roads above as “advisory cycle routes”, they do not provide any form of cycle infrastructure and the only benefit to them is that they may be quieter than some other roads. However, these roads do not attract cycling. Manor Court Road is a reasonably large and straight route with numerous pinch points where it is easy to experience fast driving and close pass overtakes. Stanley Road is barriered against through access to Vernon’s Lane. Upper Abbey Street may be a useful route given it’s not a through street for general motor traffic (not counting buses) but it involves a busy junction at its north end with Midland Road.

Despite what the local cycle map may suggest and the claim made in the statement above, a connection between the Coventry Canal towpath and Route 524 does not exist at or near Vernons Lane. While there is a stepped access point at the canal bridge, no ramp is available for cycles. The nearest non-stepped access is via the Dumbles Nature Area near Stanley Road, but this is not a cycle accessible access point where gates are often shut.

As for NCN Route 524, again this is a largely on-road route, although those roads can be much quieter than others in town. However, it is located away from the site of the supermarket and offers little value to anyone trying to access the new store by cycle.

“The availability of off-road cycle routes means that cycling locally will be more appealing, especially for less able or confident riders”.

Transport Assessment: Cycling, paragraph 2.29 (Pg.10), 06 December 2021

At present there are very few off-road cycle routes in Nuneaton. There are some shared use paths, such as those around the ring-road and other locations including through some parks, but on the whole cycling is an on-road activity when considered for everyday use. There are no off-road routes in the area around the proposed supermarket, except for the aforementioned National Cycle Network Route 52 with its noted issues. While it is true to say that there are new schemes in the pipeline, and the Transport Assessment, paragraph 2.30, makes reference to the proposed Nuneaton-Bedworth-Coventry route, these do not yet exist. The mentioned scheme will also provide very little benefit for accessing the store, where that route will join Nuneaton town centre from the south.

It is disingenous to include the above statement about off-road routes when the primary road and most direct access route – Midland Road – has no infrastructure for cycling at all and, given the volume and type of traffic, is not suitable for the “less able or confident riders” that the plan mentions. Midland Road itself is addressed in detail further down, but suffice to say that with the proposed junction changes this will leave little to no room for separated cycle provision on this important road. The plans make no attempt to accommodate cyclists (or pedestrians) crossing Midland Road to access the store, for example from Stanley Road.

Midland Road Junctions Complexity

With the intention being for cyclists to access the supermarket in the same manner as motor traffic, it’s important to look at Midland Road. The plans propose a redesign of this junction with what is described as a “ghost island” – essentially, a right-turn filter lane. No provision for enabling safe cycling is included with this redesign.

The addition of the turning lane adds complexity to an area that already features two other junctions – Jodrell Street on the north side of Midland Road; Stanley Road on the south side. The new lane along with a repositioned east bound bus stop makes using the Stanley Road junction more difficult and hazardous for all road users, but particularly so for vulnerable road users i.e., cyclists.

• There is no equivalent filter for users turning right from Midland Road to Stanley Road.
• Users leaving Stanley Road to turn right on to Midland Road are presented with increased complexity of vehicle movements on Midland Road, along with increased conflict when an east bound bus is at its stand.
• Users leaving Morrisons and turning right on to Midland Road to head west bound have to negotiate three lanes on a busy road; this may be particularly difficult for laden cyclists who do not have the acceleration of a motor vehicle.
• Midland Road cyclists heading east towards the ring road may be moving at relatively fast speeds due to the downhill nature of the road here, approaching a junction with a lot of vehicle movements adding to a risk of not being seen or speed judged accurately by drivers.

When looking at all the routes available at this junction (figure 5), it becomes clear how complex vehicle movements can be, into which cyclists are expected to mix.

It is also worth noting that although Midland Road is a busy key route into Nuneaton, it is not a particularly wide road. Measuring from the south kerb edge to the mouth of the proposed Morrisons junction, it is only approximately 8.1m wide. A junction reconfiguration as proposed leaves no space for safe cycling where 3m is given over to the two general traffic lanes and the remaining 2.1m given to the right turn lane. Limited lane width in itself presents a risk to people cycling on Midland Road, mixing with heavy traffic including HGVs – those who do not feel confident enough to “take the lane” are at risk of very close pass overtakes.

Cycle Parking

Approaching the end of the issues for cycling then, it’s time to look at the one bit of infrastructure that the store does provide – cycle parking. This is a minimal contribution, but still an important one. Even with the best routes and connectivity, it’s no good if there’s nowhere to secure a cycle at the destination.

The plan proposes to install five “cycle hoops” at a location near to the store building but away from the main entrance, near to it’s south east boundary parallel with Jodrell Street. However it is not clear exactly what is meant by cycle hoops – actual loops or the common and generally recommend “Sheffield Stands”. This will provide space for up-to ten regular cycles to be secured outside the store. It appears that these would be shared between staff and customers as no other cycle storage facility is indicated on the plan. The cycle hoops are located between the EV charging bays and Click & Collect bays, positioned on the car park side of what appear to be bollards securing the pedestrian space. It is not clear what spacing will be offered between these bollards.

Assuming this facility remains unchanged from the plan, it appears to present a number of issues:

• Storage is located away from the main entrance, off a desire line and is therefore inconvenient.
• Depending on the vehicles parked nearby, visibility to the cycle stands from the main entrance may be limited and therefore poses a security risk.
• Orientation to access a hoop is incorrect and doesn’t allow cycles to easily be “slotted in”.
• There is no accommodation for inclusive cycling, facilitating storage of non-standard cycles and trailers.
• Access from the car park will be difficult especially if the EV and Click & Collect bays are occupied.
• Spacing between the bollards may pose an accessibility issue (though this cannot be confirmed on this plan).
• Ten cycle spaces is limited, especially when shared between staff and customers.
• Cycle storage is not covered and is exposed to the elements.

The last point may be considered a bit petty perhaps, but covered cycle storage is a benefit to enabling all-weather cycling. Additionally, if staff members want to ride to work, being able to keep cycles covered is important to avoid leaving them out in bad weather for extended periods of time. It’s not good for the bike long-term and no-one wants to ride home on a soggy bike after a hard day at work!

When it comes to moving through the site to access the cycle parking, there are two main options – ride around the boundary of the car park, or ride through it. The former has the benefit of perhaps minimising the risk of conflict with drivers in the main area of the car park with vehicles moving from both sides, but brings the downside of having to divert off the desire line to the front of the store, and moving through the pedestrian space passing the entrance to get to the cycling facilities. This requires the user to double-back to access the entrance after securing their cycle. The second option is direct but potentially brings riders into greater conflict with drivers moving through the car park into and out of spaces on both sides, and brings the rider to the cycle facilities where direct access may be restricted by parked vehicles.

Neither of these is good in terms of core principles for cycling design (coherent, direct, safe, comfortable, attractive) and do nothing to enable cycling for everyday transport.

Induced Traffic

It is the complexity of the road network in the area coupled with the limited width available on Midland Road that serves as my primary objection to locating a Morrisons supermarket at this site. The repurposing of the existing junction for supermarket traffic will add many more turning vehicles in this area; it will attract more vehicles from around the town as a new destination in an area that cannot be considered fit for such volumes of traffic.

Morrisons state that by constructing a supermarket here, it will be beneficial for overall town traffic as many journeys on Midland Road are to access other supermarkets on or beyond the town’s ring-road, and this store will capture some of those journeys. This may be true, but that fails to consider that new across town journeys will be made with the purpose of visiting the new Morrisons store and they will add to the volume of traffic in the area and surrounding roads.

“The effect on the wider highway network related to providing a food store on this site would be positive. People currently leave the area to carry out a main food shop. This increases journey times and adds to delays on key parts of the network, a new store in this location would capture trips and provide a viable alternative to travelling on the inner ring road. There would be a change in turning movements at the access, which would alter elements locally, this is discussed in detail in the Transport Assessment.”

Design and Access Statement: Access & Servicing Strategy (Pg.25), 06 December 2021

This also doesn’t appear to consider the impact that the new petrol filling station will have, where pricing competition with other nearby stations can encourage drivers to travel into the area solely or primarily for fueling their vehicles for the benefit of saving a penny or two on the cost per litre.

Improving the Plans

Having thoroughly torn into the plans for sustainable travel, it’s important to show some constructive feedback and to make suggestions as to what Morrisons could (and should) change to improve these plans. There are options, although Midland Road itself is always going to be difficult when it comes to facilitating all the traffic that runs through the area.

In the pre-application consultation, I suggested a new separated route for pedestrians and cyclists that runs along the Jodrell Street boundary, from Midland Road to the existing alleyway that connects to a footbridge. With a bridge upgrade, this could form a new, higher quality cycling link to Weddington Walk replacing the need to use Stoney Road. Access to the Morrisons supermarket would branch off this route.

For Midland Road itself, a toucan crossing facility would need to be provided to the west of the site junction. This would enable safe access to the west bound bus stop. A new cut-through to the branch off Stanley Road for pedestrians and cyclists would enable safe connection for both across the busy road without cyclists needing to use the main carriageway. A pedestrian cut-through near to the petrol station would improve the desire line slightly for pedestrians walking into Morrisons.

On the north side of Midland Road, a safe pedestrian and cyclist priority crossing should be installed across the site junction to allow people who are not accessing the site to easily cross this potentially awkward space, and for cyclists to access the proposed northbound route into or passing the supermarket.

Finally, the intention to install a new petrol station should be abandoned, where there is already a fueling station located nearby. Adding a new petrol station risks inducing further traffic where drivers visit solely for the benefit of refueling and not for using the main supermarket. While the decision to use above ground tanks is a positive aspect versus underground tanks which contaminate land and require in-fill after decommissioning, providing new petrol and diesel fueling services feels out of touch with the company’s sustainability objectives and the broader need to decarbonise transport – Morrisons Supermarkets should not be supporting the use of petrol and diesel fueled vehicles in this way.

Conclusion

Plans appear to have been created with poor local knowledge, no real consideration for cycling, and poor public transport and walking accommodation. This is very disappointing from a national retailer which makes a point about its sustainability objectives. There are numerous errors and contradictions in the plan documents, including the Framework Travel Plan and the Transport Assessment, which have been drawn out above. It would appear that cycling has perhaps been evaluated through a desk exercise, based on the Nuneaton Cycle Map which does not on its own give an accurate picture of real world cycling.

The Sustainable Design and Construction Checklist submitted as part of this application asks the question, “Do the designs support sustainable transport options?” to which the affirmative answer has been given – i.e., these designs have been signed-off on sustainable transport. Yet, it is abundantly clear that this is not the case, certainly not in any meaningful sense and without any understanding of the cycling environment in Nuneaton.

These plans must be revisited. A new retailer in the town is good news but the development must be right, forward-thinking, and future-proof. Sustainable transport must be at the forefront of design – this means accomodating walking and cycling (including the variety of non-standard cycles that exist), not just electric cars and their charging points. The retailer should also be looking at how it can use sustainable transport for local deliveries through electric cargo cycles, for example. None of this is given the consideration required in these plans.

These comments will be submitted as a formal response to the consultation that is open to 07 January 2022. I urge others to do the same.

Referenced Documents

The following documents have been used in the above plan evaluation. These links direct to PDF documents from external sources and will open in a new tab/window.

• Site Layout
• Design and Access Statement Part 1
• Design and Access Statement Part 2
• Transport Assessment
• Framework Travel Plan
• Sustainable Design and Construction Checklist
• Nuneaton Cycle Map