st james building 79 oxford street manchester es adde… · · 2011-08-06st james building 79...

TTHC Ltd – the Traffic, Transport & Highway Consultancy

Manchester St James Building 79 Oxford Street Manchester M1 6EJ

www.tthc.co.uk / www.tthc.com

TTHC Ref: M10061-01TR Date: April 2011 © COPYRIGHT: The contents of this document must not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part without the

written consent of TTHC

PROPOSED FOODSTORE,

HAYLE

(Wm Morrison Supermarket plc)

SUPPLEMENTARY TRANSPORT REPORT

Liverpool Oriel Chambers No.14 Water Street Liverpool L2 8TD

Bristol Bristol Castlemead Lower Castle Street Bristol BS1 3AG

London 3rd Floor 1 Berkeley Street London W1J 8DJ

CONTENTS Page No 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1

2.0 SITE LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY 3

3.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS 8

4.0 EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOWS AND CONDITIONS 12

5.0 BASE FORECASTS 14

6.0 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC 16

7.0 IMPLICATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC 23

8.0 VISSIM 29

9.0 CONCLUSION 33

TABLES

Table 1 Main Bus Services in Vicinity of Site

Table 2 Train Services

Table 3 Proposed Development Trip Rates

Table 4

Table 5

Proposed Development Trip Generations

McIver and Dickinson Trip Types at New Stores

Table 6 Adopted Trip Proportions

Table 7 Proposed Development Generated Trips by Trip Type

Table 8 Proposed Site Access Operational Performance

Table 9 South Quays Consented Access Operational Performance

Table 10

Table 11

Buro Happold proposed improvement Geometry (Option C2) – Foundry Square

Foundry Square 2017 Base Operational Performance

Table 12 TTHC proposed improvement Geometry – Foundry Square

Table 13 Foundry Square 2017 Base + Development Operational Performance

FIGURES

Figure 1 Site Location Plan

Figure 2 Local Area Plan

Figure 3 Footpaths and Cycle Routes

Figure 4 PPG13 Catchment Areas

Figure 5 Existing Bus Services

Figure 6 Enhanced Linkage Plan

Figure 7 Existing PM Peak Traffic Flows (Vehicles)

Figure 8 Existing PM Peak Traffic Flows (PCUs)

Figure 9 2017 Growth Flows PM Peak

Figure 10 Committed Development Flows

Figure 11 2017 Base Flows PM Peak

Figure 12 Total Proposed Development Flows

Figure 13 2017 Jewsons Flows

Figure 14 The Net Additional Trips

Figure 15 2017 Base + Development

APPENDICES

Appendix A Proposed Access and Highway Improvement Scheme Plans

Appendix B CCC count data – Foundry Square

Appendix C ADL HGV information at Foundry Square

Appendix D ADL count data – Jewson’s Access

Appendix E TRICS data

Appendix F McIver & Dickinson Research Report

Appendix G TTHC Gravity Model – New Trips

Appendix H Distribution of Transferred Trips for each Zone

Appendix I Proposed Development Flows for each Individual Trip Type

Appendix J Proposed Site Access LINSIG Output

Appendix K South Quays Consented PICADY Output

Appendix L Foundry Square mini-roundabout ARCADY Output

Appendix M VISSIM output

PROPOSED FOOD SUPERSTORE DEVELOPMENT HAYLE SUPPLEMENTARY TRANSPORT REPORT

APRIL 2011 Page 1 M10061-01 TR

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 This Transport Report (TR) has been prepared by TTHC Ltd on behalf of Wm

Morrison Supermarkets plc (Morrisons) in connection with an outline planning

application on the existing Jewsons Builders Merchants site off Carnsew

Road, Hayle.

1.2 The application site (the ‘Site’), lies close to the western side of Hayle town

centre.

1.3 The application proposes a redevelopment of the Jewson builders merchants

for a new A1 food store unit of approximately 3,355m2 (36,115ft2) Gross Floor

Area (GFA) and 1,858m2 (20,000ft2) of Retail Floor area (RFA).

1.4 A planning application for a foodstore on this Site was submitted to Cornwall

County Council (CCC) in April 2010 (application reference: W1/10-0413).

Included in the submission was a Transport Assessment (TA) undertaken by

ADL Traffic Engineering Ltd on behalf of the Applicant, Actoris. An updated

TA was submitted by ADL in September 2010.

1.5 In November 2010, Morrisons requested TTHC to assist with the

development of the access scheme for the store. TTHC subsequently had

discussions and meetings with CCC regarding a revised access scheme and

the impact the proposed development will have on the surrounding network

with the consented development flows associated with the Hayle Harbour

Masterplan Development (ref: W1/08-0613). Technical notes and plans were

submitted to CCC to respond to the Council’s requests.

1.6 Following the decision to defer the application at the February Committee, a

further meeting was held on 1st March 2011 with CCC to discuss all

outstanding highway related issues. At this meeting, CCC said that in order to

be satisfied the foodstore proposals could operate in conjunction with the

consented development on the adjacent ING site they would like to see a

VISSIM microsimulation model of the proposals. CCC also requested further



details of the pedestrian linkage proposals, specifically the width of the

footway improvements on the south side of Carnsew Road.

1.7 This particular report therefore pulls together the work undertaken by TTHC

and provides details of the TTHC assessments including the VISSIM work

and further information in respect of pedestrian linkage.

1.8 The location of the Site is indicated in Figure 1, and its local area is

presented in Figure 2.

1.9 The remainder of this report provides information under the following

headings:

Site Location and Accessibility;

Development Proposals;

Existing Traffic Flows and Conditions;

Base Forecasts;

Development Traffic;

Implications of Development Traffic and

VISSIM

1.10 We will commence with site location and its accessibility.



2.0 SITE LOCATION AND ACCESSIBILITY

General Locality

2.1 The Site is located to the west of Hayle town centre, as indicated in Figure 1.

2.2 The Site is currently occupied by Jewsons builders merchant and comprises

both covered and open storage area for building materials. There are six

buildings in total - the building adjacent to Carnsew Road is listed. The

existing GFA of the Site is approximately 3,600sqm.

2.3 The Site is bounded to the north by the Hayle coastline and to the south by

B3301 Carnsew Road. To the west there are residential properties and to the

east there is land to be developed for the Hayle Harbour Scheme (ref: W1/08-

0613). This is referred to throughout this report as the ING consent.

2.4 The Site’s location adjacent to the Carnsew Road maximises the potential for

pass-by and linked trips, allowing shoppers to combine with other journey

purpose (such as work to home trip), and without any significant diversion

from the normal route. This is a key benefit of the proposed foodstore location

as many of its customers will be making journey past the store in any event,

which will help to meet Government objectives of minimising vehicle mileage.

Local Highway Network

2.5 Figure 1 shows the highway network surrounding the Site. Carnsew Road

provides access to the Site and is one of the main routes into the town centre.

The road is a single carriageway and serves a local distribution function. As

shown in Figure 1 the B3301 connects with the A30 on the periphery of Hayle

at Loggans Mill to the north and continues south to rejoin the A30 at St Erths

roundabout.



2.6 Within the vicinity of the Site Carnsew Road is approximately 7m in width and

is subject to a 30mph speed limit. There is a footway and street lighting on

the northern side.

2.7 Opposite the Jewsons site is Foundry Lane. Foundry Lane is a narrow lane

approximately 5m in width. Foundry Lane connects Carnsew Road to B3302

Foundry Hill. The road is unsuitable for vehicles over 14’9” in height. At the

junction Foundry Lane / Carnsew Road there is currently poor visibility. Given

its constraints, Foundry Lane serves a local access road function and as such

is very lightly trafficked.

2.8 Approximately 150m to the east of the Site, Carnsew Road is crossed by the

railway and then connects with the B3301 Penpol Terrace at a three armed

mini-roundabout (Foundry Square). This junction is to be improved in

conjunction with the ING consent.

Existing Pedestrian and Cycle Links

2.9 While walk and cycle modal share for foodstore customers is generally small,

owing to the limitations of carrying heavy shopping, the application site is

surrounded by residential areas, and this particularly provides staff living in

these areas, with the opportunity to walk or cycle to the proposed store.

2.10 Along Carnsew Road within the vicinity of the Site there is a footway to the

northern side of the road. To the west, the footway serves residential

proprieties. Towards the east the surfaced footway ends at the entrance to

South Quays car park. From this point there is an unsurfaced pedestrian route

which continues on the northside of Carnsew Road adjacent to the railway

viaduct and through Isis gardens. A surfaced footway also continues on the

southern side of Carnsew Road which leads to Foundry Square, although at

present there is no formal crossing point.

2.11 At the Foundry Square junction there are refuge islands with dropped kerbs

which assist pedestrians to cross Foundry Hill and Penpol Terrace.



2.12 There is a footway along the southern side of the road to the west of Foundry

Lane and to the west of the Site there is a Toucan crossing approximately 90

metres from the Jewsons access.

2.13 There are a number of public right of ways within the vicinity of the Site as

shown on the Definitive Map. Rights of Way and pedestrian crossing facilities

are shown in Figure 3.

2.14 With reference to PPG13, a walk distance of 2km and a cycle distance of 5km

are generally considered to be reasonable. Figure 4 indicates the 2km walk

catchment area, which shows that it covers the majority of Hayle and Lelant.

The 5km cycle catchment would also encompass areas as far as Carbis Bay

and parts of St.Ives.

2.15 National Cycle Route 3 (NCR3) passes the Site along Carnsew Road, which

runs from Lands End through to Hayle and on toward Truro. NCR3 is also

known as the “First and Last Trail” and is part of the Cornish Way route.

NCR3 is a mixture of off road, off carriage and on road route. The NCR3 route

is shown in Figure 3.

Public Transport Links

2.16 The Site is accessible by bus and rail modes of transport, which is particularly

important for staff access to the Site.

2.17 There are a number of bus routes within walking distance of the Site. Stops

are provided along Foundry Hill and Penpol Terrace and service from these

run between St.Ives, Penzance, Camborne and surrounding residential areas.

2.18 The bus routes, stops and rail stations are indicated in Figure 5. A summary

of bus services is provided in Table 1 below.



Bus Service Summary Table

Serving Monday – Friday Saturday Sunday

0730-0930 1630-1830 Daily Daily Daily

14,14A St.Ives - Truro 2 (2) 2 (2) 16 (15) 15 (15) 5 (5)

18.18A,18B Penzance - Truro 4 (2) 3 (4) 18 (19) 17 (16) 6 (6)

19 Penzance–Camborne - (-) - (-) 2 (3) - (-) - (-)

515 Penzance – Gwithian 1 (2) 1 (-) 5 (5) 5 (5) - (-)

547 St.Ives – Newquay - (1) 2 (2) 10 (10) 10 (10) - (-)

X18 Penzance – Truro - (-) - (1) 4 (4) 4 (4) - (-)

TOTAL 7 (7) 8 (9) 55 (56) 51 (50) 11 (11)

Stated direction (reverse direction)

Table 1

2.19 In addition to the bus services, the Site is easily accessed by rail, as it lies

approximately 400 metres from Hayle train station. The pedestrian access to

the station is via a narrow road from B3301 Penpol Terrace close to the

Foundry Square mini roundabout.

2.20 As shown in the table below, the local services available from Hayle train

station provide access to nearby towns including St. Erth (5mins), Camborne

(10mins), Penzance (15mins) and Redruth (16mins). There are also longer

distance services to Bristol, Exeter, Plymouth, Reading and London

Paddington throughout the day, although these are less relevant in respect of

this particular application.



Train Service Summary Table

Serving Monday – Friday Saturday Sunday

0730-0930 1630-1830 Daily Daily Daily

London – Redruth - Hayle –

St. Erth - Penzance 1 (1) 1 (1) 5 (2) 4 (2) 0 (1)

Plymouth – Redruth - Hayle –

St. Erth - Penzance 2 (0) 1 (0) 7 (6) 5 (6) 3 (1)

Bristol – Redruth - Hayle – St.

Erth - Penzance 0 (0) 0(0) 3 (1) 3 (1) 2 (2)

Exeter – Redruth - Hayle - St.

Erth - Penzance 0 (0) 0 (1) 1 (2) 1 (2) 1 (1)

Truro/Par – Redruth - Hayle -

St. Erth - Penzance 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (1) 1 (0) 0 (0)

TOTAL 3 (1) 2 (2) 16 (12) 14 (11) 6 (5)

Stated direction (reverse direction)

Table 2

2.20 The following section provides a description of the development proposals.



DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS

3.1 The proposed development is for a new food superstore. The foodstore will

have 3,355m2 GFA with 1,858m2 RFA with associated car parking and

servicing areas.

3.2 Of the six buildings currently on the Site five will be removed. The listed

building adjacent to Carnsew Road will be retained and used for car parking.

Vehicle Access

3.3 There are two vehicular accesses provided for the site off Carnsew Road both

of which are existing access positions.

3.4 In the original ADL access scheme the foodstore application proposed the

closure of the existing access to the builders yard opposite Foundry Lane and

creation of a new customer access via a roundabout on Carnsew Road which

was to include Foundry Lane.

3.5 As a consequence of the TTHC review of the access proposals an alternative

signal controlled junction scheme has been developed. The proposed signal

controlled access is shown on the plans contained with Appendix A.

3.6 The first plan shows the layout in the context of the existing highway network

and the second shows it in the context of the committed development access

arrangement on the South Quays site (part of the Hayle Harbour

development) – the ING consent. These proposed site access plans have

been submitted to CCC previously.

3.7 CCC have taken no issue with the access proposals other than expressing

the view that the required further information, namely VISSIM modelling, to be

assured that the proposals could operate without material detrimental impact

on the ING consented access operation.



3.8 The service yard would have its own dedicated access, located in

approximately the same location as the present access to building No. 4

Carnsew Road, which is to the west of the Site. This service access would

comprise a simple priority junction and would be provided with visibility splays

of 2.4m by 90m in either direction, which conform to the requirements for a

road subject to a 30mph speed limit.

Parking

3.9 Parking will be provided in accordance with CCC standards and National

policy guidance. Standard, mobility, staff and parent and child spaces will be

provided.

3.10 CCC’s mobility impaired parking standard is a minimum of 5% of the number

of spaces. The number of disabled spaces will be provided in line with this

policy.

3.11 CCC standards for cycle parking is 4% of the car parking provision. Cycle

parking will be provide in line to this standard and the spaces will be

accommodated close to the building entrance. In addition to cycle parking

being provided there will also be spaces provided for motorcycles.

Pedestrian

3.12 Pedestrian walkways would be provided through the Site, providing links from

Carnsew Road to the store entrance.

3.13 In conjunction with the development, an improved pedestrian link to the town

centre is proposed along with a new pedestrian crossing. The crossing will be

located between the Site and Foundry Square at the point where the surfaced

footway on the north side of Carnsew Road ceases and then continues on the

south side. This particular section is the part which CCC had sought further

information on in respect of widths and hence it is shown in more detail on the


APRIL 2011 Page 10 M10061-01 TR

plan presented in Appendix A3. As shown, it will comprise of a puffin

crossing with tactile paving.

3.14 The pedestrian link comprises improvements to existing footway along the

southern side of Carnsew Road from the proposed pedestrian crossing to

Foundry Square junction. The proposed scheme widens the footpath for most

of its length to 2 metres.

3.15 There is a local pinchpoint where the corner of John Harvey House sites

within the footway. At this point, the width would be 1.3m. However, this is no

more than a pinchpoint, similar to the effect of street furniture positioned in the

footway.

3.16 Department of Transport (DoT) Inclusive Mobility Guidance states that 2

metres will allow two wheelchairs to pass one another comfortably. It also

states that the absolute minimum width, where there is an obstacle, should be

1m clear width. This minimum is exceeded at the pinchpoint.

3.17 It is clear therefore, that the proposals will not only cater for general

pedestrian activity, they would also be suitable for providing a route which

would be entirely capable of accommodating the needs of those with mobility

impairment.

3.18 In addition to the proposals, there are also existing paths providing linkage

to/from the Site, including a well trodden route across the frontage of the ING

site which connects with Isis gardens.

3.19 The footpath network which would exist following the proposed improvements

is presented in the Enhanced Linkages Plan presented in Figure 6. As

shown, the Application Site would be well connected for pedestrians within

Hayle and would be served by suitable linkages with the town centre.


APRIL 2011 Page 11 M10061-01 TR

Public Transport

3.20 Improvements relating to Public Transport were discussed with CCC prior to

TTHC’s involvement in the project and a package of measures are to be

secured through a Section 106 Agreement. The measures include the

provision of a new bus stop closer to the store.

3.21 Morrisons would also undertake to provide and implement their Travel Plan

which would seek to reduce reliance upon the private car and promote non-

car travel particularly amongst its staff.


APRIL 2011 Page 12 M10061-01 TR

4.0 EXISTING TRAFFIC FLOWS AND CONDITIONS

4.1 In order to provide an assessment of the impact of the development

proposals, the existing traffic conditions must first be established.

Traffic Flows

4.2 It has previously been agreed with CCC that assessments of the Saturday

peak are not considered necessary as the weekday PM peak is the worst

case scenario.

4.3 CCC have requested that surveyed PM Peak Hour traffic flows from June

2006 should be used as the starting point for junction assessments, as it is

believed these are the highest flows from the various data sets available.

4.4 The traffic count undertaken in June 2006 was at the Foundry Square mini

roundabout junction. The survey included full turning movement counts at the

junction between the hours 0700-1900. A copy of the count data is provided in

Appendix B.

4.5 Analysis of the CCC survey data revealed that the PM peak hour at the

Foundry Square was 1700-1800 hours.

4.6 As shown in Appendix B the flows presented are presented in vehicles. HGV

information is presented but it is not split by hour. Therefore, in addition to the

count received from CCC, the count undertaken by ADL at Foundry Square in

2010 has been used to obtain HGV proportions for the PM peak period. The

HGV information is presented in Appendix C.

4.7 PM Peak Hour turning flows into and out of the existing Jewsons access and

Foundry Lane were surveyed in 2010 by ADL. The traffic flow data at this

location is presented in Appendix D. It should be noted that these are

existing counted flows and not the potential which the Site could achieve with

this particular landuse.


APRIL 2011 Page 13 M10061-01 TR

4.8 The resulting PM peak hour surveyed vehicle flows are presented in Figure 7.

4.9 The peak hour flows are also provided as passenger car units (PCUs) in

Figure 8. The use of PCUs, where larger vehicles (heavy goods vehicles

(HGV’s) and buses) are assigned a PCU value of 2, takes account of the

greater impact that these larger vehicles have in respect of highway

operation.


APRIL 2011 Page 14 M10061-01 TR

5.0 BASE FORECASTS

5.1 In order to consider the impact of development traffic, the ‘Base’ situation

must first be established.

5.2 At the request of CCC and in order to be consistent with other planning

applications recently submitted, the future year to be assessed has been

taken as 2017. This is slightly more onerous than the Guidelines on Transport

Assessment (GoTA) which suggest a future year for assessment of 5 years

after an Application is lodged.

5.3 The worst case PM Peak Hour traffic flows provided by CCC have therefore

been growthed to 2017 using TEMPRO growth. The resulting flows are

presented in Figure 9.

5.4 In addition to the addition of background traffic growth, future year

assessments have also take into account committed developments which are

capable of completion within the period examined. The committed

development to be included is the Hayle Harbour Masterplan development

(ref: W1/08-0613). The trip generations association with the development

have therefore been included. In combination with background traffic growth

the resulting Base Scenario is a robust starting position for the assessment of

the worst case PM Peak Hour

5.5 The trip generations of the consented development have been provided by

CCC from the Buro Happold Transport Assessment Update February 2009.

5.6 The committed development flows for assessment purposes in the PM peak

hours are presented in Figure 10.

5.7 The 2017 Base flows are produced by combining the existing surveyed flows,

growthed to 2017 (Figure 9), with the committed development flows (Figure

10). The resulting Base flows for the PM peak hour are presented in Figure

11. In order to appreciate the level of robustness applied to the starting point


APRIL 2011 Page 15 M10061-01 TR

for assessment of the Morrisons foodstore scheme, it should be noted that

the 2017 PM Peak Hour Base Flows are upto 73% higher that the surveyed

flows which are also known to provide on onerous starting position.


APRIL 2011 Page 16 M10061-01 TR

6.0 DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

Traffic Generation

6.1 The traffic implications of the proposed foodstore have been assessed against

that of the existing use on the Site. The traffic generating potential of the

proposed scheme is detailed below.

Proposed Foodstore

6.2 The traffic generation associated with the proposed foodstore has been

estimated based on data in the TRICS 2011(a) database. The TRICS output

is contained in Appendix E.

6.3 In order to obtain appropriate trip rates, the following TRICS site selection has

been adopted. Trip generation assessments have been based on store RFA

rates for a proposed store of 1,858 m2 RFA.

6.4 The selection criteria adopted are as follows:

RFA floorspace range 858m2 to 2,858m2;

Friday sites have been selected for the PM peak;

Exclude Greater London, Scotland, Ireland and Wales survey sites;

Excludes town centre sites;

Sites which have a petrol filling station are excluded; and

Only one survey per store so as not to bias the assessment.

6.5 The TRICS peak hours do not necessarily correspond with the highway peak

discussed in Section 4. However, in order to provide a robust assessment, the

trip rates employed for the proposed use are those from the highest

generating hour.

6.6 It should also be noted that there has been no allowance made for the lower

levels of parking provision which modern food superstores are required, to


APRIL 2011 Page 17 M10061-01 TR

provide under National and Local Policy, which will potentially limit peak

activity.

6.7 The resulting trip generation rates for the proposed foodstore are as detailed

in Table 3 below. The trip rates are quoted as trips per 100m2 RFA.

Foodstore Trip Rates (Vehicles) – PM Peak Hour

Proposed foodstore (1,858m2)

RFA range 858m2 – 2,858m2

In Out Total

Rate (trips per 100m2) 11.609 11.726 22.335

Flow 216 218 434

Table 3

6.8 For assessment purposes, the calculated trip generations have been rounded

up as indicated in Table 4 below.

Proposed Foodstore Development Trips (Vehicles)

In Out Total

PM Peak Hour 218 218 436

Table 4

6.9 It is widely accepted that the majority of shopping trips to new retail stores are

already using the road network and that in transferring to a new store they

simply redistribute within the network. This is particularly the case in weekday

PM peak periods. Studies from Professor G McL Hazel and from McIver and

Dickenson, both of which are included in Appendix F, have split trips to retail

centres into categories based on their characteristics. These categories are

as follows:


APRIL 2011 Page 18 M10061-01 TR

NEW: a new trip which had not been made before during the time period

of interest but would result from the opening of a new store and would

therefore be new to the network.

TRANSFERRED: a single purpose shopping trip which (prior to the new

store) had a trip end at a competing store but which would then transfer to

the new store upon opening.

DIVERTED: a multi purpose trip which does not pass outside the

proposed store previously but which now diverts from its routes to make

an immediate visit to the proposed store.

PASS-BY: any trip which used to pass outside the Site of the store which

now makes an immediate visit to the store.

6.10 It should be noted that the studies actually suggest that in general the

proportion of ‘New’ shopping trips to new foodstores is zero or very close to

zero. The McIver and Dickinson research suggests that the proportions set

out in Table 5 are typical:

McIver and Dickinson Trip Types at New Stores

Trip Type Friday

Transferred 60%

Diverted 25%

Passby 15%

Table 5

6.11 However, in order to provide a robust assessment a proportion of 10% New

trips have been adopted with an adjustment to the Transferred proportion

accordingly. Based on the above research the proportions for each category

have been assumed to be as set out in Table 6 overleaf.


APRIL 2011 Page 19 M10061-01 TR

Adopted Trip Proportions

Trip Type Friday

New 10%

Transferred 50%

Diverted 25%

Passby 15%

Table 6

6.12 As shown, the proposed store will be assessed on the basis that 10% of all

trips to and from the site will be ‘New’ to the local area. It has also been

assumed that 50% of trips on will be ‘Transferred’ trips (i.e. trips transferring

from other stores). 15% of trips will be ‘Passby’ trips (i.e. trips already

passing immediately adjacent to the Site along Carnsew Road). 25% will be

‘Diverted’ trips (i.e. trips making a slight diversion from their journey to access

the store: in this case trips which are travelling to / from Foundry Hill to / from

B3301 Penpol Terrace.

6.13 The total store related trips shown in Table 6 have thus been split into the

adopted trip types as shown in Table 7 below.

Proposed (1,858 sqm) Food Store Generated Trips by Trip Type

Total Number of Trips

Friday PM Peak Hour

Trip Type In Out Total

New 22 22 44

Transferred 109 109 218

Diverted 55 55 110

Pass-by 33 33 66

Total 219 219 438

Table 7


APRIL 2011 Page 20 M10061-01 TR

6.14 The ‘Passby’ trips will only impact on the Carnsew Road Site access junction.

‘New’ trips will create additional movements on the surrounding highway

network. The ‘Transferred’ and ‘Diverted’ trips will create some new

additional movements on local roads but will also redistribute some of the

existing traffic movements.

6.15 In particular, the distribution analysis, which is discussed in more detail later,

indicates that some of the traffic transferring from other stores relates to

current home based trips from Hayle travelling to stores in Penzance, St.Ives

and Camborne. With a new store in Hayle, many shoppers who are currently

passing the Site along Carnsew Road would instead switch to the new store,

which would obviously be closer for them. Not only are these trips, which

currently pass immediately adjacent to the Site, effectively the same as

‘Passby’ trips, they would be removed from the surrounding junctions.

Trip Distribution

Proposed Development

6.16 In order to provide an indication of the likely distribution of ‘New’ trips

associated with the proposed store, a Primary Catchment Area (PCA) has

been produced by TTHC.

6.17 The PCA for home based shopping trips, is based on a TTHC 10 minute drive

time from the proposed store and is shown in Appendix G.

6.18 Within this PCA, it would be expected that new trips at the Site access would

be split approximately 80%/20%, with the majority routing from Hayle town

centre. The previous ADL TA submitted to CCC also assumed a split at the

Site access of 80/20 based on the information provided by R.Trewthey of

CCC.


APRIL 2011 Page 21 M10061-01 TR

6.19 At the meeting on the 1st March 2011, CCC requested the distribution of the

transfer trips to be based on the method and data used in the recent

Sainsburys application submitted to CCC (planning ref: PA10/04297).

6.20 From the Sainsburys model the catchment area is divided into 8 zones based

on postcodes. The model is based on population from the GVA Grimley 2007

retail study and a trip distance factor to the foostores.

6.21 The transfer of trips from other foodstores results in trips which are

completely new within the highway area of interest. However, owing to the

location of the proposed store, a large proportion of these trips from Hayle are

seen to be currently routeing along Carnsew Road to travel to other

foodstores. The proposed Morrisons store would result in shorter journeys,

with the removal of a number of trips which currently travel along Carnsew

Road.

6.22 The flows for the existing and proposed ‘Transferred’ trips for each zone area

are shown in Appendix H. The net effect of the existing transfer trips and the

proposed transferred trips are shown in Appendix I.

6.23 ‘Pass-by’ trips are taken as trips passing along Carnsew Road past the Site

access junction ‘Pass-by’ trips taken from each direction are in proportion to

the northbound/southbound flow split at the junction. These trips are simply

deducted from the straight ahead movement, instead turning into the Site,

and again back out to continue in the original direction.

6.24 ‘Diverted’ trips are those routeing close to, but not passing, the Site i.e. from

the north along B3301 Penpol Terrace, and from the south from B3302

Foundry Hill. This results in a redistribution of traffic at the mini roundabout

junction with traffic turning towards the proposed foodstore, and then

travelling back out towards the mini-roundabout to continue in the original

direction.


APRIL 2011 Page 22 M10061-01 TR

6.25 The resulting development trips for each of the four trip components for the

PM peak are presented in Appendix I. The total proposed development flows

for the PM peak are shown in Figure 12.

6.26 By comparison with the proposed development flow (Figure 12) with those of

the existing flows for the site shown in Figure 13 (Jewsons flows growthed to

2017) the actual net change in traffic flows over the existing are indicated in

Figure 14.

6.27 The 2017 With Development Flows are the 2017 Base flows except the

existing Site flows shown in Figure 13 are replaced with the proposed

development flows (as detailed in Figure 12). The resulting With

Development Flows are indicated in Figure 15.

6.28 Having described the changes in traffic arising from the proposed foodstore

development, we will now discuss the operational implications of these

proposals.


APRIL 2011 Page 23 M10061-01 TR

7.0 IMPLICATIONS OF DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC

Operational Assessment

Proposed Site Access

7.1 The proposed signal controlled access junction for the Jewson Site

redevelopment scheme is shown on the plans in Appendix A. The first plan

shows the layout in the context of the existing highway network and the

second shows it in the context of the committed development access

arrangements on the South Quays site – the ING consent.

7.2 TTHC had previously presented CCC with tests of the access based on a

cycle time of 36 seconds. This is a low cycle time but not the lowest the

junction is capable of operating at. However, the advantage of a low cycle

time is that there will be a quick turnover of signal stages and a greater

number of intergreens which in turn will lead to a greater number of ‘gap

opportunities’ for traffic turning into or out of the Site and the consented ING

South Quays development.

7.3 Close to traffic signals vehicle platoons and gaps are more defined, making

turning into and out of side nearby roads easier for drivers to judge. In

addition to the periods generated by the intergreens, other gap opportunities

would also exist as long as the movements at the signals are not operating at

saturation levels (eg 100%).

7.4 A low cycle time test also has the advantage of the westbound right turn lane

operating more independently from the ahead lane, thereby removing the

need to test the double inclusion of this traffic within the LINSIG.

7.5 The results of the proposed junction are presented in Table 8 below, the

LINSIG output is provided in Appendix J.


APRIL 2011 Page 24 M10061-01 TR

Proposed Signal Controlled Site Access Junction LINSIG Results

2017 Base + Development PM Peak Hour

Link

Arm

Results

DoS (%) Queue

1/1 Carnsew Road (WB) left and Ahead 64.4 5

1/2 Carnsew Road (WB) Right 58.2 1

2/1 Southern arm all movements 8.4 1

3/1 Carnsew Road (EB) all movements 79.6 9

4/1 Site access - left and ahead 41.9 2

4/2 Site access – right 21.1 1

Cycle Time 36 seconds

Practical Reserve Capacity (Low Cycle Time) 13.1%

Table 8

7.6 As shown, with a low cycle time of just 36 seconds, the junction would

continue to operate well within capacity. A 36 second cycle time would result

in 100 cycles per hour which in turn would mean 100 intergreens of 6

seconds per hour. It should be noted that the right turn out of the ING access

is 96 vehicles, which would be 1 per cycle on average. The right turn in is

133, which would be 1-2 per cycle average.

7.7 Furthermore, it should also be noted that the through movements at the signal

controlled junction would be operating well within capacity (between 64% and

80%) and, as such, there would be other gaps within the natural flow of traffic.

South Quays consented access

7.8 As shown on the second plan in Appendix A the consented scheme access

for ING / South Quays is a priority junction. The operational performance of

the consented junction has been undertaken using PICADY.

7.9 The PICADY outputs are shown in Appendix K. These are summarised in

Table 9 below.


APRIL 2011 Page 25 M10061-01 TR

South Quays / ING Consented Access

2017 Assessment

Turning Movement Base Base +

Development

RFC QUEUE RFC QUEUE

Foundry Yard to Carnsew Road (WB) 0.040 0 0.044 0

Foundry Yard to Carnsew Road (EB) 0.168 1 0.222 1

Carnsew Road (E) to South Quays 0.345 1 0.370 1

South Quays to Carnsew Road (EB) 0.638 2 1.081 14

South Quays to Carnsew Road (WB) 0.714 2 1.040 8

Carnsew Road (W) to Foundry Yard 0.023 0 0.025 0

Table 9

7.10 The results above suggest that the additional traffic generated by the

proposed development would result in queuing on the ING access during the

worst case PM peak hour. However, the PICADY tests are not able to take

account of the positive effects on ‘gaps’ in the main road traffic past this

access as referred to earlier and hence these results are expected to be

much improved in practice. This will be returned to later.

7.11 In any event, given the robust nature of the worst case traffic flow volumes,

this is unlikely to occur in practice even without improvement to the quality of

gaps in traffic.

Foundry Square

7.12 In testing the implications of the proposed Foodstore on the Foundary Square

junction, the improved junction parameters from the consented development

associated with the Hayle Harbour Masterplan (Buro Happold Technical Note,

using the C2 improvement as requested by CCC) have been adopted. This

improved geometry has been combined with the Base flows shown in Figure

9.


APRIL 2011 Page 26 M10061-01 TR

7.13 The operational performance of the consented junction has been tested using

ARCADY.

7.14 The improved geometry adopted by Buro Happold, which forms the Base

position is presented in Table 10 below. As shown, this assumes an

increased flare on Penpol Terrace and both entry width and flare

improvements on the other two arms.

Foundry Square – Buro Happold proposed improvement Geometry (Option C2)

ARM V (m) E (m) LM (m) VM (m) A (m) K(m)

A - Penpol Terrace 4.8 7.4 16.0 3.25 10.0 7.5

B - Foundry Hill 4.2 7.5 27.0 3.4 11.0 7.0

C - Carnsew Road 3.0 7.0 20 3.0 12.0 10.5

Table 10

7.15 The results of the Base flows are presented in Table 11 below and the

ARCADY output provided in Appendix L.

Foundry Square 2017 Base

ARCADY Results

ARM RFC Queue

A 0.964 15

B 0.674 2

C 1.005 24

Table 11

7.16 As shown, in the Base Scenario using the worst case PM peak flows, the

junction would be expected to operate around its ultimate capacity. However,

the purpose of this test is to provide a comparison with the results of the

proposals arising from the redevelopment of the Jewson Site.

7.17 In order to mitigate the implications of the proposed foodstore scheme for the

Jewson Site, TTHC has examined what further improvements might be


APRIL 2011 Page 27 M10061-01 TR

needed. These are presented in Table 12 below. The proposed layout is

shown in Appendix L.

Foundry Square – TTHC proposed improvement Geometry

ARM V (m) E (m) LM (m) VM (m) A (m) K(m)

A - Penpol Terrace 4.8 9.5 25.0 3.25 10.0 7.5

B - Foundry Hill 4.2 7.5 27.0 3.4 11.0 7.0

C - Carnsew Road 3.0 8.7 20 3.0 12.0 10.5

Table 12

7.18 As shown in the table above, increases in entry width (Penpol Terrace and

Carnsew Road) and the flare (Penpol Terrace) are proposed (the C2

improvements at Foundary Hill would be unaltered).

7.19 With respect to the Carnsew Road approach improvements, TTHC has been

mindful of the likely approach speeds to ensure a suitable visibility envelope

is maintained particularly in respect of the left turn movement.

7.20 The ARCADY tests for the 2017 Base + Development flows against the

geometry set out in Table 12 are presented in Table 13 below with ARCADY

output provided in Appendix L.

Foundry Square

2017 Base + Development

ARCADY Results

ARM RFC Queue

A 0.819 4

B 0.718 3

C 0.996 23

Table 13

7.21 These results should be compared with those presented in Table 13 for the

Base scenario.


APRIL 2011 Page 28 M10061-01 TR

7.22 As shown, the proposed junction improvements would result in the Base +

Development Scenario operating better than the Base scenario, with arm A

being significantly improved.

7.23 Therefore, the additional improvements presented in Table 12 would provide

suitable mitigation with respect to the traffic implications of the proposed

foodstore redevelopment at the Jewson Site.


APRIL 2011 Page 29 M10061-01 TR

8.0 VISSIM TRANSPORT MODEL

8.1 In response to a request from CCC, a VISSIM model has been developed to

assist in understanding how the ‘gaps’ created by the proposed signals for the

Morrisons store would improve the results suggested by the standard

PICADY analysis.

8.2 VISSIM is a microscopic, time-step and behaviour-based simulation model.

The assessment of the network has been carried out using the VISSIM

software developed by PTV. The model has also been constructed in

conjunction with the input of PTV and in accordance with best practice.

8.3 The geometry of the simulation has been set up to recreate the proposed

geometry as closely as possible. The simulation runs for 90 minutes from

1645 to 1815 which includes ‘warm-up’ and ‘cool-down’ periods of 15 minutes

either side of the peak hour.

8.4 The vehicular traffic flows used for the assessment are equivalent to the PCU

peak hours shown in Figure 11 (2017 Base) and Figure 15 (2017 Base +

Development). The vehicle flows used are presented in Appendix M. For the

15 minutes either side of the peak hour the flows are based on the peak hour

but are reduced by 15%.

8.5 Below is a summary of the inputs to create the Base model.

An area of assessment of the site access and Carnsew Road as far as

and including Foundry Square.

The simulation resolution is the number of times the vehicle’s position will

be calculated within one simulated second. The value entered into the

model can range between 1 and 10. Based on the TfL document (Traffic

Modelling Guidelines, version 3.0) the simulation resolution should be set

to the default value of 5 steps per simulation second.

The random seed is the initial ‘seed’ value specified at the start of the

simulation run. Using different random seed changes the profile of the


APRIL 2011 Page 30 M10061-01 TR

traffic arriving which can in turn therefore can alter the results. With

results based on a single seed value there is the potential to randomly

bias the overall result. According to TfL guidance an acceptable method

of reducing potential bias is to use a minimum of five seed values. The

model for each scenario has been run five times using seed numbers 1 -

5, and averaging the results.

For the traffic flows there are two vehicle compositions, cars and HGVs.

For each vehicle composition the default vehicle types have been

selected. The default target speed for each vehicle composition is 50km/h

(32mph).

The routeing of the car and HGV flows have been created for each origin

to destination (7 zones in total). Most of the moments within the area of

assessment cordon are known but those that aren’t have been based on

the Furness procedure. The Furness process generates traffic moments

between each origin and destination by balancing inflow and outflow totals

iteratively until equilibrium is reached.

8.6 For the Base plus Development scenario the same model has been used as

in the Base scenario with additional elements to represent the proposed

highway improvements. Below is a summary of the changes made to the

Base model.

The proposed site access is a signalised junction. The junction will

operate on a cycle time of 36 seconds. The signal timings for this junction

have been taken from the LINSIG output as shown in AppendixJK.

As part of the proposed scheme a new pedestrian crossing is proposed

along B3301 Carnsew Road to the east of the Site. Based on the

proposed development and the consented South Quays development it

has been estimated that there would be approximately 100 pedestrians

each hour in each direction with a default speed of 5km/h. The proposed

pedestrian crossing has been modelled with a cycle time of 60 seconds

and, in order to provide a robust assessment, has not been to the

proposed signalised site junction.


APRIL 2011 Page 31 M10061-01 TR

Some tests have included Keep Clear markings as suggested by CCC at

the meeting on 1st March.

8.7 It should be noted that, as described in Section 7 of this report, at the Foundry

Square mini roundabout there are improvements to mitigate the implications

of the proposed foodstore scheme. The VISSIM software is not able to reflect

the same level of details as ARCADY with respect to changes in widths at

stoplines, and so, therefore, as a worst case assessment, the same geometry

as that used at the Foundry Square in the Base situation has been adopted

for the Base + Development Scenario.

8.8 The VISSIM output is contained in Appendix M. Queues have been

measured at two locations, the exit from South Quays on Carnsew Road and

also the exit from the proposed foodstore onto Carnsew Road. In accordance

with best practice, each scenario has been tested 5 times and an average

has been taken from the output for the length of queues. The output for the

queues is in metres and has been divided by 6 to show the queue lengths in

PCUs. Summary queue graphs are presented in Appendix M.

8.9 The results show that in the Base situation the queues at the exit from South

Quays / ING would peak at 9 pcus and for around 10 minutes within the peak

period.

8.10 In the Base + Development, without Keep Clear markings at the junction, the

queue would peak to 21 pcus but would only exceed 10 pcus for around ¾hr

during the worst case period and with queues quickly dispersing at the end of

the worst case peak hour. Given the robust nature of the flows which have

been adopted for testing purposes, but which are unlikely to be achieved in

practice, these results do not suggest the proposals would result in

unacceptable consequences for ING.

8.11 By modelling the network with Keep Clear markings either in the westbound

direction or both directions along Carnsew Road, the Base plus Development

scenario would result in a peak queue 4 pcus which is a slight improvement

on the Base results.


APRIL 2011 Page 32 M10061-01 TR

8.12 For the exit at the proposed foodstore the results show there would be no

queuing problems. The highest queue along the exit in the Base +

Development is 1 pcu.

8.13 As indicated earlier, there may be further scope for improvement with the

VISSIM model, such as linkage of the pedestrian crossing to the access

signals or different signal timings to generate further ‘gaps’. However, the

results suggest that the foodstore proposals would not have a significant

detrimental impact on the performance of the ING access.

8.14 Copies of all the VISSIM input/output files are attached in Appendix M. CCC

will also be provided with the VISSIM model files in order to carry out their

own tests.


APRIL 2011 Page 33 M10061-01 TR

9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

9.1 This Supplementary Transport Report has examined the transport related

impact of the proposal for a new food superstore situated on the existing

Jewson site on Carnsew Road. It relates to an outline application for a

foodstore of 3,355m2 GFA with 1,858m2 RFA.

9.2 In conjunction with the development, an improved pedestrian link to the town

centre and pedestrian crossing are proposed along Carnsew Road. The

pedestrian link comprises improvements to the existing footway on the

southern side of Carnsew Road to a width of 2m for all but a pinchpoint along

its length.

9.3 The operational analysis of the proposals using ARCADY, PICADY, LINSIG

and VISSIM models show the traffic from the proposed foodstore can readily

be accommodated on the surrounding highway network. At Foundry Square,

the mini-roundabout improvements which are proposed will improve on the

Base situation and the proposals would not result in unacceptable conditions

for the consented ING scheme.

9.4 It is therefore concluded that there are no transport related issues which

would prevent granting of planning permission.

FIGURES

Based upon the ORDNANCE SURVEY

maps with the perm ission o f the CONTROLLER

OF HER MAJESTY 'S STATIONERY OFFICE

C R O W N C O PYR IG H T R ESERVED

Unauthorised reproduction in fringes CROW N

COPYRIGHT and may lead to prosecu tion or

civil p roceed ings.

NN

SITE LOCATION

Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

SITE LOCATION PLAN

FIGURE 1

M10061

06.04.2011

MF

.

.

AN AS SHOWN


maps with the permission of theCONTROLLER

OF HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE

CROWN COPYRIGHT RESERVED

Unauthorised reproduction infringes CROWN

COPYRIGHT and may lead to prosecution or

civil proceedings.

NN

Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

LOCAL AREA PLAN

FIGURE 2

M10061-C-005

APRIL 2011

STH

.

.

. NTS

KEY

Site Location

Pharmacy

Bank

Post Office

Post Office collection centre

Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

EXISTING FOOTPATHS AND CYCLE ROUTES

FIGURE 3

M10061-C-002

APRIL 2011

GB

.

.

MWI NTS

KEY:

Site Location

Footpath

Bridleway

Byway

On road cycle route(Source: ccc website)

Off road cycle route(Source: ccc website)

Existing Path(Source: sustrans)

Toucan Crossing

Pedestrian Crossing

NN

Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

PPG13 CATCHMENT AREAS

FIGURE 4

M10061

08.04.2011

MF

.

.

MW AS SHOWN


maps with the perm ission o f the CONTROLLER

OF HER MAJESTY 'S STATIONERY OFFICE

C R O W N C O PYR IG H T R ESERVED

Unauthorised reproduction in fringes CROW N

COPYRIGHT and may lead to prosecu tion or

civil p roceed ings.

NNKEY

SITE LOCATION

2km ISOCHRONE

5km ISOCHRONE

Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

EXISTING BUS SERVICES

FIGURE 5

M10061

14.04.2011

MF

.

.

MW AS SHOWN

B a se d u p o n th e O R D N A N C E S U R V E Y

m a p s w ith th e p e rm iss io n o f th e C O N T R O L L E R

O F H E R M A JE S T Y 'S S TAT IO N E R Y O F F IC E

C R O W N C O P Y R IG H T R E S E R V E D

U n a u th o r ise d re p ro d u c t io n in fr in g e s C R O W N

C O P Y R IG H T a n d m a y le a d to p ro se cu t io n o r

c iv i l p ro ce e d in g s .

KEY

SITE LOCATION

BUS STOP

Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

ENHANCED LINKAGES PLAN

FIGURE 6

M10061-C-004

APRIL 2011

GB

.

.

MWI NTS

KEY:

Site Location

Proposed pedestriancrossing

ProposedNew/Enhancedpedestrian route

Existing Footpath

Bridleway

Byway

Existing Toucan Crossing

Existing PedestrianCrossing

Other existing paths

NN

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 243 301 6

5 1 134

541 561 4107 1517 151

CARNSEW ROAD 0

6408 4151

17 0 7

172 318 1FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL

Vehicles

M10061-E-006 MORRISONS, HAYLE

EXISTING COUNT - PM PEAK (VEHICLES)MARCH 2011

FIGURE 7

PENPOL TERRACE


5 1 144

552 573 4197 1547 154

CARNSEW ROAD 0

6419 426

117 0 7


FOUNDRY HILL

PCUs


EXISTING COUNT - PM PEAK (PCUs)MARCH 2011

FIGURE 8

PENPOL TERRACE


6 1 165

622 645 4728 174

CARNSEW ROAD 0

7472 4801

19 0 8


FOUNDRY HILL

Growth factor (2006 - 2017) PCUs1.1264

M10061 - E - 008 MORRISONS, HAYLE

2017 'GROWTH' FLOWS - PM PEAK (PCUs)March 2011

FIGURE 9

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 233 20

96 20463

152 79 28810 28

CARNSEW ROAD

133209 97

2216 33

18 20FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL

Based on Buro Happold TA update 2009 - revision 02


COMMITTED DEVELOPMENT - PM PEAK

FIGURE 10

MARCH 2011

PENPOL TERRACE


6 1 16 96 2045 63

774 724 7608 10 2028 10 202

CARNSEW ROAD 0

7 133681 577

1 2219 0 8 16 0 33


FOUNDRY HILL

PCUs


2017 BASE - PM PEAK (PCUs)MARCH 2011

FIGURE 11

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 67 -37

66 0 155 0 071 0-36 119 680 520 52

CARNSEW ROAD

150 0-31 1190

0 0 0

53 -38FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


TOTAL DEVELOPMENT FLOWS PM PEAKMARCH 2011

FIGURE 12

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 5

6 1 165

16 1155

CARNSEW ROAD

77

2FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


JEWSONS FLOWS - PM PEAKMARCH 2011

FIGURE 13

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE


60 -1 139 0 066 0-36 103 570 47

CARNSEW ROAD

143 0-31 1120

0 0 0

51 -38FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


NET ADDITONAL TRIPSMARCH 2011

FIGURE 14

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE


66 0 155 96 20471 63738 827 817

8 10 249CARNSEW ROAD 0

150 133650 6891 22

19 0 8 16 0 33


FOUNDRY HILL

(PCUs)


2017 BASE + DEVELOPMENT FLOWS PM PEAKMARCH 2011

FIGURE 15

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

CNT03 manual counts - (January 2003) HGV excluding medium goods FILENAME : L242.OTH ROAD:B3301 KM: 15.02 LOC: FOUNDRY Square, HAYLE LINKNO / DATE: 19/ 6/06 DAY: MONDAY TIME FROM: 700 TO: 1900 GRID REF: 155850 037173 REMARKS: KEY TO WEATHER: FI=FINE CL=CLOUDY SH=SHOWERY RA=RAIN SN=SNOW FO=FOG JUNCTION TURNING MOVEMENTS EXCLUDE PEDAL & MOTOR CYCLES FLOW DISTRIBUTIONS: HR INTERVAL BEGINNING AND WEATHER: ------------------ 700 800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 CL CL SH SH SH CL SH CL FI CL CL CL TOTAL FROM APP. 1,B3301 PENPOL Ter 412/02 TO EXIT: 2:FOUNDRY Hl 105 194 158 234 203 224 250 285 237 217 301 206 2614 3:CARNSEW Rd 119 262 250 238 262 213 217 211 213 216 243 190 2634 TOTAL INTO JUNCT 224 456 408 472 465 437 467 496 450 433 544 396 5248 TOTAL FROM JUNCT 259 474 530 487 516 509 593 677 678 716 728 477 6644 FROM APP. 2,B3302 FOUNDRY Hl 418/08 TO EXIT: 3:CARNSEW Rd 89 161 167 147 130 136 151 167 172 151 172 105 1748 1:PENPOL Ter 157 268 275 225 259 235 305 317 329 303 318 228 3219 TOTAL INTO JUNCT 246 429 442 372 389 371 456 484 501 454 490 333 4967 TOTAL FROM JUNCT 173 322 274 391 368 334 395 423 384 349 452 288 4153 FROM APP. 3,B3301 CARNSEW Rd 413/01 TO EXIT: 1:PENPOL Ter 102 206 255 262 257 274 288 360 349 413 410 249 3425 2:FOUNDRY Hl 68 128 116 157 165 110 145 138 147 132 151 82 1539 TOTAL INTO JUNCT 170 334 371 419 422 384 433 498 496 545 561 331 4964 TOTAL FROM JUNCT 208 423 417 385 392 349 368 378 385 367 415 295 4382 PEDAL MOTOR CARS& BUS & LIGHT MED. - - - - - HEAVY GOODS VEHICLES - - - - - TOTAL TOTAL EXC CYCLE CYCLE TAXIS COACH GOODS GOODS RIGID RIGID RIGID ARTIC ARTIC ARTIC ARTIC HGVs MOTOR/PED 2 AX 3 AX 4 AX 3 AX 4 AX 5 AX 6+AX CYCLES APP. 1 INTO JUNCT 30 72 4366 65 656 64 60 9 7 3 10 5 3 97 5248 FROM JUNCT 39 79 5553 77 810 70 102 12 9 1 5 3 2 134 6644 TWO WAY 69 151 9919 142 1466 134 162 21 16 4 15 8 5 231 11892 APP. 2 INTO JUNCT 24 47 4182 35 580 44 84 13 12 0 9 3 5 126 4967 FROM JUNCT 18 49 3490 28 488 29 63 17 11 2 16 7 2 118 4153 TWO WAY 42 96 7672 63 1068 73 147 30 23 2 25 10 7 244 9120 APP. 3 INTO JUNCT 27 55 4048 67 637 59 106 23 5 2 13 4 0 153 4964 FROM JUNCT 24 46 3553 62 575 68 85 16 4 2 11 2 4 124 4382 TWO WAY 51 101 7601 129 1212 127 191 39 9 4 24 6 4 277 9346 TOTAL ENTERING 81 174 12596 167 1873 167 250 45 24 5 32 12 8 376 15179

U-Turns

Approach 0700 0800 0900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 TOTAL

Penpol Terrace 7 3 4 15 4 4 12 11 8 6 6 8 88

Foundry Hill 2 2 18 8 15 5 1 3 3 3 1 5 66

Carnsew Rd 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

APPENDIX C

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 4.1% 0.7%

2.1%2.1%

CARNSEW ROAD

0.6% 2.0%FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL

Peak hour 1630 -1730

Survey 23rd April 2010


PERCENTAGE HGVs AT FOUNDRY SQUAREMARCH 2011

APPENDIX C

APPENDIX D

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS

5 1 134

7CARNSEW ROAD

6

117 0 7

FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL

Peak hour 1630 -1730

Vehicles


ADL SURVEY DATA - JEWSONS ACCESSMARCH 2011

APPENDIX D

APPENDIX E

TRICS 2011(a)v6.7.1 221210 B14.45 (C) 2011 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Tuesday 18/01/11

Foodstores PM peak Page 1

TTHC OXFORD STREET MANCHESTER Licence No: 734101

TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:

Land Use : 01 - RETAIL

Category : A - FOOD SUPERSTORE

VEHICLES

Selected regions and areas:

03 SOUTH WEST

DC DORSET 1 days

09 NORTH

CB CUMBRIA 1 days

Filtering Stage 2 selection:

Parameter: Retail floor area

Range: 1380 to 1500 (units: sqm)

Public Transport Provision:

Selection by: Include all surveys

Date Range: 01/01/02 to 08/07/10

Selected survey days:

Friday 2 days

Selected survey types:

Manual count 2 days

Directional ATC Count 0 days

Selected Locations:

Edge of Town Centre 1

Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 1

Selected Location Sub Categories:

Residential Zone 1

No Sub Category 1




LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters

1 CB-01-A-07 SOMERFIELD, CARLISLE CUMBRIA

WIGTON ROAD

NEWTOWN

CARLISLE

Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre)

Residential Zone

Total Retail floor area: 1 5 0 0 sqm

Survey date: FRIDAY 05/02/10 Survey Type: MANUAL

2 DC-01-A-17 SAINSBURYS, SHERBORNE DORSET

LUDBOURNE ROAD

SHERBORNE

Edge of Town Centre

No Sub Category

Total Retail floor area: 1 3 8 0 sqm

Survey date: FRIDAY 17/10/03 Survey Type: MANUAL




TRIP RATE for Land Use 01 - RETAIL/A - FOOD SUPERSTORE

VEHICLES

Calculation factor: 100 sqm

BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period

ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS

No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip

Time Range Days RFA Rate Days RFA Rate Days RFA Rate

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00000:00 - 01:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00001:00 - 02:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00002:00 - 03:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00003:00 - 04:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00004:00 - 05:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00005:00 - 06:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00006:00 - 07:00

2 1440 1.042 2 1440 0.382 2 1440 1.42407:00 - 08:00

2 1440 4.479 2 1440 2.535 2 1440 7.01408:00 - 09:00

2 1440 6.875 2 1440 4.618 2 1440 11.49309:00 - 10:00

2 1440 7.778 2 1440 5.764 2 1440 13.54210:00 - 11:00

2 1440 8.576 2 1440 8.333 2 1440 16.90911:00 - 12:00

2 1440 7.743 2 1440 8.611 2 1440 16.35412:00 - 13:00

2 1440 7.222 2 1440 7.431 2 1440 14.65313:00 - 14:00

2 1440 8.299 2 1440 8.681 2 1440 16.98014:00 - 15:00

2 1440 6.840 2 1440 7.986 2 1440 14.82615:00 - 16:00

2 1440 9.826 2 1440 8.715 2 1440 18.54116:00 - 17:00

2 1440 11.528 2 1440 11.563 2 1440 23.09017:00 - 18:00

2 1440 8.160 2 1440 10.313 2 1440 18.47218:00 - 19:00

2 1440 4.479 2 1440 7.188 2 1440 11.66719:00 - 20:00

2 1440 1.701 2 1440 2.049 2 1440 3.75020:00 - 21:00

1 1500 0.000 1 1500 0.600 1 1500 0.60021:00 - 22:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00022:00 - 23:00

0 0 0.000 0 0 0.000 0 0 0.00023:00 - 24:00

Total Rates: 9 4.548 9 4.767 189.315

Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 1380 - 1500 (units: sqm)

Survey date date range: 01/01/02 - 08/07/10

Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 2

Number of Saturdays: 0

Number of Sundays: 0

Surveys manually removed from selection: 0


Page 1


RANK ORDER for Land Use 01 - RETAIL/A - FOOD SUPERSTORE

VEHICLES

Ranking Type: TOTALS Time Range: 17:00-18:00

Under 6 Surveys Included, 15th/85th Percentile Not Highlighted

Median Values

Arrivals: 11.609

Departures: 11.726

Totals: 23.335

Trip Rate (Sorted by Totals) Travel

Rank Site-Ref Description Area RFA Day Date Arrivals Departures Totals Plan

1 DC-01-A-17 SAINSBURYS, SHERBORNE DORSET 1380 Fri 17/10/03 13.551 15.652 29.203

2 CB-01-A-07 SOMERFIELD, CARLISLE CUMBRIA 1500 Fri 05/02/10 9.667 7.800 17.467

APPENDIX F

APPENDIX G

© 1988–2009 Microsoft Corporation and/or its suppliers. All rights reserved. http://www.microsoft.com/uk/mappoint/ © 1984-2009 Tele Atlas. All rights reserved. Data Source © 2009 Tele Atlas N.V. This product in cludes mapping data licenced from Ordnance Survey® with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. ©Crown copyright and/or database right 2008. All rights reserved.Licence number 100025324. ©2009 NAVTEQ. All ri ghts reserved. NAVTEQ ON BOARD is a registered trademark of NAVTEQ.

0 km 2 4 6 8Drawing No

Date

Drawn By

Rev

Rev Date

Authorised Scale

MORRISONS, HAYLE

PRIMARY CATCHMENT AREA

APPENDIX G

M10061-C-001

JAN 2011

GB

.

.

MWI .

KEY

SITE

MORRISONS

TESCO

10 MINUTE CATCHMENTAREA

0km 2 4 6 8 10

NN

APPENDIX H

PENPOL TERRACE PENPOL TERRACE PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 0.3 PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 9 10

0.3 0.3 0.3 17 17 98

CARNSEW ROAD CARNSEW ROAD CARNSEW ROAD 0

0.3 0.3 17 17

8 10FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL FOUNDRY HILL FOUNDRY HILLNO ROUTEING FOR ZONE 7 WITHIN THE LOCAL AREA

ZONE 1 ZONE 2 ZONE 3


PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 0.1 PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS

CARNSEW ROAD CARNSEW ROAD CARNSEW ROAD

0.1FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL FOUNDRY HILL FOUNDRY HILL


NO ROUTEING FOR ZONE 7 WITHIN THE LOCAL AREANO ROUTEING FOR ZONE 7 WITHIN THE LOCAL AREA


PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 9 10

17 17 98


17 17



ZONE 7 ZONE 8 TOTAL EXISTING TRANSFER

NO ROUTEING FOR ZONE 7 WITHIN THE LOCAL AREANO ROUTEING FOR ZONE 7 WITHIN THE LOCAL AREA

MORRISONS, HAYLE

March 2010 TRANSFER TRIPS - EXISTING STORE ASSIGNMENT BY ZONES - PM PEAK

MWi APPENDIX H1


PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 34

4 10 3 544 10 34 10 3

54 3420


5454

20FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE




PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 1 PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS

5 5 15 3 15 15 1

5 3 15 2


5 35 3





PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 35 0

1 10 48 6310 48

1 63 351 28


1 631 631 0 63

0

1 28 0FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE FOUNDRY LANE


ZONE 7 ZONE 8 TOTAL PROPOSED TRANSFER

MORRISONS, HAYLE

March 2010 TRANSFER TRIPS - PROPOSED STORE ASSIGNMENT BY ZONES - PM PEAK

MWi APPENDIX H2

PENPOL TERRACE


48 6348-17 46 26

20CARNSEW ROAD

63-17 46

20 -10FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILLFOUNDRY HILL

TOTAL TRANSFER

Mar‐10

MWi

TOTAL TRANSFER TRIPS (proposed minus existing store assignment)‐ ALL ZONES COMBINED ‐ PM PEAK

MORRISONS, HAYLE

APPENDIX H3

APPENDIX I

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS 14

4 184

18 1455

CARNSEW ROAD

1818

5FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


DEVELOPMENT FLOWS - NEW TRIPS - PM PEAKMARCH 2011

APPENDIX I1

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE


48 6348-17 46 26

2020CARNSEW ROAD

63-17 46

20 -10FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


DEVELOPMENT FLOWS - TRANSFERRED TRIPS - PM PEAKMARCH 2011

APPENDIX I2

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS

14 1919-19

CARNSEW ROAD

14-14

FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


DEVELOPMENT FLOWS - PASS BY TRIPS - PM PEAKMARCH 2011

APPENDIX I3

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE


55

55 282727

CARNSEW ROAD

5555

28 -28FOUNDRY LANE

FOUNDRY HILL


DEVELOPMENT FLOWS - DIVERTED TRIPS - PM PEAKMARCH 2011

APPENIDX I4

APPENDIX J

Full Input Data And Results

Full Input Data And Results User and Project Details

Project:

Title: Sensitivity Test

Location: Hayle

File name: Foodstore access with CCC traffic flows

Author:

Company:

Address:

Controller: Generic

SCN:

Notes:

Junction Layout Diagram

Arm 1 - Carnsew Road (E)

12

1/1

1/2

Arm

2 -

12/

1

Arm 3 - Carnsew Road (W)

13/1

Arm

4 - F

oodstor e

12

4/1

4/2

Arm 5 -

15/1

Arm

6 -

16/

1

Arm 7 -

1 7/1

Arm

8 -

18 /1

A

B

C

D


Phase Diagram

A

B

C

D


Phase Intergreens Matrix

Starting Phase

Terminating Phase

A B C D

A - 6 - 5

B 5 - 5 -

C - 5 - 6

D 5 - 5 -

Phase Input Data

Phase Name Phase type Assoc Phase Street Min Cont Min

A Traffic 7 7

B Traffic 7 7

C Traffic 7 7

D Traffic 7 7

Link Input Data

Arm/ Link

Link Name Link Type

Num Lanes

PhasesStart Disp.

End Disp.

1/1 Carnsew Road (E) Left Ahead U 1 A 2 3

1/2 Carnsew Road (E) Right O 1 A 2 3

2/1 Right Left Ahead O 1 B 2 3

3/1 Carnsew Road (W) Ahead Right

Left O 1 C 2 3

4/1 Foodstore Left Ahead U 1 D 2 3

4/2 Foodstore Right O 1 D 2 3

5/1 U 1 2 3

6/1 U 1 2 3

7/1 U 1 2 3

8/1 U 1 2 3


Give-Way Link Input Data

Arm/ Link

Link Name Movement Max Flow

when Giving Way (PCU/Hr)

Opposing Link

Opp. Link

Coeff.

Opp. Mvmnts.

Right Turn Storage (PCU)

Non-Blocking Storage (PCU)

RTF

Right Turn

Move up time (s)

Max Turns in Intergreen

(PCU)

1/2 Carnsew Road

(E) Right 1/2 to 8/1 1440 3/1 1.09 3/1 2.00 - 0.50 2 2.00

2/1 Right Left

Ahead 2/1 to 5/1 1440 4/1 1.09 4/1 1.00 1.00 0.50 1 2.00

3/1 Carnsew Road

(W) Ahead Right Left

3/1 to 6/1 1440 1/1 1.09 1/1 1.00 1.00 0.50 1 2.00

4/2 Foodstore

Right 4/2 to 7/1 1440 2/1 1.09 2/1 1.00 - 0.50 1 2.00


Traffic Flow Groups

Flow Group Start Time End Time Duration Formula

1: 'Flow Group 1' 17:00 18:00 01:00

Traffic Flow Matrix Desired Flow :

Destination

Origin

A B C D Tot.

A 0 1 650 150 801

B 8 0 19 0 27

C 738 8 0 71 817

D 155 0 66 0 221

Tot. 901 9 735 221 1866

Stages Diagram

A

B

C

D

1 Min >= 7

A

B

CD

2 Min >= 7

Staging Plan Diagram

AC

1 Min: 7

5 18s

B

D

2 Min: 7

6 7s Stage Timings

Stage 1 2

Duration 18 7

Change Point 0 23


Signal Timings Diagram

0

0

10

10

20

20

30

30

Time in cycle (sec)

Pha

ses

1 5 : 18

0

2 6 : 7

23

D D

C C

B B

A A

Cycle Time36


Link Results

Link Num

Link Desc Link Type

Stage Stream

Position In Filtered Route

Full Phase Arrow Phase

Num Greens

Total Green (s)

Arrow Green (s)

Demand Flow (pcu)

Max Sat Flow (pcu/Hr)

Ave Sat Flow (pcu/Hr)

Capacity (pcu)

Deg Sat (%)

1/1 Carnsew

Road (E) Left Ahead

U N/A N/A A 1 18 - 651 1914 1914 1010 64.4

1/2 Carnsew Road (E)

Right O N/A N/A A 1 18 - 150 1787 488 258 58.2

2/1 Right Left

Ahead O N/A N/A B 1 7 - 27 1543 1455 323 8.4

3/1

Carnsew Road (W)

Ahead Right Left

O N/A N/A C 1 18 - 817 1945 1945 1026 79.6

4/1 Foodstore Left Ahead

U N/A N/A D 1 7 - 155 1665 1665 370 41.9

4/2 Foodstore

Right O N/A N/A D 1 7 - 66 1835 1406 312 21.1

5/1 U N/A N/A - - - - 901 Inf Inf Inf 0.0

6/1 U N/A N/A - - - - 9 Inf Inf Inf 0.0

7/1 U N/A N/A - - - - 735 Inf Inf Inf 0.0

8/1 U N/A N/A - - - - 221 Inf Inf Inf 0.0


Link Num

Entering (pcu)

Leaving (pcu)

Turners In Gaps (pcu)

Turners When Unopposed (pcu)

Turners In Intergreen (pcu)

Uniform Delay (pcuHr)

Rand + Oversat Delay (pcuHr)

Storage Area Uniform Delay (pcuHr)

Total Delay (pcuHr)

Av. Delay Per Veh (s/pcu)

Max. Back of Uniform Queue (pcu)

Rand + Oversat Queue (pcu)

Mean Max Queue (pcu)

1/1 651 651 - - - 1.1 0.9 - 2.0 11.1 4.5 0.9 5.4

1/2 150 150 96 0 54 0.2 0.7 0.5 1.4 32.7 0.8 0.7 1.4

2/1 27 27 8 0 0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 18.4 0.2 0.0 0.3

3/1 817 817 8 0 0 1.6 1.9 0.0 3.5 15.4 6.6 1.9 8.5

4/1 155 155 - - - 0.5 0.4 - 0.9 20.4 1.3 0.4 1.7

4/2 66 66 66 0 0 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.4 19.9 0.5 0.1 0.7

5/1 901 901 - - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6/1 9 9 - - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

7/1 735 735 - - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

8/1 221 221 - - - 0.0 0.0 - 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

PRC for Signalled Links (%): 13.1 Total Delay for Signalled Links (pcuHr): 8.24 PRC Over All Links (%): 13.1 Total Delay Over All Links(pcuHr): 8.24 Cycle Time (s): 36

APPENDIX K

2017 Base pm peak rev] TRL LIMITED (C) COPYRIGHT 2010 CAPACITIES, QUEUES, AND DELAYS AT 3 OR 4-ARM MAJOR/MINOR PRIORITY JUNCTIONS PICADY 5.1 ANALYSIS PROGRAM RELEASE 5.0 (JUNE 2010) ADAPTED FROM PICADY/3 WHICH IS CROWN COPYRIGHT BY PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HMSO -------------------------------------------------------- FOR SALES AND DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION, PROGRAM ADVICE AND MAINTENANCE CONTACT: TRL SOFTWARE SALES TEL: CROWTHORNE (01344) 770758, FAX: 770356 EMAIL: [email protected] -------------------------------------------------------- THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF HIS/HER RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION Run with file:- "P:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\Picady\Transport Assessment\2017 Base pm peak rev].vpi"(drive-on-the-left) at 12:43:36 on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 .RUN INFORMATION *************** RUN TITLE : Hayle 2017 Base LOCATION : Hayle South Quays access DATE : 30/03/11 CLIENT : ENUMERATOR : mwilliamson [TTHC17] JOB NUMBER : STATUS : DESCRIPTION : .MAJOR/MINOR JUNCTION CAPACITY AND DELAY *************************************** INPUT DATA ---------- MINOR ROAD (ARM D) I I I I I I MAJOR ROAD (ARM C) --------------------- MAJOR ROAD (ARM A) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD (ARM B) ARM A IS Carnsew Road (E) ARM B IS Southside access ARM C IS Carnsew ROad (W) ARM D IS Northside access .STREAM LABELLING CONVENTION --------------------------- STREAM A-B CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM A TO ARM B STREAM B-AC CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM B TO ARM A AND TO ARM C ETC. .GEOMETRIC DATA -------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I DATA ITEM I MINOR ROAD B I MINOR ROAD D I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I TOTAL MAJOR ROAD CARRIAGEWAY WIDTH I ( W ) 6.00 M. I ( W ) 6.00 M. I I CENTRAL RESERVE WIDTH I (WCR ) 0.00 M. I (WCR ) 0.00 M. I I I I I I MAJOR ROAD RIGHT TURN - WIDTH I (WC-B) 3.00 M. I (WA-D) 2.50 M. I I - VISIBILITY I (VC-B) 80.00 M. I (VA-D)100.00 M. I I - BLOCKS TRAFFIC (SPACES) I NO ( 0) I NO ( 0) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD - VISIBILITY TO LEFT I (VB-C) 60.0 M. I (VD-A) 75.0 M. I I - VISIBILITY TO RIGHT I (VB-A) 60.0 M. I (VD-C) 55.0 M. I I - LANE 1 WIDTH I (WB-C) - I (WD-A) - I I - LANE 2 WIDTH I (WB-A) - I (WD-C) - I I WIDTH AT 0 M FROM JUNCTION I 8.00 M. I 9.00 M. I I WIDTH AT 5 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.25 M. I 5.00 M. I I WIDTH AT 10 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.00 M. I 3.50 M. I I WIDTH AT 15 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.00 M. I 3.50 M. I I WIDTH AT 20 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.00 M. I 3.50 M. I I - LENGTH OF FLARED SECTION I 1 VEHS I 2 VEHS I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .SLOPES AND INTERCEPT -------------------- (NB:Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted) B-C Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM B-C STREAM A-C STREAM D-C STREAM A-B STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available

Page 1

2017 Base pm peak rev] B-AD Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM B-AD STREAM A-C STREAM A-D STREAM D-A STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM C-A STREAM C-B STREAM C-D -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available D-A Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM D-A STREAM C-A STREAM D-C STREAM A-B STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available D-BC Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM D-BC STREAM C-A STREAM B-A STREAM C-D STREAM B-D I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM A-C STREAM A-B STREAM A-D -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available C-B Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM C-B STREAM A-C STREAM A-B STREAM D-C STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 674.30 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A-D Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM A-D STREAM C-A STREAM C-D STREAM B-A STREAM B-D I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 674.30 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------------------- ----------------------- I ARM I FLOW SCALE(%) I ----------------------- I A I 100 I I B I 100 I I C I 100 I I D I 100 I ----------------------- .Demand set: Hayle 2017 Base TIME PERIOD BEGINS 16.45 AND ENDS 18.15 LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD - 90 MIN. LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - 15 MIN. .DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 9.15 I 13.72 I 9.15 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 0.61 I 0.92 I 0.61 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 9.96 I 14.94 I 9.96 I I ARM D I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 3.75 I 5.63 I 3.75 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .Demand set: Hayle 2017 Base -------------------------------------------------------------------- I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I I ----------------------------------------------- I TIME I FROM/TO I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I ARM D I -------------------------------------------------------------------- I 16.45 - 18.15 I I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.000 I 0.030 I 0.788 I 0.182 I I I I 0.0 I 22.0 I 577.0 I 133.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.673 I 0.000 I 0.327 I 0.000 I I I I 33.0 I 0.0 I 16.0 I 0.0 I

Page 2

2017 Base pm peak rev] I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.908 I 0.013 I 0.000 I 0.079 I I I I 724.0 I 10.0 I 0.0 I 63.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I I ARM D I 0.680 I 0.000 I 0.320 I 0.000 I I I I 204.0 I 0.0 I 96.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------- TURNING PROPORTIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA . QUEUE AND DELAY INFORMATION FOR EACH 15 MIN TIME SEGMENT -------------------------------------------------------- FOR COMBINED DEMAND SETS AND FOR TIME PERIOD 1.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 16.45-17.00 I I B-C 0.20 8.66 0.023 0.00 0.02 0.3 0.12 I I B-AD 0.41 5.39 0.077 0.00 0.08 1.2 0.20 I I A-B 0.28 I I A-C 7.24 I I A-D 1.67 8.27 0.202 0.00 0.25 3.6 0.15 I I D-A 2.56 8.84 0.290 0.00 0.40 5.7 0.16 I I D-BC 1.20 4.60 0.262 0.00 0.35 4.8 0.29 I I C-D 0.79 I I C-A 9.08 I I C-B 0.13 8.96 0.014 0.00 0.01 0.2 0.11 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.00-17.15 I I B-C 0.24 8.17 0.029 0.02 0.03 0.4 0.13 I I B-AD 0.49 4.65 0.106 0.08 0.12 1.7 0.24 I I A-B 0.33 I I A-C 8.65 I I A-D 1.99 7.77 0.257 0.25 0.34 4.9 0.17 I I D-A 3.06 8.08 0.379 0.40 0.60 8.6 0.20 I I D-BC 1.44 3.75 0.384 0.35 0.60 8.3 0.43 I I C-D 0.94 I I C-A 10.85 I I C-B 0.15 8.51 0.018 0.01 0.02 0.3 0.12 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.15-17.30 I I B-C 0.29 7.45 0.039 0.03 0.04 0.6 0.14 I I B-AD 0.61 3.62 0.167 0.12 0.20 2.8 0.33 I I A-B 0.40 I I A-C 10.59 I I A-D 2.44 7.07 0.345 0.34 0.52 7.4 0.21 I I D-A 3.74 6.14 0.609 0.60 1.46 19.8 0.40 I I D-BC 1.76 2.50 0.704 0.60 1.91 23.3 1.11 I I C-D 1.16 I I C-A 13.29 I I C-B 0.18 7.90 0.023 0.02 0.02 0.3 0.13 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.30-17.45 I I B-C 0.29 7.42 0.040 0.04 0.04 0.6 0.14 I I B-AD 0.61 3.60 0.168 0.20 0.20 3.0 0.33 I I A-B 0.40 I I A-C 10.59 I I A-D 2.44 7.07 0.345 0.52 0.52 7.8 0.22 I I D-A 3.74 5.87 0.638 1.46 1.66 24.0 0.46 I I D-BC 1.76 2.47 0.714 1.91 2.15 30.8 1.32 I I C-D 1.16 I I C-A 13.29 I I C-B 0.18 7.87 0.023 0.02 0.02 0.4 0.13 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.45-18.00 I I B-C 0.24 8.13 0.029 0.04 0.03 0.5 0.13 I I B-AD 0.49 4.62 0.107 0.20 0.12 1.9 0.24 I I A-B 0.33 I I A-C 8.65 I I A-D 1.99 7.77 0.257 0.52 0.35 5.5 0.17 I I D-A 3.06 7.97 0.384 1.66 0.64 10.3 0.21 I I D-BC 1.44 3.73 0.386 2.15 0.66 11.6 0.47 I I C-D 0.94 I I C-A 10.85 I I C-B 0.15 8.48 0.018 0.02 0.02 0.3 0.12 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 18.00-18.15 I I B-C 0.20 8.65 0.023 0.03 0.02 0.4 0.12 I I B-AD 0.41 5.38 0.077 0.12 0.08 1.3 0.20 I

Page 3

2017 Base pm peak rev] I A-B 0.28 I I A-C 7.24 I I A-D 1.67 8.27 0.202 0.35 0.26 4.0 0.15 I I D-A 2.56 8.80 0.291 0.64 0.42 6.5 0.16 I I D-BC 1.20 4.59 0.263 0.66 0.37 5.8 0.30 I I C-D 0.79 I I C-A 9.08 I I C-B 0.13 8.95 0.014 0.02 0.01 0.2 0.11 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. QUEUE FOR STREAM B-C ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.0 17.15 0.0 17.30 0.0 17.45 0.0 18.00 0.0 18.15 0.0. QUEUE FOR STREAM B-AD ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.1 17.15 0.1 17.30 0.2 17.45 0.2 18.00 0.1 18.15 0.1. QUEUE FOR STREAM A-D ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.2 17.15 0.3 17.30 0.5 * 17.45 0.5 * 18.00 0.4 18.15 0.3. QUEUE FOR STREAM D-A ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.4 17.15 0.6 * 17.30 1.5 * 17.45 1.7 ** 18.00 0.6 * 18.15 0.4. QUEUE FOR STREAM D-BC ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.3 17.15 0.6 * 17.30 1.9 ** 17.45 2.2 ** 18.00 0.7 * 18.15 0.4. QUEUE FOR STREAM C-B ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.0 17.15 0.0 17.30 0.0 17.45 0.0 18.00 0.0 18.15 0.0. QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD -------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I STREAM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I----------------------------------------------------------------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I B-C I 22.0 I 14.7 I 2.8 I 0.13 I 2.8 I 0.13 I I B-AD I 45.4 I 30.3 I 11.9 I 0.26 I 11.9 I 0.26 I I A-B I 30.3 I 20.2 I I I I I I A-C I 794.2 I 529.5 I I I I I I A-D I 183.1 I 122.0 I 33.2 I 0.18 I 33.2 I 0.18 I I D-A I 280.8 I 187.2 I 74.8 I 0.27 I 74.8 I 0.27 I I D-BC I 132.1 I 88.1 I 84.7 I 0.64 I 84.7 I 0.64 I I C-D I 86.7 I 57.8 I I I I I I C-A I 996.5 I 664.4 I I I I I I C-B I 13.8 I 9.2 I 1.7 I 0.12 I 1.7 I 0.12 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ALL I 2584.9 I 1723.3 I 209.0 I 0.08 I 209.0 I 0.08 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * DELAY IS THAT OCCURRING ONLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD * INCLUSIVE DELAY INCLUDES DELAY SUFFERED BY VEHICLES WHICH ARE STILL QUEUEING AFTER THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD * THESE WILL ONLY BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IF THERE IS A LARGE QUEUE REMAINING AT THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. *******END OF RUN*******

Page 4

2017 Base + Development pm peak rev TRL LIMITED (C) COPYRIGHT 2010 CAPACITIES, QUEUES, AND DELAYS AT 3 OR 4-ARM MAJOR/MINOR PRIORITY JUNCTIONS PICADY 5.1 ANALYSIS PROGRAM RELEASE 5.0 (JUNE 2010) ADAPTED FROM PICADY/3 WHICH IS CROWN COPYRIGHT BY PERMISSION OF THE CONTROLLER OF HMSO -------------------------------------------------------- FOR SALES AND DISTRIBUTION INFORMATION, PROGRAM ADVICE AND MAINTENANCE CONTACT: TRL SOFTWARE SALES TEL: CROWTHORNE (01344) 770758, FAX: 770356 EMAIL: [email protected] -------------------------------------------------------- THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF HIS/HER RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION Run with file:- "P:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\Picady\Transport Assessment\ 2017 Base + Development pm peak rev.vpi"(drive-on-the-left) at 12:46:32 on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 .RUN INFORMATION *************** RUN TITLE : Hayle 2017 Base + Development LOCATION : Hayle South Quays access DATE : 30/03/11 CLIENT : ENUMERATOR : mwilliamson [TTHC17] JOB NUMBER : STATUS : DESCRIPTION : .MAJOR/MINOR JUNCTION CAPACITY AND DELAY *************************************** INPUT DATA ---------- MINOR ROAD (ARM D) I I I I I I MAJOR ROAD (ARM C) --------------------- MAJOR ROAD (ARM A) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD (ARM B) ARM A IS Carnsew Road (E) ARM B IS Southside access ARM C IS Carnsew ROad (W) ARM D IS Northside access .STREAM LABELLING CONVENTION --------------------------- STREAM A-B CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM A TO ARM B STREAM B-AC CONTAINS TRAFFIC GOING FROM ARM B TO ARM A AND TO ARM C ETC. .GEOMETRIC DATA -------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I DATA ITEM I MINOR ROAD B I MINOR ROAD D I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I TOTAL MAJOR ROAD CARRIAGEWAY WIDTH I ( W ) 6.00 M. I ( W ) 6.00 M. I I CENTRAL RESERVE WIDTH I (WCR ) 0.00 M. I (WCR ) 0.00 M. I I I I I I MAJOR ROAD RIGHT TURN - WIDTH I (WC-B) 3.00 M. I (WA-D) 2.50 M. I I - VISIBILITY I (VC-B) 80.00 M. I (VA-D)100.00 M. I I - BLOCKS TRAFFIC (SPACES) I NO ( 0) I NO ( 0) I I I I I I MINOR ROAD - VISIBILITY TO LEFT I (VB-C) 60.0 M. I (VD-A) 75.0 M. I I - VISIBILITY TO RIGHT I (VB-A) 60.0 M. I (VD-C) 55.0 M. I I - LANE 1 WIDTH I (WB-C) - I (WD-A) - I I - LANE 2 WIDTH I (WB-A) - I (WD-C) - I I WIDTH AT 0 M FROM JUNCTION I 8.00 M. I 9.00 M. I I WIDTH AT 5 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.25 M. I 5.00 M. I I WIDTH AT 10 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.00 M. I 3.50 M. I I WIDTH AT 15 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.00 M. I 3.50 M. I I WIDTH AT 20 M FROM JUNCTION I 3.00 M. I 3.50 M. I I - LENGTH OF FLARED SECTION I 1 VEHS I 2 VEHS I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .SLOPES AND INTERCEPT -------------------- (NB:Streams may be combined, in which case capacity will be adjusted) B-C Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM B-C STREAM A-C STREAM D-C STREAM A-B STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Page 1

2017 Base + Development pm peak rev* Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available B-AD Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM B-AD STREAM A-C STREAM A-D STREAM D-A STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM C-A STREAM C-B STREAM C-D -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available D-A Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM D-A STREAM C-A STREAM D-C STREAM A-B STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available D-BC Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM D-BC STREAM C-A STREAM B-A STREAM C-D STREAM B-D I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM A-C STREAM A-B STREAM A-D -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 0.00 0.00 0.00 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Due to the presence of a flare, data is not available C-B Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM C-B STREAM A-C STREAM A-B STREAM D-C STREAM D-B I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 674.30 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A-D Stream -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I Intercept For Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For Opposing Slope For OpposingI I STREAM A-D STREAM C-A STREAM C-D STREAM B-A STREAM B-D I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I 674.30 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 I -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------------------- ----------------------- I ARM I FLOW SCALE(%) I ----------------------- I A I 100 I I B I 100 I I C I 100 I I D I 100 I ----------------------- .Demand set: Hayle 2017 Base + Development TIME PERIOD BEGINS 16.45 AND ENDS 18.15 LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD - 90 MIN. LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - 15 MIN. .DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I I I I I I I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 10.55 I 15.83 I 10.55 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 0.61 I 0.92 I 0.61 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 11.25 I 16.88 I 11.25 I I ARM D I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 3.75 I 5.63 I 3.75 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .Demand set: Hayle 2017 Base + Development -------------------------------------------------------------------- I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I I ----------------------------------------------- I TIME I FROM/TO I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I ARM D I -------------------------------------------------------------------- I 16.45 - 18.15 I I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.000 I 0.026 I 0.816 I 0.158 I I I I 0.0 I 22.0 I 689.0 I 133.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.673 I 0.000 I 0.327 I 0.000 I

Page 2

2017 Base + Development pm peak rev I I I 33.0 I 0.0 I 16.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.919 I 0.011 I 0.000 I 0.070 I I I I 827.0 I 10.0 I 0.0 I 63.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I I ARM D I 0.680 I 0.000 I 0.320 I 0.000 I I I I 204.0 I 0.0 I 96.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I -------------------------------------------------------------------- TURNING PROPORTIONS ARE CALCULATED FROM TURNING COUNT DATA . QUEUE AND DELAY INFORMATION FOR EACH 15 MIN TIME SEGMENT -------------------------------------------------------- FOR COMBINED DEMAND SETS AND FOR TIME PERIOD 1.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 16.45-17.00 I I B-C 0.20 8.29 0.024 0.00 0.02 0.4 0.12 I I B-AD 0.41 4.83 0.086 0.00 0.09 1.3 0.23 I I A-B 0.28 I I A-C 8.65 I I A-D 1.67 7.95 0.210 0.00 0.26 3.8 0.16 I I D-A 2.56 8.40 0.305 0.00 0.43 6.1 0.17 I I D-BC 1.20 4.08 0.295 0.00 0.41 5.6 0.34 I I C-D 0.79 I I C-A 10.38 I I C-B 0.13 8.59 0.015 0.00 0.01 0.2 0.12 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.00-17.15 I I B-C 0.24 7.71 0.031 0.02 0.03 0.5 0.13 I I B-AD 0.49 3.97 0.124 0.09 0.14 2.0 0.29 I I A-B 0.33 I I A-C 10.32 I I A-D 1.99 7.38 0.270 0.26 0.36 5.3 0.19 I I D-A 3.06 7.42 0.412 0.43 0.68 9.8 0.23 I I D-BC 1.44 3.12 0.462 0.41 0.80 10.9 0.58 I I C-D 0.94 I I C-A 12.39 I I C-B 0.15 8.07 0.019 0.01 0.02 0.3 0.13 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.15-17.30 I I B-C 0.29 6.82 0.043 0.03 0.04 0.7 0.15 I I B-AD 0.61 2.80 0.216 0.14 0.27 3.7 0.45 I I A-B 0.40 I I A-C 12.64 I I A-D 2.44 6.59 0.370 0.36 0.57 8.2 0.24 I I D-A 3.74 3.55 1.055 0.68 8.61 81.1 1.97 I I D-BC 1.76 1.70 1.036 0.80 5.26 51.5 2.87 I I C-D 1.16 I I C-A 15.18 I I C-B 0.18 7.36 0.025 0.02 0.03 0.4 0.14 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.30-17.45 I I B-C 0.29 6.72 0.044 0.04 0.05 0.7 0.16 I I B-AD 0.61 2.72 0.222 0.27 0.28 4.1 0.47 I I A-B 0.40 I I A-C 12.64 I I A-D 2.44 6.59 0.370 0.57 0.58 8.7 0.24 I I D-A 3.74 3.46 1.081 8.61 14.38 173.7 3.61 I I D-BC 1.76 1.69 1.040 5.26 7.89 99.4 4.52 I I C-D 1.16 I I C-A 15.18 I I C-B 0.18 7.28 0.025 0.03 0.03 0.4 0.14 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 17.45-18.00 I I B-C 0.24 7.57 0.032 0.05 0.03 0.5 0.14 I I B-AD 0.49 3.85 0.129 0.28 0.15 2.4 0.30 I I A-B 0.33 I I A-C 10.32 I I A-D 1.99 7.37 0.270 0.58 0.38 5.9 0.19 I I D-A 3.06 6.73 0.454 14.38 0.87 42.0 0.49 I I D-BC 1.44 2.92 0.492 7.89 1.08 37.3 1.26 I I C-D 0.94 I I C-A 12.39 I I C-B 0.15 7.94 0.019 0.03 0.02 0.3 0.13 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY GEOMETRIC DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I I 18.00-18.15 I I B-C 0.20 8.27 0.024 0.03 0.03 0.4 0.12 I

Page 3

2017 Base + Development pm peak rev I B-AD 0.41 4.81 0.086 0.15 0.10 1.5 0.23 I I A-B 0.28 I I A-C 8.65 I I A-D 1.67 7.94 0.210 0.38 0.27 4.2 0.16 I I D-A 2.56 8.40 0.305 0.87 0.45 7.0 0.17 I I D-BC 1.20 4.04 0.298 1.08 0.44 7.2 0.36 I I C-D 0.79 I I C-A 10.38 I I C-B 0.13 8.57 0.015 0.02 0.01 0.2 0.12 I I I.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------. QUEUE FOR STREAM B-C ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.0 17.15 0.0 17.30 0.0 17.45 0.0 18.00 0.0 18.15 0.0. QUEUE FOR STREAM B-AD ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.1 17.15 0.1 17.30 0.3 17.45 0.3 18.00 0.2 18.15 0.1. QUEUE FOR STREAM A-D ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.3 17.15 0.4 17.30 0.6 * 17.45 0.6 * 18.00 0.4 18.15 0.3. QUEUE FOR STREAM D-A ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.4 17.15 0.7 * 17.30 8.6 ********* 17.45 14.4 ************** 18.00 0.9 * 18.15 0.4. QUEUE FOR STREAM D-BC ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.4 17.15 0.8 * 17.30 5.3 ***** 17.45 7.9 ******** 18.00 1.1 * 18.15 0.4. QUEUE FOR STREAM C-B ------------------------- TIME NO. OF SEGMENT VEHICLES ENDING IN QUEUE 17.00 0.0 17.15 0.0 17.30 0.0 17.45 0.0 18.00 0.0 18.15 0.0. QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD -------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I STREAM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I----------------------------------------------------------------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I B-C I 22.0 I 14.7 I 3.0 I 0.14 I 3.0 I 0.14 I I B-AD I 45.4 I 30.3 I 15.0 I 0.33 I 15.0 I 0.33 I I A-B I 30.3 I 20.2 I I I I I I A-C I 948.4 I 632.2 I I I I I I A-D I 183.1 I 122.0 I 36.0 I 0.20 I 36.0 I 0.20 I I D-A I 280.8 I 187.2 I 319.7 I 1.14 I 319.7 I 1.14 I I D-BC I 132.1 I 88.1 I 212.0 I 1.60 I 212.0 I 1.60 I I C-D I 86.7 I 57.8 I I I I I I C-A I 1138.3 I 758.9 I I I I I I C-B I 13.8 I 9.2 I 1.8 I 0.13 I 1.8 I 0.13 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ALL I 2880.9 I 1920.6 I 587.5 I 0.20 I 587.6 I 0.20 I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * DELAY IS THAT OCCURRING ONLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD * INCLUSIVE DELAY INCLUDES DELAY SUFFERED BY VEHICLES WHICH ARE STILL QUEUEING AFTER THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD * THESE WILL ONLY BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IF THERE IS A LARGE QUEUE REMAINING AT THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. *******END OF RUN*******

Page 4

APPENDIX L

2017 Base flows PM - 0% G ___________________ A R C A D Y 6 ___________________ ASSESSMENT OF ROUNDABOUT CAPACITY AND DELAY Analysis Program: Release 7.0 (FEBRUARY 2010) (c) Copyright TRL Limited, 2010 Adapted from ARCADY/3 which is Crown Copyright by permission of the controller of HMSO ______________________________________________________ For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact: TRL Limited Tel: +44 (0) 1344 770758 Crowthorne House Fax: +44 (0) 1344 770356 Nine Mile Ride Email: [email protected] Wokingham, Berks. Web: www.trlsoftware.co.uk RG40 3GA,UK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Run with file:- "p:\M10000\M10061 Hayle\Tech\Arcady\2017 Base flows PM - 0% G.vai" (drive-on-the-left ) at 13:52:42 on Wednesday, 6 April 2011 .FILE PROPERTIES *************** RUN TITLE: Buro Happold - 2017 Base PM Flows LOCATION: Foundry Square DATE: 18/02/11 CLIENT: ENUMERATOR: mwilliamson [TTHC17] JOB NUMBER: STATUS: DESCRIPTION: .INPUT DATA ********** ARM A - Penpol Terrace ARM B - Foundry Hill ARM C - Carnsew Road .MINI-ROUNDABOUT GEOMETRIC DATA ------------------------------ JUNCTION IN LONDON LIGHTING CONDITIONS : NORMAL ROAD SURFACE CONDITION: NORMAL ARM *HAS A CENTRAL ISLAND ARM *HAS A CENTRAL ISLAND ARM *HAS A CENTRAL ISLAND ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- T5 I ARM I V (M) I E (M) I Lm(M) I Vm(M) I A (M) I K (M) I G (%) I SLOPE I INTERCEPT I I I I I I I I I I I (PCU/MIN) I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ARM A I 4.80 I 7.40 I 16.00 I 3.25 I 10.00 I 7.50 I 0.00 I 0.499 I 18.678 I I ARM B I 4.20 I 7.50 I 27.00 I 3.40 I 11.00 I 7.00 I 0.00 I 0.531 I 21.350 I I ARM C I 3.00 I 7.00 I 20.00 I 3.00 I 12.00 I 10.50 I 0.00 I 0.499 I 21.153 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- V = approach half-width Lm = effective flare length A = distance between arms E = entry width Vm = minimum approach half-width K= entry corner kerb line G=gradient over 50 m .TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------------------- Only sets included in the current run are shown.SCALING FACTORS.----------------------- T13 IARM I FLOW SCALE(%) I ----------------------- I A I 100 I I B I 100 I I C I 100 I ----------------------- TIME PERIOD BEGINS(16.45)AND ENDS(18.15).LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD -( 90) MINUTES.LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - (15) MINUTES .DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM THE TURNING COUNT DATA .DEMAND SET TITLE: Buro Happold - 2017 PM peak Base Flows ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ T15 I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I I I I I I I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 11.07 I 16.61 I 11.07 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 7.49 I 11.23 I 7.49 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 12.02 I 18.04 I 12.02 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DEMAND SET TITLE: Buro Happold - 2017 PM peak Base Flows.----------------------------------------------------------- T33 I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I I -------------------------------------- I TIME I FROM/T I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I

Page 1

2017 Base flows PM - 0% G ----------------------------------------------------------- I 16.45 - 18.15 I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.008 I 0.407 I 0.585 I I I I 7.0 I 361.0 I 518.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.643 I 0.002 I 0.356 I I I I 385.0 I 1.0 I 213.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.790 I 0.210 I 0.000 I I I I 760.0 I 202.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I ----------------------------------------------------------- . QUEUE AND DELAY INFORMATION FOR EACH 15 MIN TIME SEGMENT --------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ T70 I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 16.45-17.00 I I ARM A 11.12 17.42 0.638 - - - 0.0 1.7 23.9 - 0.153 I I ARM B 7.52 17.89 0.420 - - - 0.0 0.7 10.3 - 0.096 I I ARM C 12.07 18.71 0.645 - - - 0.0 1.8 24.7 - 0.146 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.00-17.15 I I ARM A 13.27 17.17 0.773 - - - 1.7 3.2 43.6 - 0.244 I I ARM B 8.97 17.21 0.522 - - - 0.7 1.1 15.5 - 0.121 I I ARM C 14.41 18.22 0.791 - - - 1.8 3.5 47.7 - 0.248 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.15-17.30 I I ARM A 16.26 16.91 0.961 - - - 3.2 11.4 126.9 - 0.644 I I ARM B 10.99 16.41 0.670 - - - 1.1 2.0 27.5 - 0.181 I I ARM C 17.65 17.58 1.004 - - - 3.5 16.9 172.5 - 0.812 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.30-17.45 I I ARM A 16.26 16.87 0.964 - - - 11.4 14.5 196.0 - 0.938 I I ARM B 10.99 16.30 0.674 - - - 2.0 2.0 30.0 - 0.188 I I ARM C 17.65 17.56 1.005 - - - 16.9 24.2 311.1 - 1.366 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.45-18.00 I I ARM A 13.27 17.02 0.780 - - - 14.5 3.8 82.2 - 0.390 I I ARM B 8.97 16.95 0.529 - - - 2.0 1.1 18.0 - 0.127 I I ARM C 14.41 18.19 0.792 - - - 24.2 4.2 132.0 - 0.561 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 18.00-18.15 I I ARM A 11.12 17.39 0.639 - - - 3.8 1.8 29.3 - 0.166 I I ARM B 7.52 17.81 0.422 - - - 1.1 0.7 11.4 - 0.098 I I ARM C 12.07 18.68 0.646 - - - 4.2 1.9 30.3 - 0.158 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .QUEUE AT ARM A -------------- TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 17.00 1.7 ** 17.15 3.2 *** 17.30 11.4 *********** 17.45 14.5 ************** 18.00 3.8 **** 18.15 1.8 ** .QUEUE AT ARM B -------------- TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 17.00 0.7 * 17.15 1.1 * 17.30 2.0 ** 17.45 2.0 ** 18.00 1.1 *

Page 2

2017 Base flows PM - 0% G 18.15 0.7 * .QUEUE AT ARM C -------------- TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 17.00 1.8 ** 17.15 3.5 **** 17.30 16.9 ***************** 17.45 24.2 ************************ 18.00 4.2 **** 18.15 1.9 ** .QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- T75 I ARM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I------------------------------------------------------------------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I A I 1219.5 I 813.0 I 502.0 I 0.41 I 502.0 I 0.41 I I B I 824.5 I 549.7 I 112.8 I 0.14 I 112.8 I 0.14 I I C I 1324.1 I 882.7 I 718.3 I 0.54 I 718.3 I 0.54 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ALL I 3368.1 I 2245.4 I 1333.0 I 0.40 I 1333.2 I 0.40 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- * DELAY IS THAT OCCURRING ONLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD. * INCLUSIVE DELAY INCLUDES DELAY SUFFERED BY VEHICLES WHICH ARE STILL QUEUEING AFTER THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. * THESE WILL ONLY BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IF THERE IS A LARGE QUEUE REMAINING AT THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. END OF JOB

Page 3

2017 Base + development flows PM revised flows ___________________ A R C A D Y 6 ___________________ ASSESSMENT OF ROUNDABOUT CAPACITY AND DELAY Analysis Program: Release 7.0 (FEBRUARY 2010) (c) Copyright TRL Limited, 2010 Adapted from ARCADY/3 which is Crown Copyright by permission of the controller of HMSO ______________________________________________________ For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact: TRL Limited Tel: +44 (0) 1344 770758 Crowthorne House Fax: +44 (0) 1344 770356 Nine Mile Ride Email: [email protected] Wokingham, Berks. Web: www.trlsoftware.co.uk RG40 3GA,UK --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- THE USER OF THIS COMPUTER PROGRAM FOR THE SOLUTION OF AN ENGINEERING PROBLEM IS IN NO WAY RELIEVED OF THEIR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CORRECTNESS OF THE SOLUTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Run with file:- "p:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\Arcady\Transport Assessment\ 2017 Base + development flows PM revised flows.vai"(drive-on-the-left ) at 17:57:21 on Thursday, 7 April 2011 .FILE PROPERTIES *************** RUN TITLE: Foundry Sqaure 2017 Base + Dvelopment LOCATION: Hayle DATE: 27/01/11 CLIENT: ENUMERATOR: mwilliamson [TTHC17] JOB NUMBER: STATUS: DESCRIPTION: .INPUT DATA ********** ARM A - Penpol Terrace ARM B - Foundry Hill ARM C - Carnsew Road .MINI-ROUNDABOUT GEOMETRIC DATA ------------------------------ JUNCTION IN LONDON LIGHTING CONDITIONS : NORMAL ROAD SURFACE CONDITION: NORMAL ARM *HAS A CENTRAL ISLAND ARM *HAS A CENTRAL ISLAND ARM *HAS A CENTRAL ISLAND ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- T5 I ARM I V (M) I E (M) I Lm(M) I Vm(M) I A (M) I K (M) I G (%) I SLOPE I INTERCEPT I I I I I I I I I I I (PCU/MIN) I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ARM A I 4.80 I 9.50 I 25.00 I 3.25 I 10.00 I 7.50 I 0.00 I 0.559 I 22.913 I I ARM B I 4.20 I 7.50 I 27.00 I 3.40 I 11.00 I 7.00 I 0.00 I 0.531 I 21.350 I I ARM C I 3.00 I 8.70 I 20.00 I 3.00 I 12.00 I 10.50 I 0.00 I 0.526 I 23.059 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- V = approach half-width Lm = effective flare length A = distance between arms E = entry width Vm = minimum approach half-width K= entry corner kerb line G=gradient over 50 m .TRAFFIC DEMAND DATA ------------------- Only sets included in the current run are shown.SCALING FACTORS.----------------------- T13 IARM I FLOW SCALE(%) I ----------------------- I A I 100 I I B I 100 I I C I 100 I ----------------------- TIME PERIOD BEGINS(16.45)AND ENDS(18.15).LENGTH OF TIME PERIOD -( 90) MINUTES.LENGTH OF TIME SEGMENT - (15) MINUTES .DEMAND FLOW PROFILES ARE SYNTHESISED FROM THE TURNING COUNT DATA .DEMAND SET TITLE: Foundry Sqaure 2017 Base + Dvelopment ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ T15 I I NUMBER OF MINUTES FROM START WHEN I RATE OF FLOW (VEH/MIN) I I ARM I FLOW STARTS I TOP OF PEAK I FLOW STOPS I BEFORE I AT TOP I AFTER I I I I I I I I I I I TO RISE I IS REACHED I FALLING I PEAK I OF PEAK I PEAK I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I ARM A I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 11.39 I 17.08 I 11.39 I I ARM B I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 7.65 I 11.48 I 7.65 I I ARM C I 15.00 I 45.00 I 75.00 I 13.32 I 19.99 I 13.32 I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ DEMAND SET TITLE: Foundry Sqaure 2017 Base + Dvelopment.----------------------------------------------------------- T33 I I TURNING PROPORTIONS I I I TURNING COUNTS I I I (PERCENTAGE OF H.V.S) I

Page 1

2017 Base + development flows PM revised flows I -------------------------------------- I TIME I FROM/T I ARM A I ARM B I ARM C I ----------------------------------------------------------- I 16.45 - 18.15 I I I I I I I ARM A I 0.008 I 0.356 I 0.637 I I I I 7.0 I 324.0 I 580.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM B I 0.567 I 0.002 I 0.431 I I I I 347.0 I 1.0 I 264.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I I I ARM C I 0.766 I 0.234 I 0.000 I I I I 817.0 I 249.0 I 0.0 I I I I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I ( 0.0)I I I I I I I ----------------------------------------------------------- . QUEUE AND DELAY INFORMATION FOR EACH 15 MIN TIME SEGMENT --------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ T70 I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 16.45-17.00 I I ARM A 11.43 21.17 0.540 - - - 0.0 1.2 16.6 - 0.101 I I ARM B 7.68 17.47 0.440 - - - 0.0 0.8 11.2 - 0.101 I I ARM C 13.38 20.73 0.645 - - - 0.0 1.8 24.9 - 0.132 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.00-17.15 I I ARM A 13.65 20.83 0.655 - - - 1.2 1.9 26.4 - 0.137 I I ARM B 9.17 16.70 0.549 - - - 0.8 1.2 17.2 - 0.132 I I ARM C 15.97 20.27 0.788 - - - 1.8 3.5 47.5 - 0.221 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.15-17.30 I I ARM A 16.72 20.46 0.817 - - - 1.9 4.1 55.0 - 0.248 I I ARM B 11.23 15.68 0.716 - - - 1.2 2.4 33.2 - 0.217 I I ARM C 19.56 19.66 0.995 - - - 3.5 16.4 170.3 - 0.721 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.30-17.45 I I ARM A 16.72 20.40 0.819 - - - 4.1 4.3 63.5 - 0.267 I I ARM B 11.23 15.64 0.718 - - - 2.4 2.5 36.7 - 0.226 I I ARM C 19.56 19.63 0.996 - - - 16.4 22.9 297.2 - 1.178 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 17.45-18.00 I I ARM A 13.65 20.66 0.661 - - - 4.3 2.0 32.2 - 0.149 I I ARM B 9.17 16.63 0.551 - - - 2.5 1.3 19.8 - 0.137 I I ARM C 15.97 20.24 0.789 - - - 22.9 4.1 116.0 - 0.440 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ I TIME DEMAND CAPACITY DEMAND/ PEDESTRIAN START END DELAY AVERAGE DELAY I I (VEH/MIN) (VEH/MIN) CAPACITY FLOW QUEUE QUEUE (VEH.MIN/ PER ARRIVING I I (RFC) (PEDS/MIN) (VEHS) (VEHS) TIME SEGMENT) VEHICLE (MIN) I - - I 18.00-18.15 I I ARM A 11.43 21.14 0.541 - - - 2.0 1.2 18.6 - 0.104 I I ARM B 7.68 17.42 0.441 - - - 1.3 0.8 12.4 - 0.103 I I ARM C 13.38 20.71 0.646 - - - 4.1 1.9 30.0 - 0.142 I I I ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ .QUEUE AT ARM A -------------- TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 17.00 1.2 * 17.15 1.9 ** 17.30 4.1 **** 17.45 4.3 **** 18.00 2.0 ** 18.15 1.2 * .QUEUE AT ARM B -------------- TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 17.00 0.8 * 17.15 1.2 * 17.30 2.4 **

Page 2

2017 Base + development flows PM revised flows 17.45 2.5 ** 18.00 1.3 * 18.15 0.8 * .QUEUE AT ARM C -------------- TIME SEGMENT NO. OF ENDING VEHICLES IN QUEUE 17.00 1.8 ** 17.15 3.5 *** 17.30 16.4 **************** 17.45 22.9 *********************** 18.00 4.1 **** 18.15 1.9 ** .QUEUEING DELAY INFORMATION OVER WHOLE PERIOD -------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- T75 I ARM I TOTAL DEMAND I * QUEUEING * I * INCLUSIVE QUEUEING * I I I I * DELAY * I * DELAY * I I I------------------------------------------------------------------I I I (VEH) (VEH/H) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I (MIN) (MIN/VEH) I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I A I 1253.9 I 835.9 I 212.3 I 0.17 I 212.4 I 0.17 I I B I 842.4 I 561.6 I 130.5 I 0.15 I 130.5 I 0.15 I I C I 1467.3 I 978.2 I 686.0 I 0.47 I 686.1 I 0.47 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- I ALL I 3563.6 I 2375.7 I 1028.8 I 0.29 I 1029.0 I 0.29 I ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- * DELAY IS THAT OCCURRING ONLY WITHIN THE TIME PERIOD. * INCLUSIVE DELAY INCLUDES DELAY SUFFERED BY VEHICLES WHICH ARE STILL QUEUEING AFTER THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. * THESE WILL ONLY BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT IF THERE IS A LARGE QUEUE REMAINING AT THE END OF THE TIME PERIOD. END OF JOB

Page 3

APPENDIX M

VISSIM

Traffic Flows

PM PEAK

PENPOL TERRACE

PROPOSED FOODSTORE SOUTH QUAYS F

B D

A

CARNSEW ROAD

C E

FOUNDRY LANE G

FOUNDRY HILL


ROUTING DIAGRAMMARCH 2011

APPENDIX M

2017 Base

LIGHTSA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 5 8 63 10 566 111 763B 6 0 1 0 0 13 1 21C 19 0 0 0 0 7 1 27D 96 0 0 0 0 128 76 300E 16 0 0 0 0 26 7 49F 393 4 1 83 14 7 357 860G 151 3 0 50 8 371 1 583

Col total 681 12 10 196 32 1118 554 2603

HGVsA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 0 0 0 0 9 3 12B 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0F 11 0 0 0 0 0 2 13G 1 0 0 0 0 7 0 8

Col total 12 0 0 0 0 17 5 34

TOTAL VEHICLESA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 5 8 63 10 575 114 775B 6 0 1 0 0 14 1 22C 19 0 0 0 0 7 1 27D 96 0 0 0 0 128 76 300E 16 0 0 0 0 26 7 49F 404 4 1 83 14 7 359 873G 152 3 0 50 8 378 1 591

Col total 693 12 10 196 32 1135 559 2637

PCUsA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 5 8 63 10 584 117 787B 6 0 1 0 0 15 1 23C 19 0 0 0 0 7 1 27D 96 0 0 0 0 128 76 300E 16 0 0 0 0 26 7 49F 415 4 1 83 14 7 361 886G 153 3 0 50 8 385 1 599

Col total 705 12 10 196 32 1152 564 2671

Destination

Origin

Destination

Origin

Origin

Destination

Destination

Origin

2017 Base + Development

LIGHTSA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 71 8 63 10 481 158 792B 66 0 0 0 0 128 27 221C 19 0 0 0 0 5 3 27D 96 0 0 0 0 152 52 300E 16 0 0 0 0 30 3 49F 371 77 1 97 13 7 320 885G 144 73 0 36 9 333 1 596

Col total 711 221 9 196 32 1137 564 2870

HGVsA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 0 0 0 0 10 3 13B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0E 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0F 11 0 0 0 0 0 2 13G 1 0 0 0 0 7 0 8

Col total 12 0 0 0 0 17 5 34

TOTAL VEHICLESA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 71 8 63 10 491 161 805B 66 0 0 0 0 128 27 221C 19 0 0 0 0 5 3 27D 96 0 0 0 0 152 52 300E 16 0 0 0 0 30 3 49F 382 77 1 97 13 7 322 898G 145 73 0 36 9 340 1 604

Col total 723 221 9 196 32 1154 569 2904

PCUsA B C D E F G Row total

A 0 71 8 63 10 501 164 818B 66 0 0 0 0 128 27 221C 19 0 0 0 0 5 3 27D 96 0 0 0 0 152 52 300E 16 0 0 0 0 30 3 49F 393 77 1 97 13 7 324 911G 146 73 0 36 9 347 1 612

Col total 735 221 9 196 32 1171 574 2938

Destination

Origin

Origin

Destination

Destination

Origin

Destination

Origin

VISSIM Output

10

15

20

25

South Quays exit - queue length (PCUs)

Base

Base plus Dev, no KC

Base plus Dev, westbound KC

Base plus Dev, both KC

0

5

10

15

20

25

16:45 17:00 17:15 17:30 17:45 18:00 18:15

South Quays exit - queue length (PCUs)

Base

Base plus Dev, no KC

Base plus Dev, westbound KC

Base plus Dev, both KC

Appendix M

VISSIM Output

Base Scenario

29_1.stz

Queue Length Record

File: P:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\VISSIM\29.inpComment: Base Date: 12 April 2011 12:15:41VISSIM: 5.30-04 [27495]

Queue Counter 41: Link 20 At 37.082 mQueue Counter 42: Link 7 At 132.550 m

Avg.: average queue length [m] within time intervalMax.: maximum queue length [m] within time intervalStop: number of stops within queue

Time; Avg.; max;Stop; Avg.; max;Stop; No.:; 41; 41; 41; 42; 42; 42; 300; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 600; 0; 0; 0; 0; 9; 1; 900; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 0; 1200; 0; 0; 0; 0; 10; 1; 1500; 0; 0; 0; 0; 15; 3; 1800; 0; 0; 0; 0; 8; 1; 2100; 0; 0; 0; 0; 8; 1; 2400; 0; 0; 0; 42; 93; 19; 2700; 0; 0; 0; 111; 137; 20; 3000; 0; 0; 0; 117; 134; 43; 3300; 0; 0; 0; 74; 137; 46; 3600; 0; 0; 0; 6; 40; 7; 3900; 0; 0; 0; 99; 137; 17; 4200; 0; 0; 0; 94; 137; 52; 4500; 0; 0; 0; 25; 97; 17; 4800; 0; 0; 0; 1; 21; 4; 5100; 0; 0; 0; 2; 29; 3; 5400; 0; 0; 0; 6; 28; 6;

Page 1

29_2.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

29_3.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

29_4.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

29_5.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

Appendix M

VISSIM Output

Base plus Development

30_1.stz

Queue Length Record

File: P:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\VISSIM\30.inpComment: Base Dev, no keep clearsDate: 12 April 2011 12:54:12VISSIM: 5.30-04 [27495]




Page 1

30_2.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

30_3.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

30_4.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

30_5.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

Appendix M

VISSIM Output


with Keep Clear marking for westbound traffic

28_1.stz

Queue Length Record

File: P:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\VISSIM\28.inpComment: Base Dev westbound KCDate: 12 April 2011 11:30:22VISSIM: 5.30-04 [27495]




Page 1

28_2.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

28_3.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

28_4.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

28_5.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

Appendix M

VISSIM Output


with Keep Clear markings in both directions

27_1.stz

Queue Length Record

File: P:\10000 PROJECTS\M10061 Morrisons, Hayle\Tech\VISSIM\27.inpComment: Base Dev both KCsDate: 12 April 2011 10:57:14VISSIM: 5.30-04 [27495]




Page 1

27_2.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

27_3.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

27_4.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

27_5.stz

Queue Length Record





Page 1

st james building 79 oxford street manchester es adde… · · 2011-08-06st james building 79...

Documents