MATTERS STATEMENT

Site: DIG1 Land East of New Road

For: Countryside Properties PLCE

Project Ref: 18092

Date: 12 February 2021

Prepared by: Liz Fitzgerald BA (Hons) Dip TP MRTPI Director Barker Parry Town Planning Ltd 33 Bancroft, Hitchin, Herts SG5 1LA T: 01462 420224 / E: [email protected]

Matter 1 – Site Dig1, East of New Road, Digswell

The site is close to Tewin Water Registered Park and Garden and to , which is a Grade II* listed structure.

1. To what extent would there be harm to these heritage assets? Would it be substantial? 2. Is the harm capable of remediation by appropriate landscaping, with or without earth mounding? 3. Is there any objective basis on which the assessed Green Belt harm could be challenged or the weight attached to it changed? 4. Could an appropriate new boundary to the Green Belt be established that could endure and have less impact on the wider Green Belt than the existing one? If so, how would this be achieved? 5. How many dwellings could the site deliver? 6. Would there be any adverse ramifications for local infrastructure, services or facilities that could not be resolved during the plan period? 7. Would the impact on highway safety and/or the free flow of traffic, following the site’s development, be severe? 8. Are there any flood risks that are unresolvable? 9. What impact would the proposal have on ecological assets and to what extent could this be mitigated or compensated for? 10. Should some of the trees on the site be retained and their retention referred to in the policy criteria? 11. Is the site’s location sustainable in the context of its accessibility, on foot or by cycle, to retail and community facilities and frequent public transport? 12. Are there any other matters that weigh against this site being proposed for residential development?

Introduction

This statement has been prepared on behalf of Countryside Properties Plc in relation to the forthcoming Hearing Sessions for the Hatfield Borough Council Local Plan Examination.

Site Dig 1: Land East of New Road, Digswell has been considered at various stages in the production of the emerging Local Plan and rejected on the grounds of impact to the Digswell Viaduct and Tewin Water.

The site is currently within the Green Belt but adjacent to the settlement of Digswell.

Digswell is classified as a Small Excluded Village and Settlement within the emerging Plan. The Village has a limited range of employment opportunities and services and is served by a railway station, Welwyn North that is located on the East Coast Mainline. The main road network is also considered to be good and provides readily access to the wider road network, including the A1(M) and A414.

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 1

Introduction

The site is currently in arable use, it is bound to the north and west by residential uses, Public Footpath 034b to the east and Bridleway 37 to the south, beyond which is Tewin Water Registered Park and Garden.

The site is not located within a Conservation Area, but does fall within the Tewin Landscape Character Area.

Planning History

The site was considered initially in 2016, as part of the Housing and Economic Land Availability Assessment 2016 (HELAA). The site reached a second stage assessment, but it was concluded that the site would have a substantial impact on heritage assets in the vicinity of the site, namely the adjacent Tewin Water Registered Park and Garden and the Welwyn Viaduct.

The site was originally a much wider area that extended beyond Footpath 034b, following comments in the early stages of the plan preparation, the site was rationalised and reduced to that currently proposed.

The site is referenced as P17a or Dig1 within the Green Belt Study Stage 3. The site is considered to have a moderate impact on the Green Belt should it be released and allocated for Housing. The Survey comments as follows:

“The site has development to the north as well as the west, so development up to the ridge crest would be consistent with existing settlement form, but there is no distinction between the arable farmland in this site and the expanse of arable land beyond. Any new development here would lack the containment by tree cover that characterises the existing settlement. There are no strong boundary features to the east which could form a new Green Belt boundary.”

It is considered that, with appropriate buffer planting, the outstanding issue pertaining to the lack of boundary features to the east could be readily overcome, to allow this site to come forward and deliver much needed housing, without resulting in any detrimental harm to the function of the Green Belt.

In response to this further Green Belt Study the site was promoted by Countryside Properties as part of the 2019 Call for Sites. Subsequent written submissions have been made in response to consultations in June 2019 and March 2020. We are advised that those responses have been provided to the Inspector.

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 2

Matter 1: Response

1. To what extent would there be harm to these heritage assets? Would it be substantial?

A Built Heritage Assessment undertaken by RPS was submitted in response to the consultation in March 2020.

There are a number of Grade II listed buildings within 1km of the site, however, the most significant are the Grade II* Digswell Viaduct and the Tewin Water Registered Park and Garden.

At present a detailed masterplan has not been prepared for the site, so assumptions have been made based on the contribution the site makes to the significance of the assets and the likely resultant impact on that significance from development of the site.

We can take the two key assets in turn:

Digswell Viaduct (Welwyn Viaduct) Grade II*

The site makes a minor contribution to the significance of the Viaduct through providing part of its original rural setting, whilst also facilitating some long- distance views of the structure allowing for some appreciation of its significance. Accordingly, development has the potential to affect some of the contribution the site makes to the setting of the heritage asset.

The potential impact of altering the rural setting of the viaduct is limited due to the residential development that has occurred in the area generally, accordingly appropriate residential development would not be out of character with the established setting of the listed building, accordingly the change of use of this site would not cause harm to the significance of the Viaduct.

The proposed development of the site would also alter long distance views of the Viaduct from within the most elevated sections of the site. These views allow for some appreciation of the significance of the Viaduct.

The potential impact is considered to be minor due to the multiple areas within the landscape from which these views can be found and that the views are incidental and not designed.

It is considered that the impact on views of the Viaduct could be mitigated through design, where key views could be retained via viewing corridors or through limiting storey heights. As views to the heritage asset are already gained through twentieth century residential built form, to continue this trend onto the proposed site would result in the character of the views being largely unchanged.

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 3

Matter 1: Response

Additionally, views gained through residential development would increase the opportunities for members of the public to appreciate the heritage asset, as opposed to from limited vantage points around an agricultural field.

It is considered that residential development could be accommodated on this site, within the setting of the listed building, without changing the character of its surroundings or affecting the ability to appreciate and experience its significance. It is therefore argued that the impact on this heritage asset is less than substantial at the lower end of the spectrum and that the delivery of the additional market and affordable housing, needed within the Borough, provides a substantial public benefit. Affordable housing should be particularly welcome given the affordability data for the Borough. These benefits would be consistent with the social role of sustainable development and the Framework’s aim to significantly boost the supply of housing.

Tewin Water Grade II Registered Park and Garden (RPG)

The site makes a minor contribution to the significance of the RPG as agricultural land historically linked to the Tewin Water Estate. There is some intervisibility between the northern reaches of the RPG and the site. The site allows for an appreciation of the northern tree belts of the RPG and the rear of the Tewin Water School building, albeit at some distance.

The development of the site would alter the rural character of the site, historically linked to the Tewin Water Estate and thus has the potential to impact on the significance of the RPG. Views may also be altered to parts of the RPG which currently allow for some appreciation of their significance.

The historic links between the Tewin Water Estate and the site are no longer legible today, moreover, much of the settlement of Digswell was constructed on land formerly owned by the Earls Cowper, as part of the Tewin Water Estate. As such there is a precedent for this type of development and it is not considered that it would affect the significance of the setting in this regard.

The development of the site formerly in agricultural use would be appreciable from parts of the RPG. However, a landscaped fringe to the eastern boundary would soften any visual impact of the proposed and partly retain the rural character of these views. Further landscaping and appropriate development to the access road bordering the RPG would further mitigate potential impact.

Any additional perceived harm could be further mitigated against by retaining views from within the site to the northern border of the RPG via viewing tunnels as suggested for the Viaduct above.

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 4

Matter 1: Response

It is considered that residential development could be accommodated on this site, within the setting of the RPG, without changing the character of its surroundings or affecting the ability to appreciate and experience its significance. It is therefore argued that the impact on this heritage asset is less than substantial and that the delivery of the additional housing, needed within the Borough, provides a significant public benefit.

We respectfully draw the Inspectors attention to site SDS1, Land North east of . This site is proposed for allocation with a vision of delivering circa 725 dwellings within the plan period. This site is comparable to Dig1 in that is it also adjacent to a Registered Park and Garden, similarly designed by Humphry Repton between 1791-1818, when he was improving the Earl of Cowper’s estates through the valley. The site is also in close proximity to many listed buildings.

A more detailed appraisal can be found within he RPS report.

2. Is the harm capable of remediation by appropriate landscaping, with or without earth mounding?

It is not considered that any earth mounding would be required to mitigate against harm. Landscaping can be accommodated along the southern and eastern boundaries of the site to create buffers to the RPG, whilst viewing tunnels can be achieved through masterplanning to create landscaped views of the wider heritage assets.

3. Is there any objective basis on which the assessed Green Belt harm could be challenged or the weight attached to it changed?

It is our opinion that the moderate impact identified within the Green Belt Study Stage 3 is correct, there is no objective basis on which the assessed Green Belt harm can be challenged.

The public footpath to the eastern boundary, provides a definitive alignment for a revised Green Belt boundary, through appropriate policy wording, this can be reinforced with strong buffer planting to create a defensible boundary. This can be seen on the Opportunities and Constraints Plan submitted in June 2019.

4. Could an appropriate new boundary to the Green Belt be established that could endure and have less impact on the wider Green Belt than the existing one? If so, how would this be achieved?

The existing Green Belt boundary is comprised of a combination of manicured hedgerows, close boarded fencing and some trees. The development of this site provides an opportunity to create a softer more sympathetic landscaped

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 5

Matter 1: Response

boundary to the wider Green Belt, more akin to the rural setting. The use of native species and planting, alongside the public right of way will create a verdant and useable green buffer that would not be subject to the manicuring that occurs when the boundary is defined by rear gardens.

Similarly, there is nothing to prevent the existing hedgerow along the Green Belt boundary from being removed and replaced with 2m close boarded fencing. The creation of a landscaped buffer that remains in the ownership of the developer and managed by a management company would ensure that such an erosion of the boundary could not occur maintaining a transition to the rural setting.

5. How many dwellings could the site deliver?

The site extends to 6.7 ha, the anticipated number of dwellings that could be delivered, having regard to access, landscaping and heritage impact is approximately 180 dwellings.

It is anticipated that in excess of 100 dwellings would be deliverable within the first 5 years following the removal of the site from the Green Belt and the allocation of the site through the adoption of the Plan.

6. Would there be any adverse ramifications for local infrastructure, services or facilities that could not be resolved during the plan period?

A Facilities and Services Study was undertaken by Savills in 2013 (Appendix 1), as there has only been limited growth in and around Digswell since the report was undertaken, it can be considered to be sufficiently up to date as to provide a clear indication that there are sufficient facilities and services in the local area to meet the needs of both the existing community and the proposed development site.

In reviewing local utilities, some upgrades are likely to be required to meet the needs arising from an additional 180 dwellings, but nothing outside the anticipated upgrades for any other residential development.

7. Would the impact on highway safety and/or the free flow of traffic, following the site’s development, be severe?

An access strategy was produced in 2015 by Transport Planning Associates (Appendix 2). Due to the current pandemic, there has been no scope to update traffic surveys. However, due to limited growth in and around Digswell in the last 6 years, it is considered that the report is sufficiently up to date to demonstrate that a development in this location would not have a detrimental impact on the effective operation of the highway network. There would be no severe impact on highway safety.

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 6

Matter 1: Response

8. Are there any flood risks that are unresolvable?

The site is located in Flood Zone 1. Whilst normal on-site mitigation via SUDs will be required to ensure green field run off rates are achieved, there are no known flood risks that are insurmountable in respect of this site.

Some background work on an appropriate drainage scheme has also been undertaken and Countryside Properties are satisfied that an appropriate SUDs scheme is deliverable on this site.

9. What impact would the proposal have on ecological assets and to what extent could this be mitigated or compensated for?

The site is in active agricultural use, such that any ecological interest is limited to site boundaries where hedgerows and trees are located. The addition of open space, SUDs and landscape buffers to the eastern and southern boundaries of the site will ensure that a net biodiversity gain can be readily deliverable across the site.

10. Should some of the trees on the site be retained and their retention referred to in the policy criteria?

There are limited trees within the site and none that are considered to be of such value that retention or reference within any policy is required. We would anticipate that any application would be submitted with an appropriate Arboricultural Impact Assessment and where trees are identified as being of significant value efforts should be made to retain them.

Reference to the need for an Arboricultural Impact Assessment within any policy wording could ensure that the information is forthcoming early in the process.

11. Is the site’s location sustainable in the context of its accessibility, on foot or by cycle, to retail and community facilities and frequent public transport?

The site is in an accessible location and sustainable location. It is the only site around the village that would allow growth that is contiguous with the settlement form. It has good access to local services and facilities and with sustainable choices providing access to higher order services in the main towns of Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield. This site would be consistent with the Framework’s aim to locate development where the need to travel is minimised and residents have a genuine choice of transport modes.

The site is located approx.10mins walking distance from Welwyn North railway station, which is served by the East Coast Mainline, the station benefits from approximately 3 trains to London and 2 trains to Stevenage per hour. Paragraph

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 7

Matter 1: Response

2.3 of the Local Plan notes that the “borough's location on radial routes out of London means that it is highly accessible by rail... The East Coast Main Line has stations at Welwyn North (in Digswell), Welwyn Garden City, Hatfield, Welham Green and Brookmans Park; with services south into London and north towards Stevenage, Cambridge and Peterborough. Cuffley, in the east of the borough, is served by trains south into London and north towards Hertford.”

Around the station are other local community facilities including the village shop, village hall and pub.

In a recent appeal decision at Elsenham (Appeal reference APP/C1570/W/19/3243744) for 350 homes the Inspector concluded at paragraph 71 of the appeal decision that “whilst accepting that PPG13 no longer carries and formal weight, no equivalent guidance on acceptable travel distances is contained within the Framework. Because of this I consider it reasonable to have regard to the PPG13 guidance, which stated that walking is the most important mode of travel at the local level and offers the greatest potential to replace short car trips, particularly under 2 km… PP13 also stated that cycling has the potential to substitute for short car trips particularly those under 5 km. “

All of the facilities within the village are within these distances and in particular the train station. The site is in a highly sustainable location within the Borough from a movement perspective.

When planning for higher density development paragraph 004 Reference ID: 66- 004-20190722 of the Government’s Planning Practice Guidance notes that a range of considerations should be taken into account in establishing appropriate densities on a site or in a particular area. Tools that can assist with this include (amongst others):

• accessibility measures such as distances and travel times to key facilities, including public transport stops or hubs (and taking into consideration service capacity and frequencies and destinations served);

The Planning Practice Guidance supports the effective use of land that is accessible to public transport stops.

Whilst the village does not benefit from any meaningful bus connections, the trainline also stops at Welwyn Garden City, one of the main towns in the borough, providing access to the full range of facilities located within the town centre. The next train station from Welwyn Garden City is Hatfield and the Spatial Vision for the Local Plan note that Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield will continue to be the main focus for shopping, leisure and employment opportunities.

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 8

Matter 1: Response

Given this level of accessibility, the site is considered to be sustainably located.

12. Are there any other matters that weigh against this site being proposed for residential development?

The only meaningful criticism of the site provided to date that has precluded its allocation has been the impact on Tewin Water RPG and the Digswell Viaduct. These have been addressed in detail by submissions on behalf of Countryside Properties made to date.

Conclusions

The potential impact of the residential development of this site on nearby heritage assets is no different than other sites proposed for allocation within the emerging Plan.

With an appropriately worded policy and careful consideration through masterplanning to the layout of the scheme, along with meaningful buffer planting along the eastern and southern boundary, it is asserted that the impact of the proposed development on heritage assets is less than substantial at the lower end of the spectrum, but the benefits of providing much needed dwellings in a sustainable location and a more substantial and softer landscaped Green Belt boundary, constitute a material public benefit that weighs in favour of the allocation of this site.

There are no other material issues that would preclude the residential development of this sustainable site.

In the recent letter from the Inspectors examining the now withdrawn St Albans City and District Local Plan they concluded at paragraph 44:

“We accept that large scale urban extensions would provide significant amounts of new infrastructure which both the new and already established communities would benefit from. On the other hand, a range of sites including smaller sites could also provide benefits. For example, they could be delivered more quickly without requiring additional infrastructure, provide choice and flexibility in the housing market and secure affordable housing more immediately.”

A similar conclusion was reached by the Inspectors examining the now withdrawn Uttlesford Local Plan outlined concerns in relation to the soundness of the plan, with the Uttlesford Inspector commenting earlier on in 2020 that:

“The scale of the need for housing for the next plan period is currently unknown and uncertain. We are concerned that the Council’s chosen strategy (reliance on three Garden Communities) would mean that other sites in the district would not be developed or permitted for a significant period of time in the future. This would be

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 9

Conclusions

likely to adversely affect the vitality and viability of services in existing towns and villages and result in a lack of housing choice in the market” (paragraph 31 on letter).”

“In order to arrive at a sound strategy, we consider that as a primary consideration, the Council would need to allocate more small and medium sized sites that could deliver homes in the short to medium term and help to bolster the 5-year HLS, until the Garden Communities begin to deliver housing. This would have the benefit of providing flexibility and choice in the market and the earlier provision of more affordable housing” (paragraph 114).”

Welwyn District Council’s Housing Delivery Test score for 2020 was just 63% with just 1,493 homes delivered over the past three years. This seeks to demonstrate the need for early deliverable sites to come forward in the area in sustainable locations to meet housing needs.

There will also be economic benefits through construction jobs, additional spending power from the construction phase and expenditure in the local economy from the new residents.

Allowing Digswell to grow which has been restricted by Green Belt for a substantial period will add to village vitality and sustainability by providing additional support and custom for existing services and facilities.

Collectively there would be substantial benefits from the release of this site from the Green Belt and the allocation of the land for a residential led scheme.

We respectfully request that this submission be read alongside our earlier submissions: - Call for Sites Submissions 4 February 2019 - Promoted Sites Consultation Response 18 June 2019 - Green Gap Assessment Response 31 October 2019 - Consultation on Emerging Local Plan Response 31 March 2020

Appendices

Appendix 1 Facilities and Services Study 2013

Appendix 2 Access Strategy 2015

18092 – Land East of New Road, Digswell Page 10

APPENDIX 1

Facilities and Services Study 2013

April 2013 Facilities and Services Study

Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms

Prepared by

Savills (UK) Limited Unex House 132-134 Hills Road Cambridge CB2 8PA

CAPL/305248/A6/HH

Contents

Contents ...... 2

1 Introduction ...... 3

2 Policy and Literature Context ...... 5

3 Assessment Methodology ...... 12

4 The Site and Local Facilities ...... 14

5 Analysis and Assessment ...... 26

6 Summary and Conclusion ...... 28

Appendix 1 ...... 30

Appendix 2 ...... 31

Appendix 3 ...... 32

Appendix 4 ...... 33

Appendix 5 ...... 34

Appendix 6 ...... 35

Appendix 7 ...... 36

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 2 of 36

1 Introduction

1.1 Savills Planning Team in Cambridge has been instructed to prepare a Study of services and facilities in Digswell, , on behalf of Wallington Farms.

1.2 This Facilities and Services Study has been prepared to help inform written representation’s to Borough Council in respect of the production of the Core Strategy and Site Allocations Development Plan Documents, as part of the on-going promotion of land behind New Road, Digswell. This Study should be read in conjunction with other documents produced as part of the assessment of the site.

1.3 This outline desktop study of the services and facilities at Digswell seeks to identify the facilities available within the area, and their existing and potential capacity. Alongside this, this report seeks to;

• Assess whether the existing services and facilities within Digswell are of sufficient size to support new and existing communities;

• Assess the evidence used by Welwyn Hatfield Council in support of their Core Strategy and other recent planning documents, to show capacity in Digswell;

• Analyse the various facilities studies that form the Evidence Base for the Local Development Framework.

Background to the Proposal

1.4 Land behind New Road, Digswell is a parcel of land approximately 6.7 ha in area which lies to the east of the of the village of Digswell, Hertfordshire. The location of the site can be found within Appendix 1. The land is part of a farming partnership which trades as Wallington Farms. Access is taken from the southern end of New Road. The site is outside of the development boundaries for the village and lies within the green belt.

1.5 Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council is currently in its third phase of Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments (SHLAA). ‘SHLAA Phase 1 – Urban Capacity’ is a technical assessment of urban sites with potential for housing, and was published in October 2009. Phase 1 considers only urban sites, as the Council considers that these are all that would be needed to meet housing targets. The land behind New Road, Digswell was not included

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 3 of 36

within this document.

1.6 SHLAA Phase 2 identified the potential to meet housing need within the borough green belt. According to the Council, this would only progress if, as a consequence of revised housing figures, green belt sites would need to be released. ‘SHLAA Phase 2 – Sites outside urban areas’ was published in October 2012.

1.7 The site at Digswell was recorded within this report, but not identified as a suitable site for the following reasons:

“Currently a single track access and potential for a wider access has not been demonstrated. Also, Digswell has a limited range of facilities and development of this scale would not generate new facilities. Agent can provide no evidence that landowner currently wants to take the site forward and therefore there is not enough certainty to release the land from the green belt.”

1.8 The SHLAA site assessment can be found within Appendix 2, and SHLAA site location within Appendix 3. The site is recorded as ‘Dig1’.

1.9 ‘SHLAA: Phase 3 – Determining the potential for housing windfall’ is an assessment of the levels of windfall development which are likely to take place in the Borough between 2014 and 2029. This was also published in October 2012 and does not make any reference to the site, given that the site failed the SHLAA test as set out in Phase 2.

1.10 The client, Wallington Farms, had a brief meeting with Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council in February 2013 to discuss the development potential of the site. It was confirmed that, whilst the Council believe that they have enough suitable urban land to meet housing targets within Development Plan period, there may be an opportunity for the site to come forward in the longer term, should the issues surrounding access and facilities within Digswell be resolved.

1.11 This Facilities and Services Study therefore seeks to identify the facilities and services available within the area, and their existing and potential capacity, in order to support an assessment of the site’s potential.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 4 of 36

2 Policy and Literature Context

2.1 The provision of suitable facilities within an area is one of the key parts of sustainable development. Resolution 42/187 of the United Nations General Assembly defined sustainable development as “meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. The UK Sustainable Development Strategy ‘Securing the Future’ sets out five ‘guiding principles’ of sustainable development: living within the planet’s environmental limits; ensuring a strong, healthy and just society; achieving a sustainable economy; promoting good governance; and using sound science responsibly.

2.2 A key part of achieving sustainable development is the promotion of sustainable communities, whereby better access to local facilities is encouraged. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), issued in 2012, states that sustainable development must have a social role, whereby a high quality built environment is created “with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being”.

2.3 The NPPF states that, as part of this, planning policies and decisions should;

“...plan positively for the provision and use of shared space, community facilities (such as local shops, meeting places, sports venues, cultural buildings, public houses and places of worship) and other local services to enhance the sustainability of communities and residential environments...” (paragraph 70).

2.4 Furthermore, planning policies and decisions should;

“Ensure an integrated approach to considering the location of housing, economic uses and community facilities and services” (paragraph 70).

2.5 In 2003 the government launched the 'Communities Plan' (Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future). The plan set out a programme of action for “delivering sustainable communities in both urban and rural areas”. As part of this, The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) (undated) define a sustainable community as;

“...places where people want to live and work, now and in the future. They meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, are sensitive to their environment, and contribute to the

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 5 of 36

high quality of life. They are safe and inclusive, well planned, built and run, and offer equality of opportunity and good services for all...For communities to be sustainable, they must offer:

• Decent homes at prices people can afford,

• Good public transport,

• Schools,

• Shops,

• Hospitals,

• A clean, safe environment...”

2.6 The creation of sustainable communities must therefore include the provision of an appropriate level of community facilities.

2.7 The Welwyn Hatfield Council's Evidence Base comprises a number of studies that have been carried out to inform the preparation of the Local Development Framework. These documents will help support the formation of numerous policy documents, as well as site specific allocations and directions for growth.

2.8 Within this Evidence Base is a range of relevant documents to this study. These include the Community Facilities and Services Study (2012), Assessment of Open Space, Outdoor Sport and Recreation (2009), Sports Facility Study (2011), and Welwyn Hatfield Retail and Town Centre Needs Assessment (2012). These will be discussed relative to the appropriate facility.

Children’s Centres

2.9 According to the Community Facilities and Services Study (2012), Digswell has an estimated 99 children aged between 0-5 out of a population of 1654. The study states that there are no children’s centres within Digswell. The study goes on to state that;

“On the one hand, the Southern Villages and Welwyn Garden City, lack behind in their provision whilst the Northern Villages and Hatfield enjoy a sufficient provision.” (page 17)

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 6 of 36

Community/Village Hall’s

2.10 According to the Community Facilities and Services Study(2012), Digswell has 2 village/community centres, with 827 of the population allocated per facility. Digswell is therefore one of the best areas in the Borough in terms of people per village/community centre.

Dentist’s Surgeries

2.11 The Community Facilities and Services Study (2012) consider access to dentist’s surgeries. The number of dentists at each practice is taken into consideration, but not if whether a dentist is private or an NHS dentist. According to this Study, Digswell does not have any dentists. The study goes on to state that;

“The Northern Villages are particularly deficient with none of the villages having sufficient access to a dentist with the only practice being situated in Welwyn. Dentist provision can also be found in Knebworth but it lies beyond the threshold distance” (page 19).

GP Surgeries

2.12 The Community Facilities and Services Study(2012) considers the location of GP surgeries, and the number of GP’s practising at each. According to this, Digswell does not have any GP’s. According to this document, Hatfield and the surrounding area (including Digswell) have a deficiency in terms of access to GP’s.

Pharmacies

2.13 According to the Community Facilities and Services Study (2012);

“The provision of pharmacies across the borough is seemingly poor with the Northern Villages being the most affected with at least 6 times more population than the suggested population threshold per pharmacy of 1800” (page 26).

2.14 The Study states that there are no pharmacies within Digswell.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 7 of 36

Post Offices

2.15 According to the Community Facilities and Services Study(2012), there are no post offices within Digswell, although there is provision in neighbouring areas. According to the study, Hatfield and the Northern Villages are underprovided for.

Nursery’s, Pre-Schools, Primary Schools and Secondary Schools

2.16 The Community Facilities and Services Study(2012) indicates that all areas across the Borough are provided for in terms of nurseries and pre schools. The only exception is Newgate Street.

2.17 This also reveals that there is one Primary School in Digswell, with a further 2 in Welwyn. Hatfield and the Northern Villages however have an undersupply, suggesting pressure on the existing primary schools.

2.18 Secondary school provision is considered for each town or group of villages, rather than on a neighbourhood level, due to the larger dwelling threshold for a secondary school (4,500 dwellings).

2.19 According to the study;

“The analysis indicates there is a less than ideal provision of secondary schools to meet the needs of the Borough. In particular, the Northern Villages do not have a secondary school and yet their needs cannot be fully met in nearby Welwyn Garden City” (page 30).

Recycling Centres

2.20 The Community Facilities and Services Study(2012) indicates that there is one recycling facility in Digswell. The Study indicates that this is sufficient provision for a village of its size.

Libraries

2.21 According to the Community Facilities and Services Study(2012), several mobile libraries exist in the Borough, and coverage across the Borough is very good according to access standards. There is no discussion of static libraries.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 8 of 36

Shopping Centres

2.22 The Local Centre within Digswell is recorded within the Welwyn Hatfield Retail and Town Centre Needs Assessment (2012) as a ‘Small Village Centre’, and has the following description;

“Digswell is situated in the north of the Borough and has a relatively small residential catchment area. The centre is surrounded by a mix of detached and semi-detached dwellings. There are six retail/service units in the centre including a butchers and hairdressers. Pedestrian flows through the centre at the time of site visit were low. The centre is in close proximity to Welwyn North Railway Station. Traffic flow through the centre was low. The centre is tidy with footpaths on both sides of the road which are in good condition” (paragraph 9.5).

2.23 Importantly, this document states that;

“The existing provision of local shopping centres within the Borough offers a balanced distribution of local facilities serving local communities. These facilities complement the two main centres (Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield Town Centres) and have a important role in serving the day-to-day needs in their local areas.”

2.24 The document goes on to state that;

“There are six large neighbourhood centres, eleven small neighbourhood centres, four large village centres and three small village centres within the Borough. The local centres range in size from 3 units in Peartree and Handside to 45 units in Brookmans Park. The existing centres are distributed to sufficiently serve the built up and expanding areas of the Borough. The south east area of the Borough has limited local shopping provision, but there is limited population in this part of the Borough.”

Leisure Centres: Indoor Sports Facilities

2.25 The Community Facilities and Services Study(2012) assesses the provision of leisure centres by town/group villages (north/south), due to the high population threshold required for a leisure centre (24,000). This concludes that;

“Both of the towns are well catered for, with 5 facilities between the two towns, however no facilities are located in the villages” (page 21).

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 9 of 36

2.26 The Welwyn Hatfield Draft Sports Facilities and Services Study (2011) assesses the quality, quantity and need for additional facilities in Welwyn Hatfield. This confirms that;

“There are a wide range of indoor sports facilities within Welwyn Hatfield, including;

• Sports halls – 25 halls of 1 court and above, on 16 sites • Swimming pools – 9 pools at 6 sites plus one lido currently closed, • including 3 learner/training/diving pools • Health and Fitness centres – 9 centres providing 530 stations • Indoor tennis centres – 7 facilities on 4 sites, a combination of 18 • traditional buildings, 4 framed fabric and 6 airhalls • Indoor Bowls Centres – 1 venue with 4 rinks.”

2.27 Paragraph 5.11 of this report states that;

“In Welwyn Hatfield there are 109m2 of all sports halls per 1000 population, compared to the average of 90 m2 and a regional average of 82 m2.”

2.28 Importantly, paragraph 5.25 confirms that;

“all residents in the borough are within 10 minutes drive of a Sports Hall (within or outside the borough) and most residents in Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield are within five minutes drive. Access levels are slightly lower for sports halls with 4 courts or more. Residents in the northern village areas of the borough are further than 10 minutes drive (but still below 15 minutes).”

Leisure Centres: Outdoor Sport Facilities

2.29 Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council produced ‘An Assessment of Welwyn Hatfield’s Open Space, Outdoor Sport and Recreation’ in 2009. Appendix 5 of the Assessment provides a ‘Summary of Outdoor Sports Facilities’. Fields in Trust proposes a national standard of 1.6- 1.8 hectares of outdoor sports facilities per 1,000 population, which incorporates public and private facilities. There are currently 2.12 hectares per 1,000 population in the Borough. This document recognises that within the Northern Villages (which include Digswell), specifically;

“There are 8 playing pitch sites, which cover 12 ha. This amounts to 1.2 ha for every 1000 people, but only 0.58 ha of publicly accessible pitches per 1000 population. This is the lowest level of provision in the borough and well below the FIT standard. But, all the public pitches are free, so the Northern Villages area actually has more freely accessible pitches than the

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 10 of 36

Southern Villages Area. Welwyn North ( and Oaklands and Mardley Heath) has a far lower provision than Welwyn South.”

2.30 According to this document, specifically within Digswell are sites;

• OSF4 - Digswell Playing Field - 1.2 ha

• OSF6 - St John's Church of England Primary School – 0.5 ha; and

• OSF9 - Digswell Park – 2 ha

2.31 This summary of information contained in the Councils own reports and assessments can be used to examine the legitimacy of Welwyn Hatfield’s claims relating to facilities within Digswell, and how well it is catered for.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 11 of 36

3 Assessment Methodology

3.1 In order to assess the facilities available in the local area, it is necessary to use a set methodology so that the assessment is comprehensive and fair.

3.2 Welwyn Hatfield Community Facilities and Services Study (October 2012) uses a set of standards with suggested minimum and maximum population/dwelling thresholds for different types of community facilities. This can be seen in the table below.

Table 1: Population and Dwelling Thresholds by Facility Type

Type of facility Population/ Dwelling Numbers

Children’s Centre 800 Additional Children (0-5 years)

Community Centre/ Village Hall 4,000 (population)

Dentist (no min)

GP Surgery (no min)

Leisure Centre 24,000 (population)

Library*

Local Shopping Centre 6,000 (population)

Nursery/Pre School 1,500 (dwellings)

Pharmacy 1,800 (population)

Post Office 5,000 (population)

Primary School 1,500 (dwellings) per 2FE**

Recycling Centre 1,000 (dwellings)

Secondary School 4,500 (dwellings) per 6FE**

Note: *85% of population to be within 2 miles of a static library. **FE refers to the number of forms of entry in one year. It is important to note that the local education authority favours the provision of primary schools at 2FE and secondary schools at least 6FE.

3.3 Alongside this, a set of Target Distance Standards have been produced by Welwyn Hatfield Council, which serve as maximum straight line distances. Again, these target distances are found below.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 12 of 36

Table 2: Target Straight Line Distances

Type of facility Target Distance (maximum)

Childrens Centre 1400m

Community Hall/ Village Hall 720m

Dentist 720m GP Surgery 720m Leisure Centre 1,400m

Library 85% pop to be within 2 miles of a static library.

Local Shopping Centre 720m

Nursery/Pre School 720m

Pharmacy 720 m

Post Office 720m

Primary School 1,400m

Recycling Centre 720m

Secondary School 1,400m

3.4 Target distance standards were produced in accordance with advice set out in the Department for Transport’s Core Accessibility Indicators; these indicated an ideal travel time for accessing key community facilities.

3.5 Easily accessible public transport is also important - Public Transport Accessibility Levels states that “most people are prepared to walk 500m to a bus stop”.

3.6 A Desktop Study has been undertaken of the facilities located in and around Digswell, using a range of resources, as set out in the following chapter. Straight line distances have been recorded, as set out in the guidance above, and local bus and train services have also been assessed where a facility is not provided.

3.7 Using this information, it is therefore possible to assess the distance of the facility from the proposed site and compare it to the recommended distances, as set out above. This information can then be compared to the results of the Welwyn Hatfield Community Facilities and Services Study (October 2012) to examine the legitimacy of the document, and whether the facilities within Digswell are sufficient to accommodate growth.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 13 of 36

4 The Site and Local Facilities

4.1 The Borough of Welwyn Hatfield is comprised of two main towns, Welwyn Garden City, with a resident population of 43,252 and Hatfield, with a resident population of 27,883 in 2001. Welwyn Garden City and Hatfield are the main sources of housing for the borough, and contain the major shopping and service facilities and are the principal locations for local employment.

4.2 In addition to the 2 main towns of Hatfield and Welwyn Garden City there are 8 large villages at Brookmans Park, Cuffley, Digswell, Little Heath, Oaklands & Mardley Heath, Welham Green, Welwyn and Woolmer Green. The location of Digswell in relation to Welwyn Hatfield Borough can be seen in the diagram below.

Figure 1: Welwyn Hatfield Borough Location Plan

Source: Welwyn Hatfield Sustainable Community Strategy

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 14 of 36

4.3 Digswell is located within the ward of Welwyn East. These ward boundaries were revised in 2008, resulting in Digswell prior to this being located within the ward of Welwyn South. However, many older policy document still refer to the previous ward boundaries, so these are still relevant.

4.4 The approximate site location in relation to the latest ward boundaries can be found within Appendix 4. The pre-2008 wards can also be found here.

4.5 According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2011), there are 110,535 people within the Borough of Welwyn Hatfield. Using ‘Lower Layer Super Output Areas’, the local neighbourhood (i.e. Digswell) contains 1,629 people. There is a population density of 4.7 people per hectare. A detailed assessment of the neighbourhood can be found in Appendix 5, which contains information taken from the ONS.

4.6 This data shows that Welwyn Hatfield has an ageing population, with nearly a third of the population aged 45 – 64. The majority of residents are one family with no dependant children, living in detached accommodation.

4.7 Health in Welwyn Hatfield is generally ‘very good’, and 40% of residents are economically active, full time employees. In Welwyn Hatfield, 18% of the population are in professional occupations – this rises to 29.8% within the ‘neighbourhood’. The majority of people also have a degree, or higher.

Local Facilities

4.8 Using a variety of sources, the facilities within the local area have been assessed in respect of their distance from the site and their capacity, as well as other relevant factors. These have been assessed using the guidance set out in the Assessment Methodology within the previous chapter.

Childrens Centres

4.9 Using Hertfordshire’s list of Childrens Centres1 it was possible to assess which facilities were located near by, and their distance from the site. This showed that the Waterside Children’s Centre is located 1km from the site, within the 1.4km buffer zone recommended in the Target Distance Standards.

1 http://www.hertschildrenscentres.org.uk/find/welwyn_hatfield.html

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 15 of 36

Table 3: Top Five Closest Children’s Centres to Site

Rank Children’s Centre Distance from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Waterside Children’s Centre 1.0

2 Tenterfield Nursery School and Children’s Centre 1.8

3 Oak Tree Children’s Centre 3.0

4 Applecroft Children’s Centre 3.2

5 Creswick Children’s Centre 3.8

Source: Savills

4.10 The Assessment of Digswell, as set out in Appendix 6, should therefore be reviewed in respect of the land behind New Road, Digswell, to say that the Children’s Centre is within the target distance.

Village/Community Hall

4.11 The five closest Village/Community Halls were assessed using the Councils list2 of facilities. This confirmed that there are two Halls within the target distance of the site, suggesting that provision is good within the area.

Table 4: Top Five Closest Community Centres/Village Halls

Rank Community Centre/ Village Hall Distance from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Digswell Village Hall 0.4

2 Margery Wood Hall 0.7

3 Burnham Green Village Hall 1.9

4 Hazel Grove Community Centre 2.2

5 Tewin Memorial Hall 2.3

Source: Savills

2 http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=310

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 16 of 36

4.12 This provision is also confirmed within the Community Facilities and Services Study(2012), but it also worth noting the extent of Halls provided within the surrounding area.

Dentist’s

4.13 The amount of Dentists within the surrounding area was assessed using sources from the NHS3. These also showed which were accepting NHS patients. This confirmed that there are no Dentists within Digswell or within the target distance, but there is supply in the surrounding area, which importantly are also accepting NHS patients.

4.14 The Community Facilities and Services Study(2012) is therefore correct in its scoring of Digswell in relation to nearby Dentists.

Table 5: Top Five Closest Dentists

Rank Dentist Distance Accept NHS Patients? from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Knightsfield Dental Practise 1.4 Yes

2 Mr N Osman, 32 High Street, Welwyn 2.0 Yes

3 Dental Surgery 2.4 No

4 Peartree Dental Surgery 2.5 Yes

5 Church Road Dental Practise 2.7 Yes (Only for existing registered patients)

Source: Savills

GP Surgeries

4.15 An assessment of GP Surgeries in the surrounding area, using NHS sources4 revealed that there were no GP’s within the target area, but that there are GP’s slightly further away that importantly, were accepting new patients.

3 http://www.nhs.uk/Service-Search

4 http://www.nhs.uk/Service-Search

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 17 of 36

Table 6: Top Five Closest GP Surgeries

Rank GP Surgery Distance from No. Of Accepting New Site (to 1dp) (km) Registered Patients? Patients

1 The Garden City 1.0 9309 Yes Practice (Haldens Medical Centre)

2 The Garden City 1.3 9309 Yes

Practice (Knightsfield branch)

3 Bridge Cottage Surgery 2.0 15764 Yes

4 Hall Grove Group 2.4 16103 Yes Practice (20 Parkway)

5 Moorswalk Surgery 2.6 22345 Yes

Source: Savills

Leisure Centres

4.16 Leisure Centres in the area were assessed using Welwyn Hatfield’s online list5. According to this list, and its definitions of what constitutes a Leisure Centre, Digswell Playing Fields are suitable as being classed as the closest facility, within the target distance. Furthermore, this also showed that there are a large range of facilities close by, within the towns. Whilst these are not within the target distance area, literature suggests that people will travel further for access to a Leisure Centre, and likely to drive there or use public transport. This suggests that the target distance is not as important as an indicator of catchment area.

Table 7: Top Five Closest Leisure Centres

Rank Leisure Centre Distance Facilities Available from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Digswell Playing Fields 0.3 3 Floodlit Tennis Courts, 1Youth Football Pitch, Children’s Play Area with Car Park

2 Panshanger Golf Complex 1.9 18 Hole Golf Course

3 Money Hole Lane Park 3.1 3 Youth Football Pitches, 1 Basketball court, 1 5-a-side pitch, 1 Floodlit tennis court, Multi activity area, 1 Rugby mini-pitch, Children’s

5 http://www.welhat.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=391

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 18 of 36

Play Area

4 King George V Playing Fields 3.9 8 Football pitches,

2 Cricket Pitches, 2 Basketball courts, 3 Astro-Turf Pitches, Changing rooms and pavilion for club and public use, Children's Playground, Skate Park/Multi-games area, Car Park

5 Stanborough Park 4.5 Water sports Centre, Children’s Play Area,

Nature trail, The Lakes, Rowing Boats & Pedalos, Fishing, Restaurant and Coffee Shop

Source: Savills

4.17 The assessment of Leisure Centres in Digswell should therefore be revised.

Libraries

4.18 A desktop assessment using an online search facility was used to determine the amount of libraries in the area and their distance from the site. When compared to the Target Straight Line Distances, which states that “85% of population to be within 2 miles of static library”, Digswell appears to have good provision. The assessment of Digswell should therefore be re- evaluated.

Table 8: Top Five Closest Libraries

Rank Library Distance from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Welwyn Library 1.8

2 Central Stocks Unit, Bessemer Road 2

3 Welwyn Garden City Library 2.2

4 Wheathampstead Library 7.0

5 Hatfield Library 7.1

Source: Savills

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 19 of 36

Local Shopping Centres

4.19 A desktop assessment using an online search facility was used to determine the amount of local shopping centres in the area and their distance from the site. This showed that the shops on Station Road, Digswell were the closest facility.

4.20 This was also reflected within the assessment of Digswell in Appendix 6. This also included the provision of public houses, which are provided within Digswell, again something which is reflected within the assessment. It is also worth noting that there are a large range of stores close to the site, within driving distance, as well as larger shopping centres such as at the Howard Centre at Howardsgate.

Table 9: Top Five Closest Local Shopping Centres

Rank Shopping Centres Distance Services from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Station Road, Digswell 0.4 Butcher and Delicatessen, Hair and Beauty, Pub, Flooring and Interiors Shop

2 Haldens, Welwyn Garden City 1.0 Pub, Convenience Store, Pharmacy, Betting Shops, Takeaway, Bakery, Carpet Shop, Hair and Beauty, Newsagent

3 Shoplands, Welwyn Garden City 1.1 Co-op, Pub, Take Away, Restaurant, Post Office

4 Welwyn High Street 2 Tesco Express, Pub, Post Office, Health and Beauty, Bakery, Restaurants, Take Away, Pharmacy

5 The Howard Centre, Howardsgate 2.5 Large Shopping Centre with most services

Source: Savills

Nursery School

4.21 An assessment of Nursery Schools in the area, using an education searching resource6 confirmed that there is provision within the Target Distance, as well as other facilities close by. This was also reflected within the Council assessment of Digswell, which in this case, does not need to have a revised score.

6 http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/search.xhtml?clear=true

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 20 of 36

Table 10: Top Five Closest Nursery Schools

Rank Nursery (Shown on Map) Distance from Site Age Capacity Total No. (to 1dp) (km) Range Of Children

1 Harwood Hill JMI and Nursery School 0.8 - - -

2 Rowan’s Primary and Nursery School 1.1 - - -

3 Circles Montessori 1.1 - - -

4 Homerswood Primary and Nursery School 1.1 - - -

5 Busy Bees Day Nursery 1.3 3-5 74 At any 80 one time Registered (2009) (2009)

Source: Savills

Pharmacies

4.22 Using an NHS resource7, the pharmacies within the local area could be assessed. This showed that there were none within the Target Distance, but there were two Pharmacies located just outside of this area.

Table 11: Top Five Closest Pharmacies

Rank Pharmacy Distance from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Lloyds Pharmacy, 34 Haldens 1.0

2 Lloyds Pharmacy, 9 Shoplands 1.2

3 Lloyds Pharmacy, 40 High Street, Welwyn 2.0

4 Bridge Cottage Pharmacy 2.0

5 Boots Pharmacy, 65 Moors Walk 2.5

Source: Savills

7 http://www.nhs.uk/Service-Search

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 21 of 36

Post Offices

4.23 Post offices were assessed using the Royal Mail’s branch finder8. This confirmed that there were none within the Target Distance area, and as a result, the assessment of Digswell, as set out in Appendix 6, does not need to be revised.

Table 12: Top Five Closest Post Offices

Rank Post Office Distance from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Shoplands Co-op Post Office 1.2

2 Burnham Green Post Office 1.9

3 Welwyn Post Office, 20 High St 2.0

4 Oaklands Post Office, 70 Great North Road 2.3

5 Tewin Post Office 2.6

Source: Savills

Primary School

4.24 An assessment of Primary Schools in the area, using an education searching resource9 showed that there were 5 Primary Schools within the Target Distance of the site, of which 4 had capacity for more students (according to the resource). This was also reflected within the Council’s assessment which does not need revising in respect of Primary Schools.

Table 13: Top Five Closest Primary Schools

Rank Primary Distance Age Capacity Total from Site (to Range No. Of 1dp) (km) Children

1 St John’s C of E Primary School 0.4 3-11 210 236

2 Harwood Hill Junior Mixed Infant and Nursery 0.8 3-11 240 192 School

3 Homerswood Primary and Nursery School 1.1 4-11 210 188

8 http://www.postoffice.co.uk/branch-finder

9 http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/search.xhtml?clear=true

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 22 of 36

4S ource: SRoavwillsa ns Primary School 1.1 3-11 210 188

5 The Holy Family Catholic Primary School 1.2 3-11 210 206

Recycling Facilities

4.25 Recycling Facilities were located using the Government’s resources lists10 which confirm that there is a facility located at Digswell Park Road, within the Target Distance area. This is also confirmed within the Council’s assessment of Digswell (Appendix 6).

Table 14: Top Five Closest Recycling Centres

Rank Recycling Centre Distance Recycling Available from Site (to 1dp) (km)

1 Digswell Park Road 0.3 Glass Paper and card Aluminium & steel cans

Textiles Plastic bottles

2 Haldens Welwyn Garden City 1 Glass Paper and card Aluminium & steel cans

Textiles Plastic bottles

3 Shoplands 1.1 Glass Paper and card Aluminium & steel cans

Textiles Plastic bottles

4 Welwyn Civic Centre 1.8 Glass Paper and card Aluminium & steel cans Textiles

Plastic bottles 5 Waitrose 2.2 Glass Paper and card Aluminium & steel cans Textiles

Plastic bottles

10 http://local.direct.gov.uk/LDGRedirect/index.jsp?LGSL=534&LGIL=8

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 23 of 36

Source: Savills

Secondary Schools

4.26 An assessment of Secondary Schools in the area, using an education searching resource11 revealed that the Monks Walk School is located within the Target Distance area, and has capacity for additional students. This is contrary to the Council’s Assessment of Digswell, suggesting that Digswell should be scored higher.

Table 15: Top Five Closest Secondary Schools

Rank Secondary Distance from Age Range Capacity Total No. Of Site (to 1dp) Children (km)

1 Monks Walk School 1.4 11-18 1341 1242 2 Sir Frederic Osborn School 2.2 11-18 1226 766

3 Stanborough School 4.0 11-18 1124 1091

4 The Sele School 6.5 11-18 699 417

5 Onslow St Audrey’s School 7.2 11-18 815 465

Source: Savills

Local Transport

4.27 Local Transport was also assessed, given the site’s close proximity to a range of bus stops and it being within walking distance of the train station. This showed that the site had good access to the local area, with frequent services serving Welwyn Hatfield and beyond. This suggests that the site is in a sustainable location, and that the Target Distances for facilities could potentially be increased given the ease of accessing those facilities located further away from the site.

11 http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/search.xhtml?clear=true

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 24 of 36

Table 16: Local Bus Stops

Rank Bus Stop Distance from Destinations Frequency Site (to 1dp) Approx.

(km)

1 Digswell, Welwyn North 0.2 Hemel Hempstead - St Albans - Hatfield Every 15minutes Railway Station (stop A) - Welwyn GC - Knebworth - Stevenage

Kimpton/ Hitchin - Welwyn Garden City Every 2 hours 2 Digswell, Welwyn North 0.2 Welwyn Garden City - Hertford Railway Station (stop B) Every 2/3 hours

Source: Savills

Table 17: Location of Rail Station

Rank Rail Station Distance from Destinations Frequency Site (to 1dp) Approx. (km)

1 Welwyn North Railway 0.3 London Kings Cross (Southbound) Every half hour Station

Peterborough

Every half hour

Cambridge

Every half hour

2 Welwyn Garden City 2.4 Peterborough Every half hour Railway Station

Cambridge Every half hour

London Every 20minutes/ half hour

Source: Savills

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 25 of 36

5 Analysis and Assessment

5.1 Following this desktop assessment of Digswell, we believe that the area should be reassessed and rescored. This revised scoring can be seen on the table in Appendix 7. This revised scoring shows that Digswell performs better than originally set out in Welwyn Hatfield’s assessment, with a total score of 30 out of 42 (as set out in Appendix 7).

5.2 Given this revised scoring, Digswell performs well as an area in terms of access to facilities, and given its low population size compared to the facilities available, as well as the capacity of those facilities, it could potentially accommodate future growth.

5.3 The Community Facilities and Services Study (2012) sets out that “Neighbourhoods scoring an average of 28 or more could be considered to be adequately provided with facilities”. Given that the reassessment of Digswell, in relation to the land behind New Road, scores Digswell with 30 points, it can be said that the area is adequately supplied with facilities.

5.4 In regards to the amount of population that can be accommodated, the Community Facilities and Services Study (2012) states that;

“a score of 28 typically involves a population of 3,200 people (which is likely to equate to 1350 dwellings based on an average household size of 2.36 persons (ONS, 2001)).”

5.5 Based on the graph shown in figure 3, and the calculation above, a score of 30 could accommodate a population of approximately 3400, as shown below. This is likely to equate to approximately 1,440 dwellings, as based on the average household size of 2.36 persons (ONS 2001).

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 26 of 36

Figure 3: Comparison of Population Size and Facilities Score

Source: Welwyn Hatfield Community Facilities and Services Study 2012

5.6 Based on Digswell’s existing population of 1,629 people (ONS 2011), Digswell is able to accommodate significant growth, and still be able to provide the necessary facilities for the population. This is further supported by census records which show that 626 households were recorded in Digswell in 2011 (ONS, 2011) but according to this assessment, could potentially accommodate up to 1,440.

5.7 Furthermore, this proves that Digswell does not have a limited range of facilities, in contrast to the Council’s assessment of the area, and in relation to the SHLAA assessment of land behind New Road.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 27 of 36

6 Summary and Conclusion

6.1 According to the emerging Core Strategy, a further 3,100 dwellings will need to be accommodated within existing urban areas of Welwyn Hatfield, based on an average density of 40 dph. On this basis, it is currently anticipated that sufficient land would need to be released from the Green Belt to accommodate a further 2,745 new homes by 2021, a further 2,500 new homes by 2026 and yet a further 2,500 by 2031.

6.2 The Local Plan for Welwyn Hatfield currently requires developments to be built at densities of 30 to 50 dwellings per hectare (dph), but allows densities of more than 50 dph in locations such as town centres. On the basic assumption that the majority of the site could be built out (e.g. approximately 5 ha, taking into account open space, highways etc with a total site area of 6.7 ha) at an average density of 35 dwellings per hectare, the site has the potential for approximately 175 houses. This would go some way to meeting housing targets for the area.

6.3 This Facilities and Services Study of land behind New Road, Digswell, has used the methodology set out within the Welwyn Hatfield Community Facilities and Services Study (2012), which assesses the access and provision of community facilities within the settlements of Welwyn Hatfield. Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council have assessed the settlement of Digswell within this document, the results of which can be found in Appendix 6.

6.4 Within the Welwyn Hatfield Community Facilities and Services Study, Digswell is ranked at no. 20 at of 28 settlements, with a score of 25 out of 42. The document states that “Neighbourhoods scoring an average of 28 or more could be considered to be adequately provided with facilities”.

6.5 A Desktop Study of land behind New Road, Digswell has shown that the scoring of Digswell should be revised, resulting in an amended score of 30 out of 42. This shows that the site is adequately provided with facilities, as shown in Appendix 7. A comparison of the population and facilities score shows that Digswell could accommodate significantly more growth, relating to the facilities it provides.

6.6 Given this assessment, it is therefore unjustified that Welwyn Hatfield have concluded within their SHLAA Phase 2 that the land behind New Road, Digswell is (emphasis in bold);

“Currently a single track access and potential for a wider access has not been

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 28 of 36

demonstrated. Also, Digswell has a limited range of facilities and development of this scale would not generate new facilities. Agent can provide no evidence that landowner currently wants to take the site forward and therefore there is not enough certainty to release the land from the green belt.”

6.7 This assessment shows that, given the amount and access to facilities within Digswell, significant further growth can be accommodated within the area and still be able to provide the necessary facilities for the population. Potential has been demonstrated for up to 1,440 households (housing 3,400 residents) in total against a current total of only 626 households (housing 1,629 residents).

6.8 On this basis, the current statement in the SHLAA for this site should be revised to reflect the fact that the available facilities are sufficient to support further development in this area.

6.8 It is also important to note that a development of this size will trigger the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) whereby the client will make monetary contributions to the Council. These are likely to support facilities off site, contributing to further choice and capacity in the local area, improving facilities for the local population.

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 29 of 36

Appendix 1

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 30 of 36

Land behind New Road, Digswell

Approximate Site Location Plan

Appendix 2

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 31 of 36

Appendix 3

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 32 of 36

5. SHLAA Phase 2: Digswell

SHLAA sites: Suitable, available and achievable

Failed a SHLAA Test

©CrownCopyright.AllrightsreservedWelwynHatfieldBoroughCouncilLA1000195472012

Appendix 4

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 33 of 36

Welwyn Hatfield ward boundaries

Figure 1: Post 2008 ward boundaries and approximate site location

Source: Neighbourhood Statistics

Figure 2: Pre-2008 ward boundaries

Source: Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council

Appendix 5

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 34 of 36

Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 1 of 7

Neighbourhood Statistics

Original URL: http://www.neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3& b=6275303&c=AL6+0AH&g=6435699& i=1001x1012&j=6305890&m=1&p=1& q=1&r=0&s=1365517400552&enc=1

2011 Census

What is it like in your neighbourhood?

How does your neighbourhood or area compare with your local authority, or with England as a whole?

This Neighbourhood Summary provides information about your area to help answer these questions. It provides a range of statistics, and by clicking on the tabs at the top of the screen you can choose what interests you.

The figures on this tab are from the 2011 Census and are for your neighbourhood, often compared with a larger area. All other tabs contain data from official administrative sources, and are the most recent available on Neighbourhood Statistics.

Usual resident population, March 2011

Variable Measure Your neighbourhood Your area Welwyn Hatfield

All people Count 1,629 5,995 110,535 Males Count 798 2,942 54,364 Females Count 831 3,053 56,171 Population density (number of people per Rate 4.7 6.7 8.5 hectare)

Percentage of people in each age band in your neighbourhood, March 2011

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013 Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 2 of 7

The 2011 Census recorded 626 households in your neighbourhood Welwyn Hatfield 001D.

The percentage breakdown of different types of household in your neighbourhood is shown in the chart, below.

Household composition in your neighbourhood, March 2011

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013 Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 3 of 7

People were asked in the 2011 Census about what kind of dwelling they were living in at the time. The chart, below, shows the percentage of different types of accommodation in your neighbourhood.

Accommodation type in your neighbourhood, March 2011

Note:

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013 Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 4 of 7

1.All dwellings are unshared unless stated otherwise. Detached, semi-detached and terraced refer to houses or bungalows.

The 2011 Census asked people to describe their general health over the preceding 12 months as 'very good', 'good', 'fair', 'bad' or 'very bad'.

People's general health, March 2011

Variable Measure Your neighbourhood Welwyn Hatfield England

Very good % 55.7 50.9 47.2 Good % 32.8 33.9 34.2 Fair % 9.1 11.2 13.1 Bad % 2.1 3.1 4.2 Very bad % 0.2 0.8 1.2

The Census also asked people whether they were providing unpaid care to family, friends or neighbours with long-term physical or mental health problems. This gave the following results:

Carers, March 2011

Variable Measure Your neighbourhood Welwyn Hatfield England

People providing unpaid % 11.4 9.4 10.3 care

The 2011 Census asked people about their working lives.

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013 Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 5 of 7

Economic activity in your neighbourhood, March 2011

Note:

1.The Local Economy tab of this Neighbourhood Summary shows overall employment, unemployment and economic activity rates, taken from the most recent official sources. The chart, above, supplements this information, showing further detail, as recorded at the time of the 2011 Census. The figures are not directly comparable, due to the different time periods.

2.Part-time employees worked 30 hours, or less, a week.

Occupations of all people in employment, March 2011

Variable Measure Your neighbourhood Welwyn Hatfield England

Managers, directors and % 20.6 11.3 10.9 senior officials Professional occupations % 29.8 18.8 17.5 Associate professional and % 17.8 13.6 12.8 technical occupations Administrative and % 10.2 11.9 11.5 secretarial occupations Skilled trades occupations % 5.7 9.9 11.4 Caring, leisure and other % 5.9 8.7 9.3 service occupations Sales and customer % 4.6 10.1 8.4 service occupations Process, plant and % 2.2 5.3 7.2 machine operatives Elementary occupations % 3.3 10.5 11.1

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013 Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 6 of 7

Qualifications held by people in your neighbourhood, March 2011

The chart, below, shows percentages of people aged 16 and over in your neighbourhood by their highest qualification.

For more information about your neighbourhood please see other Summary tabs.

Source: Office for National Statistics

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013 Print Friendly Neighbourhood Summary 2011 Census tab Page 7 of 7

AL6 0AH is within your neighbourhood Welwyn Hatfield 001D in your area Welwyn Hatfield 001 in Welwyn Hatfield local authority in the region. Note that some statistical boundaries were redrawn following the 2011 Census, so this map may not reflect the one shown on the other Summary tabs.

Copyright

This material is Crown Copyright.

Users are granted permission to reproduce Crown Copyright material provided that a Click- Use Licence has been obtained from HMSO. The Click-Use Licence can be obtained from www.clickanduse.hmso.gov.uk. When reproducing this material, copyright and source should be acknowledged.

http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk/dissemination/NeighbourhoodSummary.do?a=3... 09/04/2013

Appendix 6

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 35 of 36

Digswell Facilities Assessment

Source: Welwyn Hatfield Community Facilities Study October 2012

Appendix 7

Facilities and Services Study of Land behind New Road, Digswell

On behalf of Wallington Farms Page 36 of 36

Digswell – Revised Facilities Assessment

Facility Type Is there provision in (If no) Is there (If yes) Is it within Score neighbourhood provision nearby? target distance? (no – 0) (Yes – 2, No – 1) (yes – 3 points)

Children’s Centre No Yes – Waterside Yes – 1km 2

Village Hall Yes – Digswell Village 3 Hall, Margery Wood Hall and Burnham Green Village Hall

Dentist No No No 0

GP Surgery No Yes – Haldens No 1 Medical Centre

Leisure Centre Yes – Digswell Playing Yes – various No 2 Fields (partly leisure, so 2 points)

Library (Static) No – Welwyn Library Yes Yes 2

Local Shopping Yes 3 Centre/Convenience Store

Nursery School Yes – x1 3

Pharmacy No Yes – Haldens No 1

Post Office No Yes – Shoplands No 1

Primary School Yes – St Johns JMI 3

Public House Yes – ‘The Cowper 3 Arms’

Recycling Facility Yes – Digswell Park 3 Road Car Park

Secondary School Yes – Monks Walk – 3 1.4 km

Total Score 30

Count of facilities that score 2 or 3 10

APPENDIX 2

Access Strategy 2015

A report for MR JOHN WALLACE

In respect of Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL

Access Strategy

March 2015 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

DOCUMENT SIGNATURE AND REVIEW SHEET

Project Details

Project Title: Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL

Project No.: 1303-71 Report No.: 1303-71/TN/01B

Client: Mr John Wallace

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved for issue

Name John Hopkins - John Hopkins

Signature

Date

Document Review

Revision Date Description Checked By

A 08/01/2015 Additional information provided SM

B 03/03/15 Amendments to text SM

Issued by:

Bristol Transport Planning Associates Cambridge Sheraton House Cardiff Castle Park London Cambridge Welwyn Garden City CB3 0AX

01223 370 135 [email protected] www.tpa.uk.com

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 i Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

CONTENTS PAGE

1 INTRODUCTION 1 2 EXISTING SITUATION 2 Existing site Local highway network Existing Traffic Flows and Speed 3 ACCESS STRATEGY 5 Prospective Development Proposed Vehicular Access Non-car accessibility Off-Site Assessment 4 HIGHWAY CAPACITY ASSESSMENT 7 Existing junction operation Background Traffic Growth Development Trips Total Forecasted Traffic Flows Future Highway Capacity Assessment 5 CONCLUSIONS 12

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 ii Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Existing Traffic Flows 2014 – AM peak – 08:00 to 09:00 Figure 4.2 Existing Traffic Flows 2014 – PM peak – 17:00 to 18:00 Figure 4.3 Forecasted (2020) Base Traffic Flows – AM peak Figure 4.4 Forecasted (2020) Base Traffic Flows – PM peak Figure 4.5 Proposed Development Traffic Flows – AM peak Figure 4.6 Proposed Development Traffic Flows – PM peak Figure 4.7 Total Forecasted (2020) Traffic Flows – AM peak Figure 4.8 Total Forecasted (2020) Traffic Flows – PM peak

LIST OF APPENDICES

A ATC traffic survey results B Preliminary vehicular access option C Turning Count and Spot Queue Traffic Survey Results D ARCADY Modelling Results – Hertford Road with Harmer Green Lane E TRICS Report

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 iii Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Transport Planning Associates (TPA) has been instructed by Mr John Wallace to consider the key transport planning implications arising from the potential allocation of land for residential development behind 2 New Road in Digswell, Hertfordshire (referred to as ‘Dig 1 – land behind New Road, Digswell, within the Local Plan Consultation Document January 2015).

1.2 The site has previously been promoted through the Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA). This report has been produced in support of further representations to the Local Plan Consultation Document January 2015.

1.3 The ‘SHLAA Phase 2 – Sites outside urban areas’ (October 2012) records the site as being unsuitable for allocation for residential development. The report states:

‘Currently a single track access and potential for a wider access has not been demonstrated. Also, Digswell has a limited range of facilities and development of this scale would not generate new facilities. Agent can provide no evidence that landowner currently wants to take the site forward and therefore there is not enough certainty to release the land from the green belt.’

1.4 TPA provided evidence to accompany representations to the SHLAA Phase 2 in April 2013 to demonstrate that the site could be accessed through the creation of a simple priority junction from Harmer Green Road. Further detail in relation to this is also provided within this report.

1.5 The site has now been considered further as part of the production of a new Local Plan for Welwyn Hatfield and in that process has now been upgraded in the Council’s assessment from “unsuitable” to “less favourable”. An additional site assessment has been undertaken by the Council’s Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel which, amongst other matters, considers accessibility and infrastructure (Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council Cabinet Housing and Planning Panel, 15th October 2014). With reference to the site, the Cabinet Report states:

‘Requires safe access arrangements from Harmer Green Road and impact on roundabout with Hertford Road unclear.’

1.6 The purpose of this report therefore is to demonstrate that adequate, safe access can be provided to the site, as well as a general consideration of other transport issues relating to any future development of the site for residential purposes.

1.7 This report also clarifies the impact on the roundabout with Hertford Road, in order to resolve any highways concerns that the Council may have in regards to potentially allocating the site for residential development. This is to assist in potentially upgrading the Councils assessment of the site to a more favourable status as part of the production of a new Local Plan.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 1 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

2 EXISTING SITUATION

2.1 To inform this access strategy, the site has been visited on three separate occasions during April and May 2013. Details of the operation of the local highway network and other issues of particular interest were recorded during the site visits.

Existing site

2.2 The proposed development site is located to the east of New Road and on the eastern side of Digswell village centre. The western and northern boundary of the site is formed by the rear of residential properties on New Road and a section of Harmer Green Lane, with open fields to the east and parkland (Tewinwater Park) to the south.

2.3 Harmer Green Lane is the only point at which the proposed development site meets the existing highway network.

2.4 The site is currently active farmland with access currently provided via a footway cross and access road from Harmer Green Lane and a farm track on the northern boundary of the site that leads to Penny Fathers Lane and New Road.

Local highway network

2.5 Harmer Green Lane and New Road provide a link between Stevenage and various villages to the north of Digswell with Hertford Road, which in turn provides access to the A1(M), Welwyn Garden City and Hertford.

2.6 Within the vicinity of the existing site access, Harmer Green Lane has a general carriageway width of approximately 7 metres, whilst further north and once the road becomes New Road the width varies between approximately 6 metres and 7 metres.

2.7 From the junction of Hertford Road and Harmer Green Lane to the junction of Harmer Green Lane and New Road there is a single footway to the eastern side of the carriageway; this section of Harmer Green Lane is restricted to a 30mph speed limit and incorporates street lighting.

2.8 To the north of the junction of Harmer Green Lane and New Road, which is where the road changes from Harmer Green Lane to New Road, there is a section of the road with footways along both sides before it switches back to just a single footway, which is to the western side of the carriageway; this section of New Road is restricted to a 30mph speed limit and incorporates street lighting along its bottom section.

2.9 To the north of the village the road once more becomes Harmer Green Lane before exiting the village with speed restricted to 30mph and a single footway.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 2 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

2.10 The junction of Hertford Road and Harmer Green Lane is a mini-roundabout whilst both the Harmer Green Lane and New Road junctions are simple priority controlled junctions.

2.11 Harmer Green Lane and New Road are predominately residential in character with residential properties taking direct access, as well as various minor road junctions providing access to blocks of residential developments.

Existing Traffic Flows and Speed

2.12 To determine the existing volume and speeds of traffic that uses Harmer Green Lane and New Road a traffic survey using an Automatic Traffic Counter (ATC) was undertaken for the seven day period between Thursday 18 April 2013 and Wednesday 24 April 2013. The ATC was located on Harmer Green Lane adjacent to the site. Full results from the ATC survey are provided in Appendix A.

2.13 Average weekday traffic flows recorded during the survey are summarised in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1 Harmer Green Lane Traffic Flows

Period Northbound Southbound 2-Way Total

AM Peak (0800-0900) 75 301 376

PM Peak (1700-1800) 261 90 351

12-Hour (0700-1900) 1,304 1,457 2,761

24-Hour 1,540 1,688 3,228

2.14 The results indicate that Harmer Green Lane is relatively lightly trafficked and is certainly accommodating traffic well within its design capacity. The results also demonstrate a high level of imbalance between the directional flows in the peak periods, with much more uniformity at other times, which would suggest the road is used as a commuter route.

2.15 Average traffic speeds recorded as part of the survey are summarised in Table 2.2 as follows:

Table 2.2 Harmer Green Lane 7 Day Average Traffic Speeds

Speed Northbound Southbound

Average 23.6mph 23.8mph

85th Percentile 26.0mph 26.2mph

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 3 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

2.16 The results of the speed survey indicate that average speeds, and even the 85th percentile speeds, are markedly lower than the posted speed limit. Looking at the total volume of traffic, over 96% of the speeds were recorded as being less than or equal to the posted speed limit.

Non-Car Accessibility

2.17 With reference to information obtained from the public transport pages of the Hertfordshire County Council website (http://www.intalink.org.uk), it has been determined that Digswell is served by two local bus services, with bus stops on New Road in relatively close proximity to the site.

2.18 Service 388 operates between Welwyn Garden City and Hertford with seven scheduled services on a weekday and five on a Saturday, whilst Service 203 operates a single service in each direction on a Thursday between Watton-at-Stone and Welwyn Garden City.

2.19 Welwyn North train station is within an acceptable walking distance being located approximately 300 metres from the entrance to the development site. Welwyn North train station benefits from a regular frequency of train services from either Peterborough or Cambridge and London.

2.20 There is an existing Bridleway (Welwyn 050) that runs to the south of the proposed development site and an existing Public Footpath (034B) that runs to the east of the proposed development site.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 4 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

3 ACCESS STRATEGY

Prospective Development

3.1 The Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council Cabinet for Housing and Planning Panel (15th October 2014) considers that5 the site could accommodate approximately 130 dwellings.

3.2 The Local Plan consultation considers that if growth is distributed across the district on a proportional basis, the identified need for housing in Digswell between 2011 and 2031 is 180. Sufficient land in Digswell needs to be found for 171 new dwellings.

Proposed Vehicular Access

3.3 The point at which the boundary of the site meets with the highway is restricted to a section of Harmer Green Lane. The consideration of vehicular access options has therefore focused on this location and upon a strategy which can be achieved without the need for further land acquisition.

3.4 The proposed access strategy for the site comprises of the creation of a new simple priority junction from Harmer Green Road.

3.5 The preliminary design for the site access junction is presented in drawing number 1303- 71/PL01, which is provided in Appendix B.

3.6 The geometric design of the proposed access solution has been made with reference to both national and local design guidance. Roads in Hertfordshire: Highway Design Guide 3rd Edition (Section 6.1) states that “not more than 300 dwellings should be served by a single point of access to the wider highway network” and, as such, a single point of access, as proposed, should be acceptable in design terms.

Non-car accessibility

3.7 Pedestrian connectivity between the site and the existing local network of footways is provided for by the inclusion of 2m wide footways on both sides of the proposed site access junction and access road. Dropped kerbs and tactile paving would also be proposed to be included in any design of a site access junction to aid pedestrian movements across the junction.

3.8 The position of the site access junction and internal access road has been considered to ensure it does not impact on the route of the existing Bridleway to the south of the site.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 5 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

3.9 Linkage between existing public transport facilities, both bus and train, is expected to be good in terms of proximity to these facilities and the existing and proposed network of local footways.

Off-Site Assessment

3.10 Outside of the requirements to undertake highway works necessary to access the site, it is not envisaged that off-site junction improvements will be required to mitigate capacity issues. The traffic generation of this scale of development is unlikely to materially impact junctions on the local highway network. Such conclusions would, of course, need to be confirmed at the appropriate time through a full Transport Assessment.

3.11 However, the following chapter of this report does provide some specific capacity analysis of the roundabout with Hertford Road that was specifically highlighted by the council as requiring assessment.

3.12 Additionally, improvements to pedestrian and cycle access over and above those associated with direct access are not envisaged.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 6 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

4 HIGHWAY CAPACITY ASSESSMENT

4.1 This chapter of the report considers the capacity of the existing mini-roundabout of Hertford Road with Harmer Green Lane. An assessment has been undertaken to consider the capacity implication of the additional vehicle movements that may be generated by a future development.

Existing junction operation

4.2 To better understand the existing traffic patterns in the vicinity of the proposed development, a traffic survey was carried out on the mini-roundabout junction of Hertford Road with Harmer Green Lane. The survey was undertaken on Tuesday 16th December 2014 between 07:00 and 10:00 and between 14:30 and 18:30 ensuring both peak periods were considered. Further to the traffic flow survey, spot queue counts were undertaken at 5 minute intervals on each arm of the surveyed junction during the survey time periods.

4.3 The data from these surveys is contained within Appendix C.

4.4 Analysis of the survey data from the junction has revealed that the highway network weekday peak hours are between 08:00 and 09:00 and between 17:00 and 18:00.

4.5 The AM and PM peak hour flows are displayed in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2 respectively.

4.6 The Hertford Road mini-roundabout with Harmer Green Lane has been analysed under the loading of the existing traffic flows presented in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2 to ensure the suitability of the model for the future year traffic impact analysis when the proposed development will become operational.

4.7 The roundabout has been assessed using ARCADY under the loading of the surveyed traffic flows. The model has then been calibrated using the queue surveys to better reflect the operation of the junction as surveyed and ensure a validated model.

4.8 The full model results from the existing scenario model are contained within Appendix D with the results summarised in Table 4.1.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 7 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

Table 4.1 ARCADY Results – Hertford Road mini-roundabout with Harmer Green Lane – Surveyed (2014) Traffic Flows

AM Peak (08:00 to 09:00) PM Peak (17:00 to 18:00) Arm/Link Max RFC Max Queues Max RFC Max Queues

Harmer Green 0.65 2 0.16 0 Lane

Hertford Road 0.53 1 0.85 5 (East)

Hertford Road 0.76 3 0.42 1 (West)

4.9 It is evident from the results presented in Table 4.1 that the junction is operating within capacity with the maximum Ratio of Flow to Capacity (RFC) of 0.85 on the Hertford Road (East) arm in the PM peak period. This resulted in a maximum queue length of 5 vehicles. This is reflective of the traffic survey where minimal queuing was generally observed throughout the survey periods.

Background Traffic Growth

4.10 In order to determine the background traffic growth that is to be expected in the area and to be in line with DfT Guidance for future year assessment, TEMPRO version 6.2, dataset 62 has been interrogated to derive local growth factors to correct NTM growth forecast from 2015 (year of application) to 2020 (future year 5 years post registration of a planning application).

4.11 Origin and destination local factors for Welwyn North (26UL4) have been derived for each peak period to provide local growth factors for car drivers. These local factors have been adjusted using the National Traffic Model (NTM) (AF09) using urban, principle road parameters and regional effects. These TEMPRO forecast are presented in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2 Forecast Traffic Growth Factors to 2020

Local Growth NTM Adjusted Origin Destination

Weekday AM 1.0430 1.0559 1.0839

Weekday PM 1.0498 1.0427 1.0806

4.12 The NTM adjusted factors identified in Table 4.2 for Weekday AM and PM peak have been applied to the ahead movements of Hertford Road within surveyed period flows presented in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2 to produce background traffic growth to 2020.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 8 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

4.13 Growth has been applied to the ahead movements travelling along Hertford Road as growth associated with other movements will be related to any development of the site.

4.14 Total traffic volumes on the local highway network that are forecast through the application of background growth factors for 2020 are presented in Figure 4.3 and Figure 4.4 for the AM and PM peaks.

Development Trips

4.15 In order to consider the likely traffic attraction associated with the proposed development, the TRICS 7.1.3 database has been interrogated to produce trip rates for the proposed land use.

4.16 Sites of a similar location for TRICS Land Use Class 03 - Residential, A - Houses privately owned with the number of development units between 100 and 160 units have been included in the assessment.

4.17 The resultant vehicle trip rates for the AM and PM peak are shown in Table 4.3 with the calculated number of trips, based on the proposed development size. The TRICS report containing these trip rates is contained within Appendix E.

Table 4.3 Proposed Trip Rates

AM Peak PM Peak

Arrive Depart Total Arrive Depart Total

Trip Rate 0.161 0.467 0.628 0.422 0.24 0.662 per unit

Trips 21 61 82 55 31 86

4.18 The information presented in Table 4.3 suggests that the development proposal is likely to generate 82 two-way vehicular trips during the AM peak and 86 two-way trips during the PM peak. This broadly equates to three vehicles entering or exiting the site every two minutes across the peak period.

4.19 These proposed development trips have been distributed onto the local highway network and are presented in Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 for the AM and PM peak periods respectively.

Total Forecasted Traffic Flows

4.20 Total forecast traffic flows consider the cumulative impact of existing traffic, forecast background traffic growth and traffic associated with the development proposal. As such, total

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 9 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

forecast traffic flows for the AM and PM peak periods are the sum of the total forecasted (2020) base traffic flows and the total development traffic.

4.21 Total forecasted traffic flows for 2020 for the AM and PM peak period are presented in Figure 4.7 and Figure 4.8 respectively.

Future Highway Capacity Assessment

4.22 The base traffic model presented earlier for the surveyed traffic flows has been utilised to assess the impact of traffic volumes in the forecasted future years. The results for the modelling of the following scenarios are presented below:

 Total forecasted (2020) base traffic flows (no development); and  Total forecasted (2020) traffic flows (with development).

4.23 The junction has been assessed using ARCADY under the loading of both the ‘no development’ and ‘with development’ 2020 traffic flows. The results are summarised in Table 4.4 for the ‘no development’ scenario and in Table 4.5 for the ‘with development’ scenario.

4.24 Full modelling results are contained within Appendix D.

Table 4.4 ARCADY Results – Hertford Road mini-roundabout with Harmer Green Lane – Total Forecasted (2020) ‘no development’ Traffic Flows

AM Peak (08:00 to 09:00) PM Peak (17:00 to 18:00) Arm/Link Max RFC Max Queues Max RFC Max Queues

Harmer Green 0.67 2 0.17 0 Lane

Hertford Road 0.57 1 0.89 7 (East)

Hertford Road 0.82 4 0.45 1 (West)

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 10 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

Table 4.5 ARCADY Results – Hertford Road mini-roundabout with Harmer Green Lane – Total Forecasted (2020) ‘with development’ Traffic Flows

AM Peak (08:00 to 09:00) PM Peak (17:00 to 18:00) Arm/Link Max RFC Max Queues Max RFC Max Queues

Harmer Green 0.80 4 0.22 0 Lane

Hertford Road 0.59 1 0.92 8 (East)

Hertford Road 0.86 5 0.51 1 (West)

4.25 The results indicate that the proposed development will have a negligible impact with a worst case increase of two vehicles in the queue on Harmer Green Lane. On Hertford Road (East) in the PM peak, there is a negligible increase in RFC by 0.03, against the total forecasted 2020 ‘no development’ traffic flows, resulting in one extra vehicle.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 11 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

5 CONCLUSIONS

5.1 This Access Strategy has been prepared on behalf of Mr John Wallace in relation to land behind 2 New Road in Digswell, which is being promoted for residential development through the Local Plan.

5.2 The primary purpose of the strategy is to provide demonstrate that safe access can be provided to the site where Welwyn Hatfield Borough Council had previously reported that this had not been demonstrated.

5.3 It is concluded that a safe and design compliant means of access can be provided from the proposed development site to the existing local highway network.

5.4 The traffic volumes forecast to be generated by the proposed development have been derived and analysed through an interrogation of national industry standard software. The analysis of the impact of the development of local highway junction capacity has been undertaken for a five year period after the submission of a planning application.

5.5 The analysis demonstrates that the development does not prejudice the efficient operation of the highway network. More specifically, this report shows that development of the site would have a negligible impact upon the Harmer Green mini-roundabout.

5.6 It is further concluded that access for all modes of transport can be accommodated if the site were to be developed for around 130 dwellings.

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Page 12 of 12 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

FIGURES

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Figures A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

364 0

4 0

Site Access

0 0

0 0

90 0

2 0

3 175 186 0 1 3 32 1 482 1 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

55 1

309 2

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Surveyed 2014 Traffic Flows - AM peak - 08:00 to 09:00 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.1 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

91 0

1 0

Site Access

0 0

0 0

287 0

0 0

0 53 38 0 1 0 70 0 195 1 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

217 0

569 0

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Surveyed 2014 Traffic Flows - PM peak - 17:00 to 18:00 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.2 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

364 0

4 0

Site Access

0 0

0 0

90 0

2 0

3 175 186 0 1 3 32 1 522 1 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

55 1

335 2

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Forecasted (2020) Base Traffic Flows - AM peak 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.3 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

91 0

1 0

Site Access

0 0

0 0

287 0

0 0

0 53 38 0 1 0 70 0 211 1 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

217 0

615 0

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Forecasted (2020) Base Traffic Flows - PM peak 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.4 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

0 0

0 0

Site Access

0 0

61 0

0 21

0 0

0 43 18 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

6 0

0 0

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Proposed Development Traffic Flows - AM peak 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.5 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

0 0

0 0

Site Access

0 0

31 0

0 55

0 0

0 22 9 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

17 0

0 0

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Proposed Development Traffic Flows - PM peak 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.6 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

364 0

4 0

Site Access

0 0

61 0

90 21

2 0

3 218 204 0 1 3 47 1 522 1 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

61 1

335 2

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Total Forecasted (2020) Traffic Flows - AM peak 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.7 - A4 RESERVED COPYRIGHT ORIGINAL

PLOT SIZE INDICATIVE

Harmer Green Road

91 0

1 0

Site Access

0 0

31 0

287 55

0 0

0 75 47 0 1 0 109 0 211 1 0 0

Hertford Road Hertford Road

0 0

234 0

615 0

Key: 000 Total Vehicles 000 Total HGV

2 Date: Status: Scale: Total Forecasted (2020) Traffic Flows - PM peak 29/12/14 I N F O R M A T I O N NTS

Prepared By: Checked By: Approved By:

New Road, DIGSWELL TH SM SM

Project No: Figure No: Revision:

Wallington Farms 1303-71 4.8 - Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

APPENDIX A

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Appendix A Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 1 - Northbound Vehicle Flow Week 1

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Hr Ending Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 5 Day Ave 7 Day Ave 1 2 4 14 16 2 5 3 3 7 2 5 2 6 5 3 1 3 3 4 3 1 0 5 2 0 0 1 0 1 4 2 3 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 5 0 0 0 3 0 1 1 0 1 6 3 2 0 0 3 4 4 3 2 7 19 10 3 6 16 12 13 14 11 8 72 72 13 5 77 78 75 75 56 9 78 71 39 19 70 66 80 73 60 10 80 70 65 26 59 77 75 72 65 11 77 67 95 49 67 79 86 75 74 12 64 76 115 75 80 71 92 77 82 13 101 95 109 104 97 90 99 96 99 14 96 97 104 73 80 74 101 90 89 15 89 80 76 78 74 62 69 75 75 16 130 120 79 87 105 104 94 111 103 17 143 165 102 86 135 133 159 147 132 18 239 256 100 62 262 252 294 261 209 19 152 124 92 58 144 170 176 153 131 20 94 83 67 39 70 77 88 82 74 21 42 54 38 38 41 50 58 49 46 22 53 27 35 14 37 38 32 37 34 23 37 41 25 12 22 24 26 30 27 24 14 18 17 6 6 10 12 12 12

7-19 1321 1293 989 722 1250 1256 1400 1304 1176 6-22 1529 1467 1132 819 1414 1433 1591 1487 1341 6-24 1580 1526 1174 837 1442 1467 1629 1529 1379 0-24 1593 1537 1201 864 1450 1478 1641 1540 1395

Vehicle Flow (Channel 1)

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

Number of Vehicles of Number 0-24 0 6-24 18/04/2013 6-22 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 7-19 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Date

7-19 6-22 6-24 0-24 Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 1 - Northbound Average Speed Week 1

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Hr Ending Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 1 20.5 25.5 22.6 25.3 25.5 21.5 25.5 - 2 25.5 20.5 22.2 25.5 22.2 15.5 22.2 - 3 25.5 - 25.5 20.5 - - 25.5 - 4 20.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 - - - - 5 - - - 22.2 - 15.5 15.5 - 6 15.5 25.5 - - 25.5 18.0 25.5 - 7 23.8 24.5 25.5 23.8 22.3 24.5 25.5 - 8 22.0 24.9 22.4 23.5 23.7 23.1 22.9 - 9 20.4 20.2 22.1 23.8 19.2 19.7 20.5 - 10 22.2 22.4 23.1 23.2 23.6 23.3 23.2 - 11 22.7 23.2 24.2 23.8 23.4 23.4 23.9 - 12 23.8 22.5 24.6 22.0 24.0 23.7 23.9 - 13 23.7 23.6 23.9 23.8 22.9 24.1 24.0 - 14 24.3 23.9 23.9 23.5 23.7 23.7 23.7 - 15 21.7 22.8 23.9 24.8 23.2 23.0 23.5 - 16 22.4 22.6 23.7 23.4 21.8 21.6 21.1 - 17 24.2 23.8 23.4 23.6 24.7 24.2 24.1 - 18 24.5 24.8 24.2 22.9 24.5 24.5 24.1 - 19 24.3 24.1 23.8 24.9 24.4 24.0 24.3 - 20 24.4 23.2 24.6 24.4 24.7 23.9 23.7 - 21 23.6 23.2 24.2 25.1 23.8 24.0 23.4 - 22 24.2 24.0 23.7 23.4 23.9 22.3 23.3 - 23 24.8 23.5 22.3 22.2 24.1 24.8 24.3 - 24 22.6 24.4 22.6 23.8 23.8 24.5 23.0 -

10-12 23.2 22.8 24.4 22.7 23.7 23.6 23.9 - 14-16 22.1 22.7 23.8 24.1 22.4 22.1 22.1 - 0-24 23.4 23.5 23.8 23.7 23.6 23.5 23.5 -

7 Day Ave 23.6

85th Percentile

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Hr Ending Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 1 26.2 26.1 25.9 26.1 25.7 26.2 25.8 - 2 26.0 26.1 25.8 26.1 26.0 - 26.4 - 3 - - 26.4 25.9 - - - - 4 25.8 25.8 26.5 - - - - - 5 - - - 26.1 - - - - 6 15.8 25.8 - - 25.8 25.6 26.2 - 7 26.3 26.3 25.9 26.2 26.1 25.7 25.8 - 8 25.5 26.3 25.8 26.4 26.0 26.2 25.6 - 9 26.3 26.1 25.7 26.3 25.7 26.0 25.5 - 10 26.3 26.5 25.7 25.5 26.4 25.9 25.8 - 11 26.2 26.4 26.1 26.0 26.2 25.6 26.3 - 12 25.5 25.7 25.9 26.4 26.0 26.2 25.8 - 13 25.9 26.2 25.9 25.9 25.9 26.4 25.7 - 14 26.4 26.5 26.2 26.2 25.6 26.0 26.0 - 15 26.3 25.7 25.8 26.0 26.3 25.6 25.8 - 16 25.9 26.0 26.1 26.0 26.0 26.3 25.8 - 17 26.5 25.6 25.7 26.0 26.3 25.9 25.5 - 18 26.4 26.5 25.7 25.9 26.1 26.0 26.0 - 19 25.6 26.2 26.1 25.9 26.3 26.0 25.7 - 20 26.4 25.5 25.6 25.8 25.5 25.7 26.4 - 21 25.9 26.1 26.0 25.6 25.7 25.8 26.1 - 22 26.0 25.6 26.4 25.7 25.6 25.6 26.3 - 23 26.3 25.6 25.8 26.5 25.6 26.1 26.4 - 24 25.6 26.3 26.3 25.6 25.8 25.7 25.8 -

10-12 26.1 25.8 25.9 25.9 25.6 26.4 26.0 - 14-16 26.0 25.5 25.8 25.9 25.5 25.6 25.6 - 0-24 25.8 25.8 26.4 26.0 26.0 25.9 26.1 -

7 Day Ave 26.0 Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 1 - Northbound Speed Summary Week 1

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Speed (MPH) Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 0-30 1561 1504 1181 850 1428 1452 1621 31-45 32 33 20 14 22 26 20 46-60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1593 1537 1201 864 1450 1478 1641

Speed Summary (MPH)

100%

100%

99%

99%

98%

98%

97%

97% 18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013Date 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013

0-30 31-45 46-60 61- Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 1 - Northbound Vehicle Class Week 1

Classes Car / LGV / OGV1 / Bus OGV2 TOTAL Day / Time Caravan - 1 - 2,3,5,6,7,12 - 4,8,9,10,11,13 - 1-13 18/04/2013 7-19 1226 93 2 1321 6-22 1430 97 2 1529 6-24 1478 100 2 1580 0-24 1489 102 2 1593 19/04/2013 7-19 1200 88 5 1293 6-22 1368 94 5 1467 6-24 1426 95 5 1526 0-24 1434 98 5 1537 20/04/2013 7-19 949 39 1 989 6-22 1091 40 1 1132 6-24 1132 41 1 1174 0-24 1155 45 1 1201 21/04/2013 7-19 707 14 1 722 6-22 800 18 1 819 6-24 818 18 1 837 0-24 845 18 1 864 22/04/2013 7-19 1150 99 1 1250 6-22 1307 106 1 1414 6-24 1335 106 1 1442 0-24 1342 107 1 1450 23/04/2013 7-19 1175 78 3 1256 6-22 1344 86 3 1433 6-24 1378 86 3 1467 0-24 1387 88 3 1478 24/04/2013 7-19 1312 87 1 1400 6-22 1497 93 1 1591 6-24 1534 94 1 1629 0-24 1545 95 1 1641

Average 7-19 1103 71 2 1176 6-22 1262 76 2 1341 6-24 1300 77 2 1379 0-24 1314 79 2 1395

Total Vehicle Class Distribution

0% 6%

94% Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 2 - Southbound Vehicle Flow Week 1

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Hr Ending Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 5 Day Ave 7 Day Ave 1 4 6 20 16 3 6 1 4 8 2 2 3 3 5 1 0 4 2 3 3 2 2 2 3 0 0 1 1 1 4 0 0 2 0 0 1 1 0 1 5 1 1 1 0 3 1 2 2 1 6 8 10 3 0 7 6 6 7 6 7 35 29 8 5 35 33 39 34 26 8 186 187 23 14 177 189 204 189 140 9 304 284 75 26 318 299 302 301 230 10 125 120 118 81 122 128 130 125 118 11 97 94 127 83 83 99 102 95 98 12 106 95 115 85 87 85 90 93 95 13 88 73 91 57 91 85 85 84 81 14 93 87 105 104 104 79 91 91 95 15 115 112 108 98 72 93 80 94 97 16 99 98 94 77 104 89 105 99 95 17 91 98 91 59 107 85 108 98 91 18 89 94 87 67 78 97 92 90 86 19 96 115 94 70 106 82 92 98 94 20 74 79 61 49 65 76 66 72 67 21 66 34 29 31 30 54 53 47 42 22 39 21 26 18 31 19 23 27 25 23 24 31 35 3 10 23 29 23 22 24 13 17 19 5 9 7 8 11 11

7-19 1489 1457 1128 821 1449 1410 1481 1457 1319 6-22 1703 1620 1252 924 1610 1592 1662 1637 1480 6-24 1740 1668 1306 932 1629 1622 1699 1672 1514 0-24 1757 1690 1337 956 1643 1636 1714 1688 1533

Vehicle Flow (Channel 2)

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

Number of Vehicles of Number 0-24 0 6-24 18/04/2013 6-22 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 7-19 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Date

7-19 6-22 6-24 0-24 Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 2 - Southbound Average Speed Week 1

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Hr Ending Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 1 24.9 26.3 25.2 26.4 29.7 27.6 25.5 - 2 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 25.5 - 25.5 - 3 20.5 20.5 25.5 25.5 - - 25.5 - 4 - - 25.5 - - 15.5 25.5 - 5 25.5 33.0 38.0 - 25.5 25.5 31.8 - 6 23.0 26.0 22.2 - 25.1 22.2 23.8 - 7 26.8 25.8 21.8 25.5 24.6 26.7 25.9 - 8 24.3 24.1 26.3 27.1 24.1 24.8 24.2 - 9 20.6 20.6 25.7 27.0 19.3 21.3 19.2 - 10 24.4 23.4 24.9 24.7 23.7 23.7 23.5 - 11 24.0 24.8 24.1 23.9 24.0 24.4 24.4 - 12 24.4 23.8 24.8 23.9 24.3 24.9 23.1 - 13 24.8 25.1 25.4 24.2 25.3 24.7 24.6 - 14 24.7 24.9 25.4 24.8 24.5 26.2 25.3 - 15 22.8 20.8 24.6 24.8 22.9 23.8 25.4 - 16 21.0 19.6 24.6 24.5 20.0 20.9 20.9 - 17 24.6 23.3 24.6 23.9 24.3 24.3 24.1 - 18 24.7 24.0 25.2 24.0 24.4 24.1 23.0 - 19 24.7 24.5 25.0 25.6 23.3 24.3 24.5 - 20 25.4 24.0 24.1 24.9 24.2 24.7 24.1 - 21 24.3 25.8 25.0 25.6 26.2 25.3 25.5 - 22 25.4 25.4 25.2 24.9 23.9 25.8 25.1 - 23 24.9 25.3 24.6 25.5 25.2 26.0 24.7 - 24 26.7 24.8 25.8 27.0 23.3 26.6 25.5 -

10-12 24.2 24.3 24.5 23.9 24.2 24.6 23.8 - 14-16 21.9 20.2 24.6 24.6 21.2 22.4 22.9 - 0-24 23.6 23.2 24.9 24.7 23.0 23.8 23.2 -

7 Day Ave 23.8

85th Percentile

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Hr Ending Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 1 33.4 33.2 26.3 26.5 38.2 38.3 - - 2 26.5 25.9 25.7 25.9 - - 26.3 - 3 25.6 26.0 26.3 25.9 - - - - 4 - - 25.7 - - - - - 5 - - - - 25.9 - 38.2 - 6 26.1 33.5 25.6 - 25.8 26.2 26.4 - 7 33.3 25.9 25.6 25.8 26.0 33.9 26.1 - 8 25.6 26.0 33.8 34.0 25.6 26.4 25.9 - 9 26.0 25.7 25.9 33.8 26.0 25.9 25.9 - 10 25.7 26.1 26.0 26.2 26.5 25.6 26.4 - 11 26.5 26.0 25.6 25.9 26.1 26.5 26.1 - 12 25.6 26.2 25.6 26.2 26.4 26.3 26.4 - 13 25.5 26.4 25.7 25.8 26.2 26.2 26.0 - 14 25.8 25.9 25.5 25.9 25.9 26.2 25.8 - 15 26.0 25.8 26.2 25.9 26.2 25.5 26.4 - 16 26.4 25.8 26.0 26.4 25.6 25.7 25.8 - 17 26.0 25.7 26.1 25.6 26.3 25.7 25.8 - 18 25.9 26.0 25.7 26.1 26.2 26.0 25.7 - 19 26.3 25.7 26.0 25.8 26.0 25.9 25.8 - 20 26.3 26.1 26.2 25.6 25.7 25.6 25.5 - 21 26.2 25.9 26.3 33.2 26.2 25.8 26.2 - 22 33.7 26.4 25.9 25.6 25.8 33.6 26.3 - 23 26.5 26.0 26.4 25.9 26.3 26.3 25.8 - 24 33.3 25.7 26.2 34.0 25.6 26.7 26.2 -

10-12 26.0 26.2 25.6 26.0 26.0 25.7 25.9 - 14-16 25.9 26.2 26.1 26.0 26.3 26.4 26.3 - 0-24 26.2 26.1 26.2 26.5 26.3 25.9 26.2 -

7 Day Ave 26.2 Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 2 - Southbound Speed Summary Week 1

18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013 Speed (MPH) Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday 0-30 1668 1620 1235 898 1582 1546 1649 31-45 89 70 102 58 61 90 65 46-60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL 1757 1690 1337 956 1643 1636 1714

Speed Summary (MPH)

100%

98%

96%

94%

92%

90%

88% 18/04/2013 19/04/2013 20/04/2013Date 21/04/2013 22/04/2013 23/04/2013 24/04/2013

0-30 31-45 46-60 61- Digswell ATC, Harmer Green Lane

Produced by PCC Traffic Information Consultancy Ltd.

Channel 2 - Southbound Vehicle Class Week 1

Classes Car / LGV / OGV1 / Bus OGV2 TOTAL Day / Time Caravan - 1 - 2,3,5,6,7,12 - 4,8,9,10,11,13 - 1-13 18/04/2013 7-19 1336 152 1 1489 6-22 1532 170 1 1703 6-24 1568 171 1 1740 0-24 1580 176 1 1757 19/04/2013 7-19 1307 147 3 1457 6-22 1458 159 3 1620 6-24 1505 160 3 1668 0-24 1525 162 3 1690 20/04/2013 7-19 1026 99 3 1128 6-22 1140 108 4 1252 6-24 1192 110 4 1306 0-24 1221 112 4 1337 21/04/2013 7-19 761 60 0 821 6-22 859 65 0 924 6-24 866 66 0 932 0-24 890 66 0 956 22/04/2013 7-19 1288 159 2 1449 6-22 1437 171 2 1610 6-24 1455 172 2 1629 0-24 1466 175 2 1643 23/04/2013 7-19 1248 161 1 1410 6-22 1417 174 1 1592 6-24 1447 174 1 1622 0-24 1459 176 1 1636 24/04/2013 7-19 1323 153 5 1481 6-22 1490 167 5 1662 6-24 1524 170 5 1699 0-24 1537 172 5 1714

Average 7-19 1184 133 2 1319 6-22 1333 145 2 1480 6-24 1365 146 2 1514 0-24 1383 148 2 1533

Total Vehicle Class Distribution

0% 10%

90% Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

APPENDIX B

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Appendix B of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. Crown Copyright - Licence No. AL100034021 A3 NOTES: ORIGINAL PLOT SIZE

------

Rev Date Details Drawn Checked Approved by by by

Sheraton House Castle Park Cambridge CB3 0AX

CLIENT: WALLINGTON FARMS

PROJECT: NEW ROAD DIGSWELL

TITLE: PROPOSED SITE ACCESS ARRANGEMENT

STATUS:

SCALE: DATE: DRAWN: CHECKED: APPROVED: 1:500 12/04/13 LH W E S JOB NO: DRAWING NO: REVISION: 1303-71 PL01 INDICATIVE RESERVED COPYRIGHT Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

APPENDIX C

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Appendix C Digswell - Manual Traffic Survey, Tuesday 16th December 2014

Junction: (1) Harmer Green Lane / Hertford Road

Approach: Harmer Green Lane

Left to Hertford Road (East) Right to Hertford Road (West) U-Turn TIME P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL 0700 - 0715 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 9 1 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0715 - 0730 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 6 1 0 0 1 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0730 - 0745 0 0 12 2 0 0 0 14 0 0 32 1 1 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0745 - 0800 0 0 47 5 0 0 0 52 0 0 18 1 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 82 8 0 0 0 90 0 0 65 4 1 0 1 71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0800 - 0815 0 0 45 3 0 0 0 48 0 0 21 0 0 1 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0815 - 0830 0 0 55 3 0 1 0 59 0 1 45 4 0 0 0 50 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0830 - 0845 1 1 40 1 0 0 0 43 0 0 56 4 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0845 - 0900 0 0 31 3 1 1 0 36 0 0 40 3 0 0 0 43 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 Hourly Total 1 1 171 10 1 2 0 186 0 1 162 11 0 1 0 175 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3 0900 - 0915 0 0 14 2 0 0 0 16 0 0 21 2 0 0 0 23 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0915 - 0930 0 0 13 2 0 0 0 15 0 0 17 3 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0930 - 0945 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0945 - 1000 0 0 9 2 1 0 0 12 0 0 13 3 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 43 6 1 0 0 50 0 0 73 8 0 0 0 81 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

Session Total 1 1 296 24 2 2 0 326 0 1 300 23 1 1 1 327 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4

1400 - 1415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1415 - 1430 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1430 - 1445 2 0 10 2 0 0 0 14 0 0 12 4 0 0 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1445 - 1500 1 0 6 0 0 1 0 8 0 0 17 1 1 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total3 0 16 2 0 1 0 22 0 0 29 5 1 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 - 1515 0 0 14 2 1 0 0 17 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1515 - 1530 1 0 12 1 0 1 0 15 0 0 19 1 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1530 - 1545 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 22 3 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1545 - 1600 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 8 0 0 13 2 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total1 0 39 5 1 1 0 47 0 0 68 6 0 0 0 74 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1600 - 1615 0 0 3 2 0 0 1 6 0 0 18 3 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1615 - 1630 0 0 11 1 0 0 0 12 0 0 10 1 1 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1630 - 1645 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 15 6 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1645 - 1700 0 0 10 1 0 0 0 11 0 0 12 4 1 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 34 4 0 0 1 39 0 0 55 14 2 0 0 71 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1700 - 1715 0 0 11 2 0 0 0 13 0 0 14 3 0 0 1 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1715 - 1730 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 9 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1730 - 1745 0 0 8 1 0 0 0 9 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1745 - 1800 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 7 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 32 6 0 0 0 38 0 0 49 3 0 0 1 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1800 - 1815 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 18 1 0 0 0 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1815 - 1830 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 6 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1830 - 1845 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1845 - 1900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 11 1 0 0 0 12 0 0 30 1 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Session Total 4 0 132 18 1 2 1 158 0 0 231 29 3 0 1 264 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 Digswell - Manual Traffic Survey, Tuesday 16th December 2014

Junction: (1) Harmer Green Lane / Hertford Road

Approach: Hertford Road (East)

Ahead to Hertford Road (West) Right to Harmer Green Lane U-Turn TIME P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL 0700 - 0715 0 0 24 6 0 0 0 30 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0715 - 0730 0 1 24 2 1 0 0 28 1 0 8 4 0 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0730 - 0745 0 0 49 12 0 0 1 62 0 0 3 3 0 0 1 7 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0745 - 0800 1 0 57 8 0 0 0 66 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total1 1 154 28 1 0 1 186 1 0 25 8 0 0 1 35 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0800 - 0815 0 1 77 8 0 1 0 87 0 0 13 3 1 0 0 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0815 - 0830 0 0 70 13 0 0 0 83 0 0 11 1 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0830 - 0845 0 0 71 3 1 0 0 75 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0845 - 0900 0 0 54 10 0 0 0 64 0 0 17 1 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 1 272 34 1 1 0 309 0 0 48 6 1 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0900 - 0915 0 0 54 12 0 0 2 68 0 0 11 3 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0915 - 0930 0 0 38 9 0 0 0 47 0 0 5 4 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0930 - 0945 1 0 37 10 1 0 0 49 0 0 8 4 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0945 - 1000 0 0 26 6 1 0 0 33 0 0 10 5 0 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total1 0 155 37 2 0 2 197 0 0 34 16 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Session Total 2 2 581 99 4 1 3 692 1 0 107 30 1 0 1 140 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

1400 - 1415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1415 - 1430 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1430 - 1445 0 0 29 5 1 0 0 35 0 0 6 2 0 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1445 - 1500 2 0 35 4 0 1 0 42 0 0 7 0 2 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total2 0 64 9 1 1 0 77 0 0 13 2 2 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 - 1515 0 0 48 3 0 1 0 52 0 0 9 1 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1515 - 1530 0 0 37 5 0 0 0 42 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1530 - 1545 0 0 65 8 1 0 0 74 1 0 20 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1545 - 1600 0 1 45 6 0 1 0 53 0 0 17 4 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 1 195 22 1 2 0 221 1 0 53 5 0 0 0 59 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 1600 - 1615 0 0 64 16 1 0 0 81 0 0 14 4 0 0 0 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1615 - 1630 0 0 67 11 0 0 0 78 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1630 - 1645 0 0 88 8 0 0 1 97 0 0 22 2 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1645 - 1700 0 0 97 9 2 0 0 108 0 0 34 2 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 316 44 3 0 1 364 0 0 79 10 0 0 0 89 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1700 - 1715 0 0 110 7 0 0 0 117 0 0 44 3 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1715 - 1730 1 0 165 12 0 0 0 178 0 1 59 3 0 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1730 - 1745 0 1 121 8 0 0 0 130 0 0 52 2 0 0 0 54 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1745 - 1800 1 1 134 8 0 0 0 144 1 0 50 2 0 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total 2 2 530 35 0 0 0 569 1 1 205 10 0 0 0 217 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1800 - 1815 0 0 74 9 0 0 0 83 0 0 40 2 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1815 - 1830 0 0 73 5 0 0 0 78 0 0 18 3 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1830 - 1845 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1845 - 1900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 147 14 0 0 0 161 0 0 58 5 0 0 0 63 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Session Total 4 3 1252 124 5 3 1 1392 2 1 408 32 2 1 0 446 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 Digswell - Manual Traffic Survey, Tuesday 16th December 2014

Junction: (1) Harmer Green Lane / Hertford Road

Approach: Hertford Road (West)

Left to Harmer Green Lane Ahead to Hertford Road (East) U-Turn TIME P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL P/CYCLE M/CYCLE CAR LGV OGV1 OGV2 BUS TOTAL 0700 - 0715 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 1 0 28 7 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0715 - 0730 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 1 0 46 10 1 0 0 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0730 - 0745 0 0 12 2 0 0 0 14 1 0 52 13 0 0 0 66 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0745 - 0800 0 0 3 6 0 0 0 9 0 0 95 11 0 0 1 107 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 21 10 0 0 0 31 3 0 221 41 1 0 1 267 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0800 - 0815 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 6 0 0 106 11 0 0 0 117 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0815 - 0830 0 0 7 1 0 0 0 8 0 1 103 13 0 0 0 117 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0830 - 0845 0 0 9 3 1 0 0 13 0 0 125 9 0 0 0 134 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0845 - 0900 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 99 14 0 1 0 114 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 23 8 1 0 0 32 0 1 433 47 0 1 0 482 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0900 - 0915 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 6 0 0 84 11 1 0 0 96 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0915 - 0930 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 41 5 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0930 - 0945 0 0 14 1 0 0 0 15 0 0 59 6 2 0 0 67 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0945 - 1000 0 0 11 2 0 0 0 13 0 0 35 9 1 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 32 7 0 0 0 39 0 0 219 31 4 0 0 254 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Session Total 0 0 76 25 1 0 0 102 3 1 873 119 5 1 1 1003 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1

1400 - 1415 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1415 - 1430 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1430 - 1445 0 0 14 2 0 0 0 16 0 0 37 8 0 1 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1445 - 1500 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 43 8 2 0 0 53 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 24 2 0 0 0 26 0 0 80 16 2 1 0 99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1500 - 1515 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 37 6 1 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1515 - 1530 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 13 0 1 52 7 1 0 0 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1530 - 1545 0 0 21 1 1 0 0 23 0 0 52 7 1 0 1 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1545 - 1600 0 0 15 1 0 0 0 16 0 0 53 8 0 0 0 61 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 62 2 1 0 0 65 0 1 194 28 3 0 1 227 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1600 - 1615 0 0 17 1 0 0 0 18 0 1 41 12 1 0 0 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1615 - 1630 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 39 12 0 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1630 - 1645 0 0 14 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 46 9 2 0 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1645 - 1700 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 46 9 1 0 0 56 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 65 1 0 0 0 66 0 1 172 42 4 0 0 219 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1700 - 1715 0 0 23 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 44 4 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1715 - 1730 0 0 18 1 0 0 0 19 0 0 40 8 0 0 1 49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1730 - 1745 0 0 13 0 0 0 0 13 0 0 35 6 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1745 - 1800 0 0 15 0 0 0 0 15 0 0 47 10 0 0 0 57 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 69 1 0 0 0 70 0 0 166 28 0 0 1 195 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1800 - 1815 0 0 23 1 0 0 0 24 0 0 47 3 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1815 - 1830 0 0 16 1 0 0 0 17 0 0 43 7 0 0 0 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1830 - 1845 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1845 - 1900 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Hourly Total0 0 39 2 0 0 0 41 0 0 90 10 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1

Session Total 0 0 259 8 1 0 0 268 0 2 702 124 9 1 2 840 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Digswell - Spot Queue Length Survey, Tuesday 16th December 2014

Junction 1

Harmer Green Lane Hertford Road (E) Hertford Road (W) Time Lane 1 Lane 1 Lane 1 07:05 0 0 0 07:10 0 0 0 07:15 0 0 0 07:20 0 0 0 07:25 0 0 0 07:30 0 0 0 07:35 0 0 0 07:40 0 0 0 07:45 0 0 0 07:50 0 0 0 07:55 0 0 0 08:00 0 0 0 08:05 1 0 0 08:10 0 0 0 08:15 0 0 0 08:20 0 0 0 08:25 2 0 0 08:30 2 0 0 08:35 1 0 0 08:40 0 0 0 08:45 0 0 0 08:50 0 0 0 08:55 0 0 0 09:00 2 5 8 09:05 1 0 7 09:10 0 0 0 09:15 0 0 0 09:20 0 0 0 09:25 0 0 0 09:30 0 0 0 09:35 0 0 0 09:40 1 0 0 09:45 0 0 0 09:50 0 0 0 09:55 0 0 0 10:00 0 0 0

14:35 0 0 0 14:40 0 0 0 14:45 0 0 0 14:50 0 0 0 14:55 0 0 0 15:00 0 0 0 15:05 0 0 0 15:10 0 0 0 15:15 0 0 0 15:20 0 0 0 15:25 0 0 0 15:30 0 0 0 15:35 0 0 0 15:40 0 2 0 15:45 0 0 0 15:50 0 0 0 15:55 0 1 0 Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

APPENDIX D

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Appendix D

ARCADY 7

Version: 7.1.1.245 [9th June 2011] © Copyright Transport Research Laboratory 2011

For sales and distribution information, program advice and maintenance, contact TRL: Tel: +44 (0)1344 770758 E-mail: [email protected] Web: http://www.trlsoftware.co.uk

The users of this computer program for the solution of an engineering problem are in no way relieved of their responsibility for the correctness of the solution

File: P:\13\03\71 - New Road, Digswell\08 Calculations and Technical Data\Junction analysis\Arcady\Hertford Road Mini Roundabout.arc7 Report generation date: 05/01/2015 13:12:37

Summary of roundabout performance

AM

Queue (PCU) RFC

AM Calibration - Surveyed

Harmer Green Lane 1.80 0.65 Hertford Road East 1.13 0.53 Hertford Road West 3.01 0.76

AM Calibration - Total 2020 with Dev

Harmer Green Lane 3.61 0.80 Hertford Road East 1.43 0.59 Hertford Road West 4.99 0.86

AM Calibration - Total Base 2020

Harmer Green Lane 1.98 0.67 Hertford Road East 1.30 0.57 Hertford Road West 4.08 0.82

PM

Queue (PCU) RFC

PM Calibration - Surveyed

Harmer Green Lane 0.20 0.16 Hertford Road East 4.84 0.85 Hertford Road West 0.72 0.42

PM Calibration - Total 2020 with Dev Harmer Green Lane 0.28 0.22 Hertford Road East 8.40 0.92 Hertford Road West 1.03 0.51

PM Calibration - Total Base 2020

Harmer Green Lane 0.20 0.17 Hertford Road East 6.78 0.89 Hertford Road West 0.81 0.45

Values shown are the maximum values over all time segments. Delay is the maximum value of average delay per arriving vehicle.

Surveyed - AM runs from 08:00:00 to 09:00:00 Surveyed - PM runs from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 Total Base 2020 - AM runs from 08:00:00 to 09:00:00 Total Base 2020 - PM runs from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00 Total 2020 with Dev - AM runs from 08:00:00 to 09:00:00 Total 2020 with Dev - PM runs from 17:00:00 to 18:00:00

File summary File Description Title Hertford Road Mini Roundabout Location Digswell Site Number Date 29/12/2014 Version Status On-going Identifier Client Jobnumber 1303-71 Enumerator PTL\tim.hornby Description

Analysis Options RFC Threshold Vehicle Length (m) Do Queue Variations 0.85 5.75

Sorting and Display Show Arm Names Arm Grouping Sorting Direction Sorting Type Data Matrix Style Time Style Yes Order Ascending Numerical By Destination Absolute Time

Units Distance Speed Traffic Units Traffic Units Flow Average Delay Total Delay Rate Of Delay Units Units Input Results Units Units Units Units m kph PCU PCU perHour min -Min perMin A2 - AM Calibration - D1 - Surveyed, AM

Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings

Analysis Set Details Network Flow Network Reason For Include In Use Specific Demand Name Description Locked Scaling Factor Capacity Scaling Scaling Report Demand Set Set (%) Factor (%) Factors AM Yes Yes D1,D3,D5 100.000 100.000 Calibration

Demand Set Details Time Time Time Start Finish Perio Perio Run Use Segme Traffic Scenari Descripti Locke Relationsh Time Time d Name d Automatica Relationsh nt Profile o Name on d ip (HH:m (HH:m Lengt Nam lly ip Length Type m) m) h e (min) (min) Surveye Surveye DIREC AM Yes 08:00 09:00 60 15 d, AM d T Roundabout Network

Roundabout Type(s) Roundabout Grade Large Do Geometric ID Name Arm Order Type Separated Roundabout Delay Hertford Road Mini 1 Harme,HertE,HertW Mini-roundabout Roundabout

Roundabout Network Options Driving Side Lighting Road Surface In London Left Normal/unknown Normal/unknown Arms

Arms ID Name Description Harme Harmer Green Lane HertE Hertford Road East HertW Hertford Road West

Capacity Options Minimum Capacity Maximum Capacity Assume Flat Start Initial Queue Arm (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Profile (PCU) Harmer Green Lane 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road West 0.00 99999.00 0.00

Mini Roundabout Geometry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance to Entry corner Gradient Kerbed approach Arm road half- width flare length next arm kerb line over 50m central road half- width (m) (m) (m) (m) distance (m) (%) island width (m) Harmer Green Lane 3.30 3.30 6.70 3.10 12.60 4.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 3.20 3.20 3.80 4.70 13.80 14.70 0.00 Hertford Road West 2.90 2.90 5.30 2.30 12.50 3.60 0.00

Pedestrian Crossings Arm Crossing Type Harmer Green Lane None Hertford Road East None Hertford Road West None

Arm Slope/ Intercept and Capacity

Arm Intercept Adjustments Arm Use Adjustment Reason Direct Intercept Adjustment (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane Yes Calibration to queue survey 75.00 Hertford Road East N/A N/A Hertford Road West N/A N/A

Slope and Intercept used in model Arm Enter Directly Slope Intercept (PCU/hr) Final Slope Final Intercept (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.557 942.566 Hertford Road East ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.576 855.963 Hertford Road West ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.527 797.354 The slope and intercept shown above include any corrections and adjustments. Traffic Flows

Demand Set Data Options Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle PCU Estimate Turning Turning Turning Default Mix Mix Mix Factor Default Vehicle Mix from Proportions Proportions Proportions Vehicle Varies Varies Varies for a Turning Source entry/exit Vary Over Vary Over Vary Over Mix Over Over Over HV Proportions counts Time Turn Entry Time Turn Entry (PCU) HV Yes Yes 2.00 Yes Yes Percentages Entry Flows

General Flows Data Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) PHF Harmer Green Lane DIRECT 100.000 0.83 Hertford Road East DIRECT 100.000 0.88 Hertford Road West DIRECT 100.000 0.87 Direct/Resultant Flows

Direct Flows Data Direct Demand Direct Direct Demand Time DirectDemandEntryFlowInPCU Arm Entry Flow Demand Exit Pedestrian Flow Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Flow (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) 1 Harmer Green Lane 280.00 280.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road East 416.00 416.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road West 492.00 492.00 N/A N/A 2 Harmer Green Lane 440.00 440.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road East 380.00 380.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road West 500.00 500.00 N/A N/A 3 Harmer Green Lane 412.00 412.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road East 332.00 332.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road West 588.00 588.00 N/A N/A 4 Harmer Green Lane 324.00 324.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road East 328.00 328.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road West 476.00 476.00 N/A N/A Turning Proportions

Turning Counts or Proportions (PCU/hr) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 3.000 186.000 175.000 From HertE 55.000 0.000 309.000 HertW 32.000 482.000 0.000

Turning Proportions (PCU) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.01 0.51 0.48 From HertE 0.15 0.00 0.85 HertW 0.06 0.94 0.00 Vehicle Mix

Average PCU Per Vehicle - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 1.000 1.016 1.006 From HertE 1.018 1.000 1.007 HertW 1.031 1.002 1.000

Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 1.610 0.570 From HertE 1.820 0.000 0.650 HertW 3.130 0.210 0.000 Results

Results Summary Inclusive Inclusive Total Rate Of Max Max Total Average Queuein Queuein Max Max Total Queuein Queuein Intercep Dela Queu Demand Queuein g Total g Slop Arm RF LO Arrival g Delay g Delay t y e (PCU/hr g Delay Delay Average e C S s (PCU) (PCU- (PCU- (PCU/hr) (min) (PCU) ) (min) (PCU- Delay min) min/min) min) (min) Harmer Green 0.65 0.27 1.80 C 364.00 364.00 75.15 0.21 1.25 75.19 0.21 0.557 942.566 Lane Hertfor d Road 0.53 0.17 1.13 B 364.00 364.00 57.32 0.16 0.96 57.34 0.16 0.576 855.963 East Hertfor d Road 0.76 0.32 3.01 C 514.00 514.00 119.31 0.23 1.99 119.42 0.23 0.527 797.354 West

Main Results

Main results: (08:00-08:15) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 280.00 70.00 277.28 94.65 454.81 0.00 689.29 556.50 0.406 0.00 0.68 Lane Hertford Road 416.00 104.00 411.47 596.50 135.59 0.00 777.85 699.20 0.535 0.00 1.13 East Hertford Road 492.00 123.00 485.00 482.60 64.46 0.00 763.40 739.28 0.644 0.00 1.75 West

Main results: (08:15-08:30) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 440.00 110.00 435.68 92.13 468.53 0.00 681.65 556.50 0.646 0.68 1.76 Lane Hertford Road 380.00 95.00 380.12 691.16 213.05 0.00 733.23 699.20 0.518 1.13 1.10 East Hertford Road 500.00 125.00 499.63 532.15 61.03 0.00 765.20 739.28 0.653 1.75 1.84 West

Main results: (08:30-08:45) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 412.00 103.00 411.85 90.04 546.99 0.00 637.95 556.50 0.646 1.76 1.80 Lane Hertford Road 332.00 83.00 333.07 757.44 201.40 0.00 739.95 699.20 0.449 1.10 0.83 East Hertford Road 588.00 147.00 583.31 480.74 53.72 0.00 769.05 739.28 0.765 1.84 3.01 West

Main results: (08:45-09:00) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 324.00 81.00 327.56 82.27 451.36 0.00 691.21 556.50 0.469 1.80 0.91 Lane Hertford Road 328.00 82.00 328.26 618.74 160.18 0.00 763.69 699.20 0.429 0.83 0.77 East Hertford Road 476.00 119.00 481.33 436.14 52.30 0.00 769.80 739.28 0.618 3.01 1.68 West

Queueing Delay Results

Queueing Delay results: (08:00-08:15) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 9.70 0.65 0.146 A A Hertford Road East 15.93 1.06 0.163 A A Hertford Road West 23.98 1.60 0.211 B B

Queueing Delay results: (08:15-08:30) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 24.28 1.62 0.242 B B Hertford Road East 16.67 1.11 0.171 B B Hertford Road West 27.14 1.81 0.226 B B

Queueing Delay results: (08:30-08:45) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 26.77 1.78 0.268 C B Hertford Road East 12.97 0.86 0.149 A A Hertford Road West 41.17 2.74 0.316 C B

Queueing Delay results: (08:45-09:00) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 14.41 0.96 0.168 B B Hertford Road East 11.75 0.78 0.139 A A Hertford Road West 27.02 1.80 0.213 B B Overview: Mini-roundabout Geometry

Mini Roundabout Geometry Entry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance corner Gradient Kerbed Final approach Final Arm road half- width flare to next kerb line over 50m central Intercept road half- Slope width (m) (m) length (m) arm (m) distance (%) island (PCU/hr) width (m) (m) Harmer Green 3.30 6.70 3.10 3.30 12.60 4.00 0.00 0.557 942.566 Lane Hertford Road 3.20 3.80 4.70 3.20 13.80 14.70 0.00 0.576 855.963 East Hertford Road 2.90 5.30 2.30 2.90 12.50 3.60 0.00 0.527 797.354 West Overview: Time Segment Results

Time Segment Results Pedestrian Start End Queueing Geometric Average Time Demand Capacity Arm RFC Demand Queue Queue Total Delay Total Delay Delay Per Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (PCU-min) (PCU-min) Arriving Vehicle (min) Harmer 1 Green 280.00 689.29 0.406 0.00 0.00 0.68 9.70 (0.02) 0.146 Lane Hertford 1 Road 416.00 777.85 0.535 0.00 0.00 1.13 15.93 (0.02) 0.163 East Hertford 1 Road 492.00 763.40 0.644 0.00 0.00 1.75 23.98 (0.02) 0.211 West Harmer 2 Green 440.00 681.65 0.646 0.00 0.68 1.76 24.28 (0.02) 0.242 Lane Hertford 2 Road 380.00 733.23 0.518 0.00 1.13 1.10 16.67 (0.02) 0.171 East Hertford 2 Road 500.00 765.20 0.653 0.00 1.75 1.84 27.14 (0.02) 0.226 West Harmer 3 Green 412.00 637.95 0.646 0.00 1.76 1.80 26.77 (0.02) 0.268 Lane Hertford 3 Road 332.00 739.95 0.449 0.00 1.10 0.83 12.97 (0.02) 0.149 East Hertford 3 Road 588.00 769.05 0.765 0.00 1.84 3.01 41.17 (0.02) 0.316 West Harmer 4 Green 324.00 691.21 0.469 0.00 1.80 0.91 14.41 (0.02) 0.168 Lane Hertford 4 Road 328.00 763.69 0.429 0.00 0.83 0.77 11.75 (0.02) 0.139 East Hertford 4 Road 476.00 769.80 0.618 0.00 3.01 1.68 27.02 (0.02) 0.213 West A2 - AM Calibration - D3 - Total Base 2020, AM

Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings

Analysis Set Details Network Flow Network Reason For Include In Use Specific Demand Name Description Locked Scaling Factor Capacity Scaling Scaling Report Demand Set Set (%) Factor (%) Factors AM Yes Yes D1,D3,D5 100.000 100.000 Calibration

Demand Set Details Time Time Start Finish Time Run Use Segme Traffic Nam Scenari Perio Descriptio Locke Relationsh Time Time Perio Automatical Relationsh nt Profile e o Name d n d ip (HH:m (HH:m d ly ip Length Type Name m) m) Lengt (min) h (min) Total Total Base DIREC Base AM Yes 08:00 09:00 60 15 2020 T 2020 , AM Roundabout Network

Roundabout Type(s) Roundabout Grade Large Do Geometric ID Name Arm Order Type Separated Roundabout Delay Hertford Road Mini 1 Harme,HertE,HertW Mini-roundabout Roundabout

Roundabout Network Options Driving Side Lighting Road Surface In London Left Normal/unknown Normal/unknown Arms

Arms ID Name Description Harme Harmer Green Lane HertE Hertford Road East HertW Hertford Road West

Capacity Options Minimum Capacity Maximum Capacity Assume Flat Start Initial Queue Arm (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Profile (PCU) Harmer Green Lane 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road West 0.00 99999.00 0.00

Mini Roundabout Geometry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance to Entry corner Gradient Kerbed approach Arm road half- width flare length next arm kerb line over 50m central road half- width (m) (m) (m) (m) distance (m) (%) island width (m) Harmer Green Lane 3.30 3.30 6.70 3.10 12.60 4.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 3.20 3.20 3.80 4.70 13.80 14.70 0.00 Hertford Road West 2.90 2.90 5.30 2.30 12.50 3.60 0.00

Pedestrian Crossings Arm Crossing Type Harmer Green Lane None Hertford Road East None Hertford Road West None

Arm Slope/ Intercept and Capacity

Arm Intercept Adjustments Arm Use Adjustment Reason Direct Intercept Adjustment (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane Yes Calibration to queue survey 75.00 Hertford Road East N/A N/A Hertford Road West N/A N/A

Slope and Intercept used in model Arm Enter Directly Slope Intercept (PCU/hr) Final Slope Final Intercept (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.557 942.566 Hertford Road East ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.576 855.963 Hertford Road West ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.527 797.354 The slope and intercept shown above include any corrections and adjustments. Traffic Flows

Demand Set Data Options Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle PCU Estimate Turning Turning Turning Default Mix Mix Mix Factor Default Vehicle Mix from Proportions Proportions Proportions Vehicle Varies Varies Varies for a Turning Source entry/exit Vary Over Vary Over Vary Over Mix Over Over Over HV Proportions counts Time Turn Entry Time Turn Entry (PCU) HV Yes Yes 2.00 Yes Yes Percentages Entry Flows

General Flows Data Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) PHF Harmer Green Lane DIRECT 100.000 0.83 Hertford Road East DIRECT 100.000 0.88 Hertford Road West DIRECT 100.000 0.88 Direct/Resultant Flows

Direct Flows Data Direct Demand Direct Direct Demand Time DirectDemandEntryFlowInPCU Arm Entry Flow Demand Exit Pedestrian Flow Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Flow (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) 1 Harmer Green Lane 280.00 280.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road East 444.00 444.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road West 532.00 532.00 N/A N/A 2 Harmer Green Lane 440.00 440.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road East 408.00 408.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road West 540.00 540.00 N/A N/A 3 Harmer Green Lane 412.00 412.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road East 356.00 356.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road West 632.00 632.00 N/A N/A 4 Harmer Green Lane 324.00 324.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road East 348.00 348.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road West 512.00 512.00 N/A N/A Turning Proportions

Turning Counts or Proportions (PCU/hr) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 3.000 186.000 175.000 From HertE 55.000 0.000 335.000 HertW 35.000 522.000 0.000

Turning Proportions (PCU) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.01 0.51 0.48 From HertE 0.14 0.00 0.86 HertW 0.06 0.94 0.00 Vehicle Mix

Average PCU Per Vehicle - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 1.000 1.016 1.006 From HertE 1.018 1.000 1.006 HertW 1.031 1.002 1.000

Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 1.610 0.570 From HertE 1.820 0.000 0.600 HertW 3.130 0.190 0.000 Results

Results Summary Inclusive Inclusive Total Rate Of Max Max Total Average Queuein Queuein Max Max Total Queuein Queuein Intercep Dela Queu Demand Queuein g Total g Slop Arm RF LO Arrival g Delay g Delay t y e (PCU/hr g Delay Delay Average e C S s (PCU) (PCU- (PCU- (PCU/hr) (min) (PCU) ) (min) (PCU- Delay min) min/min) min) (min) Harmer Green 0.67 0.30 1.98 C 364.00 364.00 80.94 0.22 1.35 80.98 0.22 0.557 942.566 Lane Hertfor d Road 0.57 0.19 1.30 B 389.00 389.00 65.56 0.17 1.09 65.58 0.17 0.576 855.963 East Hertfor d Road 0.82 0.40 4.08 C 554.00 554.00 151.59 0.27 2.53 151.76 0.27 0.527 797.354 West Main Results

Main results: (08:00-08:15) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 280.00 70.00 277.14 97.04 490.38 0.00 669.48 554.81 0.418 0.00 0.71 Lane Hertford Road 444.00 111.00 438.78 632.00 135.53 0.00 777.89 699.67 0.571 0.00 1.30 East Hertford Road 532.00 133.00 523.26 510.15 64.16 0.00 763.55 742.96 0.697 0.00 2.19 West

Main results: (08:15-08:30) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 440.00 110.00 435.20 95.04 505.57 0.00 661.02 554.81 0.666 0.71 1.91 Lane Hertford Road 408.00 102.00 408.09 727.95 212.82 0.00 733.37 699.67 0.556 1.30 1.28 East Hertford Road 540.00 135.00 539.46 559.77 61.14 0.00 765.15 742.96 0.706 2.19 2.32 West

Main results: (08:30-08:45) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 412.00 103.00 411.75 93.06 585.69 0.00 616.40 554.81 0.668 1.91 1.98 Lane Hertford Road 356.00 89.00 357.32 796.09 201.35 0.00 739.97 699.67 0.481 1.28 0.95 East Hertford Road 632.00 158.00 624.96 504.89 53.78 0.00 769.02 742.96 0.822 2.32 4.08 West

Main results: (08:45-09:00) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 324.00 81.00 328.05 84.51 487.33 0.00 671.18 554.81 0.483 1.98 0.96 Lane Hertford Road 348.00 87.00 348.38 654.96 160.42 0.00 763.55 699.67 0.456 0.95 0.86 East Hertford Road 512.00 128.00 520.00 456.97 51.83 0.00 770.05 742.96 0.665 4.08 2.08 West

Queueing Delay Results

Queueing Delay results: (08:00-08:15) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 10.15 0.68 0.154 A A Hertford Road East 18.22 1.21 0.176 B B Hertford Road West 29.44 1.96 0.243 B B

Queueing Delay results: (08:15-08:30) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 26.17 1.74 0.263 C B Hertford Road East 19.36 1.29 0.186 B B Hertford Road West 34.09 2.27 0.266 C B

Queueing Delay results: (08:30-08:45) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 29.28 1.95 0.295 C B Hertford Road East 14.85 0.99 0.159 A A Hertford Road West 54.18 3.61 0.398 C C

Queueing Delay results: (08:45-09:00) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 15.34 1.02 0.179 B B Hertford Road East 13.13 0.88 0.146 A A Hertford Road West 33.88 2.26 0.248 B B Overview: Mini-roundabout Geometry

Mini Roundabout Geometry Entry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance corner Gradient Kerbed Final approach Final Arm road half- width flare to next kerb line over 50m central Intercept road half- Slope width (m) (m) length (m) arm (m) distance (%) island (PCU/hr) width (m) (m) Harmer Green 3.30 6.70 3.10 3.30 12.60 4.00 0.00 0.557 942.566 Lane Hertford Road 3.20 3.80 4.70 3.20 13.80 14.70 0.00 0.576 855.963 East Hertford Road 2.90 5.30 2.30 2.90 12.50 3.60 0.00 0.527 797.354 West Overview: Time Segment Results

Time Segment Results Average Pedestrian Start End Queueing Geometric Delay Per Time Demand Capacity Arm RFC Demand Queue Queue Total Delay Total Delay Arriving Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (PCU-min) (PCU-min) Vehicle (min) Harmer 1 Green 280.00 669.48 0.418 0.00 0.00 0.71 10.15 (0.02) 0.154 Lane Hertford 1 Road 444.00 777.89 0.571 0.00 0.00 1.30 18.22 (0.02) 0.176 East Hertford 1 Road 532.00 763.55 0.697 0.00 0.00 2.19 29.44 (0.02) 0.243 West Harmer 2 Green 440.00 661.02 0.666 0.00 0.71 1.91 26.17 (0.02) 0.263 Lane Hertford 2 Road 408.00 733.37 0.556 0.00 1.30 1.28 19.36 (0.02) 0.186 East Hertford 2 Road 540.00 765.15 0.706 0.00 2.19 2.32 34.09 (0.02) 0.266 West Harmer 3 Green 412.00 616.40 0.668 0.00 1.91 1.98 29.28 (0.02) 0.295 Lane Hertford 3 Road 356.00 739.97 0.481 0.00 1.28 0.95 14.85 (0.02) 0.159 East Hertford 3 Road 632.00 769.02 0.822 0.00 2.32 4.08 54.18 (0.02) 0.398 West Harmer 4 Green 324.00 671.18 0.483 0.00 1.98 0.96 15.34 (0.02) 0.179 Lane Hertford 4 Road 348.00 763.55 0.456 0.00 0.95 0.86 13.13 (0.02) 0.146 East Hertford 4 Road 512.00 770.05 0.665 0.00 4.08 2.08 33.88 (0.02) 0.248 West A2 - AM Calibration - D5 - Total 2020 with Dev, AM

Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings

Analysis Set Details Network Flow Network Reason For Include In Use Specific Demand Name Description Locked Scaling Factor Capacity Scaling Scaling Report Demand Set Set (%) Factor (%) Factors AM Yes Yes D1,D3,D5 100.000 100.000 Calibration

Demand Set Details Time Time Time Start Finish Perio Run Use Segme Traffic Nam Scenari Perio Descriptio Locke Relationsh Time Time d Automatical Relationsh nt Profile e o Name d n d ip (HH:m (HH:m Lengt ly ip Length Type Name m) m) h (min) (min) Total Total 2020 2020 DIREC with AM Yes 08:00 09:00 60 15 with T Dev, Dev AM Roundabout Network

Roundabout Type(s) Roundabout Grade Large Do Geometric ID Name Arm Order Type Separated Roundabout Delay Hertford Road Mini 1 Harme,HertE,HertW Mini-roundabout Roundabout

Roundabout Network Options Driving Side Lighting Road Surface In London Left Normal/unknown Normal/unknown Arms

Arms ID Name Description Harme Harmer Green Lane HertE Hertford Road East HertW Hertford Road West

Capacity Options Minimum Capacity Maximum Capacity Assume Flat Start Initial Queue Arm (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Profile (PCU) Harmer Green Lane 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road West 0.00 99999.00 0.00

Mini Roundabout Geometry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance to Entry corner Gradient Kerbed approach Arm road half- width flare length next arm kerb line over 50m central road half- width (m) (m) (m) (m) distance (m) (%) island width (m) Harmer Green Lane 3.30 3.30 6.70 3.10 12.60 4.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 3.20 3.20 3.80 4.70 13.80 14.70 0.00 Hertford Road West 2.90 2.90 5.30 2.30 12.50 3.60 0.00

Pedestrian Crossings Arm Crossing Type Harmer Green Lane None Hertford Road East None Hertford Road West None

Arm Slope/ Intercept and Capacity

Arm Intercept Adjustments Arm Use Adjustment Reason Direct Intercept Adjustment (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane Yes Calibration to queue survey 75.00 Hertford Road East N/A N/A Hertford Road West N/A N/A

Slope and Intercept used in model Arm Enter Directly Slope Intercept (PCU/hr) Final Slope Final Intercept (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.557 942.566 Hertford Road East ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.576 855.963 Hertford Road West ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.527 797.354 The slope and intercept shown above include any corrections and adjustments. Traffic Flows

Demand Set Data Options Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle PCU Estimate Turning Turning Turning Default Mix Mix Mix Factor Default Vehicle Mix from Proportions Proportions Proportions Vehicle Varies Varies Varies for a Turning Source entry/exit Vary Over Vary Over Vary Over Mix Over Over Over HV Proportions counts Time Turn Entry Time Turn Entry (PCU) HV Yes Yes 2.00 Yes Yes Percentages Entry Flows

General Flows Data Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) PHF Harmer Green Lane DIRECT 100.000 0.83 Hertford Road East DIRECT 100.000 0.87 Hertford Road West DIRECT 100.000 0.87 Direct/Resultant Flows

Direct Flows Data Direct Demand Direct Direct Demand Time DirectDemandEntryFlowInPCU Arm Entry Flow Demand Exit Pedestrian Flow Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Flow (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) 1 Harmer Green Lane 320.00 320.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road East 452.00 452.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road West 544.00 544.00 N/A N/A 2 Harmer Green Lane 512.00 512.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road East 412.00 412.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road West 556.00 556.00 N/A N/A 3 Harmer Green Lane 488.00 488.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road East 360.00 360.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road West 656.00 656.00 N/A N/A 4 Harmer Green Lane 380.00 380.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road East 356.00 356.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road West 520.00 520.00 N/A N/A Turning Proportions

Turning Counts or Proportions (PCU/hr) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To From Harme HertE HertW Harme 3.000 204.000 218.000 HertE 61.000 0.000 335.000 HertW 47.000 522.000 0.000

Turning Proportions (PCU) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.01 0.48 0.51 From HertE 0.15 0.00 0.85 HertW 0.08 0.92 0.00 Vehicle Mix

Average PCU Per Vehicle - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 1.000 1.015 1.005 From HertE 1.016 1.000 1.006 HertW 1.021 1.002 1.000

Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 1.470 0.460 From HertE 1.640 0.000 0.600 HertW 2.130 0.190 0.000 Results

Results Summary Inclusive Inclusive Total Rate Of Max Max Total Average Queuein Queuein Max Max Total Queuein Queuein Intercep Dela Queu Demand Queuein g Total g Slop Arm RF LO Arrival g Delay g Delay t y e (PCU/hr g Delay Delay Average e C S s (PCU) (PCU- (PCU- (PCU/hr) (min) (PCU) ) (min) (PCU- Delay min) min/min) min) (min) Harmer Green 0.80 0.47 3.61 D 425.00 425.00 128.10 0.30 2.14 128.18 0.30 0.557 942.566 Lane Hertfor d Road 0.59 0.21 1.43 B 395.00 395.00 72.38 0.18 1.21 72.42 0.18 0.576 855.963 East Hertfor d Road 0.86 0.47 4.99 D 569.00 569.00 170.94 0.30 2.85 171.14 0.30 0.527 797.354 West

Main Results

Main results: (08:00-08:15) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 320.00 80.00 316.38 115.13 490.34 0.00 669.50 564.75 0.478 0.00 0.90 Lane Hertford Road 452.00 113.00 446.29 642.20 164.52 0.00 761.19 686.79 0.594 0.00 1.43 East Hertford Road 544.00 136.00 534.49 539.83 70.98 0.00 759.96 739.52 0.716 0.00 2.38 West

Main results: (08:15-08:30) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 512.00 128.00 502.96 112.87 509.31 0.00 658.93 564.75 0.777 0.90 3.16 Lane Hertford Road 412.00 103.00 412.01 750.74 261.54 0.00 705.30 686.79 0.584 1.43 1.43 East Hertford Road 556.00 139.00 555.17 606.53 67.02 0.00 762.05 739.52 0.730 2.38 2.59 West

Main results: (08:30-08:45) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 488.00 122.00 486.21 112.51 593.00 0.00 612.33 564.75 0.797 3.16 3.61 Lane Hertford Road 360.00 90.00 361.47 826.38 252.83 0.00 710.32 686.79 0.507 1.43 1.06 East Hertford Road 656.00 164.00 646.40 555.19 59.11 0.00 766.21 739.52 0.856 2.59 4.99 West

Main results: (08:45-09:00) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 380.00 95.00 389.01 101.52 487.22 0.00 671.24 564.75 0.566 3.61 1.36 Lane Hertford Road 356.00 89.00 356.42 673.95 202.29 0.00 739.43 686.79 0.481 1.06 0.95 East Hertford Road 520.00 130.00 531.09 501.06 57.65 0.00 766.98 739.52 0.678 4.99 2.21 West

Queueing Delay Results

Queueing Delay results: (08:00-08:15) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 12.76 0.85 0.170 B B Hertford Road East 19.83 1.32 0.189 B B Hertford Road West 31.78 2.12 0.257 C B

Queueing Delay results: (08:15-08:30) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 41.12 2.74 0.369 C C Hertford Road East 21.40 1.43 0.206 B B Hertford Road West 37.73 2.52 0.289 C B Queueing Delay results: (08:30-08:45) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 51.73 3.45 0.469 D C Hertford Road East 16.55 1.10 0.174 B B Hertford Road West 64.46 4.30 0.466 D C

Queueing Delay results: (08:45-09:00) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 22.50 1.50 0.221 B B Hertford Road East 14.60 0.97 0.158 A A Hertford Road West 36.98 2.47 0.266 C B Overview: Mini-roundabout Geometry

Mini Roundabout Geometry Entry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance corner Gradient Kerbed Final approach Final Arm road half- width flare to next kerb line over 50m central Intercept road half- Slope width (m) (m) length (m) arm (m) distance (%) island (PCU/hr) width (m) (m) Harmer Green 3.30 6.70 3.10 3.30 12.60 4.00 0.00 0.557 942.566 Lane Hertford Road 3.20 3.80 4.70 3.20 13.80 14.70 0.00 0.576 855.963 East Hertford Road 2.90 5.30 2.30 2.90 12.50 3.60 0.00 0.527 797.354 West Overview: Time Segment Results

Time Segment Results Average Pedestrian Start End Queueing Geometric Delay Per Time Demand Capacity Arm RFC Demand Queue Queue Total Delay Total Delay Arriving Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (PCU-min) (PCU-min) Vehicle (min) Harmer 1 Green 320.00 669.50 0.478 0.00 0.00 0.90 12.76 (0.02) 0.170 Lane Hertford 1 Road 452.00 761.19 0.594 0.00 0.00 1.43 19.83 (0.02) 0.189 East Hertford 1 Road 544.00 759.96 0.716 0.00 0.00 2.38 31.78 (0.02) 0.257 West Harmer 2 Green 512.00 658.93 0.777 0.00 0.90 3.16 41.12 (0.02) 0.369 Lane Hertford 2 Road 412.00 705.30 0.584 0.00 1.43 1.43 21.40 (0.02) 0.206 East Hertford 2 Road 556.00 762.05 0.730 0.00 2.38 2.59 37.73 (0.02) 0.289 West Harmer 3 Green 488.00 612.33 0.797 0.00 3.16 3.61 51.73 (0.02) 0.469 Lane Hertford 3 Road 360.00 710.32 0.507 0.00 1.43 1.06 16.55 (0.02) 0.174 East Hertford 3 Road 656.00 766.21 0.856 0.00 2.59 4.99 64.46 (0.02) 0.466 West Harmer 4 Green 380.00 671.24 0.566 0.00 3.61 1.36 22.50 (0.02) 0.221 Lane Hertford 4 Road 356.00 739.43 0.481 0.00 1.06 0.95 14.60 (0.02) 0.158 East Hertford 4 Road 520.00 766.98 0.678 0.00 4.99 2.21 36.98 (0.02) 0.266 West A3 - PM Calibration - D2 - Surveyed, PM

Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings

Analysis Set Details Network Flow Network Reason For Include In Use Specific Demand Name Description Locked Scaling Factor Capacity Scaling Scaling Report Demand Set Set (%) Factor (%) Factors PM Yes Yes D2,D4,D6 100.000 100.000 Calibration

Demand Set Details Time Time Time Start Finish Perio Perio Run Use Segme Traffic Scenari Descripti Locke Relationsh Time Time d Name d Automatica Relationsh nt Profile o Name on d ip (HH:m (HH:m Lengt Nam lly ip Length Type m) m) h e (min) (min) Surveye Surveye DIREC PM Yes 17:00 18:00 60 15 d, PM d T Roundabout Network

Roundabout Type(s) Roundabout Grade Large Do Geometric ID Name Arm Order Type Separated Roundabout Delay Hertford Road Mini 1 Harme,HertE,HertW Mini-roundabout Roundabout

Roundabout Network Options Driving Side Lighting Road Surface In London Left Normal/unknown Normal/unknown Arms

Arms ID Name Description Harme Harmer Green Lane HertE Hertford Road East HertW Hertford Road West

Capacity Options Minimum Capacity Maximum Capacity Assume Flat Start Initial Queue Arm (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Profile (PCU) Harmer Green Lane 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road West 0.00 99999.00 0.00

Mini Roundabout Geometry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance to Entry corner Gradient Kerbed approach Arm road half- width flare length next arm kerb line over 50m central road half- width (m) (m) (m) (m) distance (m) (%) island width (m) Harmer Green Lane 3.30 3.30 6.70 3.10 12.60 4.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 3.20 3.20 3.80 4.70 13.80 14.70 0.00 Hertford Road West 2.90 2.90 5.30 2.30 12.50 3.60 0.00

Pedestrian Crossings Arm Crossing Type Harmer Green Lane None Hertford Road East None Hertford Road West None

Arm Slope/ Intercept and Capacity

Arm Intercept Adjustments Arm Use Adjustment Reason Direct Intercept Adjustment (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane N/A N/A Hertford Road East Yes Calibration to queue surveys 315.00 Hertford Road West N/A N/A

Slope and Intercept used in model Arm Enter Directly Slope Intercept (PCU/hr) Final Slope Final Intercept (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.557 867.566 Hertford Road East ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.576 1170.963 Hertford Road West ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.527 797.354 The slope and intercept shown above include any corrections and adjustments. Traffic Flows

Demand Set Data Options Default Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle PCU Default Vehicle Mix Estimate Turning Turning Turning Vehicle Mix Mix Mix Factor Turning Source from Proportions Proportions Proportions Mix Varies Varies Varies for a Proportions Over Over Over HV entry/exit Vary Over Vary Over Vary Over Time Turn Entry (PCU) counts Time Turn Entry HV Yes Yes 2.00 Yes Yes Percentages Entry Flows

General Flows Data Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) PHF Harmer Green Lane DIRECT 100.000 0.73 Hertford Road East DIRECT 100.000 0.82 Hertford Road West DIRECT 100.000 0.92 Direct/Resultant Flows

Direct Flows Data Direct Demand Direct Direct Demand Time DirectDemandEntryFlowInPCU Arm Entry Flow Demand Exit Pedestrian Flow Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Flow (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) 1 Harmer Green Lane 124.00 124.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road East 656.00 656.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road West 284.00 284.00 N/A N/A 2 Harmer Green Lane 92.00 92.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road East 964.00 964.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road West 272.00 272.00 N/A N/A 3 Harmer Green Lane 84.00 84.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road East 736.00 736.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road West 216.00 216.00 N/A N/A 4 Harmer Green Lane 64.00 64.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road East 788.00 788.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road West 288.00 288.00 N/A N/A Turning Proportions

Turning Counts or Proportions (PCU/hr) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 38.000 53.000 From HertE 217.000 0.000 569.000 HertW 70.000 195.000 0.000

Turning Proportions (PCU) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.00 0.42 0.58 From HertE 0.28 0.00 0.72 HertW 0.26 0.74 0.00 Vehicle Mix

Average PCU Per Vehicle - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 1.000 1.000 1.019 From HertE 1.000 1.000 1.000 HertW 1.000 1.005 1.000

Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 0.000 1.890 From HertE 0.000 0.000 0.000 HertW 0.000 0.510 0.000 Results

Results Summary Inclusive Inclusive Total Rate Of Max Max Total Average Queuein Queuein Max Max Total Queuein Queuein Intercep Dela Queu Demand Queuein g Total g Slop Arm RF LO Arrival g Delay g Delay t y e (PCU/hr g Delay Delay Average e C S s (PCU) (PCU- (PCU- (PCU/hr) (min) (PCU) ) (min) (PCU- Delay min) min/min) min) (min) Harmer Green 0.16 0.10 0.20 A 91.00 91.00 8.36 0.09 0.14 8.36 0.09 0.557 867.566 Lane Hertfor d Road 0.85 0.30 4.84 C 786.00 786.00 142.83 0.18 2.38 142.94 0.18 0.576 1170.963 East Hertfor d Road 0.42 0.16 0.72 A 265.00 265.00 37.48 0.14 0.62 37.50 0.14 0.527 797.354 West

Main Results

Main results: (17:00-17:15) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 124.00 31.00 123.21 253.92 207.01 0.00 752.29 598.64 0.165 0.00 0.20 Lane Hertford Road 656.00 164.00 650.57 258.46 71.76 0.00 1129.63 970.12 0.581 0.00 1.36 East Hertford Road 284.00 71.00 281.32 542.72 179.61 0.00 702.73 656.26 0.404 0.00 0.67 West

Main results: (17:15-17:30) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 92.00 23.00 92.23 334.11 200.07 0.00 756.15 598.64 0.122 0.20 0.14 Lane Hertford Road 964.00 241.00 950.05 238.59 53.72 0.00 1140.02 970.11 0.846 1.36 4.84 East Hertford Road 272.00 68.00 271.90 741.48 262.29 0.00 659.18 656.26 0.413 0.67 0.70 West

Main results: (17:30-17:45) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 84.00 21.00 84.07 263.79 159.63 0.00 778.67 598.64 0.108 0.14 0.12 Lane Hertford Road 736.00 184.00 747.94 194.73 48.96 0.00 1142.76 970.12 0.644 4.84 1.86 East Hertford Road 216.00 54.00 216.93 590.42 206.49 0.00 688.57 656.26 0.314 0.70 0.46 West

Main results: (17:45-18:00) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 64.00 16.00 64.11 293.07 211.17 0.00 749.97 598.64 0.085 0.12 0.09 Lane Hertford Road 788.00 197.00 786.96 237.94 37.34 0.00 1149.45 970.12 0.686 1.86 2.12 East Hertford Road 288.00 72.00 286.98 607.04 217.27 0.00 682.90 656.26 0.422 0.46 0.72 West

Queueing Delay Results

Queueing Delay results: (17:00-17:15) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 2.88 0.19 0.096 A A Hertford Road East 19.25 1.28 0.124 A A Hertford Road West 9.56 0.64 0.142 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:15-17:30) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 2.16 0.14 0.091 A A Hertford Road East 62.31 4.15 0.296 C B Hertford Road West 10.33 0.69 0.155 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:30-17:45) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 1.87 0.12 0.087 A A Hertford Road East 30.45 2.03 0.156 A A Hertford Road West 7.20 0.48 0.128 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:45-18:00) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 1.45 0.10 0.088 A A Hertford Road East 30.81 2.05 0.165 A A Hertford Road West 10.39 0.69 0.152 A A Overview: Mini-roundabout Geometry

Mini Roundabout Geometry Entry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance corner Gradient Kerbed Final approach Final Arm road half- width flare to next kerb line over 50m central Intercept road half- Slope width (m) (m) length (m) arm (m) distance (%) island (PCU/hr) width (m) (m) Harmer Green 3.30 6.70 3.10 3.30 12.60 4.00 0.00 0.557 867.566 Lane Hertford Road 3.20 3.80 4.70 3.20 13.80 14.70 0.00 0.576 1170.963 East Hertford Road 2.90 5.30 2.30 2.90 12.50 3.60 0.00 0.527 797.354 West Overview: Time Segment Results

Time Segment Results Average Pedestrian Start End Queueing Geometric Delay Per Time Demand Capacity Arm RFC Demand Queue Queue Total Delay Total Delay Arriving Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (PCU-min) (PCU-min) Vehicle (min) Harmer 1 Green 124.00 752.29 0.165 0.00 0.00 0.20 2.88 (0.02) 0.096 Lane Hertford 1 Road 656.00 1129.63 0.581 0.00 0.00 1.36 19.25 (0.02) 0.124 East Hertford 1 Road 284.00 702.73 0.404 0.00 0.00 0.67 9.56 (0.02) 0.142 West Harmer 2 Green 92.00 756.15 0.122 0.00 0.20 0.14 2.16 (0.02) 0.091 Lane Hertford 2 Road 964.00 1140.02 0.846 0.00 1.36 4.84 62.31 (0.02) 0.296 East Hertford 2 Road 272.00 659.18 0.413 0.00 0.67 0.70 10.33 (0.02) 0.155 West Harmer 3 Green 84.00 778.67 0.108 0.00 0.14 0.12 1.87 (0.02) 0.087 Lane Hertford 3 Road 736.00 1142.76 0.644 0.00 4.84 1.86 30.45 (0.02) 0.156 East Hertford 3 Road 216.00 688.57 0.314 0.00 0.70 0.46 7.20 (0.02) 0.128 West Harmer 4 Green 64.00 749.97 0.085 0.00 0.12 0.09 1.45 (0.02) 0.088 Lane Hertford 4 Road 788.00 1149.45 0.686 0.00 1.86 2.12 30.81 (0.02) 0.165 East Hertford 4 Road 288.00 682.90 0.422 0.00 0.46 0.72 10.39 (0.02) 0.152 West A3 - PM Calibration - D4 - Total Base 2020, PM

Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings

Analysis Set Details Network Flow Network Reason For Include In Use Specific Demand Name Description Locked Scaling Factor Capacity Scaling Scaling Report Demand Set Set (%) Factor (%) Factors PM Yes Yes D2,D4,D6 100.000 100.000 Calibration

Demand Set Details Time Time Time Start Finish Perio Run Use Segme Traffic Nam Scenari Perio Descriptio Locke Relationsh Time Time d Automatical Relationsh nt Profile e o Name d n d ip (HH:m (HH:m Lengt ly ip Length Type Name m) m) h (min) (min) Total Total Base DIREC Base PM Yes 17:00 18:00 60 15 2020 T 2020 , PM Roundabout Network

Roundabout Type(s) Roundabout Grade Large Do Geometric ID Name Arm Order Type Separated Roundabout Delay Hertford Road Mini 1 Harme,HertE,HertW Mini-roundabout Roundabout

Roundabout Network Options Driving Side Lighting Road Surface In London Left Normal/unknown Normal/unknown Arms

Arms ID Name Description Harme Harmer Green Lane HertE Hertford Road East HertW Hertford Road West

Capacity Options Minimum Capacity Maximum Capacity Assume Flat Start Initial Queue Arm (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Profile (PCU) Harmer Green Lane 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road West 0.00 99999.00 0.00

Mini Roundabout Geometry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance to Entry corner Gradient Kerbed approach Arm road half- width flare length next arm kerb line over 50m central road half- width (m) (m) (m) (m) distance (m) (%) island width (m) Harmer Green Lane 3.30 3.30 6.70 3.10 12.60 4.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 3.20 3.20 3.80 4.70 13.80 14.70 0.00 Hertford Road West 2.90 2.90 5.30 2.30 12.50 3.60 0.00

Pedestrian Crossings Arm Crossing Type Harmer Green Lane None Hertford Road East None Hertford Road West None

Arm Slope/ Intercept and Capacity

Arm Intercept Adjustments Arm Use Adjustment Reason Direct Intercept Adjustment (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane N/A N/A Hertford Road East Yes Calibration to queue surveys 315.00 Hertford Road West N/A N/A

Slope and Intercept used in model Arm Enter Directly Slope Intercept (PCU/hr) Final Slope Final Intercept (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.557 867.566 Hertford Road East ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.576 1170.963 Hertford Road West ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.527 797.354 The slope and intercept shown above include any corrections and adjustments. Traffic Flows

Demand Set Data Options Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle PCU Estimate Turning Turning Turning Default Mix Mix Mix Factor Default Vehicle Mix from Proportions Proportions Proportions Vehicle Varies Varies Varies for a Turning Source entry/exit Vary Over Vary Over Vary Over Mix Over Over Over HV Proportions counts Time Turn Entry Time Turn Entry (PCU) HV Yes Yes 2.00 Yes Yes Percentages Entry Flows General Flows Data Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) PHF Harmer Green Lane DIRECT 100.000 0.73 Hertford Road East DIRECT 100.000 0.82 Hertford Road West DIRECT 100.000 0.91 Direct/Resultant Flows

Direct Flows Data Direct Demand Direct Direct Demand Time DirectDemandEntryFlowInPCU Arm Entry Flow Demand Exit Pedestrian Flow Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Flow (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) 1 Harmer Green Lane 124.00 124.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road East 692.00 692.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road West 300.00 300.00 N/A N/A 2 Harmer Green Lane 92.00 92.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road East 1020.00 1020.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road West 288.00 288.00 N/A N/A 3 Harmer Green Lane 84.00 84.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road East 780.00 780.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road West 228.00 228.00 N/A N/A 4 Harmer Green Lane 64.00 64.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road East 836.00 836.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road West 308.00 308.00 N/A N/A Turning Proportions

Turning Counts or Proportions (PCU/hr) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 38.000 53.000 From HertE 217.000 0.000 615.000 HertW 70.000 211.000 0.000

Turning Proportions (PCU) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.00 0.42 0.58 From HertE 0.26 0.00 0.74 HertW 0.25 0.75 0.00 Vehicle Mix

Average PCU Per Vehicle - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 1.000 1.000 1.019 From HertE 1.000 1.000 1.000 HertW 1.000 1.005 1.000 Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 0.000 1.890 From HertE 0.000 0.000 0.000 HertW 0.000 0.470 0.000 Results

Results Summary Inclusive Inclusive Total Rate Of Max Max Total Average Queuein Queuein Max Max Total Queuein Queuein Intercep Dela Queu Demand Queuein g Total g Slop Arm RF LO Arrival g Delay g Delay t y e (PCU/hr g Delay Delay Average e C S s (PCU) (PCU- (PCU- (PCU/hr) (min) (PCU) ) (min) (PCU- Delay min) min/min) min) (min) Harmer Green 0.17 0.10 0.20 A 91.00 91.00 8.48 0.09 0.14 8.48 0.09 0.557 867.566 Lane Hertfor d Road 0.89 0.38 6.78 C 832.00 832.00 179.46 0.22 2.99 179.63 0.22 0.576 1170.963 East Hertfor d Road 0.45 0.16 0.81 A 281.00 281.00 41.27 0.15 0.69 41.30 0.15 0.527 797.354 West

Main Results

Main results: (17:00-17:15) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 124.00 31.00 123.20 252.87 223.06 0.00 743.35 590.04 0.167 0.00 0.20 Lane Hertford Road 692.00 173.00 685.82 274.51 71.75 0.00 1129.63 973.00 0.613 0.00 1.55 East Hertford Road 300.00 75.00 297.06 578.70 178.87 0.00 703.12 663.66 0.427 0.00 0.73 West

Main results: (17:15-17:30) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 92.00 23.00 92.23 332.29 216.16 0.00 747.19 590.05 0.123 0.20 0.14 Lane Hertford Road 1020.00 255.00 999.08 254.68 53.72 0.00 1140.02 973.00 0.895 1.55 6.78 East Hertford Road 288.00 72.00 287.87 792.22 260.58 0.00 660.08 663.66 0.436 0.73 0.77 West

Main results: (17:30-17:45) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 84.00 21.00 84.07 265.24 171.99 0.00 771.79 590.04 0.109 0.14 0.12 Lane Hertford Road 780.00 195.00 798.21 207.10 48.97 0.00 1142.75 973.00 0.683 6.78 2.22 East Hertford Road 228.00 57.00 229.05 638.99 208.19 0.00 687.68 663.66 0.332 0.77 0.50 West

Main results: (17:45-18:00) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 64.00 16.00 64.11 294.10 230.36 0.00 739.28 590.05 0.087 0.12 0.10 Lane Hertford Road 836.00 209.00 834.62 257.13 37.34 0.00 1149.45 973.00 0.727 2.22 2.57 East Hertford Road 308.00 77.00 306.78 654.27 217.68 0.00 682.68 663.66 0.451 0.50 0.81 West

Queueing Delay Results

Queueing Delay results: (17:00-17:15) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 2.92 0.19 0.098 A A Hertford Road East 21.77 1.45 0.133 A A Hertford Road West 10.45 0.70 0.147 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:15-17:30) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 2.19 0.15 0.093 A A Hertford Road East 82.53 5.50 0.381 C C Hertford Road West 11.35 0.76 0.162 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:30-17:45) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 1.89 0.13 0.088 A A Hertford Road East 37.98 2.53 0.183 B B Hertford Road West 7.83 0.52 0.132 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:45-18:00) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 1.47 0.10 0.090 A A Hertford Road East 37.18 2.48 0.189 B B Hertford Road West 11.65 0.78 0.160 A A Overview: Mini-roundabout Geometry

Mini Roundabout Geometry Entry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance corner Gradient Kerbed Final approach Final Arm road half- width flare to next kerb line over 50m central Intercept road half- Slope width (m) (m) length (m) arm (m) distance (%) island (PCU/hr) width (m) (m) Harmer Green 3.30 6.70 3.10 3.30 12.60 4.00 0.00 0.557 867.566 Lane Hertford Road 3.20 3.80 4.70 3.20 13.80 14.70 0.00 0.576 1170.963 East Hertford Road 2.90 5.30 2.30 2.90 12.50 3.60 0.00 0.527 797.354 West Overview: Time Segment Results

Time Segment Results Average Pedestrian Start End Queueing Geometric Delay Per Time Demand Capacity Arm RFC Demand Queue Queue Total Delay Total Delay Arriving Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (PCU-min) (PCU-min) Vehicle (min) Harmer 1 Green 124.00 743.35 0.167 0.00 0.00 0.20 2.92 (0.02) 0.098 Lane Hertford 1 Road 692.00 1129.63 0.613 0.00 0.00 1.55 21.77 (0.02) 0.133 East Hertford 1 Road 300.00 703.12 0.427 0.00 0.00 0.73 10.45 (0.02) 0.147 West Harmer 2 Green 92.00 747.19 0.123 0.00 0.20 0.14 2.19 (0.02) 0.093 Lane Hertford 2 Road 1020.00 1140.02 0.895 0.00 1.55 6.78 82.53 (0.02) 0.381 East Hertford 2 Road 288.00 660.08 0.436 0.00 0.73 0.77 11.35 (0.02) 0.162 West Harmer 3 Green 84.00 771.79 0.109 0.00 0.14 0.12 1.89 (0.02) 0.088 Lane Hertford 3 Road 780.00 1142.75 0.683 0.00 6.78 2.22 37.98 (0.02) 0.183 East Hertford 3 Road 228.00 687.68 0.332 0.00 0.77 0.50 7.83 (0.02) 0.132 West Harmer 4 Green 64.00 739.28 0.087 0.00 0.12 0.10 1.47 (0.02) 0.090 Lane Hertford 4 Road 836.00 1149.45 0.727 0.00 2.22 2.57 37.18 (0.02) 0.189 East Hertford 4 Road 308.00 682.68 0.451 0.00 0.50 0.81 11.65 (0.02) 0.160 West A3 - PM Calibration - D6 - Total 2020 with Dev, PM

Data Errors and Warnings No errors or warnings

Analysis Set Details Network Flow Network Reason For Include In Use Specific Demand Name Description Locked Scaling Factor Capacity Scaling Scaling Report Demand Set Set (%) Factor (%) Factors PM Yes Yes D2,D4,D6 100.000 100.000 Calibration

Demand Set Details Time Time Time Start Finish Perio Run Use Segme Traffic Nam Scenari Perio Descriptio Locke Relationsh Time Time d Automatical Relationsh nt Profile e o Name d n d ip (HH:m (HH:m Lengt ly ip Length Type Name m) m) h (min) (min) Total Total 2020 2020 DIREC with PM Yes 17:00 18:00 60 15 with T Dev, Dev PM Roundabout Network

Roundabout Type(s) Roundabout Grade Large Do Geometric ID Name Arm Order Type Separated Roundabout Delay Hertford Road Mini 1 Harme,HertE,HertW Mini-roundabout Roundabout

Roundabout Network Options Driving Side Lighting Road Surface In London Left Normal/unknown Normal/unknown Arms

Arms ID Name Description Harme Harmer Green Lane HertE Hertford Road East HertW Hertford Road West

Capacity Options Minimum Capacity Maximum Capacity Assume Flat Start Initial Queue Arm (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Profile (PCU) Harmer Green Lane 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 0.00 99999.00 0.00 Hertford Road West 0.00 99999.00 0.00

Mini Roundabout Geometry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance to Entry corner Gradient Kerbed approach Arm road half- width flare length next arm kerb line over 50m central road half- width (m) (m) (m) (m) distance (m) (%) island width (m) Harmer Green Lane 3.30 3.30 6.70 3.10 12.60 4.00 0.00 Hertford Road East 3.20 3.20 3.80 4.70 13.80 14.70 0.00 Hertford Road West 2.90 2.90 5.30 2.30 12.50 3.60 0.00

Pedestrian Crossings Arm Crossing Type Harmer Green Lane None Hertford Road East None Hertford Road West None

Arm Slope/ Intercept and Capacity

Arm Intercept Adjustments Arm Use Adjustment Reason Direct Intercept Adjustment (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane N/A N/A Hertford Road East Yes Calibration to queue surveys 315.00 Hertford Road West N/A N/A

Slope and Intercept used in model Arm Enter Directly Slope Intercept (PCU/hr) Final Slope Final Intercept (PCU/hr) Harmer Green Lane ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.557 867.566 Hertford Road East ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.576 1170.963 Hertford Road West ((calculated)) ((calculated)) 0.527 797.354 The slope and intercept shown above include any corrections and adjustments. Traffic Flows

Demand Set Data Options Vehicle Vehicle Vehicle PCU Estimate Turning Turning Turning Default Mix Mix Mix Factor Default Vehicle Mix from Proportions Proportions Proportions Vehicle Varies Varies Varies for a Turning Source entry/exit Vary Over Vary Over Vary Over Mix Over Over Over HV Proportions counts Time Turn Entry Time Turn Entry (PCU) HV Yes Yes 2.00 Yes Yes Percentages Entry Flows

General Flows Data Arm Profile Type Use Turning Counts Average Demand Flow (PCU/hr) Flow Scaling Factor (%) PHF Harmer Green Lane DIRECT 100.000 0.74 Hertford Road East DIRECT 100.000 0.82 Hertford Road West DIRECT 100.000 0.91 Direct/Resultant Flows

Direct Flows Data Direct Demand Direct Direct Demand Time DirectDemandEntryFlowInPCU Arm Entry Flow Demand Exit Pedestrian Flow Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) Flow (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) 1 Harmer Green Lane 164.00 164.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road East 708.00 708.00 N/A N/A 1 Hertford Road West 352.00 352.00 N/A N/A 2 Harmer Green Lane 124.00 124.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road East 1040.00 1040.00 N/A N/A 2 Hertford Road West 332.00 332.00 N/A N/A 3 Harmer Green Lane 112.00 112.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road East 796.00 796.00 N/A N/A 3 Hertford Road West 256.00 256.00 N/A N/A 4 Harmer Green Lane 88.00 88.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road East 852.00 852.00 N/A N/A 4 Hertford Road West 340.00 340.00 N/A N/A Turning Proportions

Turning Counts or Proportions (PCU/hr) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.000 47.000 75.000 From HertE 234.000 0.000 615.000 HertW 109.000 211.000 0.000

Turning Proportions (PCU) - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 0.00 0.39 0.61 From HertE 0.28 0.00 0.72 HertW 0.34 0.66 0.00 Vehicle Mix

Average PCU Per Vehicle - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW Harme 1.000 1.000 1.013 From HertE 1.000 1.000 1.000 HertW 1.000 1.005 1.000

Heavy Vehicle Percentages - Hertford Road Mini Roundabout (for whole period) To Harme HertE HertW From Harme 0.000 0.000 1.330 HertE 0.000 0.000 0.000 HertW 0.000 0.470 0.000 Results

Results Summary Inclusive Inclusive Total Rate Of Max Max Total Average Queuein Queuein Max Max Total Queuein Queuein Intercep Dela Queu Demand Queuein g Total g Slop Arm RF LO Arrival g Delay g Delay t y e (PCU/hr g Delay Delay Average e C S s (PCU) (PCU- (PCU- (PCU/hr) (min) (PCU) ) (min) (PCU- Delay min) min/min) min) (min) Harmer Green 0.22 0.10 0.28 A 122.00 122.00 11.94 0.10 0.20 11.94 0.10 0.557 867.566 Lane Hertfor d Road 0.92 0.45 8.40 D 849.00 849.00 207.00 0.24 3.45 207.22 0.24 0.576 1170.963 East Hertfor d Road 0.51 0.19 1.03 B 320.00 320.00 53.37 0.17 0.89 53.41 0.17 0.527 797.354 West

Main Results

Main results: (17:00-17:15) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 164.00 41.00 162.86 311.79 229.45 0.00 739.79 625.40 0.222 0.00 0.28 Lane Hertford Road 708.00 177.00 701.19 292.19 100.12 0.00 1113.29 949.49 0.636 0.00 1.70 East Hertford Road 352.00 88.00 347.98 608.05 193.26 0.00 695.54 659.49 0.506 0.00 1.00 West

Main results: (17:15-17:30) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 124.00 31.00 124.33 392.31 218.84 0.00 745.69 625.40 0.166 0.28 0.20 Lane Hertford Road 1040.00 260.00 1013.20 266.74 76.43 0.00 1126.93 949.49 0.923 1.70 8.40 East Hertford Road 332.00 83.00 331.90 810.37 279.26 0.00 650.24 659.49 0.511 1.00 1.03 West

Main results: (17:30-17:45) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 112.00 28.00 112.12 313.69 169.89 0.00 772.96 625.40 0.145 0.20 0.17 Lane Hertford Road 796.00 199.00 819.73 213.08 68.93 0.00 1131.26 949.49 0.704 8.40 2.47 East Hertford Road 256.00 64.00 257.65 662.72 225.93 0.00 678.33 659.49 0.377 1.03 0.62 West

Main results: (17:45-18:00) Entry Exit Circulating Pedestrian Saturation Start End Demand Arrivals Capacity Arm Flow Flow Flow Demand Capacity RFC Queue Queue (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU/hr) (PCU) (PCU) Harmer Green 88.00 22.00 88.14 349.71 223.18 0.00 743.28 625.40 0.118 0.17 0.14 Lane Hertford Road 852.00 213.00 850.52 257.14 54.19 0.00 1139.75 949.49 0.748 2.47 2.84 East Hertford Road 340.00 85.00 338.48 670.29 234.42 0.00 673.86 659.49 0.505 0.62 1.00 West

Queueing Delay Results

Queueing Delay results: (17:00-17:15) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 4.13 0.28 0.105 A A Hertford Road East 23.84 1.59 0.143 A A Hertford Road West 14.13 0.94 0.171 B B

Queueing Delay results: (17:15-17:30) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 3.11 0.21 0.097 A A Hertford Road East 98.14 6.54 0.451 D C Hertford Road West 15.32 1.02 0.189 B B

Queueing Delay results: (17:30-17:45) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 2.62 0.17 0.092 A A Hertford Road East 44.00 2.93 0.206 B B Hertford Road West 9.64 0.64 0.144 A A

Queueing Delay results: (17:45-18:00) Queueing Rate Of Average Delay Per Queueing Total Unsignalised Signalised Arm Delay (PCU- Arriving Vehicle Delay (PCU-min) Level Of Service Level Of Service min/min) (min) Harmer Green Lane 2.08 0.14 0.092 A A Hertford Road East 41.03 2.74 0.206 B B Hertford Road West 14.28 0.95 0.179 B B Overview: Mini-roundabout Geometry

Mini Roundabout Geometry Entry Minimum Approach Entry Effective Distance corner Gradient Kerbed Final approach Final Arm road half- width flare to next kerb line over 50m central Intercept road half- Slope width (m) (m) length (m) arm (m) distance (%) island (PCU/hr) width (m) (m) Harmer Green 3.30 6.70 3.10 3.30 12.60 4.00 0.00 0.557 867.566 Lane Hertford Road 3.20 3.80 4.70 3.20 13.80 14.70 0.00 0.576 1170.963 East Hertford Road 2.90 5.30 2.30 2.90 12.50 3.60 0.00 0.527 797.354 West Overview: Time Segment Results

Time Segment Results Average Pedestrian Start End Queueing Geometric Delay Per Time Demand Capacity Arm RFC Demand Queue Queue Total Delay Total Delay Arriving Segment (PCU/hr) (PCU/hr) (Ped/hr) (PCU) (PCU) (PCU-min) (PCU-min) Vehicle (min) Harmer 1 Green 164.00 739.79 0.222 0.00 0.00 0.28 4.13 (0.02) 0.105 Lane Hertford 1 Road 708.00 1113.29 0.636 0.00 0.00 1.70 23.84 (0.02) 0.143 East Hertford 1 Road 352.00 695.54 0.506 0.00 0.00 1.00 14.13 (0.02) 0.171 West Harmer 2 Green 124.00 745.69 0.166 0.00 0.28 0.20 3.11 (0.02) 0.097 Lane Hertford 2 Road 1040.00 1126.93 0.923 0.00 1.70 8.40 98.14 (0.02) 0.451 East Hertford 2 Road 332.00 650.24 0.511 0.00 1.00 1.03 15.32 (0.02) 0.189 West Harmer 3 Green 112.00 772.96 0.145 0.00 0.20 0.17 2.62 (0.02) 0.092 Lane Hertford 3 Road 796.00 1131.26 0.704 0.00 8.40 2.47 44.00 (0.02) 0.206 East Hertford 3 Road 256.00 678.33 0.377 0.00 1.03 0.62 9.64 (0.02) 0.144 West Harmer 4 Green 88.00 743.28 0.118 0.00 0.17 0.14 2.08 (0.02) 0.092 Lane Hertford 4 Road 852.00 1139.75 0.748 0.00 2.47 2.84 41.03 (0.02) 0.206 East Hertford 4 Road 340.00 673.86 0.505 0.00 0.62 1.00 14.28 (0.02) 0.179 West

Land behind 2 New Road, DIGSWELL Mr John Wallace Access Strategy

APPENDIX E

1303-71/TN/01B Transport Planning Associates March 2015 Appendix E TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 1 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

Calculation Reference: AUDIT-219603-141229-1212 TRIP RATE CALCULATION SELECTION PARAMETERS:

Land Use : 03 - RESIDENTIAL Category : A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL VEHICLES

Selected regions and areas: 04 EAST ANGLIA SF SUFFOLK 1 days 05 EAST MIDLANDS LN LINCOLNSHIRE 1 days 06 WEST MIDLANDS SH SHROPSHIRE 1 days WO WORCESTERSHIRE 1 days 07 YORKSHIRE & NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE NY NORTH YORKSHIRE 1 days 08 NORTH WEST CH CHESHIRE 1 days 11 SCOTLAND FI FIFE 1 days SR STIRLING 1 days 12 CONNAUGHT GA GALWAY 1 days 15 GREATER DUBLIN DL DUBLIN 1 days 17 ULSTER (NORTHERN IRELAND) AN ANTRIM 1 days AR ARMAGH 1 days

This section displays the number of survey days per TRICS® sub-region in the selected set

Filtering Stage 2 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: 101 to 155 (units: ) Range Selected by User: 100 to 160 (units: )

Public Transport Provision: Selection by: Include all surveys

Date Range: 01/01/06 to 22/09/12

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 3 days Tuesday 3 days Wednesday 1 days Thursday 2 days Friday 3 days

This data displays the number of selected surveys by day of the week.

Selected survey types: Manual count 12 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: Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) 6 Edge of Town 6 TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 2 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

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 Out of Town 1 No Sub Category 4

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.

Filtering Stage 3 selection:

Use Class: C 3 12 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: 1,001 to 5,000 3 days 5,001 to 10,000 2 days 10,001 to 15,000 1 days 15,001 to 20,000 3 days 20,001 to 25,000 1 days 25,001 to 50,000 2 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 1 days 50,001 to 75,000 4 days 75,001 to 100,000 3 days 100,001 to 125,000 2 days 250,001 to 500,000 1 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 9 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 12 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. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 3 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters

1 AN-03-A-06 SEMI-DET. ANTRIM GLENMOUNT ROAD

N E W T O W N A B B E Y Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) No Sub Category Total Number of dwellings: 1 3 2 Survey date: THURSDAY 10/06/10 Survey Type: MANUAL 2 AR-03-A-01 MIXED HOUSES ARMAGH BIRCHDALE MANOR

LURGAN Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 5 3 Survey date: TUESDAY 15/06/10 Survey Type: MANUAL 3 CH-03-A-06 SEMI-DET./BUNGALOWS CHESHIRE CREWE ROAD

CREWE Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) No Sub Category Total Number of dwellings: 1 2 9 Survey date: TUESDAY 14/10/08 Survey Type: MANUAL 4 DL-03-A-06 DETACHED DUBLIN UPPER KILMACUD ROAD DUNDRUM DUBLIN Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 4 7 Survey date: FRIDAY 30/04/10 Survey Type: MANUAL 5 FI-03-A-03 MIXED HOUSES FIFE WOODMILL ROAD

DUNFERMLINE Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 5 5 Survey date: MONDAY 30/04/07 Survey Type: MANUAL 6 GA-03-A-01 SEMI DETACHED GALWAY HEADFORD ROAD KNOCKAYARRAGH GALWAY Edge of Town No Sub Category Total Number of dwellings: 1 2 3 Survey date: WEDNESDAY 20/09/06 Survey Type: MANUAL 7 LN-03-A-01 MIXED HOUSES LINCOLNSHIRE BRANT ROAD BRACEBRIDGE LINCOLN Edge of Town Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 5 0 Survey date: TUESDAY 15/05/07 Survey Type: MANUAL TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 4 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

LIST OF SITES relevant to selection parameters (Cont.)

8 NY-03-A-06 BUNGALOWS & SEMI DET. NORTH YORKSHIRE HORSEFAIR

BOROUGHBRIDGE Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 1 5 Survey date: FRIDAY 14/10/11 Survey Type: MANUAL 9 SF-03-A-03 MIXED HOUSES SUFFOLK BARTON HILL FORNHAM ST MARTIN BURY ST EDMUNDS Edge of Town Out of Town Total Number of dwellings: 1 0 1 Survey date: MONDAY 15/05/06 Survey Type: MANUAL 10 SH-03-A-04 TERRACED SHROPSHIRE ST MICHAEL'S STREET

SHREWSBURY Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) No Sub Category Total Number of dwellings: 1 0 8 Survey date: THURSDAY 11/06/09 Survey Type: MANUAL 11 SR-03-A-01 DETACHED STIRLING BENVIEW

STIRLING Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 1 5 Survey date: MONDAY 23/04/07 Survey Type: MANUAL 12 WO-03-A-03 DETACHED WORCESTERSHIRE BLAKEBROOK BLAKEBROOK KIDDERMINSTER Suburban Area (PPS6 Out of Centre) Residential Zone Total Number of dwellings: 1 3 8 Survey date: FRIDAY 05/05/06 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 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 5 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL VEHICLES 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 12 131 0.073 12 131 0.312 12 131 0.385 08:00 - 09:00 12 131 0.161 12 131 0.467 12 131 0.628 09:00 - 10:00 12 131 0.176 12 131 0.251 12 131 0.427 10:00 - 11:00 12 131 0.156 12 131 0.185 12 131 0.341 11:00 - 12:00 12 131 0.181 12 131 0.183 12 131 0.364 12:00 - 13:00 12 131 0.204 12 131 0.192 12 131 0.396 13:00 - 14:00 12 131 0.231 12 131 0.185 12 131 0.416 14:00 - 15:00 12 131 0.195 12 131 0.204 12 131 0.399 15:00 - 16:00 12 131 0.281 12 131 0.228 12 131 0.509 16:00 - 17:00 12 131 0.346 12 131 0.195 12 131 0.541 17:00 - 18:00 12 131 0.422 12 131 0.240 12 131 0.662 18:00 - 19:00 12 131 0.293 12 131 0.242 12 131 0.535 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 2.719 2.884 5.603

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.

Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 101 - 155 (units: ) Survey date date range: 01/01/06 - 22/09/12 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 12 Number of Saturdays: 0 Number of Sundays: 0 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. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 6 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 7 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 8 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 9 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL PEDESTRIANS 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 12 131 0.022 12 131 0.045 12 131 0.067 08:00 - 09:00 12 131 0.042 12 131 0.149 12 131 0.191 09:00 - 10:00 12 131 0.042 12 131 0.045 12 131 0.087 10:00 - 11:00 12 131 0.036 12 131 0.042 12 131 0.078 11:00 - 12:00 12 131 0.025 12 131 0.034 12 131 0.059 12:00 - 13:00 12 131 0.043 12 131 0.036 12 131 0.079 13:00 - 14:00 12 131 0.034 12 131 0.040 12 131 0.074 14:00 - 15:00 12 131 0.040 12 131 0.035 12 131 0.075 15:00 - 16:00 12 131 0.111 12 131 0.052 12 131 0.163 16:00 - 17:00 12 131 0.068 12 131 0.051 12 131 0.119 17:00 - 18:00 12 131 0.069 12 131 0.037 12 131 0.106 18:00 - 19:00 12 131 0.067 12 131 0.047 12 131 0.114 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 0.599 0.613 1.212

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.

Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 101 - 155 (units: ) Survey date date range: 01/01/06 - 22/09/12 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 12 Number of Saturdays: 0 Number of Sundays: 0 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. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 10 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 11 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 12 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 13 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

TRIP RATE for Land Use 03 - RESIDENTIAL/A - HOUSES PRIVATELY OWNED MULTI-MODAL PUBLIC TRANSPORT USERS 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 12 131 0.001 12 131 0.013 12 131 0.014 08:00 - 09:00 12 131 0.006 12 131 0.039 12 131 0.045 09:00 - 10:00 12 131 0.003 12 131 0.012 12 131 0.015 10:00 - 11:00 12 131 0.004 12 131 0.008 12 131 0.012 11:00 - 12:00 12 131 0.010 12 131 0.011 12 131 0.021 12:00 - 13:00 12 131 0.007 12 131 0.011 12 131 0.018 13:00 - 14:00 12 131 0.007 12 131 0.004 12 131 0.011 14:00 - 15:00 12 131 0.007 12 131 0.006 12 131 0.013 15:00 - 16:00 12 131 0.011 12 131 0.005 12 131 0.016 16:00 - 17:00 12 131 0.005 12 131 0.001 12 131 0.006 17:00 - 18:00 12 131 0.021 12 131 0.006 12 131 0.027 18:00 - 19:00 12 131 0.029 12 131 0.006 12 131 0.035 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 0.111 0.122 0.233

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.

Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 101 - 155 (units: ) Survey date date range: 01/01/06 - 22/09/12 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 12 Number of Saturdays: 0 Number of Sundays: 0 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. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 14 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 15 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 16 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 17 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

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 12 131 0.105 12 131 0.435 12 131 0.540 08:00 - 09:00 12 131 0.239 12 131 0.856 12 131 1.095 09:00 - 10:00 12 131 0.251 12 131 0.365 12 131 0.616 10:00 - 11:00 12 131 0.228 12 131 0.281 12 131 0.509 11:00 - 12:00 12 131 0.252 12 131 0.273 12 131 0.525 12:00 - 13:00 12 131 0.300 12 131 0.298 12 131 0.598 13:00 - 14:00 12 131 0.324 12 131 0.276 12 131 0.600 14:00 - 15:00 12 131 0.294 12 131 0.301 12 131 0.595 15:00 - 16:00 12 131 0.559 12 131 0.356 12 131 0.915 16:00 - 17:00 12 131 0.537 12 131 0.317 12 131 0.854 17:00 - 18:00 12 131 0.630 12 131 0.360 12 131 0.990 18:00 - 19:00 12 131 0.472 12 131 0.393 12 131 0.865 19:00 - 20:00 20:00 - 21:00 21:00 - 22:00 22:00 - 23:00 23:00 - 24:00 Total Rates: 4.191 4.511 8.702

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.

Parameter summary

Trip rate parameter range selected: 101 - 155 (units: ) Survey date date range: 01/01/06 - 22/09/12 Number of weekdays (Monday-Friday): 12 Number of Saturdays: 0 Number of Sundays: 0 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. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 18 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 19 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph. TRICS 7.1.3 091214 B17.00 (C) 2015 JMP Consultants Ltd on behalf of the TRICS Consortium Monday 29/12/14 Housing Trips - Digswell Page 20 Transport Planning Associates Castle Park Cambridge Licence No: 219603

This graph is a visual representation of the trip rate calculation results screen. The same time periods and trip rates are displayed, but in addition there is an additional column showing the percentage of the total trip rate by individual time period, allowing peak periods to be easily identified through observation. Note that the type of count and the selected direction is shown at the top of the graph.