Appendix G
Transport Assessment
Uphall Estates Ltd
Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian
Transportation Assessment
November 2020
Dougall Baillie Associates 3 Glenfield Road, Kelvin, East Kilbride, G75 0RA P: 01355 266 480 F: 01355 221 991 E: [email protected] W: www.dougallbaillie.com
Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
© DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES LIMITED
Copyright of this document is reserved by Dougall Baillie Associates Limited. Copying of this document is strictly prohibited without the prior authorisation of Dougall Baillie Associates Limited. Assignation of this document is prohibited. The report is personal to the addressee only and can only be relied upon by the addressee. Specific permission in writing must be obtained from Dougall Baillie Associates in order for any party other than that addressee to rely upon this report or any part of this report or any element of its contents.
DBA is quality assured to BS EN ISO 9001(2015) and the company’s Quality Management System is certified by NQA (certificate No. 8891).
Document Control
Document Title: - Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment
Project Number: - 20097
Project Title: - Uphall, Broxburn
Directory and File Name: - W:\20000s\20097 - Uphall, Broxburn\Admin\Reports\20097-TA-01b.docx
Issue Date Distribution Comments - 07/10/20 Client Team Draft for comment A 19/10/20 Client Team Updated for change in content B 06/11/20 Client Team Updated for finalised layout
Document Approval
Originator: Date: 06/11/20
Checked By: Date: 06/11/20
Authorisation: Date: 06/11/20
Page 2 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
CONTENTS
1 Introduction ...... 4
2 National & Local Policy Framework ...... 6
3 Development Content & Access Arrangements ...... 11
4 Sustainable Transport Assessment ...... 14
5 Data Collection & Abstraction ...... 24
6 Development Generation & Distribution ...... 26
7 Junction and Network Analysis ...... 32
8 Parking & Service Arrangements ...... 35
9 Conclusions ...... 37
APPENDICES
Appendix A – Development Layout Diagram
Appendix B – Development Access Layout
Appendix C – Traffic Flow Diagrams
Appendix D – TRICS Data
Appendix E – Census Data
Appendix F – Gravity Model (Datashine: Scotland Commute)
Appendix G – Linsig V3 Outputs
Page 3 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
1 Introduction
1.1 Dougall Baillie Associates (DBA) were appointed by Uphall Estates Ltd to produce a Transportation Assessment (TA) for the proposed erection of a mixed-use development in Uphall, West Lothian.
1.2 The site is bordered by the M8 to the south, Station Road to the west, the A89 to the north and Uphall Business Park to the east. The location of the site is demonstrated in Diagram 1.1 below.
Diagram 1.1 – Site Location
1.3 The current proposal is for a mixed-use development containing 200 residential units with 1000m2 associated commercial floor spaces, a 150 bay Park & Ride area serving Uphall Station and a Solar Power Plant as is detailed in the development layout plan included in Appendix A.
1.4 Access to the residential, commercial, and Park & Ride elements would be taken via a new junction on Station Road whilst the Solar Power Plant would take access from the existing business park access road.
1.5 In keeping with current government policy guidelines this Transportation Assessment assesses the potential for minimising private car usage by public transport. To this end an assessment of existing pedestrian, cycle, and public transport facilities has been carried out. Parking provision and servicing requirements are also assessed.
Page 4 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
1.6 This document takes into account current national, regional, and local legislation and identifies the accessibility of the site by all sustainable transport modes. Travel information has been studied and an assessment of existing transport infrastructure and service provision has been made.
1.7 The report also identifies the impact of vehicular traffic generated by the proposed development on the adjacent road network. The traffic data collection, calculations of traffic generation and local road network assessment have been summarised in this report. More detailed information pertaining to certain aspects of the report are available and can be obtained on request.
1.8 The content of this Transportation Assessment report has been informed by scoping discussions undertaken with West Lothian Council Transport Officers.
Page 5 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
2 National & Local Policy Framework
Introduction
2.1 The development takes into account the latest advice from national government, as encapsulated in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP), Planning Advice Note 75 and Designing Streets as well as local government reflected by the West Lothian Local Development Plan 2018 and West Lothian Council Supplementary Guidance: Residential Development Guide.
Scottish Planning Policy
2.2 The SPP was created in order to focus plan making, planning discussions and development design on the Scottish Governments Purpose. This purpose is the creation of a more successful country, with opportunities for all of Scotland to flourish through increasing sustainable economic growth.
Page 6 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
2.3 Sustainable economic growth is described in the SPP Glossary as "Building a dynamic and growing economy that will provide prosperity and opportunities for all, while ensuring that future generations can enjoy a better quality of life too."
2.4 Paragraph 269 notes that "Planning can play an important role in improving connectivity and promoting more sustainable patterns of transport and travel as part of the transition to a low carbon economy."
2.5 Paragraph 270 states that the planning system should support patterns of development which; • optimise the use of existing infrastructure; • provide safe and convenient opportunities for walking and cycling for both active travel and recreation, and facilitate travel by public transport; • enable the integration of transport modes; • facilitate freight movement by rail or water.
2.6 The SPP identifies the key transport issues which should be taken account of with regards to land use. These issues can be found in paragraph 272 and are as follows; • the capacity of the existing transport network • environmental or operational constraints • proposed or committed projects
2.7 Paragraph 279 notes that "Significant travel-generating uses should be sited at location which are well served by public transport, subject to parking restraint policies and are supported by measures to promote the availability of high-quality public transport services." The SPP also indicates that Travel Plans may be required for these types of developments.
2.8 Paragraph 287 goes on to emphasise that planning permission should not be granted for significant travel generating uses in locations where; • direct links to local facilities via walking and cycling networks are not or cannot be made available • access to local facilities via public transport would involve walking more than 400m • the transport assessment does not identify satisfactory ways of meeting sustainable transport requirements.
2.9 SPP paragraph 273 gives a hierarchy of personal travel modes to be prioritised in the following order; • walking • cycling • public transport • cars
Page 7 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
2.10 Paragraph 281 notes the SPPs policy on parking standards. National maximum parking standards are set in Annex B of the SPP however the SPP also states that local authorities have the ability to set more or less restrictive standards based on the level of public transport services which serve the development.
Planning Advice Note (PAN) 75
2.11 PAN 75 accompanies the SPP providing advice on good practice. Paragraph 6 notes that ‘one focus of SPP 17 (now superseded by the SPP on Transport) is to achieve better and earlier integration between transport and land use planning at national, regional and local level.' It continues that ‘Integration can reduce the need to travel and offer more sustainable travel choices. To achieve sustainable development, the objectives of the SPP must be considered in the context of other planning policy and guidance’.
2.12 With regard to accessibility, Appendix B to PAN 75 notes that development should be able to demonstrate the following:
• For accessibility of housing to public transport the recommended guidelines are less than 400m to bus services and up to 800m to rail services. • Accessibility to local facilities by walking and cycling: o A maximum threshold of 1600m for walking is broadly in line with observed travel behaviour. o If there is a significant population within 800m then improvements to the quality of walking and cycling networks will increase accessibility.
Designing Streets
2.1 Designing Streets is a policy statement in Scotland for street design which updates and replaces PAN 76 New Residential Streets (now withdrawn).
2.2 Designing Streets identifies a clear distinction between streets and roads through the following definitions: • Roads are thoroughfares whose main function is to facilitate the movement of motor traffic. • Streets have important public realm functions beyond those related to motor traffic. They are typically lined with buildings and public spaces and, whilst facilitation of movement is still a key function, they normally support a range of social, leisure, retail, and commercial functions.
2.3 Based on these definitions it is stated that "all thoroughfares within urban settings and rural boundaries should normally be treated as streets."
2.4 The policies within Designing Streets should be followed in all instances of street design and technical advice is aimed particularly at residential and lightly trafficked streets. Streets are identified as having the two key functions of 'place' and 'movement'.
Page 8 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
2.5 Designing Streets identifies a "positive sense of place" as encompassing a number of aspects with the most notable of them being: • local distinctiveness; • visual quality; and • potential to encourage social and economic activity.
West Lothian Local Development Plan 2018
2.6 The West Lothian Local Development Plan was adopted on the 4th September 2018 and sets out objectives and strategy which will be used to guide future development proposals. Within the context of the proposed development, the plan notes its key aims as: • Sustainable Housing Locations Provide a generous supply of housing land and an effective five year housing land supply at all times; Continue to promote and support major development within the previously identified CDAs; and Support the council’s new build housing programme and increase the supply of affordable housing across a range of tenures. • Infrastructure Requirements and Delivery Ensure that all essential infrastructure and facilities are provided to support population and economic growth and where appropriate, secure proportional developer contributions to facilitate the delivery of such provision. It is important to note that without the necessary infrastructure requirements having been satisfactorily addressed the council will be unable to support development proposals. • The Natural and Historic Environment Protect and enhance the natural and built environment and it’s cultural landscapes; Provide an improved network of linked open spaces incorporating active travel routes; and Ensure that appropriate brownfield sites are redeveloped for appropriate uses. • Climate Change and Renewable Energy Help achieve climate change objectives by minimising the area’s carbon footprint through promoting development in sustainable locations and supporting mitigation and adaptation measures.
West Lothian Council Supplementary Guidance: Residential Development Guide
2.7 The Supplementary Guidance is intended to enable the consistent application of design policy and to provide a framework for those involved in providing new residential development. Key objectives relevant to the proposals are:
Page 9 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
• to create more homes and generally utilise land more efficiently and effectively, by optimizing densities where appropriate; • to encourage development in areas of higher accessibility such as within public transport corridors; • to achieve layouts where high accessibility and connectivity encourages sustainable travel such as walking, cycling and the use of public transport ahead of the car; • to make places for living that are of high quality design and distinctiveness and respect and enhance local character; • to create environments that are secure and enable residents to live without the fear of crime; • to improve the quality and choice of housing with particular regard to size, household composition, tenure, price, and accessibility; • to create attractive, people-friendly places that are easy to get to and move around in, focusing on the needs of pedestrians rather than cars; • to protect and enhance biodiversity by providing habitats for flora and fauna to establish and thrive and to promote and incorporate the principles of sustainable development; • to promote design and site planning principles that aim to increase energy efficiency in all new residential development.
Summary
2.8 This Transportation Assessment (TA) report demonstrates how the proposed residential development satisfies the requirements of local and national planning policy for transport with regard to the ability to integrate the development into existing and planned networks for pedestrians, cyclists, and public transport.
2.9 Section 3 of this assessment considers the access strategy proposed for the development and identifies links to the adjacent transport network. Section 4 investigates the pedestrian, cycle and public transport that would link the proposed development site to a wider area.
Page 10 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
3 Development Content & Access Arrangements
Development Content
3.1 The content of the proposed mixed-use development is as follows: • Residential Development – 200 units o 160 housing units o 40 flatted units • Commercial Development – 1000m2 • Park & Ride Development – 150 parking bays • Solar Power Plant Development
Access Strategy
3.2 As is depicted in the layout diagram in Appendix A, the proposed residential, commercial and P&R developments would take vehicular access from Station Road on the site’s western boundary.
3.3 There is an existing field access to the site (pictured below in Image 3.1) on Station Road which could be used as the location for a priority access junction.
Image 3.1 – Existing field access on Station Road
3.4 The proposed layout of the development access at this location is attached in Appendix B for reference. The layout details the achievable 4.5m x 120m visibility splays required due to the 40mph speed limit on Station Road.
Page 11 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
3.5 This access junction would also support pedestrian access, providing 2m footways on both sides of the carriageway into and throughout the development.
3.6 Additionally, there is a segregated pedestrian footpath which runs through the site between the proposed residential/P&R developments and the Solar Power Plant development. The path currently provides a traffic free, fully lit route from Broxburn and the A89 to Uphall Station.
3.7 There is an existing informal pedestrian link between the site and this footpath as is demonstrated in Image 3.2 below.
Image 3.2 – Pedestrian link to the site from the adjacent footpath
3.8 A formalised pedestrian link between the site and the footpath would be incorporated as part of the proposed development, for use by both residents and commuters from the Park & Ride.
3.9 The Solar Power Plant development would take access from the Uphall Business Park access road as demonstrated in the development layout included in Appendix A.
Park & Ride Development
3.10 Network Rail previously had plans to increase the number of parking spaces at Uphall Station by 71 in the summer of 2018. These plans were ultimately scrapped in 2019 and Network Rail have not produced any further proposals to expand the station’s parking provision.
Page 12 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
3.11 The high demand for parking at Uphall Station has resulted in commuters parking in the surrounding residential streets when they are unable to find a parking space within the designated car parks. This has resulted in conflict with local residents and multiple complaints being made.
3.12 The proposed P&R development would provide 150 more spaces for commuters to use and would contribute significantly with alleviating the ongoing parking issues at Uphall Station.
Page 13 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4 Sustainable Transport Assessment
4.1 This assessment of Sustainable Transport Accessibility considers in detail the elements of the public transport network that serve the area in which the proposed development is located. Separate sections are included for pedestrian facilities, cycling facilities, bus services, and train services.
4.2 The bus and train sections deal with the routes, quantity, and availability of all relevant services. The current infrastructure for these modes has been examined, along with the potential to maximise access to the site for all relevant travel modes.
4.3 This part of the assessment is based on published service data for bus and train services. This data is often subject to revision and the data used will become outdated in the future, however it is considered to represent a reasonable basis on which to carry out the type of desktop study summarised in this section of the report.
4.4 Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) – Planning for Transport, emphasises that development should be located in areas that are capable of being integrated into effective networks for all forms of transport, including walking cycling and public transport. SPP also clearly identifies a hierarchy of priority that should be given to different transport modes in terms of measures to accommodate their access to a development. This hierarchy is walking, cycling, public transport, and lastly private car.
Pedestrian Facilities 4.5 The term ‘pedestrian’ covers able-bodied people, disabled people, with or without the use of wheelchairs, the infirm, the elderly and parents with children in pushchairs or buggies. Due to the range of mobility exhibited by pedestrians it is important to ensure that the requirements of those with restricted mobility are considered.
4.6 Designing Streets policy guidance outlines the importance of pedestrian accessibility to and from new developments. This accessibility is achieved by connecting new street layouts to the existing street network and so encouraging walking and cycling while also making navigation throughout the network as easy as possible.
4.7 The most popular pedestrian routes serving the development are anticipated to be those leading to public transport facilities, surrounding residential areas and local amenities.
4.8 Existing pedestrian facilities are currently provided on Station Road providing access to the east and west of the development site and the A89 providing access to the west and east. A further pedestrian route passes north / south through the development site providing pedestrian access to the station from the eastern edge of the site. Existing pedestrian routes are indicated on Diagram 4.1.
Page 14 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4.9 Image 4.1 below illustrates footway provision along the development frontage onto Station Road. Improvements to this infrastructure could be accommodated within the development frontage should this prove necessary.
Image 4.1 – View of Station Road looking south
4.10 Access to Uphall railway station would require pedestrians to pass under the M8 using the existing pedestrian underpass facilities. As indicated on Image 4.2. these are of a good quality incorporating footway which is a minimum of 2 metres in width.
4.11 Whilst this is not the primary route to and from the station for P&R commuters, it is an established pedestrian route which provides convenient access to the station for residents.
Image 4.2 – Pedestrian facilities on Station Road below M8.
Page 15 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4.12 Access to the station, via Station Road would require pedestrians to cross the accesses to the existing park and ride facilities as indicated in Image 4.3, signalised crossing facilities are incorporated at this junction.
Image 4.3 – Pedestrian facilities at Uphall rail station car park access.
4.13 As noted previously, there is an established pedestrian footpath which runs through the proposed development site from Broxburn to Uphall Station. The route crosses the A89 via a pedestrian overbridge, shown in Image 4.4, and would pass through the development and under the M8 and onto the railway station and Uphall Station and Pumpherston to the south via a pedestrian underspass show in in Image 4.5.
Image 4.4 – Pedestrian overbridge crossing A89
Page 16 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Image 4.5 – Pedestrian underpass below M8
4.14 It is an established local route and incorporates lighting provision along its entirety (see Image 4.6 below) and would provide the development with a car free route into Uphall Station via the pedestrian. Additionally, improvements to the lighting and landscaping of the footpath are intended as part of the proposed development, further increasing the attractiveness of the route to pedestrians.
Image 4.6 – Pedestrian footpath which runs through the site
Page 17 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4.15 A shared footway / cycleway is also provided along the northern boundary of the site on the A89 as shown in Image 4.7.
Image 4.7 – Shared footway / cycleway on A89
4.16 Pedestrian crossing facilities are incorporated into the Station Road (northbound) and A89 (westbound) approaches to the junction.
4.17 The commercial units proposed within the development are expected to provide residents with local retail amenities however, further amenities are available within a reasonable walking distance in Uphall and Uphall Station. The existing pedestrian routes, public transport and local amenities are identified on Diagram 4.1.
4.18 Walking distances to important local amenities are detailed in Table 4.1 over, as well as the estimated walking times to each amenity.
4.19 As indicated in Table 4.1, the development is within 400m of existing bus stops on Station Road, within 800m of Uphall Station and 1600m of local amenities satisfying the requirements of PAN 75.
4.20 It is considered that a significant proportion of overall trips to the development will be pedestrian trips, particularly as part of a longer trip, for example to the local train station or bus stops.
Page 18 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Distance on Foot Approx. Time Destinations / Approx. Cycle to Reach on Amenities Time (4m/s) Via Station Via Pedestrian Foot (1.4m/s) Road Access Footpath Access Public Transport Accessibility Bus Stops: Station Road 400m 800m 5 minutes 1 minute (south of site) Bus Stops: Station Road 520m 1000m 6 minutes 1-2 minutes (north of site) Uphall Train Station 450m 450m 5 minutes 1-2 minutes Educational Establishments Non-Denominational Schools Uphall Primary School 2.1km 1.7km 20 minutes 7 minutes Broxburn Academy 3.1km 2.6km 31 minutes 11 minutes Denominational Schools St Nicholas’ RC Primary 2.5km 2.0km 24 minutes 8 minutes School St Margaret’s Academy 5.3km 5.8km 63 minutes 22 minutes Local Retail & Amenities Scotmid (Uphall 350m 750m 4 minutes 1-2 minutes Station) Main Street Shops 1.3km 1km 12 minutes 4 minutes (Uphall) Lidl Supermarket 3.7km 3.2km 38 minutes 13 minutes (Broxburn) Asda Supermarket 5.3km 5.8km 63 minutes 22 minutes (Livingston) Table 4.1 – Local amenities serving the Development Site
Safe Routes to Schools
4.21 To maximise the number of residents who walk as part of local journeys, it is important to have safe walking routes to nearby schools.
4.22 This is particularly important for Primary Schools which are often located closer to residential developments than Secondary Schools, thereby encouraging walking. Primary School pupils are also more vulnerable road users due to their age and experience.
4.23 West Lothian Council, like all local authorities in Scotland, have a statutory requirement to provide school transport where the distance to school is over a specified walking distance.
4.24 The current walking distance criteria for West Lothian is more than 1.5 miles (2.4km) for pupils attending primary schools and more than 2 miles (3.2km) for those attending secondary school.
Page 19 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4.25 As identified in Table 4.1, the proposed development lies within the catchment area of Uphall Primary and Broxburn Academy which would serve as the non-denominational schools for the site. The denominational schools serving the site are St Nicholas’ RC Primary School and St Margaret’s Academy.
4.26 Of these schools, only St Margaret’s Academy meets the criteria for funded school transport and the other schools are deemed to be within a reasonable walking distance for pupils.
4.27 Each of the schools within walking distance noted in Table 4.1 are located to the north side of the A89. Despite the location of the development site, school pupils would not be required to cross this busy road at grade but would be able to use the existing bridge shown in Image 4.4.
4.28 Pupils attending Uphall Primary School could use the pedestrian bridge to cross the A89 into Uphall where they would walk north through the residential streets, cross West Main Street at the signalised junction before walking through more residential streets to reach the school.
4.29 For the pupils attending St Nicholas’ RC Primary School, they would take the footpath onto the A89 and use the signalised crossing facilities at the junction with South Middleton. The pupils would then walk through residential streets to get to the school.
4.30 The secondary school pupils attending Broxburn Academy would walk a similar route to those pupils attending St Nicholas’ RC Primary School except once they cross the A89 they would walk north to West Main Street and cross at the signalised crossing to the west of Cardross Road. From here the pupils would walk north through residential streets to reach Broxburn Academy.
Cycle Facilities
4.31 As noted previously and shown in Image 4.7, a shared pedestrian / cycle route is provided adjacent to the A89 to the north of the site. To access the route, residents would head north on Station Road or use the pedestrian footpath which runs through the site. Diagram 4.1 identifies the route of the cycle infrastructure within the vicinity of the development site however, this facility would provide onward links to Bathgate and Livingstone to the west and Broxburn, Newbridge and Edinburgh to the east.
4.32 From the A89 shared path cyclists can also access the National Cycle Route 754 (NCR754) by heading east on the A89 for approximately 1.8km and joining the route at the Union Canal. This route would provide convenient traffic free cycle access to Broxburn, Winchburgh, Ratho and Edinburgh park within a 1 hour cycle ride. Diagram 4.2 over shows an extract from the Sustrans network plan illustrating the national cycle route in the vicinity of the development site.
Page 20 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Diagram 4.2 – National Cycle Route Extract
4.33 It is anticipated the cycling has the potential to be a viable travel option and alternative to private car travel with a journey time of approximately 20 minutes to Winchburgh, 30 minutes to Ratho and 40 minutes to Edinburgh Park / South Gyle.
Bus Network
4.34 The locations of bus stops in the vicinity of the development are shown in Diagram 4.1. The closest bus stops to the development, as identified in Table 4.1, are 400m to the south of the site in Uphall Station. There would be scope to accommodate additional bus stops on-road along the Station Road frontage should this prove necessary.
4.35 Published timetables indicate that several bus services operate on Station Road and currently pass the proposed development’s access. These bus services are detailed in Table 4.2 below.
Weekday Weekday Saturday Sunday Service Route Description Daytime Evening Operator Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Dunnet Way, Broxburn, Oatridge Hotel, Pumpherston, Willowbank, St John’s Lothian 275 Hospital, Labrador Avenue, Livingston, 30 mins 60 mins 30 mins 60 mins Millfield, Toll Roundabout, Seafield Arms, Country Blackburn, Mosside Terrace, Bathgate
Loganlea, Burnside View, Union Square, Harwood Church, Livingston, Craigshill, Lothian 276 30 mins 60 mins 30 mins 60 mins Uphall Station, Oatridge Hotel, Broxburn, Country Dunnet Way
Deans North, Deans South, Livingston, First West X24 Pumpherston, Broxburn, Newbridge, 30 mins 60 mins 30 mins 60 mins Ratho Station, Edinburgh Lothian
Table 4.2 – Bus Services near the Development Site
Page 21 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4.36 The combination of the above bus services provides a good level of bus accessibility for the development site, with frequent services to Livingston, Broxburn and via the X24 to Edinburgh.
Rail Network
4.37 As identified in Table 4.1, Uphall Station is approximately 450m away (5 minute walk) from both the Station Road access to the development and the footpath access.
4.38 Due to the location of the P&R development within the site, it is expected that the majority of commuters using the P&R site would walk to the station via the pedestrian footpath. Development residents would be split between this footpath route and the route via Station Road.
4.39 Uphall Station is on the Helensburgh to Edinburgh and Milngavie to Edinburgh lines which both travel via Glasgow Queen Street. Therefore, Uphall Station provides good links to Glasgow and Edinburgh City Centres and links across the central belt.
4.40 The services available at Uphall Station and the frequency at which they arrive is detailed in Table 4.3 below.
Weekday Weekday Saturday Sunday Route Description Daytime Evening Operator Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Helensburgh Central, Dumbarton Central, Dalmuir, Hyndland, Partick, Charing Cross, Glasgow Queen Street, High Street, Garrowhill, Easterhouse, Blairhill, Coatbridge Sunnyside, Coatdyke, Airdrie, 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins 30 mins Scotrail Drumgelloch, Caldercruix, Blackridge, Armadale Bathgate, Livingston North, Uphall, Edinburgh Park, Haymarket, Edinburgh
Milngavie, Hyndland, Partick, Charing Cross, Glasgow Queen Street, High Street, Bellgrove, 30 mins (commuting Carntyne, Shettleston, Coatbridge Sunnyside, AM & PM peaks only) no service no service Scotrail Airdrie, Drumgelloch, Caldercruix, Blackridge, Armadale Bathgate, Livingston North, Uphall, Edinburgh Park, Haymarket, Edinburgh
Table 4.3 – Train Services near the Development Site
Summary
4.41 This section identifies the extensive pedestrian and cycle networks and public transport provision that are available within the area surrounding the development. This assessment demonstrates how the development would meet SPP requirements by; • optimising the use of existing infrastructure; • providing safe and convenient opportunities for walking and cycling, and facilitating travel by public transport; and • enabling the integration of transport modes.
Page 22 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
4.42 The assessment also demonstrates SPP requirements for ‘Significant travel- generating uses to be sited at locations which are supported by measures to promote the availability of high-quality public transport services."
Page 23 Based upon the Ordnance Survey map with the c Copyright of this document is reserved by permission of the Controller of H.M. Dougall Baillie Associates Ltd. Stationery Office. Crown Copyright Reserved. DO NOT scale from this drawing Licence No. AL 100018007 Broxburn Academy Notes:
Site Location
Retail Amenities
Educational Amenities
Uphall Primary School Leisure Amenities
Pedestrian Walking Routes
Cycle Route
Bus Stop Locations
St Nicholas' RC Primary School
Diagram 4.1 Local Amenities Diagram
Scale: Diag. NTS @ A3 Ref: 20097-SK-01 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
5 Data Collection & Abstraction
5.1 The traffic effects of a new development will depend on the amount of traffic generated by the proposed development and the capacity available on the roads directly affected by development traffic.
5.2 In order to predict the impact of a development on the adjacent road network, it is necessary to consider the operation of the network during the following periods: - • road network traffic peak conditions combined with the predicted levels of development traffic at that time, and • peak development traffic periods combined with the road network conditions at that time.
5.3 Residential developments and Park & Ride facilities would typically produce maximum trip generation levels during the typical weekday AM and PM commuting peak periods. Since these components of the proposed development are expected to produce the vast majority of the vehicle trips, this Transportation Assessment has examined the typical weekday AM & PM peak periods in order to assess the most onerous combination of existing and development generated traffic levels.
5.4 For a detailed analysis to be carried out four types of information are required- • base traffic flows in the locality, projected to the appropriate future ‘design year’, • any committed development traffic flows within the study road network, • the amount and geographical distribution of traffic generated by the proposed development (along with any committed developments in the area), and • details of the adjacent road network, including geometric layout and existing method of control at relevant junctions.
Base Traffic Flows
5.5 During scoping discussions with West Lothian Council, it was identified that during the ongoing Covid 19 pandemic restrictions traffic count data collected at present would not be reliable for junction analysis. WLC provided historic data from 2016 to be used as the basis of this assessment.
5.6 The following junctions were identified for analysis and traffic count data provided: • Station Road / A89 – Signalised Junction • Uphall Station Car Park (north) / Station Road – Signalised Junction • Uphall Station Car Park (south) / Station Road – Signalised Junction • Pumpherston Road / Cawburn Road / Uphall Station Road / Houston Road – Signalised Junction
Page 24 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
5.7 The base survey information for the identified peaks is shown in Figures 1a and 1b in Appendix C.
Design Years
5.8 Traffic flows are commonly projected forward to the year of opening of the development. In this instance the traffic flows have been projected forward to the year 2023, which is considered to represent a reasonable assessment of when the development could be completed and occupied.
5.9 The traffic flows have been projected using the “Low” growth prediction from the National Road Traffic Forecasts as shown in Table 5.1.
Year Index Factor 2016 1.240 1.050 2023 1.302 Table 5.1 - NRTF Low Traffic Growth Rates
5.10 Figures 2a and 2b of Appendix C illustrate 2023 design year traffic flows in morning and evening peak periods.
Committed Developments 5.11 No committed developments were identified for this assessment during scoping discussions with WLC.
Page 25 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
6 Development Generation & Distribution
6.1 The latest planning policy and guidance issued by the Scottish Government stresses the importance of carrying out transportation studies such that full account is taken of the multi-modal nature of the development operation, and that the effects of the scheme on road, public transport, cycling and pedestrian networks are identified.
6.2 Estimation of trip levels generated by the proposed development is based on a combination of engineering experience, local reference information and on surveys undertaken at comparable existing developments related to a common index. In the case of residential developments, the accepted index is the number of dwellings.
6.3 It is generally accepted that the peak periods for trip generation coincide with the weekday morning and evening commuting peak periods on the network.
6.4 To assess the trip generation characteristics of the proposed development, reference was made to trip rates calculated from the TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) database and travel information from local resident areas around the development site extracted from the 2011 Scottish Census.
Residential Multi-Modal Trip Generation
6.5 In line with current guidance, a full multi-modal trip generation assessment of the proposed development has been produced based upon TRICS data (contained in Appendix D for reference) and travel information extracted from the 2011 Scottish Census for the local area surrounding the development site (contained in Appendix E). The Census Output Areas selected include areas that have similar access to local public transport, pedestrian and cycle routes / facilities and therefore present travel mode options representative of those who would reside in the proposed development.
6.6 The representative areas selected are listed in the (Appendix E) Census extracts and indicatively shown below in Diagram 6.1. Residents outside of these selected areas have been judged to have access to a different set of public transport opportunities, (particularly alternative bus services) and have therefore been excluded.
Page 26 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Site Location
Diagram 6.1 – Selected Representative 2011 Census Output Areas
6.7 Reflecting the extracted census information, Table 6.1 summarises the mode split information for residential trips in the vicinity of the development. In the interest of a robust assessment methodology, those working or studying from home have been excluded from the modal split percentages applied to the development trip generation calculations.
Work or Method of Total Study Public Vehicle Passenger Travel to Work Cyclists Pedestrian Other Person from Transport Trips Trips or Study Trips Home Census Results, Person Trip 54 122 306 81 0 43 7 613 Types Residential 8.8% 19.9% 49.9% 13.2% 0.0% 7.0% 1.1% 100% Modal Split Modal Split (adjusted to account for 21.8% 54.7% 14.5% 0.0% 7.7% 1.3% 100% Study or Work from Home having no impact) Table 6.1 – Calculated modal split for proposed residential development
Page 27 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
6.8 Residential person trip rates extracted from the TRICS database are summarised in Table 6.2.
Proposed Person Time Trip Rates (and Generation) Departures Arrivals AM Peak Hour 0.926 (185 trips) 0.206 (41 trips) PM Peak Hour 0.289 (58 trips) 0.591 (118 trips)
Table 6.2 – Residential Person Trip Rates & Generation
6.9 Applying the modal split and person trip data included in Tables 6.1 and 6.2 results in the multi-modal trip generation levels shown in Table 6.3.
Total Public Vehicle Passenger Period Routing Cyclists Pedestrian Other Person Transport Trips Trips Trips
Weekday AM OUT 40 101 27 0 14 2 185 Peak Hr IN 9 23 6 0 3 1 42
Weekday PM OUT 13 32 8 0 4 1 58 Peak Hr IN 26 65 17 0 9 1 118 Table 6.3 – Multi-modal trip generation of proposed residential development
Residential Vehicle Trip Generation and Distribution
6.10 The residential developments vehicle trip generation levels (and resulting equivalent trip rates), in accordance with the multi-modal calculations, are set out in Table 6.4.
Weekday AM Peak Hr Weekday PM Peak Hr 200 Unit Residential Development Departures Arrivals Departures Arrivals Vehicle Trips 101 23 32 65
Rates (vehicle trips per unit) 0.507 0.113 0.158 0.324
Table 6.4 – Residential Development Vehicle Trip Generation (and equivalent trip rates)
6.11 It is worth noting that the predicted level of residential vehicle trip generation would produce around two new vehicle trips per minute during the AM peak.
6.12 Predicted distribution of the developments vehicle trip generation has been established using census data obtained from the Datashine website for the Scotland Commute dataset (http://scotlandcommute.datashine.org.uk)
6.13 Data was extracted for the car driver work trips from the Uphall, Dechmont and Ecclesmachan area. Trips that had no fixed place of employment were removed and the rest of the data analysed. The gravity model developed from this data can be seen in Appendix F.
Page 28 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
6.14 A summary of the gravity model calculated origins & destinations for development generated vehicle trips is featured in Table 6.5.
Gravity Model Calculated Routing Origin/Destination on Percentage Study Rd Network Split (to/from development site) A89 (east) 37.8% via Station Road A89 (west) 38.9% via Station Road Uphall Station Road (south) 10.3% via Station Road Houston Road (west) 5.8% via Station Road Cawburn Road (east) 1.7% via Station Road Station Road (north) 5.5% via Station Road Total 100.0% Table 6.5 – Development Generated Vehicle Trip Distribution Summary
6.15 Figures 4a and 4b of Appendix C show the proposed developments vehicle trip generation levels distributed across the study road network in accordance with the gravity model calculations.
Park & Ride Vehicle Trip Generation
6.16 TRICS data is not available for Park & Ride developments and therefore could not be used to estimate the proposed 150 space development’s vehicle trip generation.
6.17 To estimate proposed P&R facility traffic generation, reference was made to the 2016 base flows provided by WLC and the Scotrail stations and facilities webpage.
6.18 Using the base traffic flows, the number of vehicles turning into and out of each of the three station car parks during the AM and PM peak hours can be calculated. Whilst many of these movements may be drop off trips and not making use of the car parking facilities, for the sake of a robust assessment they have been assumed as such.
6.19 The peak hour trip generation can then be compared with the total number of parking spaces in the Uphall Station car parks, which was found on Scotrail’s website (https://www.scotrail.co.uk/plan-your-journey/stations-and- facilities/uha), to calculate the vehicle trip rates per parking space.
6.20 There is a total of 282 spaces spread between the three station car parks, when compared to the peak hour vehicle movements the trip rates detailed in Table 6.7 below were calculated.
Page 29 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Existing Car Parks Vehicle Trip Rate Calculations 282 Bays AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Vehicle Trips 201 70 72 183 Trip Rates 0.713 0.248 0.255 0.649 Table 6.7 – Existing car parks vehicle trip rate calculation
6.21 The trip rates calculated in Table 6.7 above were then applied to the number of parking spaces in the proposed P&R development to calculate the peak hour trip generation detailed in Table 6.8.
6.22 For the purposes of this assessment, it has been assumed that the proposed development would operate at full capacity.
Proposed P&R Vehicle Trip Generation Calculations 150 Bays AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arrivals Departures Arrivals Departures Vehicle Trips 0.713 0.248 0.255 0.649 Trip Rates 107 37 38 97 Table 6.8 - Proposed P&R Vehicle Trip Generation Calculations
Park & Ride Vehicle Trip Distribution
6.23 The expected distribution of vehicles using the Park & Ride development has been split into two groups, the first being newly generated trips by the development and the second being trips diverted from the existing train station car parks and/or surrounding residential streets.
6.24 In the interest of a robust assessment, 70% of trips attracted by the development have been assumed to be new generated trips diverted from the M8 to use the park and ride facilities to travel to Edinburgh. As is demonstrated in Figure 5a in Appendix C.
6.25 The remaining 30% have been assumed as local diverted trips from the existing train station car park split evenly between northern and southern trips, as is demonstrated in Figure 5b.
6.26 The vehicle trips generated by the P&R development during the AM and PM peak periods are demonstrated in Figures 6a and 6b of Appendix C respectively.
Commercial Element Vehicle Trip Generation
6.27 Reference was made to the TRICS database to obtain vehicle trip rates for ‘Local Shops’ developments. The collected data is attached in Appendix D for reference and the morning and evening peak period trip rates are detailed in Table 6.9 below.
Page 30 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Arrivals Departures AM Peak Period 6.643 6.429 PM Peak Period 6.762 7.333 Table 6.9 – Commercial Development Trip Rates
6.28 These trip rates were then applied to the 1000m2 GFA of commercial development proposed at this site to calculate the expected vehicle trip generation. The results are shown in Table 6.10 below.
Arrivals Departures AM Peak Period 66 64 PM Peak Period 68 73 Table 6.10 – Commercial Development Trip Generation
6.29 The proposed commercial development is intended to serve as local amenities to the residential development and Park & Ride development which would suggest that the generated trips would be internal to the site. It is anticipated that the commercial units may attract trips from outwith the development, split between new trips and diverted commuting trips. To account for this, and to conduct a robust assessment, the generated trips identified in Table 6.10 have been split 50/50 between internal and external trips
Commercial Vehicle Trip Distribution
6.30 Due to the local retail amenities available to the residents of Uphall Station, it is expected that any newly generated commercial trips would come from Uphall to the north of the site. The trips coming from Uphall have been split evenly between Station Road (north) and the A89 (east) as detailed in Figure 7 in Appendix C.
6.31 Traffic generation associated with the commercial element of the site are identified in Figures 8a and 8b in Appendix C.
Page 31 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
7 Junction and Network Analysis
7.1 Design year traffic flows for the weekday morning and evening peak periods were obtained by the methods described in Sections 5 and 6. Throughout this analysis, these base and projected flows have been used.
7.2 The years identified for analysis were base year 2016, projected year 2023 (representing the potential year of opening). Figures 10a and 10b in Appendix C illustrate design year traffic flows including proposed development generated traffic.
7.3 The Institution of Highways and Transportation (IHT) Guidelines for Traffic Impact Assessment suggests that detailed analysis of junctions within a study road network should be carried out where congestion does or will exist within the assessment period (or if the location is sensitive) when the impact of the proposed development exceeds a limiting value of 5%, with a 10% threshold for uncongested networks.
5.12 For this road network study, the 5% limiting value has been adopted. Based on the impacts indicated in Figures 11a and 11b, the following junctions have been identified for further detailed analysis: • Development Access Junction • Station Road / A89 – Signalised Junction
7.4 The detailed junction analysis was undertaken using industry standard analysis software, Linsig V3.
7.5 For signal-controlled junctions the comparable measure is Degree of Saturation (DoS) and 90% is generally adopted as the practical limiting figure. This limiting value allows for variations in daily traffic demand and site- specific model variations.
7.6 It should be noted however, that the level of available capacity within a signalised junction can be varied by the adjustment of cycle and stage times without the need for physical improvements. Changing the junctions staging (varying which signal phases are called together) can also achieve betterment without physical improvements.
Development Access Junction
7.1 This junction was analysed using the industry standard analysis program Junctions 9. The results of the analysis are summarised in Table 7.1.
7.2 The maximum predicted Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) value is 0.722 on the Development Access approach during the 2023 Weekday AM peak period with generated traffic.
7.3 This analysis predicts that the junction would operate within capacity in the design year 2023 following the addition of development traffic.
Page 32 Table 7.1 - Picady Results Station Road (north) / Development Access / Station Road (south) Priority Junction
Station Road (north) Development Access Station Road (south) RFC Queue Delay RFC Queue Delay RFC Queue Delay PCUs seconds PCUs seconds PCUs seconds
Weekday AM 2023 + Generation - - - 0.722 2.5 41.217 0.052 0.1 5.580
Weekday PM 2023 + Generation - - - 0.507 101.0 22.394 0.041 0.4 4.739
Notes: - RFC represent Ratio of Flow to Capacity - queue lengths are maximum values expressed in numbers of PCUs - vehicle delays are stated as average delays in seconds Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Station Road / A89 – Signalised Junction
7.4 This junction was analysed using the industry standard analysis program Linsig V3. The results of the analysis are attached in Appendix G. The analysis of the junction was based on on-site measurements and junction operation characteristic.
7.5 On-site observations were undertaken on the 22nd of September 2020 to assess the junction’s operation during the morning commuting peak period.
7.6 It was observed that the pedestrian stage was rarely called due to the limited number of pedestrians in the area. When it was called, it was called most often on the Station Road (south) arm for pedestrians and cyclists using the shared path on the A89.
7.7 Few pedestrian movements crossing the A89 at the junction were noted which may be in part due to the overpass crossing the A89 as identified in Section 3 of this report.
7.8 It was also noted that the right turn from the A89 (east) arm onto Station Road was not called every cycle and would only be called on demand. This allows the A89 (west) arm to receive a full green period with right turns running simultaneously with the straight and left turn movements on the opposite approach.
7.9 The base traffic flow data provided by WLC identifies 17 vehicles making the right turn movement during the morning peak hour. During the evening peak hour the corresponding figure is 29 vehicles.
7.10 From on-site observations and reference to the base traffic data, it can be anticipated that the junction would typically operate with no pedestrian stage and no right turn stage on the A89 (east) albeit the facility for these stages to be called is provided.
7.11 The analysis of this junction therefore reflects the limited use of the pedestrian stage however, it is not possible to model the behaviour of the right turn on the A89 (east) arm using Linsig. Therefore, a second model was produced which removed the right turning movements from the A89 (east), which are limited in number, and gave the additional green time to the straight and left lanes of the A89 (west). Both model’s results are attached in Appendix G for reference.
7.12 A summary of the maximum Degree of Saturation (DoS) achieved by the Linsig Models during the 2023 + Gen scenarios is detailed in Table 7.2 below for reference.
Page 33 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
2023AM + Gen 2023PM + Gen Station Road/A89 Junction 89.7% 89.7% (without A89 east right turns) Station Road/A89 Junction 95.6% 91.7% (with A89 east right turns)
Table 7.2 – Maximum DoS for each scenario
7.13 As identified in the above table, analysis of the junction excluding the occasionally called right turn stage demonstrates that the junction would operate with a maximum DoS of 89.7% and therefore within capacity.
7.14 Junction analysis including the right turn identifies that the junction would operate with a DoS of over 90% during both the AM and PM peak periods. While over the generally accepted limiting figure of 90%, the junction would still operate within the ultimate capacity taking account of the occasionally called right turn movement
7.15 For comparison purposes the junction has also been assessed in the situation where both pedestrian and right turn stages are called but without the addition of development traffic.
7.16 A summary of the maximum Degree of Saturation achieved by this Linsig model during the 2016AM/PM and 2023AM/PM periods are detailed in Table 7.3 below. The full results for this model are attached in Appendix G for reference.
AM Peak Period PM Peak Period 2016 106.6% 105.8% 2023 111.9% 107.7%
Table 7.3 – Maximum DoS for each scenario without development traffic
7.17 As identified in the above table, when the pedestrian and right turn stages are called the junction operates over the 90% DoS limiting factor across all of the assessed periods without development traffic. This demonstrates that the junction currently operates well over capacity when the pedestrian and right turn stages are called.
7.18 Therefore, as previously highlighted, the addition of development traffic to the local road network would not cause the Station Road / A89 junction to operate over capacity.
Page 34 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
8 Parking & Service Arrangements
8.1 West Lothian Council have adopted the parking standards identified in SCOTS National Roads Development Guide for all new developments.
8.2 It is noted that this application is for Planning Permission in Principle and the final layout of the development will be subject to further discussion and detailed design. The development road layout would be designed in accordance with the SCOTS.
Residential Development
8.3 The parking standards for residential developments according to SCOTS are detailed in Table 8.1 below.
Table 8.1 – SCOTS Residential Parking Provision Standards
8.4 The standards detailed above are to be applied to the finalised content of the proposed 200-unit residential development.
Commercial Development
8.5 The parking standards for Local Shops according to SCOTS are detailed in Table 8.2 below.
Table 8.2 – SCOTS Local Shops Parking Provision Standards
Page 35 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
8.6 When the above standards are applied to the 1000m2 of proposed commercial development a total of 20 car parking spaces are to be provided, of which three are to be allocated as disabled bays.
8.7 Additionally, 4 cycle parking spaces are to be provided at the commercial development.
Cycle Hub
8.8 In addition to the P&R development serving Uphall Train Station a Cycle Hub is to be implemented provided cycle parking spaces and supporting multi- modal trips via bicycle and train.
8.9 The Cycle Hub would offer safe storage spaces for commuters to park their bikes, lockers to store any equipment or clothing, and changing facilities for those who require it.
8.10 These facilities, in combination with the cycle route on the A89 to the north, would offer an attractive alternative trip to commuters.
Page 36 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
9 Conclusions
9.1 This assessment considers the transportation implications of the proposed mixed-use development.
9.2 The proposed development is in accordance with current Government policy as set down in Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) with regard to the ability to integrate the development into existing and planned networks for pedestrians, cyclists, and public transport.
9.3 The development would be accessible by a range of sustainable transport modes, and pedestrian connections would be made to the existing local footway network on Station Road and the A89.
9.4 There are existing bus stops on Station Road which are within reasonable walking distance of the development. Rail services are easily accessible from Uphall Station via Station Road or the segregated footpath running through the site. These train services provide fast and frequent links to Edinburgh and Glasgow City Centres. It is expected that these facilities would offer a very attractive alternative to the private car for visitors to and residents of the proposed development.
9.5 The development layout will be designed in accordance with the Designing Streets policy which is intended to enhance the environment for pedestrians and cyclists and mitigate against the private car dominating the development.
9.6 A particular approach to the Linsig V3 analysis of the Station Road / A8 signalised junction has been taken reflecting the limited demand for the pedestrian and A89 (east) right turn movement. On site observation have identified that both of these dedicated stages are called on demand. With regard to the right turn movement from the A89 (east) onto Station Road, this is supported by the historic traffic data provided by WLC which identifies low number of vehicles making this movement during the morning and evening peak periods.
9.7 The analysis undertaken identifies that the additional demand generated by the development could be accommodated by the existing junction during typical operational conditions.
9.8 Analysis without the addition of development traffic and including both on- demand stages identifies that the junction would operate over capacity in both peak periods. It is proposed the the addition of development traffic would have no material impact on the operation of this junction.
9.9 The development’s parking provision would be in accordance with the SCOTS National Roads Development Guide parking standards.
9.10 Service vehicles would be accommodated within the final design of the development road layout.
Page 37 Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix A
Development Layout Diagram
notes:
1. This drawing is Copyright reserved and should be used only for the purposes intended in its original issue.
2. Do not scale off this drawing, use only figured dimensions. The Contractor is to bring to the attention of the Architect any discrepancies contained in this drawing prior to work commencing.
3. This drawing is to be read in conjunction with all relevant drawings and specifications including those from other Consultants.
4. Any existing dimensions should be checked on site and any discrepancies reported to the Architect.
Uphall
A89
Proposed Solar PV Array & Landscaped Paths
4.000Ha
N
SW Drain and easement zone
D 06.11.2020 Design zones clarified DS APR Access to core path Revision Description By Chk ZONE C 3 Storey Residential project Uphall Estates
ZONE C Ground Floor Commercial Proposed Development units
ZONE B Uphall 2 Storey Residential
SUDS Basin Bicycle Park FLEXIBLE FUTURE EXPANSION AREA: Residential, open P&R Services Uphall Business Park space and/ or Bus drop-off linked to Open Space/ Park & Ride Parkland title Uphall Masterplan
PARK & RIDE Phase 1 South Parking 150No. Bays Including 12No. Access path Accessible bays to station and Vehicular landscape Site Boundary improvements Access ZONE A 2 Storey Residential
Station Road scale size date drawn checked 1:2000 A1 July 2020 DS APR
drawing status M8 Motorway INFORMATION
AITKEN TURNBULL ARCHITECTS 5 Castle Terrace Edinburgh EH1 2DP
0131 297 2350 [email protected] www.aitken-turnbull.co.uk
Also at Galashiels & Dumfries
project no. drawing no. revision Uphall Station AT3400 L(-1)103 D notes:
1. This drawing is Copyright reserved and should be used only for the purposes intended in its original issue.
2. Do not scale off this drawing, use only figured dimensions. The Contractor is to bring to the attention of the Architect any discrepancies contained in this drawing prior to work commencing.
3. This drawing is to be read in conjunction with all relevant drawings and specifications including those from other Consultants.
4. Any existing dimensions should be checked on site and any discrepancies SW Drain and reported to the Architect. SUDS Basin easement zone
ZONE B 2 Storey ZONE C Residential 3 Storey Residential
Access to core path
ZONE C Ground Floor Commercial units
Open Space/ Parkland N
FLEXIBLE FUTURE EXPANSION AREA: Residential, open space and/ or Bus drop-off linked to Park & Ride E 06.11.2020 Design zones clarified DS APR ZONE A Revision Description By Chk project 2 Storey Bicycle Residential Park Uphall Estates Proposed Development P&R Services Uphall
title Masterplan Layout PARK & RIDE 150No. Bays
Including 12No. Accessible bays scale size date drawn checked 1:500 A1 July 2020 DS APR
drawing status INFORMATION
AITKEN TURNBULL ARCHITECTS 5 Castle Terrace Edinburgh EH1 2DP Access path 0131 297 2350 to station and [email protected] landscape www.aitken-turnbull.co.uk improvements Also at Galashiels & Dumfries
project no. drawing no. revision AT3400 L(-1)101 E Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix B
Development Access Layout
c Copyright of this document is reserved by Dougall Baillie Associates Ltd. DO NOT scale from this drawing
Notes:
2.0m
3.0m
R6.0m
4.5m x 120m Visibility Splay to 4.5m x 120m the left Visibility Splay to the right Rev. Revision details: By: Checked: Date: Date:
Client: UPHALL ESTATES LTD
Project: UPHALL, BROXBURN
Drawing Title: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACCESS 2.0m LAYOUT WITH VISIBILITY SPLAYS
Drawn: Checked: 3.0m DW SH
Date: Date: 19/10/20 19/10/20 R6.0m Scale: Dwg. 1/500 @A3 No: 20097-SK-02 Dwg Status: INFORMATION Print: COLOUR Dougall Baillie Associates 3 Glenfield Road, Kelvin East Kilbride G75 0RA t: 01355 266480 f: 01355 221991 e: [email protected] w: www.dougallbaillie.com civil. structural. transportation. water management.
?
BasedpermissionStationeryLicenceAL 100018007 upon No. ofOffice. the the Ordnance Controller Crown CopyrightSurvey of H.M. map Reserved. with the Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix C
Traffic Flow Diagrams
Station Road
20 44 208 51 578 32 A89 (west) A89 (east) 17 513 35 106 145 259
503
Development Access
286
425 78
Car Park Access 21 21 261 53
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
2 416 28 5 2 8 Car Park Access Car Park Access 8 4 7 10 300 30
57 16 237 78 21 14 Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 1a 66 2016 Base Traffic Flows 7 AM Peak Hour (07:45-08:45) 9 241 50 33 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
69 24 104 42 598 29 A89 (west) A89 (east) 30 630 39 148 169 141
279
Development Access
373
267 12
Car Park Access 55 31 318 14
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
3 276 21 5 2 3 Car Park Access Car Park Access 42 4 47 3 284 19
214 174 146 8 97 177 Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 1b 11 2016 Base Traffic Flows 121 PM Peak Hour (16:45 - 17:45) 159 131 72 87 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
21 46 218 54 607 34 A89 (west) A89 (east) 18 539 37 111 152 272
528
Development Access
300
446 82
Car Park Access 22 22 274 56
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
2 437 29 5 2 8 Car Park Access Low Growth Factor Car Park Access 8 2016 1.240 1.050 4 2023 1.302 7 11 315 32
60 17 249 82 22 15 Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 2a 69 2023 Projected Traffic Flows 7 AM Peak Hour (07:45-08:45) 9 253 53 35 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
72 25 109 44 628 30 A89 (west) A89 (east) 32 662 41 155 177 148
293
Development Access
392
280 13
Car Park Access 58 33 334 15
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
3 290 22 5 2 3 Car Park Access Low Growth Factor Car Park Access 44 2016 1.240 1.050 4 2023 1.302 49 3 298 20
225 183 153 8 102 186 Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 1b 12 2023 Projected Traffic Flows 127 PM Peak Hour (16:45 - 17:45) 167 138 76 91 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road 5.5% Station Road
5.5%
38.9% 38.9% 37.8% A89 (west) A89 (east)
38.9% 5.5% 37.8% 37.8%
82.3%
Development Access 82.3% 17.7% 17.7%
17.7%
Car Park Access
17.7%
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
17.7%
Car Park Access Car Park Access
17.7%
5.8% 5.8% 10.3% 1.7%
5.8% 1.7% Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 3 1.7% Residential Trip Distribution AM & PM Peak Hours 10.3% All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road 10.3% Station Road
1
9 A89 (west) A89 (east)
39 6 38 9
19
Development Access 83 18 4
18
Car Park Access
4
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
18
Car Park Access Residential Vehicle Trip Generation Car Park Access 200 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.113 0.507 0.324 0.158 4 Vehicle Trips 23 101 65 32
1 6 10 2
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 4a 0 Residential Trip Generation AM Peak Hour 2 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
4
25 A89 (west) A89 (east)
12 2 12 24
53
Development Access 26 6 11
6
Car Park Access
11
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
6
Car Park Access Residential Vehicle Trip Generation Car Park Access 200 Units AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.113 0.507 0.324 0.158 11 Vehicle Trips 23 101 65 32
4 2 3 1
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 4b 1 Residential Trip Generation PM Peak Hour 7 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
70.0% 70.0% A89 (west) A89 (east)
70.0%
70.0%
Development Access 70.0%
Car Park Access
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
Car Park Access Car Park Access
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 5a Park & Ride New Trip Distribution AM & PM Peak Hours All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
70.0% A89 (west) A89 (east)
-15.0% 15.0%
Development Access 15.0% 15.0% -15.0% 15.0%
15.0% -15.0%
Car Park Access -15.0% -15.0% 15.0% -15.0%
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
Car Park Access Car Park Access
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 5b Park & Ride Diverted Trip Distribution AM & PM Peak Hours All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
75 A89 (west) A89 (east)
26
-16 91
Development Access 32 6 -6 16
6 -16
Car Park Access -6 -6 16 -16
M8 M8 Existing Car Park Vehicle Trip Generation Train Line Train Line 282 Bays AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.713 0.248 0.255 0.649 Vehicle Trips 201 70 72 183
Car Park Access Park & Ride Vehicle Trip Generation Car Park Access 150 Bays AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.713 0.248 0.255 0.649 Vehicle Trips 107 37 38 97
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 6a Park & Ride Trip Generation AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
27 A89 (west) A89 (east)
68
-6 33
Development Access 83 15 -15 6
15 -6
Car Park Access -15 -15 6 -6
M8 M8 Existing Car Park Vehicle Trip Generation Train Line Train Line 282 Bays AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.713 0.248 0.255 0.649 Vehicle Trips 201 70 72 183
Car Park Access Park & Ride Vehicle Trip Generation Car Park Access 150 Bays AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 0.713 0.248 0.255 0.649 Vehicle Trips 107 37 38 97
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 6b Park & Ride Trip Generation PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road 50.0% Station Road
50.0%
50.0% A89 (west) A89 (east)
50.0% 50.0% 50.0%
100.0%
Development Access 100.0%
Car Park Access
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
Car Park Access Car Park Access
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 7 Commercial Trip Distribution AM & PM Peak Hours All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
17
A89 (west) A89 (east)
32 32 17
33
Development Access 64
Car Park Access
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
Car Park Access Total Residential Vehicle Trip Generation Car Park Access 1000 m2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 6.643 6.429 6.762 7.333 Vehicle Trips 66 64 68 73 Internal Trips 33 32 34 37 New Trips 33 32 34 37
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 8a Commercial Trip Generation AM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
17
A89 (west) A89 (east)
18 18 17
34
Development Access 37
Car Park Access
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
Car Park Access Total Residential Vehicle Trip Generation Car Park Access 1000 m2 AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Arr Dep Arr Dep Trip Rates 6.643 6.429 6.762 7.333 Vehicle Trips 66 64 68 73 Internal Trips 33 32 34 37 New Trips 33 32 34 37
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 8b Commercial Trip Generation PM Peak Hour All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
18
84 A89 (west) A89 (east)
66 38 70 25
-16 143
Development Access 179 24 -6 20
24 -16
Car Park Access -6 -6 20 -16
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
18
Car Park Access Car Park Access
4
1 6 10 2
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 9a Total Development Trip Generation AM Peak Hour 2 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
20
52 A89 (west) A89 (east)
80 20 30 41
-6 120
Development Access 145 20 -15 17
20 -6
Car Park Access -15 -15 17 -6
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
6
Car Park Access Car Park Access
11
4 2 3 1
Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 9b Total Development Trip Generation PM Peak Hour 7 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
21 46 236 54 607 117 A89 (west) A89 (east) 18 539 102 149 223 297
512 143
Development Access 179 24 295 20
470 66
Car Park Access 16 16 294 40
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
2 455 29 5 2 8 Car Park Access Car Park Access 8 4 7 11 319 32
61 23 259 84 22 15 Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 10a 69 2023 Flows + Trip Generation 7 AM Peak Hour (07:45-08:45) 9 255 53 35 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
72 25 130 44 628 82 A89 (west) A89 (east) 32 662 121 175 208 189
287 120
Development Access 145 20 377 17
301 7
Car Park Access 43 18 351 9
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
3 295 22 5 2 3 Car Park Access Car Park Access 44 4 49 3 310 20
228 185 157 9 102 186 Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 10b 12 2023 Flows + Trip Generation 127 PM Peak Hour (16:45 - 17:45) 167 144 76 91 All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
11.9%
5.8% A89 (west) A89 (east) 11.6%
36.4%
36.3%
N/A Development Access
2.7%
2.7%
N/A Car Park Access
2.8%
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
2.8%
0.0% Car Park Access Car Park Access 0.0%
2.7%
3.0%
0.6% Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 11a 5.5% Percentage Impact AM Peak Hour (07:45-08:45) 2.1% All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Station Road
9.3%
4.2% A89 (west) A89 (east) 9.1%
37.0%
35.7%
N/A Development Access
2.5%
2.5%
N/A Car Park Access
2.6%
M8 M8 Train Line Train Line
2.6%
0.0% Car Park Access Car Park Access 0.0%
2.6%
2.2%
0.1% Houston Road Cawburn Road Figure 11b 0.6% Percentage Impact PM Peak Hour (16:45 - 17:45) 1.2% All Flows in PCUs
Uphall Station Road Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix D
TRICS Data (Residential Development)
TRICS 7.5.3 121018 B18.48 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 04/12/18 Page 1 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Filtering Summary
Land Use 03/A RESIDENTIAL/HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED
Selected Trip Rate Calculation Parameter Range 40-432 DWELLS
Actual Trip Rate Calculation Parameter Range 40-180 DWELLS
Date Range Minimum: 01/01/10 Maximum: 22/11/17
Days of the week selected Monday 1 Tuesday 3 Wednesday 2
Main Location Types selected Edge of Town Centre 2 Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 3 Edge of Town 1
Population <1 Mile ranges selected 1,001 to 5,000 2 5,001 to 10,000 1 10,001 to 15,000 2 15,001 to 20,000 1
Population <5 Mile ranges selected 5,001 to 25,000 2 50,001 to 75,000 1 75,001 to 100,000 2 250,001 to 500,000 1
Car Ownership <5 Mile ranges selected 1.1 to 1.5 6
PTAL Rating No PTAL Present 6 TRICS 7.5.3 121018 B18.48 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 04/12/18 Page 2 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-713101-181204-1222 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
Land Use : 03 - RESIDENTIAL Category : A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL TOTAL PEOPLE
Selected regions and areas: 07 YORKSHIRE & NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE NE NORTH EAST LINCOLNSHIRE 1 days NY NORTH YORKSHIRE 2 days SY SOUTH YORKSHIRE 1 days 09 NORTH CB CUMBRIA 1 days 11 SCOTLAND HI HIGHLAND 1 days
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set
Secondary Filtering selection:
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Parameter: Number of dwellings Actual Range: 40 to 180 (units: ) Range Selected by User: 40 to 432 (units: )
Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys
Date Range: 01/01/10 to 22/11/17
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Selected survey days: Monday 1 days Tuesday 3 days Wednesday 2 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.
Selected survey types: Manual count 6 days Directional ATC Count 0 days
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys are undertaking using machines.
Selected Locations: Edge of Town Centre 2 Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 3 Edge of Town 1
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Not Known.
Selected Location Sub Categories: Residential Zone 5 No Sub Category 1
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village, Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category.
Secondary Filtering selection:
Use Class: C 3 6 days
This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005 has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®. TRICS 7.5.3 121018 B18.48 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 04/12/18 Page 3 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Secondary Filtering selection (Cont.):
Population within 1 mile: 1,001 to 5,000 2 days 5,001 to 10,000 1 days 10,001 to 15,000 2 days 15,001 to 20,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
Population within 5 miles: 5,001 to 25,000 2 days 50,001 to 75,000 1 days 75,001 to 100,000 2 days 250,001 to 500,000 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
Car ownership within 5 miles: 1.1 to 1.5 6 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling, within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Travel Plan: No 6 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place, and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
PTAL Rating: No PTAL Present 6 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings. TRICS 7.5.3 121018 B18.48 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 04/12/18 Page 4 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
Site(1): CB-03-A-05 Site area: 1.51 hect Development Name: DETACHED/TERRACED HOUSING Number of dwellings: 5 0 Location: PENRITH Housing density: 4 0 Postcode: CA11 9HS Total Bedrooms: 1 6 3 Main Location Type: Edge of Town Centre Survey Date: 21/06/16 Sub-Location Type: Residential Zone Survey Day: Tuesday PTAL: n/a Parking Spaces: 117
Site(2): HI-03-A-14 Site area: 1.48 hect Development Name: SEMI-DETACHED & TERRACED Number of dwellings: 4 0 Location: INVERNESS Housing density: 3 6 Postcode: IV3 8LX Total Bedrooms: 1 2 1 Main Location Type: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Survey Date: 23/03/16 Sub-Location Type: Residential Zone Survey Day: Wednesday PTAL: n/a Parking Spaces: 89
Site(3): NE-03-A-03 Site area: 8.00 hect Development Name: PRIVATE HOUSES Number of dwellings: 1 8 0 Location: SCUNTHORPE Housing density: Postcode: DN15 6BW Total Bedrooms: 4 3 2 Main Location Type: Edge of Town Centre Survey Date: 20/05/14 Sub-Location Type: Residential Zone Survey Day: Tuesday PTAL: n/a Parking Spaces: 482
Site(4): NY-03-A-09 Site area: 3.30 hect Development Name: MIXED HOUSING Number of dwellings: 5 2 Location: NORTHALLERTON Housing density: 1 8 Postcode: DL6 1BQ Total Bedrooms: 1 5 2 Main Location Type: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Survey Date: 16/09/13 Sub-Location Type: Residential Zone Survey Day: Monday PTAL: n/a Parking Spaces: 135
Site(5): NY-03-A-10 Site area: 2.21 hect Development Name: HOUSES AND FLATS Number of dwellings: 7 1 Location: RIPON Housing density: 4 8 Postcode: HG4 1UH Total Bedrooms: 1 3 8 Main Location Type: Edge of Town Survey Date: 17/09/13 Sub-Location Type: No Sub Category Survey Day: Tuesday PTAL: n/a Parking Spaces: 59
Site(6): SY-03-A-01 Site area: 1.73 hect Development Name: SEMI DETACHED HOUSES Number of dwellings: 5 4 Location: DONCASTER Housing density: 3 4 Postcode: DN5 9TD Total Bedrooms: 1 6 2 Main Location Type: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Survey Date: 18/09/13 Sub-Location Type: Residential Zone Survey Day: Wednesday PTAL: n/a Parking Spaces: 61 TRICS 7.5.3 121018 B18.48 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2018. All rights reserved Tuesday 04/12/18 Page 5 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL TOTAL PEOPLE Calculation factor: 1 DWELLS BOLD print indicates peak (busiest) period
ARRIVALS DEPARTURES TOTALS No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip No. Ave. Trip Time Range Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate Days DWELLS Rate 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 07:00 - 08:00 6 75 0.076 6 75 0.447 6 75 0.523 08:00 - 09:00 6 75 0.206 6 75 0.926 6 75 1.132 09:00 - 10:00 6 75 0.244 6 75 0.293 6 75 0.537 10:00 - 11:00 6 75 0.163 6 75 0.226 6 75 0.389 11:00 - 12:00 6 75 0.215 6 75 0.217 6 75 0.432 12:00 - 13:00 6 75 0.255 6 75 0.221 6 75 0.476 13:00 - 14:00 6 75 0.219 6 75 0.291 6 75 0.510 14:00 - 15:00 6 75 0.213 6 75 0.293 6 75 0.506 15:00 - 16:00 6 75 0.532 6 75 0.336 6 75 0.868 16:00 - 17:00 6 75 0.550 6 75 0.264 6 75 0.814 17:00 - 18:00 6 75 0.591 6 75 0.289 6 75 0.880 18:00 - 19:00 6 75 0.342 6 75 0.291 6 75 0.633 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 3.606 4.094 7.700
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places. Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix D
TRICS Data (Commercial Development)
TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Monday 07/09/20 Page 1 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Calculation Reference: AUDIT-713101-200907-0923 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:
Land Use : 01 - RETAIL Category : I - SHOPPING CENTRE - LOCAL SHOPS VEHICLES
Selected regions and areas: 05 EAST MIDLANDS LE LEICESTERSHIRE 1 days 06 WEST MIDLANDS SH SHROPSHIRE 1 days WM WEST MIDLANDS 1 days 08 NORTH WEST CH CHESHIRE 2 days 09 NORTH TV TEES VALLEY 1 days TW TYNE & WEAR 1 days 11 SCOTLAND SR STIRLING 1 days
This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set
Primary Filtering selection:
This data displays the chosen trip rate parameter and its selected range. Only sites that fall within the parameter range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Parameter: Gross floor area Actual Range: 260 to 900 (units: sqm) Range Selected by User: 210 to 3000 (units: sqm)
Parking Spaces Range: All Surveys Included
Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys
Date Range: 01/01/12 to 24/05/19
This data displays the range of survey dates selected. Only surveys that were conducted within this date range are included in the trip rate calculation.
Selected survey days: Monday 1 days Tuesday 3 days Wednesday 1 days Thursday 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.
Selected survey types: Manual count 8 days Directional ATC Count 0 days
This data displays the number of manual classified surveys and the number of unclassified ATC surveys, the total adding up to the overall number of surveys in the selected set. Manual surveys are undertaken using staff, whilst ATC surveys are undertaking using machines.
Selected Locations: Edge of Town 4 Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) 4
This data displays the number of surveys per main location category within the selected set. The main location categories consist of Free Standing, Edge of Town, Suburban Area, Neighbourhood Centre, Edge of Town Centre, Town Centre and Not Known.
Selected Location Sub Categories: Residential Zone 7 Retail Zone 1
This data displays the number of surveys per location sub-category within the selected set. The location sub-categories consist of Commercial Zone, Industrial Zone, Development Zone, Residential Zone, Retail Zone, Built-Up Zone, Village, Out of Town, High Street and No Sub Category. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Monday 07/09/20 Page 2 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
Secondary Filtering selection:
Use Class: A 1 1 days
This data displays the number of surveys per Use Class classification within the selected set. The Use Classes Order 2005 has been used for this purpose, which can be found within the Library module of TRICS®.
Population within 1 mile: 5,001 to 10,000 2 days 10,001 to 15,000 1 days 20,001 to 25,000 2 days 25,001 to 50,000 3 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 1-mile radii of population.
Population within 5 miles: 75,001 to 100,000 1 days 100,001 to 125,000 3 days 125,001 to 250,000 1 days 250,001 to 500,000 2 days 500,001 or More 1 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated 5-mile radii of population.
Car ownership within 5 miles: 0.6 to 1.0 3 days 1.1 to 1.5 5 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys within stated ranges of average cars owned per residential dwelling, within a radius of 5-miles of selected survey sites.
Petrol filling station: Included in the survey count 0 days Excluded from count or no filling station 8 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that include petrol filling station activity, and the number of surveys that do not.
Travel Plan: Yes 1 days No 7 days
This data displays the number of surveys within the selected set that were undertaken at sites with Travel Plans in place, and the number of surveys that were undertaken at sites without Travel Plans.
PTAL Rating: No PTAL Present 8 days
This data displays the number of selected surveys with PTAL Ratings. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Monday 07/09/20 Page 3 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters
1 CH-01-I-02 LOCAL SHOPS CHESHIRE CHRISTLETON ROAD CHESTER BOUGHTON HEATH Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 2 6 0 sqm Survey date: TUESDAY 15/05/12 Survey Type: MANUAL 2 CH-01-I-03 LOCAL SHOPS CHESHIRE MILL LANE CHESTER BACHE Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 3 6 5 sqm Survey date: THURSDAY 17/05/12 Survey Type: MANUAL 3 LE-01-I-02 LOCAL SHOPS LEICESTERSHIRE RYDER ROAD LEICESTER
Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 5 5 0 sqm Survey date: TUESDAY 28/10/14 Survey Type: MANUAL 4 SH-01-I-02 LOCAL SHOPS SHROPSHIRE WREKIN DRIVE TELFORD DONNINGTON Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 9 0 0 sqm Survey date: THURSDAY 24/10/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 5 SR-01-I-02 LOCAL SHOPS STIRLING ALLOA ROAD STIRLING
Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 5 5 0 sqm Survey date: THURSDAY 26/06/14 Survey Type: MANUAL 6 TV-01-I-04 LOCAL SHOPS TEES VALLEY CARGO FLEET LANE MIDDLESBROUGH ORMESBY Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 5 8 5 sqm Survey date: MONDAY 07/10/13 Survey Type: MANUAL 7 TW-01-I-02 LOCAL SHOPS TYNE & WEAR DURHAM ROAD SUNDERLAND BARNES PARK Neighbourhood Centre (PPS6 Local Centre) Residential Zone Total Gross floor area: 5 4 0 sqm Survey date: WEDNESDAY 21/11/12 Survey Type: MANUAL 8 WM-01-I-03 LOCAL SHOPS WEST MIDLANDS BRISTOL ROAD SOUTH BIRMINGHAM
Edge of Town Retail Zone Total Gross floor area: 4 5 0 sqm Survey date: TUESDAY 10/11/15 Survey Type: MANUAL
This section provides a list of all survey sites and days in the selected set. For each individual survey site, it displays a unique site reference code and site address, the selected trip rate calculation parameter and its value, the day of the week and date of each survey, and whether the survey was a manual classified count or an ATC count. TRICS 7.7.2 250720 B19.45 Database right of TRICS Consortium Limited, 2020. All rights reserved Monday 07/09/20 Page 4 DOUGALL BAILLIE ASSOCIATES GLENFIELD ROAD EAST KILBRIDE Licence No: 713101
TRIP RATE for Land Use 01 - RETAIL/I - SHOPPING CENTRE - LOCAL SHOPS 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 GFA Rate Days GFA Rate Days GFA Rate 00:00 - 01:00 01:00 - 02:00 02:00 - 03:00 03:00 - 04:00 04:00 - 05:00 05:00 - 06:00 06:00 - 07:00 1 540 1.296 1 540 1.296 1 540 2.592 07:00 - 08:00 8 525 6.310 8 525 5.714 8 525 12.024 08:00 - 09:00 8 525 6.643 8 525 6.429 8 525 13.072 09:00 - 10:00 8 525 6.024 8 525 5.929 8 525 11.953 10:00 - 11:00 8 525 6.119 8 525 5.429 8 525 11.548 11:00 - 12:00 8 525 6.929 8 525 7.357 8 525 14.286 12:00 - 13:00 8 525 9.214 8 525 8.476 8 525 17.690 13:00 - 14:00 8 525 7.762 8 525 7.262 8 525 15.024 14:00 - 15:00 8 525 6.071 8 525 6.190 8 525 12.261 15:00 - 16:00 8 525 6.429 8 525 6.833 8 525 13.262 16:00 - 17:00 8 525 7.190 8 525 7.262 8 525 14.452 17:00 - 18:00 8 525 6.762 8 525 7.333 8 525 14.095 18:00 - 19:00 8 525 6.833 8 525 7.333 8 525 14.166 19:00 - 20:00 6 596 6.434 6 596 5.902 6 596 12.336 20:00 - 21:00 6 596 4.420 6 596 4.783 6 596 9.203 21:00 - 22:00 6 596 3.636 6 596 4.364 6 596 8.000 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 9 8.072 9 7.892 195.964
This section displays the trip rate results based on the selected set of surveys and the selected count type (shown just above the table). It is split by three main columns, representing arrivals trips, departures trips, and total trips (arrivals plus departures). Within each of these main columns are three sub-columns. These display the number of survey days where count data is included (per time period), the average value of the selected trip rate calculation parameter (per time period), and the trip rate result (per time period). Total trip rates (the sum of the column) are also displayed at the foot of the table.
To obtain a trip rate, the average (mean) trip rate parameter value (TRP) is first calculated for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. The average (mean) number of arrivals, departures or totals (whichever applies) is also calculated (COUNT) for all selected survey days that have count data available for the stated time period. Then, the average count is divided by the average trip rate parameter value, and multiplied by the stated calculation factor (shown just above the table and abbreviated here as FACT). So, the method is: COUNT/TRP*FACT. Trip rates are then rounded to 3 decimal places.
The survey data, graphs and all associated supporting information, contained within the TRICS Database are published by TRICS Consortium Limited ("the Company") and the Company claims copyright and database rights in this published work. The Company authorises those who possess a current TRICS licence to access the TRICS Database and copy the data contained within the TRICS Database for the licence holders' use only. Any resulting copy must retain all copyrights and other proprietary notices, and any disclaimer contained thereon.
The Company accepts no responsibility for loss which may arise from reliance on data contained in the TRICS Database. [No warranty of any kind, express or implied, is made as to the data contained in the TRICS Database.]
Parameter summary
Trip rate parameter range selected: 260 - 900 (units: sqm) Survey date date range: 01/01/12 - 24/05/19 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 8 Number of Saturdays: 0 Number of Sundays: 0 Surveys automatically removed from selection: 1 Surveys manually removed from selection: 0
This section displays a quick summary of some of the data filtering selections made by the TRICS® user. The trip rate calculation parameter range of all selected surveys is displayed first, followed by the range of minimum and maximum survey dates selected by the user. Then, the total number of selected weekdays and weekend days in the selected set of surveys are show. Finally, the number of survey days that have been manually removed from the selected set outside of the standard filtering procedure are displayed. Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix E
Census Data
C11 Scotland's Census 2011 - National Records of Scotland Table QS702SC - Method of travel to work or study (1)All people aged 4 and over who are studying or aged 16 to 74 in employment in the week before the census 2011OutputArea by Transport to place of work or study by Term-time Address (Indicator) and In education or employment Counting: Person
Filters: Default SummationPerson Term-time Address Resident(Indicator) In education or employmentIn education or employment - Part time students
Work or study Underground, Bus, minibus or Driving a car or Passenger in a Motorcycle, Transport to place of work or study All people Train Taxi or minicab Bicycle On foot Other mainly at or from metro, light rail or coach van car or van scooter or moped
2011OutputArea S00133879 42 4 0 4 3 0 22 8 0 0 1 0 S00133930 42 5 0 0 5 0 24 4 0 0 2 2 S00133931 71 9 0 0 5 0 40 11 0 0 6 0 S00133932 93 5 0 4 19 0 47 8 2 0 6 2 S00133933 96 7 0 4 11 0 49 9 0 0 14 2 S00133934 60 4 0 2 9 1 31 9 0 0 4 0 S00133935 110 17 0 12 17 1 40 18 0 0 4 1 S00133936 42 0 0 5 9 0 19 4 0 0 5 0 S00133937 57 3 0 8 5 1 29 10 0 0 1 0
(1) Excludes some 4 and 5 year olds (a total of 11,867 in Scotland) who were reported as being in full-time education but for whom no information on their place of study or method of travel to study was provided. Crown copyright 2013 For further information on variables, see www.scotlandscensus.gov.uk/variables In order to protect against disclosure of personal information, some records have been swapped between different geographic areas. Some cell values will be affected, particularly small values at the most detailed geographies. Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix F
Gravity Model (Datashine: Scotland Commute)
Gravity Model & Residential Vehicle Trip Distribution Calculations Data extracted from DataShine: Scotland Commute http://scotlandcommute.datashine.org.uk A89 A89 Uphall Station Road Houston Road Cawburn Road Station Road Origin Destination Trips Percent (east) (west) (south) (west) (west) (north) Broxburn East 121 9.7% 9.73% Bellsquarry, Adambrae and Kirkton 113 9.1% 4.55% 4.55% South Gyle 86 6.9% 3.5% 3.5% Howden 83 6.7% 3.34% 3.34% Pumpherston and Uphall Station 63 5.1% 1.69% 1.69% 1.69% Ratho, Ingliston and Gogar 63 5.1% 5.07% Dalmeny, Kirkliston and Newbridge 57 4.6% 4.59% Dedridge East 52 4.2% 4.18% Knightsridge and Deans North 51 4.1% 2.05% 2.05% Bathgate, Wester Inch and Inchcross 50 4.0% 4.02% Uphall, Dechmont and Ecclesmachan 48 3.9% 3.86% Broxburn Kirkhill 40 3.2% 3.22% Broomhouse and Bankhead 28 2.3% 1.1% 1.1% Bathgate East 22 1.8% 1.77% Corstorphine 22 1.8% 1.77% Deans Village 17 1.4% 0.7% 0.7% Currie West 16 1.3% 1.29% Tollcross 16 1.3% 0.6% 0.6% Polmont 14 1.1% 1.13% Boswall and Pilton 13 1.0% 0.5% 0.5% Winchburgh, Bridgend and Philpstoun 13 1.0% 0.5% 0.5% Linlithgow Bridge 13 1.0% 1.05% Craigleith, Orchard Brae and Crewe Toll 12 1.0% 0.5% 0.5% Queensferry East 12 1.0% 0.97% Whitburn Central 11 0.9% 0.88% Western Harbour and Leith Docks 11 0.9% 0.4% 0.4% Granton West and Salvesen 9 0.7% 0.4% 0.4% Mid Calder and Kirknewton 9 0.7% 0.72% Blackburn 9 0.7% 0.72% Straiton 9 0.7% 0.72% Bankton and Murieston 9 0.7% 0.72% Craigshill 9 0.7% 0.72% Merchiston and Greenhill 8 0.6% 0.64% Morningside 8 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% Ladywell 8 0.6% 0.64%
Uphall, Dechmont and Ecclesmachan Knightsridge 8 0.6% 0.64% Old Town, Princes Street and Leith Street 8 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% The Calders 7 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% West Calder and Polbeth 7 0.6% 0.56% Fallside 7 0.6% 0.56% Rosyth South 7 0.6% 0.56% Dunfermline Pitcorthie East 7 0.6% 0.56% Craigmillar 7 0.6% 0.56% Breich Valley 6 0.5% 0.48% Stockbridge 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% New Town East and Gayfield 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% Portobello 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% Newington and Dalkeith Road 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% Craiglockhart 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% Shandon 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% Stenhouse and Saughton Mains 6 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% Broxburn South 6 0.5% 0.48% England 6 0.5% 0.48% Totals 1243 100% 37.8% 38.9% 10.3% 5.8% 1.7% 5.5% Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix G
Linsig V3 Outputs
Station Road / A89 Signalised Junction (without pedestrian stage)
Basic Results Summary Basic Results Summary
User and Project Details Project: Uphall, Broxburn Title: A89 / Station Road - Signalised Junction Location: Uphall Client: Uphall Estates Ltd Date Started: 18/09/20 Date Completed: 18/09/20 Additional detail: File name: 20033 - A89_Station Road Junction (no ped - with right turns) (RevA).lsg3x Author: Daniel Winnie Company: Dougall Baillie Associates Address: 3 Glenfield Road
Scenario 1: '2016AM ' (FG1: '2016AM', Plan 2: 'Without ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 75.5% PRC: 19.2 %
Total Traffic Delay: 24.9 pcuHr Arm 8 -
401
Inf
0.0%
2006
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
2.7% 737 1768 1 74.8% 773 1915 2 74.8% 43 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 24 69.4% 2 1925 739 69.4% 1 1778 696 37.2%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1925
0.0%
Inf
385
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
74.3%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------75.5% 0 0 0 24.9 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------75.5% 0 0 0 24.9 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 23 - 303 2006 401 75.5% - - - 5.3 63.0 11.0 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 46 - 259 1778 696 37.2% - - - 2.2 30.1 6.4
A89 (east) 69.4 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 46:7 - 530 1925:1738 739+24 - - - 5.7 38.6 15.4 Ahead Right 69.4%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 23 - 286 1925 385 74.3% - - - 5.0 62.8 10.3 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 49 - 20 1768 737 2.7% - - - 0.1 23.2 0.4
A89 (west) 74.8 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 49:7 - 610 1915:1759 773+43 - - - 6.6 39.2 17.9 Right Ahead 74.8%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 19.2 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 24.92 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 19.2 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 24.92
Basic Results Summary Scenario 2: '2016PM ' (FG2: '2016PM', Plan 2: 'Without ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 73.0% PRC: 15.6 %
Total Traffic Delay: 23.7 pcuHr Arm 8 -
233
Inf
0.0%
1996
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
8.5% 810 1768 1 70.2% 852 1915 2 70.2% 41 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 39 77.9% 2 1925 809 77.9% 1 1778 770 18.3%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1932
0.0%
Inf
467
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
75.6%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------77.9% 0 0 0 23.7 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------77.9% 0 0 0 23.7 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 13 - 170 1996 233 73.0% - - - 3.7 78.7 6.7 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 51 - 141 1778 770 18.3% - - - 0.9 23.8 3.0
A89 (east) 77.9 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 51:7 - 660 1925:1738 809+39 - - - 7.2 39.3 19.9 Ahead Right 77.9%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 28 - 353 1932 467 75.6% - - - 5.6 57.6 12.4 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 54 - 69 1768 810 8.5% - - - 0.4 20.8 1.3
A89 (west) 70.2 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 54:7 - 627 1915:1759 852+41 - - - 5.9 33.6 17.3 Right Ahead 70.2%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 15.6 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 23.75 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 15.6 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 23.75
Basic Results Summary Scenario 3: '2023AM' (FG3: '2023AM', Plan 2: 'Without ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 79.3% PRC: 13.5 %
Total Traffic Delay: 27.4 pcuHr Arm 8 -
401
Inf
0.0%
2006
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
2.9% 737 1768 1 78.6% 773 1915 2 78.6% 43 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 25 72.9% 2 1925 739 72.9% 1 1778 696 39.1%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1925
0.0%
Inf
385
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
77.9%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------79.3% 0 0 0 27.4 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------79.3% 0 0 0 27.4 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 23 - 318 2006 401 79.3% - - - 5.9 66.4 11.9 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 46 - 272 1778 696 39.1% - - - 2.3 30.5 6.8
A89 (east) 72.9 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 46:7 - 557 1925:1738 739+25 - - - 6.2 40.2 16.6 Ahead Right 72.9%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 23 - 300 1925 385 77.9% - - - 5.5 65.9 11.1 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 49 - 21 1768 737 2.9% - - - 0.1 23.2 0.4
A89 (west) 78.6 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 49:7 - 641 1915:1759 773+43 - - - 7.4 41.3 19.6 Right Ahead 78.6%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 13.5 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 27.36 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 13.5 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 27.36
Basic Results Summary Scenario 4: '2023PM' (FG4: '2023PM', Plan 2: 'Without ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 74.3% PRC: 13.5 %
Total Traffic Delay: 24.7 pcuHr Arm 8 -
233
Inf
0.0%
1997
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
8.6% 810 1768 1 71.3% 853 1915 2 71.3% 41 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 39 79.3% 2 1925 809 79.3% 1 1778 770 18.6%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1932
0.0%
Inf
467
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
77.7%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------79.3% 0 0 0 24.7 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------79.3% 0 0 0 24.7 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 13 - 173 1997 233 74.3% - - - 3.8 79.9 7.0 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 51 - 143 1778 770 18.6% - - - 0.9 23.8 3.0
A89 (east) 79.3 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 51:7 - 672 1925:1738 809+39 - - - 7.5 40.2 20.6 Ahead Right 79.3%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 28 - 363 1932 467 77.7% - - - 6.0 59.3 13.0 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 54 - 70 1768 810 8.6% - - - 0.4 20.8 1.4
A89 (west) 71.3 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 54:7 - 637 1915:1759 853+41 - - - 6.0 34.0 17.6 Right Ahead 71.3%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 13.5 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 24.69 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 13.5 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 24.69
Basic Results Summary Scenario 5: '2023AM+Gen' (FG5: '2023AM+Gen', Plan 2: 'Without ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 95.6% PRC: -6.2 %
Total Traffic Delay: 47.6 pcuHr Arm 8 -
352
Inf
0.0%
2009
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
3.2% 663 1768 1 93.9% 647 1915 2 93.9% 125 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 22 81.5% 2 1925 662 81.5% 1 1778 622 47.7%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1922
0.0%
Inf
497
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
95.5%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------95.6% 0 0 0 47.6 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------95.6% 0 0 0 47.6 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 20 - 336 2009 352 95.6% - - - 10.6 114.0 17.1 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 41 - 297 1778 622 47.7% - - - 3.0 36.0 8.1
A89 (east) 81.5 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 41:8 - 557 1925:1738 662+22 - - - 7.7 49.5 18.5 Ahead Right 81.5%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 30 - 474 1922 497 95.5% - - - 12.4 94.1 22.2 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 44 - 21 1768 663 3.2% - - - 0.2 26.6 0.5
A89 (west) 93.9 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 44:8 - 724 1915:1759 647+125 - - - 13.8 68.6 27.4 Right Ahead 93.9%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): -6.2 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 47.61 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): -6.2 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 47.61
Basic Results Summary Scenario 6: '2023PM+Gen' (FG6: '2023PM+Gen', Plan 2: 'Without ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 91.7% PRC: -1.9 %
Total Traffic Delay: 38.6 pcuHr Arm 8 -
217
Inf
0.0%
2003
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
9.8% 737 1768 1 85.1% 738 1915 2 85.1% 96 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 35 90.4% 2 1925 732 90.4% 1 1778 696 27.1%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1930
0.0%
Inf
563
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
89.5%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------91.7% 0 0 0 38.6 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------91.7% 0 0 0 38.6 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 12 - 199 2003 217 91.7% - - - 6.8 122.9 10.4 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 46 - 189 1778 696 27.1% - - - 1.5 28.4 4.4
A89 (east) 90.4 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 46:7 - 694 1925:1738 732+35 - - - 11.0 56.8 25.3 Ahead Right 90.4%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 34 - 504 1930 563 89.5% - - - 9.5 67.8 19.9 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 49 - 72 1768 737 9.8% - - - 0.5 24.0 1.5
A89 (west) 85.1 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 49:7 - 710 1915:1759 738+96 - - - 9.4 47.4 22.6 Right Ahead 85.1%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): -1.9 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 38.57 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): -1.9 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 38.57
Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix G
Linsig V3 Outputs
Station Road / A89 Signalised Junction (without right turn movements on the A89 east)
Basic Results Summary Basic Results Summary
User and Project Details Project: Uphall, Broxburn Title: A89 / Station Road - Signalised Junction Location: Uphall Client: Uphall Estates Ltd Date Started: 18/09/20 Date Completed: 18/09/20 Additional detail: File name: 20033 - A89_Station Road Junction (no ped - no right turns).lsg3x Author: Daniel Winnie Company: Dougall Baillie Associates Address: 3 Glenfield Road
Scenario 1: '2016AM' (FG1: '2016AM', Plan 3: 'No right turn from eastern arm') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 72.5% PRC: 24.1 %
Total Traffic Delay: 22.7 pcuHr Arm 8 -
418
Inf
0.0%
2006
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
2.3% 884 1768 1 62.6% 923 1915 2 62.6% 51 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1955 0 0.0% 2 1925 722 71.1% 1 1778 667 38.8%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1925
0.0%
Inf
401
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
71.3%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------72.5% 0 0 0 22.7 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------72.5% 0 0 0 22.7 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 24 - 303 2006 418 72.5% - - - 5.0 59.6 10.6 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 44 - 259 1778 667 38.8% - - - 2.3 31.8 6.6
A89 (east) 71.1 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1:0 44:0 - 513 1925:1955 722+0 - - - 5.8 40.5 15.7 Ahead Right 0.0%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 24 - 286 1925 401 71.3% - - - 4.7 59.5 10.0 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 59 - 20 1768 884 2.3% - - - 0.1 17.3 0.3
A89 (west) 62.6 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 59:7 - 610 1915:1759 923+51 - - - 4.8 28.1 14.9 Right Ahead 62.6%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 24.1 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 22.66 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 24.1 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 22.66
Basic Results Summary Scenario 2: '2016PM' (FG2: '2016PM', Plan 3: 'No right turn from eastern arm') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 73.0% PRC: 19.0 %
Total Traffic Delay: 21.0 pcuHr Arm 8 -
233
Inf
0.0%
1996
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
7.0% 987 1768 1 57.8% 1034 1915 2 57.8% 50 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1955 0 0.0% 2 1925 834 75.5% 1 1778 770 18.3%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1932
0.0%
Inf
467
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
75.6%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------75.6% 0 0 0 21.0 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------75.6% 0 0 0 21.0 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 13 - 170 1996 233 73.0% - - - 3.7 78.7 6.7 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 51 - 141 1778 770 18.3% - - - 0.9 23.8 3.0
A89 (east) 75.5 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1:0 51:0 - 630 1925:1955 834+0 - - - 6.5 37.3 19.2 Ahead Right 0.0%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 28 - 353 1932 467 75.6% - - - 5.6 57.6 12.4 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 66 - 69 1768 987 7.0% - - - 0.3 14.2 1.1
A89 (west) 57.8 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 66:7 - 627 1915:1759 1034+50 - - - 3.9 22.6 13.6 Right Ahead 57.8%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 19.0 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 21.04 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 19.0 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 21.04
Basic Results Summary Scenario 3: '2023AM' (FG3: '2023AM', Plan 3: 'No right turn from eastern arm') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 76.1% PRC: 18.3 %
Total Traffic Delay: 24.7 pcuHr Arm 8 -
418
Inf
0.0%
2006
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
2.4% 884 1768 1 65.8% 923 1915 2 65.8% 52 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1955 0 0.0% 2 1925 722 74.7% 1 1778 667 40.8%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1925
0.0%
Inf
401
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
74.8%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------76.1% 0 0 0 24.7 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------76.1% 0 0 0 24.7 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 24 - 318 2006 418 76.1% - - - 5.5 62.2 11.4 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 44 - 272 1778 667 40.8% - - - 2.4 32.2 7.0
A89 (east) 74.7 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1:0 44:0 - 539 1925:1955 722+0 - - - 6.3 42.2 17.0 Ahead Right 0.0%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 24 - 300 1925 401 74.8% - - - 5.2 61.9 10.8 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 59 - 21 1768 884 2.4% - - - 0.1 17.3 0.4
A89 (west) 65.8 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 59:7 - 641 1915:1759 923+52 - - - 5.2 29.0 16.1 Right Ahead 65.8%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 18.3 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 24.67 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 18.3 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 24.67
Basic Results Summary Scenario 4: '2023PM' (FG4: '2023PM', Plan 3: 'No right turn from eastern arm') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 74.3% PRC: 15.8 %
Total Traffic Delay: 21.8 pcuHr Arm 8 -
233
Inf
0.0%
1997
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
7.1% 987 1768 1 58.8% 1035 1915 2 58.8% 49 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1955 0 0.0% 2 1925 834 76.8% 1 1778 770 18.6%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1932
0.0%
Inf
467
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
77.7%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------77.7% 0 0 0 21.8 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------77.7% 0 0 0 21.8 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 13 - 173 1997 233 74.3% - - - 3.8 79.9 7.0 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 51 - 143 1778 770 18.6% - - - 0.9 23.8 3.0
A89 (east) 76.8 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1:0 51:0 - 641 1925:1955 834+0 - - - 6.8 38.0 19.6 Ahead Right 0.0%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 28 - 363 1932 467 77.7% - - - 6.0 59.3 13.0 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 66 - 70 1768 987 7.1% - - - 0.3 14.2 1.1
A89 (west) 58.8 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 66:7 - 637 1915:1759 1035+49 - - - 4.0 22.8 13.9 Right Ahead 58.8%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 15.8 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 21.85 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 15.8 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 21.85
Basic Results Summary Scenario 5: '2023AM+Gen' (FG5: '2023AM+Gen', Plan 3: 'No right turn from eastern arm') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 87.3% PRC: 0.4 %
Total Traffic Delay: 37.9 pcuHr Arm 8 -
385
Inf
0.0%
2009
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
2.6% 796 1768 1 79.3% 765 1915 2 88.7% 132 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1955 0 0.0% 2 1925 610 88.4% 1 1778 563 52.7%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1922
0.0%
Inf
529
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
89.7%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------89.7% 0 0 0 37.9 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------89.7% 0 0 0 37.9 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 22 - 336 2009 385 87.3% - - - 7.4 79.7 13.9 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 37 - 297 1778 563 52.7% - - - 3.3 40.4 8.6
A89 (east) 88.4 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1:0 37:0 - 539 1925:1955 610+0 - - - 9.3 62.1 20.4 Ahead Right 0.0%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 32 - 474 1922 529 89.7% - - - 9.3 70.8 19.0 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 53 - 21 1768 796 2.6% - - - 0.1 20.7 0.4
A89 (west) 79.3 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 53:8 - 724 1915:1759 765+132 - - - 8.4 41.7 20.3 Right Ahead 88.7%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 0.4 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 37.90 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 0.4 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 37.90
Basic Results Summary Scenario 6: '2023PM+Gen' (FG6: '2023PM+Gen', Plan 3: 'No right turn from eastern arm') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 85.2% PRC: 0.3 %
Total Traffic Delay: 33.3 pcuHr Arm 8 -
234
Inf
0.0%
2003
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
8.0% 899 1768 1 70.4% 892 1915 2 70.4% 116 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1955 0 0.0% 2 1925 738 89.7% 1 1778 682 27.7%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1930
0.0%
Inf
563
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
89.5%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Deg Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow Sat In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (%) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------89.7% 0 0 0 33.3 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------89.7% 0 0 0 33.3 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 13 - 199 2003 234 85.2% - - - 5.4 97.3 9.0 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 45 - 189 1778 682 27.7% - - - 1.5 29.2 4.5
A89 (east) 89.7 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1:0 45:0 - 662 1925:1955 738+0 - - - 10.3 56.3 24.5 Ahead Right 0.0%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 34 - 504 1930 563 89.5% - - - 9.5 67.8 19.9 Right Ahead
4/1 A89 (west) Left U D 1 60 - 72 1768 899 8.0% - - - 0.3 17.3 1.3
A89 (west) 70.4 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 60:7 - 710 1915:1759 892+116 - - - 6.2 31.6 17.5 Right Ahead 70.4%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): 0.3 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 33.32 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): 0.3 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 33.32
Dougall Baillie Associates Proposed Mixed-Use Development Uphall, West Lothian Transportation Assessment November 2020
Appendix G
Linsig V3 Outputs
Station Road / A89 Signalised Junction (with pedestrian and right turn stages)
Basic Results Summary Basic Results Summary
User and Project Details Project: Uphall, Broxburn Title: A89 / Station Road - Signalised Junction Location: Uphall Client: Uphall Estates Ltd Date Started: 18/09/20 Date Completed: 13/10//20 Additional detail: File name: 20033 - A89_Station Road Junction (with ped - with right turns).lsg3x Author: Daniel Winnie Company: Dougall Baillie Associates Address: 3 Glenfield Road
Scenario 1: '2016AM' (FG1: '2016AM', Plan 1: 'With ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 106.6% PRC: -18.5 %
Total Traffic Delay: 83.2 pcuHr Arm 8 -
284
Inf
0.0%
2006
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
3.9% 516 1768 1 105.6% 547 1915 2 105.6% 30 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 18 92.7% 2 1925 554 92.7% 1 1778 519 49.9%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1925
0.0%
Inf
273
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
104.9%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity Deg Sat When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) (%) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------106.6% 0 0 0 83.2 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------106.6% 0 0 0 83.2 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 16 - 303 2006 284 106.6% - - - 19.7 233.7 25.3 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 34 - 259 1778 519 49.9% - - - 3.0 42.2 7.6
A89 (east) 92.7 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 34:7 - 530 1925:1738 554+18 - - - 11.2 76.1 21.8 Ahead Right 92.7%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 16 - 286 1925 273 104.9% - - - 17.1 215.3 22.4 Right Ahead
A89 (west) 4/1 U D 1 34 - 20 1768 516 3.9% - - - 0.2 34.1 0.5 Left
A89 (west) 105.6 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 34:7 - 610 1915:1759 547+30 - - - 32.0 188.7 44.9 Right Ahead 105.6%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): -18.5 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 83.16 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): -18.5 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 83.16
Basic Results Summary Scenario 2: '2016PM' (FG2: '2016PM', Plan 1: 'With ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 102.2% PRC: -17.5 %
Total Traffic Delay: 86.7 pcuHr Arm 8 -
166
Inf
0.0%
1996
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
12.3% 560 1768 1 100.6% 594 1915 2 100.6% 29 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 28 105.8% 2 1925 596 105.8% 1 1778 563 25.0%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1932
0.0%
Inf
338
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
104.4%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity Deg Sat When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) (%) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------105.8% 0 0 0 86.7 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------105.8% 0 0 0 86.7 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 9 - 170 1996 166 102.2% - - - 10.2 216.8 13.3 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 37 - 141 1778 563 25.0% - - - 1.4 34.7 3.7
A89 (east) 105.8 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 37:7 - 660 1925:1738 596+28 - - - 34.2 186.6 48.5 Ahead Right 105.8%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 20 - 353 1932 338 104.4% - - - 19.3 197.2 26.1 Right Ahead
A89 (west) 4/1 U D 1 37 - 69 1768 560 12.3% - - - 0.6 32.8 1.7 Left
A89 (west) 100.6 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 37:7 - 627 1915:1759 594+29 - - - 20.9 119.9 34.1 Right Ahead 100.6%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): -17.5 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 86.67 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): -17.5 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 86.67
Basic Results Summary Scenario 3: '2023AM' (FG3: '2023AM', Plan 1: 'With ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 111.9% PRC: -24.3 %
Total Traffic Delay: 115.9 pcuHr Arm 8 -
284
Inf
0.0%
2006
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
4.1% 516 1768 1 111.0% 547 1915 2 111.0% 31 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 18 97.4% 2 1925 553 97.4% 1 1778 519 52.5%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1925
0.0%
Inf
273
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
110.0%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity Deg Sat When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) (%) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------111.9% 0 0 0 115.9 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------111.9% 0 0 0 115.9 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 16 - 318 2006 284 111.9% - - - 26.7 302.1 32.5 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 34 - 272 1778 519 52.5% - - - 3.2 42.8 8.1
A89 (east) 97.4 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 34:7 - 557 1925:1738 553+18 - - - 15.2 98.1 26.6 Ahead Right 97.4%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 16 - 300 1925 273 110.0% - - - 23.4 280.5 28.8 Right Ahead
A89 (west) 4/1 U D 1 34 - 21 1768 516 4.1% - - - 0.2 34.1 0.5 Left
A89 (west) 111.0 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 34:7 - 641 1915:1759 547+31 - - - 47.2 265.2 60.5 Right Ahead 111.0%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): -24.3 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 115.88 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): -24.3 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 115.88
Basic Results Summary Scenario 4: '2023PM' (FG4: '2023PM', Plan 1: 'With ped stage') Network Layout Diagram
D
1
Inf
A89 / Station Road 104.0% PRC: -19.6 %
Total Traffic Delay: 101.6 pcuHr Arm 8 -
166
Inf
0.0%
1997
Arm 1 - Station Road (north) Road Station - 1 Arm
1
12.5% 560 1768 1 102.2% 595 1915 2 102.2% 28 1759 3 0.0% Inf Inf 1
Arm 4 - A89 (west) Arm 7 -
C A
Arm 6 - Arm 2 - A89 (east)
1 Inf Inf 0.0% 3 1738 29 107.7% 2 1925 595 107.7% 1 1778 563 25.4%
1
Arm 3 - Station Road (south)
1932
0.0%
Inf
338
Arm 5 - - 5 Arm
107.4%
Inf
1
B
Basic Results Summary Network Results Turners Av. Mean Total Arrow Demand Turners Turners In Total Lane Lane Full Arrow Num Sat Flow Capacity Deg Sat When Delay Max Item Green Green Flow In Gaps Intergreen Delay Description Type Phase Phase Greens (pcu/Hr) (pcu) (%) Unopposed Per PCU Queue (s) (s) (pcu) (pcu) (pcu) (pcuHr) (pcu) (s/pcu) (pcu)
Network: A89 / Station Road ------107.7% 0 0 0 101.6 - - Signalised Junction
A89 / Station ------107.7% 0 0 0 101.6 - - Road
Station Road 1/1 (north) Ahead U F 1 9 - 173 1997 166 104.0% - - - 11.3 235.6 14.4 Right Left
2/1 A89 (east) Left U A 1 37 - 143 1778 563 25.4% - - - 1.4 34.8 3.7
A89 (east) 107.7 : 2/2+2/3 U A B 1 37:7 - 672 1925:1738 595+29 - - - 39.9 213.7 54.8 Ahead Right 107.7%
Station Road 3/1 (south) Left U C 1 20 - 363 1932 338 107.4% - - - 23.7 234.9 30.5 Right Ahead
A89 (west) 4/1 U D 1 37 - 70 1768 560 12.5% - - - 0.6 32.9 1.7 Left
A89 (west) 102.2 : 4/2+4/3 U D E 1 37:7 - 637 1915:1759 595+28 - - - 24.6 139.3 38.2 Right Ahead 102.2%
C1 PRC for Signalled Lanes (%): -19.6 Total Delay for Signalled Lanes (pcuHr): 101.55 Cycle Time (s): 120 PRC Over All Lanes (%): -19.6 Total Delay Over All Lanes(pcuHr): 101.55