Coventry Public Transport Model 2008

Local Model Validation Report (LMVR)

November 2009

DOCUMENT CONTROL SHEET BPP 04 F8

Client: Coventry City Council / CENTRO Project: Coventry Public Transport Models Job No: B0999800 Document Title: Local Model Validation Report

Originator Checked by Reviewed by Approved by

ORIGINAL NAME NAME NAME NAME Firuz Sulaimi Geoff Smith DATE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE September 2009

Document Status: Working Draft

ORIGINAL NAME NAME NAME NAME Firuz Sulaimi Geoff Smith Mike Lampkin Phil Collins DATE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE November 2009

Document Status: Final

ORIGINAL NAME NAME NAME NAME

DATE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE

Document Status:

ORIGINAL NAME NAME NAME NAME

DATE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE SIGNATURE

Document Status:

This document has been prepared by Jacobs Consultancy UK Ltd, a subsidiary of Jacobs Engineering U.K. Limited (“Jacobs”) in its professional capacity as consultants in accordance with the terms and conditions of Jacobs’ contract with the commissioning party (the “Client”). Regard should be had to those terms and conditions when considering and/or placing any reliance on this document. No part of this document may be copied or reproduced by any means without prior written permission from Jacobs. If you have received this document in error, please destroy all copies in your possession or control and notify Jacobs.

Any advice, opinions, or recommendations within this document (a) should be read and relied upon only in the context of the document as a whole; (b) do not, in any way, purport to include any manner of legal advice or opinion; (c) are based upon the information made available to Jacobs at the date of this document and on current UK standards, codes, technology and construction practices as at the date of this document. It should be noted and it is expressly stated that no independent verification of any of the documents or information supplied to Jacobs has been made. No liability is accepted by Jacobs for any use of this document, other than for the purposes for which it was originally prepared and provided. Following final delivery of this document to the Client, Jacobs will have no further obligations or duty to advise the Client on any matters, including development affecting the information or advice provided in this document.

This document has been prepared for the exclusive use of the Client and unless otherwise agreed in writing by Jacobs, no other party may use, make use of or rely on the contents of this document. Should the Client wish to release this document to a third party, Jacobs may, at its discretion, agree to such release provided that (a) Jacobs’ written agreement is obtained prior to such release; and (b) by release of the document to the third party, that third party does not acquire any rights, contractual or otherwise, whatsoever against Jacobs and Jacobs, accordingly, assume no duties, liabilities or obligations to that third party; and (c) Jacobs accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage incurred by the Client or for any conflict of Jacobs’ interests arising out of the Client's release of this document to the third party.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION 1

1.1 Background 1

1.2 Model Area 1

1.3 Report Structure 1

1.3 Report Structure 2

2 NETWORK DEVELOPMENT 3

2.1 Source data 3

2.2 Bus and Rail Routes and Timetables 3

2.3 Zone Definition 4

2.4 Zone Connectors 6

2.5 Walk Links 7

2.6 Public Transport Model Fares 8

3 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 14

3.1 Bus Passenger Interview Surveys 14

3.2 Counts 14

3.3 Fieldwork 14

3.4 Additional 2009 Surveys 16

3.5 Coventry Station Survey 16

3.6 Bus Data Processing 17

3.7 Bus Data Expansion 19 3.7.1 Forward expansion 19 3.7.2 Double Counting Adjustment 19 3.7.3 Transposition and Reverse Expansion 20 3.7.4 Matrix Building 20 3.7.5 Coventry Rail Station Matrices 21

4 MATRIX DEVELOPMENT 22

4.1 Bus matrices 22 4.1.1 Incorporation of Solihull and NEC Surveys 22 4.1.2 Incorporation of Coventry PT Model (VIPS) Infill Matrices 22 4.1.3 Merged Bus Matrix 23

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

4.2 Base Rail Matrices 24

4.3 Development of ‘Prior’ Matrices 25

5 CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION 27

5.1 Introduction 27

5.2 Assignment Settings and Generalised Time Definition 27 5.2.1 No Fares (Nfa) Assignment Procedure 28 5.2.2 Fares (Fa) Assignment Procedure 32

5.3 Calibration Counts 33 5.3.1 Inner Cordon 34 5.3.2 Outer Cordon Radial 35 5.3.3 Outer Cordon Orbital 36 5.3.4 Bus Boarding and Alighting (Area) Counts 36 5.3.5 Rail Boarding and Alighting 37 5.3.6 Rail Link Flow Counts 38 5.3.7 Screenline 1 39 5.3.8 Screenline 2 39

5.4 Prior Matrix Calibration Results 40 5.4.1 Introduction 40 5.4.2 Inner Cordon Summary 40 5.4.3 Outer Cordon Radial Summary 41 5.4.4 Outer Cordon Orbital Summary 41 5.4.5 Screenline 1 42 5.4.6 Screenline 2 43 5.4.7 Bus Boarding and Alighting Summary 44 5.4.8 Rail Boarding and Alighting Summary 44 5.4.9 Rail Link Flow Counts 45 5.4.10 Conclusion 45

5.5 Calibration Results 45 5.5.1 Introduction 45 5.5.2 Inner Cordon 46 5.5.3 Outer Cordon Radial 46 5.5.4 Outer Cordon Orbital 47 5.5.5 Screenline 1 48 5.5.6 Screenline 2 49 5.5.7 Bus Boarding and Alighting 49 5.5.8 Rail Boarding and Alighting 50 5.5.9 Rail Link Flow Counts 50 5.5.10 Sector to Sector Analysis 51 5.5.11 Trip Length Distribution Analysis 56 5.5.12 Conclusion 57

5.6 Corridor Validation Results 58 5.6.1 Introduction 58 5.6.2 Corridor 58 Boarding and Alighting Validation 58 5.6.3 Corridor 3 Boarding and Alighting Validation 61 5.6.4 Corridor 3a Link Flow Validation 65 5.6.5 Willenhall Corridor Boarding and Alighting Validation 66

6 JOURNEY TIME VALIDATION 70

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

7 CONCLUSIONS 79

APPENDIX A - BUS AND TRAIN ROUTES WITHIN THE MODEL 80

APPENDIX B - ZONE HEIRARCHY 84

APPENDIX C - PRIOR MATRIX AM CALIBRATION TABLES 94 C.1.1 AM Inner Cordon 94 C.1.2 AM Outer Cordon Radial 95 C.1.3 AM Outer Cordon Orbital 96 C.1.4 AM Screenline 1 97 C.1.5 AM Screenline 2 97 C.1.6 AM Bus Boarding & Alighting 98 C.1.7 AM Rail Boarding & Alighting 99 C.1.8 AM Rail Flow Count 100

APPENDIX D - PRIOR MATRIX IP CALIBRATION TABLES 101 D.1.1 IP Inner Cordon 101 D.1.2 PM Outer Cordon Radial 102 D.1.3 IP Outer Cordon Orbital 103 D.1.4 IP Screenline 1 104 D.1.5 IP Screenline 2 104 D.1.6 IP Bus Boarding & Alighting 105 D.1.7 IP Rail Boarding & Alighting 106 D.1.8 IP Rail Flow Count 107

APPENDIX E - PRIOR MATRIX PM CALIBRATION TABLES 108 E.1.1 PM Inner Cordon 108 E.1.2 PM Outer Cordon Radial 109 E.1.3 PM Outer Cordon Orbital 110 E.1.4 PM Screenline 1 111 E.1.5 PM Screenline 2 111 E.1.6 PM Bus Boarding & Alighting 112 E.1.7 PM Rail Boarding & Alighting 113 E.1.8 PM Rail Flow Count 114

APPENDIX F - POST MATRIX AM CALIBRATION TABLES 115 F.1.1 AM Inner Cordon 115 F.1.2 AM Outer Cordon Radial 116 F.1.3 AM Outer Cordon Orbital 117 F.1.4 AM Screenline 1 118 F.1.5 AM Screenline 2 118 F.1.6 AM Bus Boarding & Alighting 119 F.1.7 AM Rail Boarding & Alighting 120 F.1.8 AM Rail Flow Count 121

APPENDIX G - POST MATRIX IP CALIBRATION TABLES 122 G.1.1 IP Inner Cordon 122 G.1.2 IP Outer Cordon Radial 123 G.1.3 IP Outer Cordon Orbital 124 G.1.4 IP Screenline 1 125 G.1.5 IP Screenline 2 125 G.1.6 IP Bus Boarding & Alighting 126 G.1.7 IP Rail Boarding & Alighting 127 G.1.8 IP Rail Flow Count 128

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

APPENDIX H - POST MATRIX PM CALIBRATION TABLES 129 H.1.1 PM Inner Cordon 129 H.1.2 PM Outer Cordon Radial 130 H.1.3 PM Outer Cordon Orbital 131 H.1.4 PM Screenline 1 132 H.1.5 PM Screenline 2 132 H.1.6 PM Bus Boarding & Alighting 133 H.1.7 PM Rail Boarding & Alighting 134 H.1.8 PM Rail Flow Count 135

Table 1 Speed of Walk Links 7 Table 3 Boarding penalty and fare points from Birmingham to Coventry (Slow Train)11 Table 4 Boarding penalty and fare points from Coventry to Nuneaton line 12 Table 5 Boarding penalty and fare points from Coventry to Rugby line 13 Table 6 Sample Rates by time period 15 Table 7 2009 Surveys 16 Table 8 Access Mode to Bus Stops 18 Table 9 Coventry Station Access Modes 18 Table 10 Car Availability of Bus Survey Respondents 18 Table 11 Party Composition Analysis 19 Table 12 Summary of 2008 Bus OD Survey Matrices 21 Table 15 Coventry Station Users Boarding Sample Rates by Time Period 21 Table 16 Coventry Station users Alighting Sample Rates by Time Period 21 Table 13 Combination of Bus Matrices 23 Table 14 Summary of Rail Matrices 25 Table 17 Summary of Prior Matrices 25 Table 18 Prior Matrix Inner Cordon Summary Tables 40 Table 19 Prior Matrix Outer Cordon Radial Summary Tables 41 Table 20 Prior Matrix Outer Cordon Orbital Summary Tables 42 Table 21 Prior Matrix Screenline 1 Summary Tables 42 Table 22 Prior Matrix Screenline 2 Summary Tables 43 Table 23 Prior Matrix Bus Boarding Summary 44 Table 24 Prior Matrix Bus Alighting Summary 44 Table 25 Prior Matrix Rail Boarding Summary 44 Table 26 Prior Matrix Rail Alighting Summary 44 Table 27 Prior Matrix Rail Link Flow Counts 45 Table 28 Inner Cordon Calibration Results 46 Table 29 Outer Cordon Radial Calibration Results 47 Table 30 Outer Cordon Orbital Calibration Results 47 Table 31 Screenline 1 Calibration Results 48 Table 32 Screenline 2 Calibration Results 49 Table 33 Bus Boarding and Alighting Calibration Results 49 Table 34 Rail Boarding and Alighting Calibration Results 50 Table 35 Rail Link Flow Calibration Results 50 Table 36 AM Before and After Matrix Estimation Sector Analysis Table 53 Table 37 IP Before and After Matrix Estimation Sector Analysis Table 54 Table 38 PM Before and After Matrix Estimation Sector Analysis Table 55 Table 39 Corridor 58 B&A Validation Summary Table 59 Table 40 Corridor 3 B&A Validation Summary Table 62 Table 41 Corridor 3a Link Flow Validation Results 66 Table 42 Willenhall Corridor B&A Validation Summary Table 67

Figure 1 Model Area 1 Figure 2 Network Model Development Process 3 Figure 3 Example Bus Route (service 11) 4

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

Figure 4 Study Zones 5 Figure 5 Zone and Connectors in Coventry City Centre 6 Figure 6 Types of Walk Links in the PT model 7 Figure 7 Zone Base Fare Option Settings 8 Figure 8 Transport System Supplements 9 Figure 9 Distance-Based Supplements for Train Transport System 9 Figure 10 Fare Option Settings 10 Figure 11 Fares from Coventry Station (BNS to Coventry Slow Line) 11 Figure 12 Fares from Coventry Station (Coventry to Nuneaton Line) 12 Figure 13 Fares from Coventry Station (Coventry to Rugby Line) 13 Figure 14 Survey Locations 15 Figure 15 2009 Survey Locations 16 Figure 16 Hourly Distribution of Passengers –Total for all survey locations 17 Figure 17 Hourly Distributions of Passengers – Coventry City Centre 17 Figure 18 2008 Merged Bus AM Matrix Origin Trip Distribution 23 Figure 19 2008 Merged Bus AM Matrix Destination Trip Distribution 24 Figure 20 AM Assignment Procedure 28 Figure 21 Nfa Search Settings 29 Figure 22 Nfa Preselection Settings 29 Figure 23 Nfa Impedance Settings 30 Figure 24 Nfa Origin Waiting Time Settings 30 Figure 25 Choice Procedure Settings 31 Figure 26 Fa Search Procedure Settings 32 Figure 27 Fa Search Procedure: Tys-Impedance Settings 32 Figure 28 Fa Impedance Settings 33 Figure 29 Locations of Inner Cordon Counts 34 Figure 30 Locations of Outer Cordon Radial Counts 35 Figure 31 Locations of Outer Cordon Orbital Counts 36 Figure 32 Locations of Bus Boarding and Alighting Counts 37 Figure 33 Locations of Rail Boarding and Alighting Counts 38 Figure 34 Locations of Rail Link Flow Counts 38 Figure 35 Screenline 1 39 Figure 36 Screenline 2 39 Figure 37 Sector Definition 51 Figure 38 AM Trip Length Distribution 56 Figure 39 IP Trip Length Distribution 57 Figure 40 PM Trip Length Distribution 57 Figure 41 Location of the Corridor 58 B&A counts 58 Figure 42 Corridor 58: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 59 Figure 43 Corridor 58: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 59 Figure 44 Corridor 58: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 60 Figure 45 Corridor 58: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 60 Figure 46 Corridor 58: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 60 Figure 47 Corridor 58: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 61 Figure 48 Location of Corridor 3 B&A counts 61 Figure 49 Corridor 3: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 62 Figure 50 Corridor 3: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 63 Figure 51 Corridor 3: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 63 Figure 52 Corridor 3: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 63 Figure 53 Corridor 3: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 64 Figure 54 Corridor 3: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 64 Figure 55 Zone 21314 and 21612 connectors 64 Figure 56 Zone 21314 and 21612 demographic layout 65 Figure 57 Location of Corridor 3a B&A Counts 65 Figure 58 Location of Willenhall Corridor B&A Counts 66 Figure 59 Willenhall Corridor : AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 67 Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

Figure 60 Willenhall Corridor : AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 67 Figure 61 Willenhall Corridor : IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 68 Figure 62 Willenhall Corridor : IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 68 Figure 63 Willenhall Corridor : PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound) 68 Figure 64 Willenhall Corridor : PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound) 69 Figure 65 Journey Time Validation Corridors 71

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

In 2008 Coventry City Council and CENTRO commissioned Jacobs Consultancy to develop new public transport assignment models using the VISUM software. The models are envisaged as part of a suite of transport models to be developed to cover the majority of the journey to work area of Coventry, particularly in the North South Corridor between Leamington Spa and Nuneaton.

The development of the public transport models involved network development including up-to-date bus and rail service routes and timetables, collection of new origin – destination data and counts, matrix development and model calibration and validation.

The public transport surveys were undertaken in the Spring / early Summer of 2008, the data was processed in Summer / Autumn 2008 and the model was calibrated in Spring 2009. Additional surveys were undertaken in Spring / early Summer 2009 and the model recalibrated in Summer 2009.

1.2 Model Area

The model area to be covered is shown in Figure 1. The model covers the whole of Coventry City in detail and extends to the north to cover Bedworth and Nuneaton, and to the south to cover Kenilworth, Warwick and Leamington. The model extends to the edge of the main West Midlands conurbation including the rural parts of Solihull. The detailed model does not extend far to the east and Rugby is modelled strategically.

Figure 1 Model Area

Nuneaton

1.3

Coventry Rugby

Warwick Leamington Spa

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 1 of 135

Report Structure

Following this introduction, Section 2 presents the development of the network model. Section 3 presents the new data collection and Section 4 presents the development of the matrices. Section 5 presents the calibration and validation of the models.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 2 of 135

2 NETWORK DEVELOPMENT

2.1 Source data

Figure 2 shows the source data for the development of the modelled public transport network definitions in VISUM. Figure 2 Network Model Development Process

The ‘Cluster number’ for stop-pairs and nodes were imported from CENTRO’s VIPS model which is consistent with latest CENTRO’s VISUM Model. The road network links and nodes, that enable the bus routes to be shown diagrammatically against a map base, were sourced from CENTRO’s VISUM model.

2.2 Bus and Rail Routes and Timetables

The bus service route and timetable information was sourced from ATCO Cif files from Centro and Warwickshire County Council. The ATCO Cif files contain detailed service data – provided for internet timetable planning. Jacobs Consultancy’s innovative ATCO Cif file transfer programme enabled all the line routes and their individual timetables to be imported into VISUM via Microsoft Access databases. The advantage of this process relates to the complete time-profile information within the resultant model which enables detailed modelling of time segments throughout the day.

Each bus route was imported into VISUM and ‘tied’ to the existing VISUM Clusters and network. The railway network and timetable information was secured from the rail industry’s MOIRA model. All timetables were checked and adjusted to match the published timetables for the spring (May / June) 2008.

Walk links were added in key City and Town Centres and where interchange occurs between routes.

The model contains;

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 3 of 135

• Three time periods, 0700 – 0900, average of 2 hours interpeak between 1000 and 1400 and 1600 – 1800. • 37,554 links and 15,408 Nodes. • 131 bus routes. • 21 train routes / services.

A list of bus and train services within the model is included as Appendix A.

Figure 3 shows an example bus route within the network model.

Figure 3 Example Bus Route (service 11)

2.3 Zone Definition

The PT model zones (415) delineated for the study area include:

• Coventry – The zone structure is based on the Centro Triple Zones based on the PRISM model and was redefined at the some locations to incorporate the spatial characteristics of the area such as Walsgrave Hospital, Park and Ride Zones, Coventry Railway Station1. A total of 246 zones were delineated from the Coventry City Council area. • Two park and ride (North and South) zones in Coventry.

1 Triple Zones are not fully consistent with detailed Output Areas but are consistent with Ward Boundaries. They reflect movement barriers and land use patterns and were chosen to ensure consistency between different models in the region. Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 4 of 135

• • Warwick and Leamington – The zone structure is based on the aggregation of Output Areas in each ward so that each ward represents a number of zones based on the land use parameters such as population and employment. A total of 55 zones are identified for Warwick and Leamington area. • Nuneaton and Bedworth – The zone structure is based on the aggregation of Output Areas in each ward so that each ward represents a number of zones based on the land use parameters such as population and employment. A total of 48 zones are identified for Nuneaton and Bedworth. • North Warwickshire - A total of 14 zones are delineated to cover the outer part of the study area towards north and east of Nuneaton in particular Fillongley, Atherstone, Corley etc. The zone system is based on the aggregation of Output Areas. • Solihull – A total of 15 zones are delineated from the Centro triple zone based on aggregation of Triple Zones in the outskirts of the study area. • Rugby – 5 zones delineated to capture inter zonal movement between Coventry and Rugby and Rugby with other zones. • 11 zones represent the railway stations within study area. • 18 zones represent external zones including railway stations and coach stations outside the study area and one park and ride zone (Hampton in Arden Car Park).

A list of the model zones with names and zone numbers are presented in Appendix B Figure 4 Study Zones

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 5 of 135

2.4 Zone Connectors

Connectors link zone centroids and nodes to provide connections between the demand matrices and the public transport ‘lines’. The methodology employed for the definition of zone connectors was in line with Centro’s methodology used for the West Midlands (conurbation) model. In summary;

• Zone centroids were positioned within each zone by plotting all postcodes in the zones and using an average weighted methodology in Mapinfo to position the centroid in relation to the spatial distribution of addresses. • ‘valid’ stops for zone connectors were initially based on assumed maximum walk distances for Bus and Rail (400m and 1km respectively) • Connector lengths are calculated automatically. • Connectors to rail stations are connected via an additional node and link termed ‘Coffee Shop Nodes’ to allow the calibration against flows (along the link between station and ‘coffee shop’), rather than boarding and alighting figures at the station itself. • In calibration additional links were added where some zones are poorly served and it was considered likely that passengers would walk to services running in a neighbouring zone. • Average walking speed is set at 4.8km/h.

Figure 5 shows an example of zones and connectors in Coventry City Centre. The pink lines represent the zone boundaries, blue lines represent zone connectors. The dotted lines represent walking links which can be only used by pedestrians. Passengers are allowed to also walk along highway links in Coventry City Centre and within 1km of rail stations. Figure 5 Zone and Connectors in Coventry City Centre

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 6 of 135

2.5 Walk Links

The walk links in the model are coded extensively within the city centre boundaries and rail stations. Figure 6 shows the different types of walk links coded in the model. These walk links consist of:

• Pedestrian walkways on the road. • Underpasses. • Staircases. • Ramps. • Narrow passageways. • Uncontrolled pedestrian crossings.

Figure 6 Types of Walk Links in the PT model

Walk time speeds are attached to respective walk link types. This is to reflect the pedestrian actual walk time and also perception time of certain walk links such as underpasses, stairs and ramps. Table 1 below summarises the speed of the walk links.

Table 1 Speed of Walk Links Walk Link Types Speed (km/h) Pedestrian walkways on the road 4.8 Uncontrolled pedestrian crossings 3.58 Narrow passage way 4.41 Underpass 2.75 Stairs up 2.12 Stairs down 2.41 Ramp up 4.86 Ramp down 4.93

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 7 of 135

The pedestrian walkway speed of 4.8 km/h was assumed (in line with Centro’s models) and the remaining link types and speeds came from PEDROUTE. The walk time is factored by a weight of 2 in the generalised cost calculation during the assignment in VISUM (as described in Section 5.2).

2.6 Public Transport Model Fares

The PT model is run twice for passengers paying fares and ‘no-fares’ where no-fares represents all passengers using pre-paid passes and concessionary travel passes.

The fares inputs represent Spring 2008 prices for bus and rail. The bus fares are coded as a flat fare of £1.30 that reflects discounts and return fares. The rail fares are coded as a flat fare plus increments to represent the point to point fares charged.

Several tests were undertaken to establish the appropriate fare settings to be used to represent the fares for the public transport services. From the tests it was concluded that the best option is to represent the £1.30 bus flat fare by creating a single-fare bus ticket under VISUM’s Public Transport (PuT) Ticket Type option as shown in Figures 7 and 8.

A single fare ticket type is created for the Fares demand segment. A zone based fare option has been selected and a fare level of 0 pence is defined by the number of traverse fare zones as there are no fare zones in the PT model. The flat fare charge is added to the transport system (Tsys) supplements tab where a fix of 130 pence constant supplement is charged only for Bus Tsys users. The calculation of the bus fares has been set to sum bus fares and apply to the path leg as shown in Figure 9. This approach ensures that passengers paying cash fares incur additional fare per boarding.

Figure 7 Zone Base Fare Option Settings

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 8 of 135

Figure 8 Transport System Supplements

Figure 9 Distance-Based Supplements for Train Transport System

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 9 of 135

Figure 10 Fare Option Settings

The rail fares are represented as a boarding penalty of £1.40 and traversed fare points. A fix of 140 pence constant supplement is charged on the Train Tsys to reflect the boarding penalty. The fare points are calculated based on distance-based fare levels as shown in Figure 9. VISUM takes into consideration the supplement due to the distance or fare points covered by means of the Train transport system in the fare model. The fares coded for key routes, and the comparison with actual fares, are shown below.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 10 of 135

Birmingham – Coventry

Flat fare: £1.40 Table 2 Boarding penalty and fare points from Birmingham to Coventry (Slow Train) Fares

Origin Fare Points BNS BIA Hampton-in-Arden Berkswell Hill Tile Canley Coventry BNS 1.80 0.00 3.20 3.30 3.40 3.50 3.60 3.70 BIA 0.10 3.20 0.00 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 1.90 Hampton-in-Arden 0.10 3.30 1.50 0.00 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80 Berkswell 0.10 3.40 1.60 1.50 0.00 1.50 1.60 1.70 Tile Hill 0.10 3.50 1.70 1.60 1.50 0.00 1.50 1.60 Canley 0.10 3.60 1.80 1.70 1.60 1.50 0.00 1.50 Coventry 3.70 1.90 1.80 1.70 1.60 1.50 0.00

Figure 11 Fares from Coventry Station (BNS to Coventry Slow Line)

Fares from Coventry 4.00

3.50 VISUM Fares 3.00

2.50

2.00 Cost (£) Cost 1.50

1.00

0.50

0.00 BNS BIA Hampton- Berkswell Tile Hill Canley Coventry in-Arden Station

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 11 of 135

Coventry to Nuneaton Line

Flat fare: £1.40 Table 3 Boarding penalty and fare points from Coventry to Nuneaton line Fares

Origin Fare Points Coventry Bedworth Nuneaton Coventry 1.30 0.00 2.70 3.90 Bedworth 1.20 2.70 0.00 2.60 Nuneaton 3.90 2.60 0.00

Figure 12 Fares from Coventry Station (Coventry to Nuneaton Line)

Fares from Coventry 4.50 4.00

3.50 VISUM 3.00 Fares 2.50 2.00 Cost (£) 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00 Coventry Bedw orth Nuneaton Station

(The modelled VISUM and actual fares match exactly in this graph)

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 12 of 135

Coventry – Rugby Line

Flat fare: £1.40 Table 4 Boarding penalty and fare points from Coventry to Rugby line

Fares

Origin Fare Points BNS BIA Coventry Rugby BNS 1.60 0.00 3.00 3.80 7.20 Birmingham International 0.80 3.00 0.00 2.20 5.60 Coventry 3.40 3.80 2.20 0.00 4.80 Rugby 7.20 5.60 4.80 0.00 Figure 13 Fares from Coventry Station (Coventry to Rugby Line)

Fares from Coventry 6.00 VISUM Fares 5.00

4.00

3.00 Cost (£)

2.00

1.00

0.00 BNS Birmingham International Coventry Rugby Station

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 13 of 135

3 DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

3.1 Bus Passenger Interview Surveys

The passenger matrices were developed through the collection of origin – destination data for public transport passengers, requiring interviews with people during their journeys. To maximise the efficiency of the data collection process, surveys were targeted at key trip destinations where there is a large throughput of passengers. A sample of bus passenger interviews and full boarding and alighting counts were undertaken at;

• Coventry City Centre – all stops within the ring road plus Coventry Station bus stops, Warwick Rd, Foleshill Rd and Swanswell St just outside the ring road; • Nuneaton bus station and Town Centre; • Bedworth Town Centre; • Foleshill Road between Lockhurst Lane and Cross Road; • Tesco Arena bus station; • Walsgrave Hospital main entrance and approach road; • Bell Green local centre; • Walsgrave Road between Clements Street and Harefield Road; • Cannon Park Shopping Centre; • Jardine Crescent local centre; • Earlsdon, Herald Avenue; • Warwick University including Gibbet Hill Rd and Kirby Corner Road; • Kenilworth Town Centre; • Coventry Airport; • Warwick Town Centre, and; • Leamington Spa, Upper and Lower Parades.

3.2 Counts

The study made use of available count data, specifically the Coventry Bus Cordon Count surveys undertaken bi-annually and counts undertaken as part of Primelines (quality bus partnership) monitoring. Additional bus occupancy counts were undertaken at an outer cordon around Coventry covering all radial routes. These were undertaken at the roadside – involving the estimation of on-board passengers.

The interview and count locations are shown in Figure 14.

3.3 Fieldwork

The surveys were undertaken on typical weekdays Mondays to Thursdays; between 21st and 24th April 2008 at Warwick University; between 13th May and 30th June 2008 for the other survey locations, and; top-up interviews continued to 26th July 2008. The surveys covered 74 ‘stop clusters’ involving 130 bus stops. Interviews of boarding passengers were conducted between 0700 and 0900, 1000 and 1500 and between 1600 and 1800. The passenger counts of boarding and alighting passengers were undertaken between 0700 and 1800 hours.

The surveys collected information on origin and destination, journey purpose, access mode to the survey stop, bus services, time of the journey, car availability, reverse journey departure time, and party size.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 14 of 135

Figure 14 Survey Locations

In total 51,418 passengers were counted boarding services during all the surveys and there were 11,742 completed interviews undertaken providing a total survey sample size of 23%. Table 6 shows the sample rates by time period. Whilst the sample rate is significantly lower in the AM peak the important inbound trips are created by transposition and factoring of the PM peak data where there is a high sample rate.

Table 5 Sample Rates by time period

AM Peak Interpeak PM Peak (0700-0900) (1000-1500) (1600-1800) Boarding Count 4,484 30,847 11,128 Interviews 866 7,304 2,950 Sample Rate 19% 24% 27%

The number of passenger journeys within the data is significantly higher when the data is expanded by the repeat interview data. Where group interviews are included i.e. two or more people making the same journey, the sample rate increases by approximately 8%.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 15 of 135

3.4 Additional 2009 Surveys

Additional surveys were undertaken in 2009 to improve the validation of the 2008 Public Transport Models and to prepare the model for the appraisal of key projects in the City including Coventry Sprint and Connecting Coventry. The additional data surveys undertaken are shown in Table 7 and locations shown in Figure 15.

Figure 15 2009 Survey Locations

Table 6 2009 Surveys

Dates Survey Type Locations 23/6/09, 25/6/09, Bus Cordon Counts Lockhurst Lane / Burnaby Road, Walsgrave Road (Ball 29/6/09 Hill), Ansty Road. 24/6/09 On- Board B/A Count 55 / 56 / 57 services between Coventry and Keresley. 30/6/09 Park and Ride B/A North and South park and ride sites. Counts

The cordon counts involved boarding the vehicles to secure robust passengers counts, the park and ride counts were undertaken over the whole day to replace half day counts.

3.5 Coventry Station Survey

Interviews of passengers at Coventry Station were undertaken on 1st and 2nd July 2009. The survey form for the Coventry Station interviews was designed based on the 2008 bus OD survey form adjusted to apply to rail passengers and to include greater detail in terms of access modes (and a specific question relating to the ‘Connecting Coventry’ scheme). The fieldwork and key results of the above mentioned surveys are presented in the 2009 survey report.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 16 of 135

3.6 Bus Data Processing

The count and response data was checked, and punched into excel spreadsheets. Origin and destination postcodes were allocated based on the respondents’ address details. Initial range checks were undertaken to ensure the input data was valid. Data cleaning involved data checking to identify and fill gaps and correct errors to improve the quality of the final matrices. This included checks for short bus trips and long walk trips. Only 3% of records were deleted as a result of not being able to determine postcodes / zones.

The postcode OSGR’s were added to each record for the origin postcodes, destination postcodes and survey location (cluster number). The Mapinfo GIS system was used to allocate the VISUM model zone numbers for the origin and destination.

Figure 16 shows the pattern of passenger boardings and alightings across the day for the survey carried out at all locations, whereas Figure 17 shows the pattern of passengers boarding and alighting at the Coventry City Centre bus stops. Figure 16 Hourly Distribution of Passengers –Total for all survey locations

Hourly distribution of passengers -Total

12000

10000 8000 Boarding 6000 Alighting Total 4000 Passengers 2000

0 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time Period

Figure 17 Hourly Distributions of Passengers – Coventry City Centre

Hourly distribution of passengers -City Centre

7000 6000 5000

4000 Boarding 3000 Alighting Total Passengers 2000 1000 0 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Time Period

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 17 of 135

The two graphs show that there is a relatively small morning peak between 0800 and 0900 in the city centre for the alighting passengers and the same holds for the boarding passengers in the evening peak between 1700 and 1800. However the busiest hours in the bus matrix are in the interpeak period.

Table 8 shows the reported access mode to the bus stops. Three quarters of passengers reported that they walked to the stop and the majority of the remainder used another public transport service to reach the stop, mainly buses. Less than 2% used rail to reach the stop. Table 7 Access Mode to Bus Stops

Number Percent Walk 8,677 75.2% Bus 2,309 21.3% Train 206 1.7% Car (Driver) 27 0.2% Car (Passenger) 126 1.1% Taxi 15 0.1% Other 17 0.1% Total 11,377 100%

Table 9 shows the access modes for Coventry Station Users. Car access was split between the station car parks and elsewhere with around 75% of car drivers parking in the formal station car parks. Over a quarter of passengers walked to the station - half of these walked from the City Centre and half from elsewhere. Average walk time quoted was 12 minutes. Bus access accounts for 17% of passengers with 65% using the stops in Station Square and 35% the stops at Warwick Road.

Table 8 Coventry Station Access Modes

Number Percent Walk 339 27% Bus 218 17% Train 167 13% Car (Driver) 142 12% Car (Passenger) 203 16% Taxi 151 12% Cycle 26 2% Total 1246

Table 10 shows that 19% of bus respondents reported that they had a car available for the journey they were making and 81% did not have a car available. Within Coventry City Centre 25% of bus users had a car available for the journey. Almost half of Coventry Station users had a car available for the journey.

Table 9 Car Availability of Bus Survey Respondents

Car Availability Responses % Yes 2,205 19% No 9,172 81% Total 11,377 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 18 of 135

Table 11 shows the party size composition of respondents. 80% of journeys were being made by people travelling alone, 7% of respondents were travelling with children and 14% were travelling with at least 1 other adult.

Table 10 Party Composition Analysis

Adults 1 2 3 4 5+ Total Children 0 9,080 1,403 83 23 9 10,598 1 433 139 14 3 599 2 111 36 8 155 3 24 5 2 1 32 4 1 1 1 3 Total 9,649 1,584 108 27 9 11,377

3.7 Bus Data Expansion

The data expansion process involved:

• Forward Expansion. • Double counting adjustment. • Transposition of the data. • Reverse expansion. • Infilling for any unobserved time periods. • Matrix building.

Data processing was undertaken using Excel and SPSS statistics software.

3.7.1 Forward expansion

‘Forward expansion’ is the process of expanding survey responses to their associated boarding counts. In contrast, ‘reverse expansion’ provides estimates of O-D flows for the reverse, un-surveyed, direction of travel where boarding and alighting counts were obtained but no interviews undertaken.

In forward expansion the separate counts for adults and children were summed to provide total boardings and alightings for each bus and unique expansion factors were computed for all observed combinations of 33 bus service groupings (‘service groups’), two directions of travel (surveyed and un-surveyed) and three times periods (A.M. Peak=0700-08:59, Inter-peak=10:00-15:59 and P.M. Peak = 1600-17:59).

A ‘party size factor’ was computed for each response record as the sum of the adults and children in the party.

3.7.2 Double Counting Adjustment

Some O-D flows were double-sampled because a traveller interchanged between two bus services. Such trips were double-counted as they were counted as an alighting trip at the end of the first leg and as a boarding trip at the start of the second leg. To compensate for this a ‘Bus Access Mode’ factor of 0.5 was assigned.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 19 of 135

Interviews were conducted in Coventry City Centre and at various other locations within suburban Coventry and nearby towns. Consequently, some O-D flows were surveyed at both their origin and destination ends. A ‘Within-Survey Area’ factor was assigned a value of 0.5 for response records where the traveller’s boarding and alighting stop clusters were both sampled.

Respondents boarding stop cluster numbers were recorded by interviewers. However, only their destination postcode and zone were obtained. From the destination data it was not certain which bus stop cluster they alighted at and consequently, whether the alighting bus stop cluster was surveyed.

To resolve this, the zonal catchment of each surveyed bus stop cluster was determined, assuming that the catchment comprised the most important origin zones (i.e. those contributing 90% of bus stop cluster passengers). The remaining minor contributor zones were assumed not to be in the catchment, with passengers from such zones either have trip origins close to the periphery of the zone or atypical travel patterns.

The factor was applied when both the origin and destination zones of a response record lay within the catchments of surveyed bus stop clusters.

3.7.3 Transposition and Reverse Expansion

Reverse expansion provides estimates of the O-D matrix of trips in the un-surveyed direction. Transposing and factoring of response data to estimate the reverse (alighting) movements at surveyed bus stop clusters was undertaken as follows:

Forward Period Reversed Period AM Peak >> PM Peak Interpeak >> Interpeak PM Peak >> AM Peak

The reverse expansion followed the same general process as the forward expansion and at the same level of data aggregation; i.e. time period (3) and service group (33). The origin and destination of each response record were transposed for the un- surveyed direction, as in the above time period correspondence. The party size factors and double counting factors were retained unchanged. A ‘Reverse Count factor’ was computed to expand the transposed responses to their associated alighting count.

3.7.4 Matrix Building

Passengers on the two Park & Ride services (North and South) were assumed to have the non-city centre trip end zone of the Park & Ride sites (zones 500 and 501).

The un-surveyed (transposed) direction response records were appended to the surveyed direction response records and the forward and reverse count factors were combined into a single variable. The final matrices for each of the three time periods were produced by summing the combined expansion factor for each O-D zone pair within each of the three time periods. The resultant matrices contain total zone-to-zone trips within each time period (note that they are not hourly totals), summarised in Table 12.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 20 of 135

Table 11 Summary of 2008 Bus OD Survey Matrices

AM Peak Off Peak PM Peak (0700 – 0859) (0900 – 1559) (1600 – 1759) Observed Cells 2,533 6,323 2,533 Total Trips 11,703 69,527 17,125

3.7.5 Coventry Rail Station Matrices

The Coventry Rail Station matrices were built from the O-D survey of the rail users that was conducted in 2009. The objective of the survey was to provide an accurate O-D trip distribution of the rail users at Coventry Rail station and also to gain a better understanding of the station access modes of the rail users for coding within the model.

The 2008 Spring rail boarding and alighting counts were used to calculate the expansion factors. The expansion factors were categorised on the basis of boarding and alighting counts, time period and direction.

The time period of the O-D survey was from 0700 and 1900 hours. In total there were 12,022 passengers were counted boarding and alighting within the survey period and 1,701 completed interviews, with a total sample rate of 14%. Table 15 and 16 summarise the boarding and alighting sample rates by direction and time periods.

Table 12 Coventry Station Users Boarding Sample Rates by Time Period

Time Period / Direction (to) Bham London Nuneaton Leamington AM Peak (0700-0900) 12% 19% 12% 26% Inter Peak (1000-1600) 17% 28% 37% 21% PM Peak (1600-1800) 10% 14% 8% 22%

Table 13 Coventry Station users Alighting Sample Rates by Time Period

Time Period / Direction (from) Bham London Nuneaton Leamington AM Peak (0700-0900) 8% 15% 7% 19% Inter Peak (1000-1600) 8% 14% 6% 16% PM Peak (1600-1800) 10% 16% 11% 20%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 21 of 135

4 MATRIX DEVELOPMENT

4.1 Bus matrices

The bus ‘prior’ matrices used for the matrix development were based primarily on the 2008 survey matrices as described above, but also involved the incorporation of other survey data from recent bus surveys in Solihull and the NEC, rail matrices, Coventry Rail Station OD survey and an infill matrix for unobserved cells of the matrices from the existing (1999) Coventry (VIPS) Public Transport Model.

4.1.1 Incorporation of Solihull and NEC Surveys

The 2005 NEC and 2004 Solihull bus matrices were used to infill the OD movements between the Meriden Gap and Solihull. The matrix was converted to the VISUM zones using Mapinfo. Conversion factors from 2005 to 2008 for the respective time periods were calculated from the annual Coventry cordon counts. The OD trips to and from Coventry and Warwickshire were allocated as external zones and excluded from the merging of the bus matrices.

4.1.2 Incorporation of Coventry PT Model (VIPS) Infill Matrices

The previous (VIPS) Coventry model matrices are stop to stop matrices built for Centro’s 1999 Coventry VIPS model. These have the advantage of incorporating data from a long time period of low sample rate Continuous On-Bus Survey (COBS) data collected for concessionary travel monitoring. Whilst this data is still collected it is no longer available for model development due to confidentiality agreements with the bus operators.

The older data was used to infill the OD movements within Coventry that were not captured from the 2008 bus survey such as short distance non-city centre based trips and through trips on cross-city bus services. Conversion factors for each time period were calculated from the 1999 and 2007 annual bus cordon counts in Coventry. The matrix was converted to the VISUM model zones using Mapinfo through plotting the stop cluster coordinates.

The PM peak VIPS matrix was created by transposition of the AM peak matrix and factored by the ratio between the AM and PM peaks (1.46) based on the 2008 surveys.

Trips to/from external zones were removed as the zones do not relate to the new model zone system.

The infill VIPS OD matrix was processed to represent ‘unobserved’ data by progressive reduction as follows;

• Deleting OD’s to / from zones surveyed in 2008, both in the City Centre and Suburban survey zones; • Assigned using ‘with fares’ assumption to identify interchanges in the City Centre (appearing as whole numbers in the ‘with fares’ scenario); • Extraction of paths and identification of interchange trips in the City Centre; • Removal of zone to zone movements involving interchanging in the City Centre.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 22 of 135

4.1.3 Merged Bus Matrix

Table 13 shows the elements of the bus matrices by data source.

Table 14 Combination of Bus Matrices

AM Peak Off Peak PM Peak (0700 – 0859) (1000 - 1159) (1600 – 1759) 2008 Survey Flows 11,703 19,865 17,125 NEC / Solihull Flows 463 342 300 Infill VIPS Flows 4,974 2,570 8,401 Total Bus Trips 17,139 22,777 25,836

The merged bus matrices for the AM peak are shown in Figures 18 and 19, revealing a good coverage of the survey area and gaps in trips in the rural zones as expected.

Figure 18 2008 Merged Bus AM Matrix Origin Trip Distribution

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 23 of 135

Figure 19 2008 Merged Bus AM Matrix Destination Trip Distribution

4.2 Base Rail Matrices

Three main data sources were utilised to build the rail matrix:

• 2007 passenger matrices for local stations from Centro based on OD interviews and counts provided at Centro VISUM zone level. • 2008 boarding and alighting by train counts by direction from Centro enabling a station to station matrix to be estimated for longer distance services (including Coventry Station). • 2008 origin destination surveys and counts at Warwickshire stations collected for the Station Travel Plans study.

Each rail station was allocated to a VISUM zone and stations outside the study area grouped to external zones based on the recognised train routes. The zones were updated to the respective rail station surveys.

Individual rail stations matrices were built to the respective AM, Interpeak and PM peak periods. The 2008 counts were used to infer station to station flows only where there was no O-D survey available. The data for individual rail stations were combined together to create the rail matrix.

A significant number of bus survey destinations were reported as Coventry Station. These were distributed to other stations based on the pattern in the rail matrix and the rail matrix adjusted accordingly to avoid double counting. Coventry Station destinations from outside the model area were distributed based on the Coventry origin – destination pattern in the fully observed station data (local stations).

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 24 of 135

The resultant matrices contain total zone-to-zone trips within each time period summarised in Table 14.

Table 15 Summary of Rail Matrices

AM Peak Off Peak PM Peak (0700 – 0859) (1000 – 1159) (1600 – 1759) Observed Cells 83 80 76 Total Trips 11,583 3,286 7,769

4.3 Development of ‘Prior’ Matrices

The prior matrices were created by merging the bus, rail and Coventry Station matrices. The bus and rail matrices were firstly combined together to form the bus and rail matrix. The Coventry Station matrices were later merged into the prior matrices to replace the trips – providing improved distribution including trips originating from the station zone (including those that arrive by car and taxi), city centre and beyond.

The Coventry station matrices were merged using the Variance Weighted method through the following formula:

T1I 2 +T2 I1 Merged cell trip value,Tm = I1 + I 2

Iij = Var(Tij ) /Tij

Var(Tij ) = ∑eij (eij −1) n where

T1 and T2 = trip value from cell ij of matrix 1 and 2. I1 and I2 = the index of dispersion of cell ij from matrix 1 and 2. Var (Tij) = Variance from cell ij e = expansion factor for each recorded journey n = count of number recorded journey from origin i and dest j

The merging process was only carried to cells that were observed in both matrices.

The prior matrix statistics are shown in Table 17, there is a slight reduction as a result of the combination of the Coventry station survey as a result of higher weight given to more recent observed data.

Table 16 Summary of Prior Matrices

AM Peak Off Peak PM Peak (0700 – 0859) (1000 – (1600 – 1759) 1159) Bus Matrix 17,139 22,777 27,834 Rail Matrix 11,583 3,286 7,769 Combined Bus and Rail Matrix 28,722 26,063 35,603 Coventry Station Matrix 2,488 1,086 2,184 Prior Matrix 27,251 25,130 31,254

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 25 of 135

The matrices were subsequently split to fare and no fare matrices. The ‘fare’ matrices refer to cash payer users while the ‘no fare’ matrices are travel card users. Split factors were applied to the prior matrices based on Centro advice (based on the 2001/02 Rolling Bus Programme Survey (RBPS)). The factors were 65.5% no-fares in the AM and PM peaks and 79.5% no-fares in the interpeak.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 26 of 135

5 CALIBRATION AND VALIDATION

5.1 Introduction

The Coventry PT model was calibrated and validated based Department of Transport (DfT) Webtag guidance. This guidance can be found in TAG 3.11.2 “Road Traffic and Public Transport Assignment Modelling”.2

The guidance stated that the validation of a public transport model should involve three types of checks:

1. Validation of trip matrix. 2. Network and service validation. 3. Assignment validation: • Across modelled screenlines, modelled flows should in total be within 15% of the observed values. • On individual links in the network, modelled flows should be within 25% of the counts, except where observed flows are particularly low (less than 150).

5.2 Assignment Settings and Generalised Time Definition

This section describes the assignment procedures and parameters used for the PT assignment in VISUM, including the algorithms and generalised cost weightings and how fares modelling are included in the model.

The timetable assignment (also known as schedule-based assignment) was chosen for the PT model. Timetable assignment was preferred to headway assignment because it is able to reflect the actual public transport services arrival/departure times at the time when users make their choices. Another advantage of this assignment method is that it allows the origin waiting time to be calculated as half the headway. The origin waiting time calculations are explained in detail in section 5.2.4.

Figure 20 shows the procedure settings for the 2008 base year AM assignment. The settings consists the following steps:

1. Initialising the previous assignment. 2. Assignment of demand segment Fares (Fa). 3. Assignment of demand segment No Fares (Nfa).

2 DfT TAG 3.11.2 :http://www.dft.gov.uk/webtag/webdocuments/3_Expert/11_Specifications/3.11.2.htm#10 Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 27 of 135

Figure 20 AM Assignment Procedure

5.2.1 No Fares (Nfa) Assignment Procedure

The No Fares (Nfa) demand is assigned with the Nfa assignment parameters. The following are the steps undertaken during the assignment:

• Step 1: Search for PT connection. • Step 2: Selection of found connections. • Step 3: Impedance calculations. • Step 4: Distribute demand on found connections.

(a) Search Settings

The “Branch and Bound Search” option was used for the assignment. Figure 21 shows the search parameter settings. In this option, a tree search of suitable partial connections is generated for each origin zone and later stored in the model. The calculation was based on the search impedance formulae shown in Figure 20. An impedance weight of 10 minutes is applied to the number of transfer (NT).

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 28 of 135

Figure 21 Nfa Search Settings

(b) Preselection Settings

The Preselection procedure evaluates and compares all connections in order to identify and delete the less attractive ones. Only convenient connections are presented to the passenger in connection choice. Figure 22 shows the settings for the preselection procedure.

Figure 22 Nfa Preselection Settings

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 29 of 135

(c) Impedance Settings

The settings for the Impedance procedure are shown in Figure 23. The in-vehicle time is multiplied by in-vehicle time factor. The factor represents the attractiveness of mode of transport. The in vehicle factor of bus services was 1.0 and train services was 0.9. The lower factor indicates the higher attractiveness of the service over and above journey time, frequency and access factors within the model.

Figure 23 Nfa Impedance Settings

The advantage of the timetable based assignment is that it allows the mean origin wait time to be calculated as half of the headway. This means that passengers will arrive randomly at the stop for services. However, this is only suitable for services with short headways as passengers for services with long headways will try to time their arrival at the stop to minimise their waiting time. A maximum waiting time of 10 minutes is therefore applied in the assignment parameters to replicate the behaviour of these passengers as shown in Figure 24.

Figure 24 Nfa Origin Waiting Time Settings

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 30 of 135

The impedance weights used for the No Fares demand segments and each time periods were:

• In-vehicle time: 1.0. • In-vehicle time factor: Bus = 1, Train = 0.9. • Access time: 2.0. • Egress time: 2.0. • Walking time: 2.0. • Origin Waiting time: 2.0. • Transfer waiting time: 2.0. • Number of transfers: 10 minutes.

These are in line with DfT guidance and Centro’s conurbation VISUM model.

(d) Choice Settings

The Kirchhoff mode choice model was utilised for the assignment. The settings for this procedure are shown in Figure 25.

Figure 25 Choice Procedure Settings

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 31 of 135

5.2.2 Fares (Fa) Assignment Procedure

The Fares (Fa) demand is assigned with procedure as the Nfa demand but additional parameters are added to the Search and Impedance settings to represent the fares.

(a) Search Settings

The impedance by transport system is added to the search Fa Search settings to reflect the fares as shown in Figure 25. A flat fare or constant supplement of £1.30 was applied to the bus and £1.40 to the train transport system. A value of time (VOT) of 0.31 min/p or £1.92/h used to the Imp / FarePoint for the train transport system for both the AM and PM peak (Figure 27). A value of time of 0.60 min/p or £1/h was used for the IP model.

Figure 26 Fa Search Procedure Settings

Figure 27 Fa Search Procedure: Tys-Impedance Settings

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 32 of 135

(b) Impedance Settings

In the Fares Impedance settings, similar impedance weights as the Nfa settings were applied. The only difference is that fares are added to perceived journey time (PJT) to calculate the Fares impedance as shown in Figure 28. VOT of 0.31 min/p is multiplied to the Fares for AM and PM peak and 0.6min/p for IP.

Figure 28 Fa Impedance Settings

5.3 Calibration Counts

The PT calibration was carried out using various counts at the following levels:

• Individual Count. • Inner Cordon. • Outer Cordon Radial. • Outer Cordon Orbital. • Bus Boarding and Alighting. • Rail Boarding and Alighting. • Rail Link Flow Counts. • Screenlines.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 33 of 135

5.3.1 Inner Cordon

The inner cordon counts consist mainly of 2007 bus passenger flow counts around Coventry City Centre. These counts are conducted by Centro every two years as part of the Local Transport Plan monitoring. The 2009 cordon count at Walsgrave Road was split into Clay Street and Walsgrave Road counts and incorporated as the inner cordon counts. The following are the inner cordon counts sites:

• Site 201: Foleshill Road • Site 202: Stoney Stanton Road • Site 203: Harnall East Road • Site 205: Binley Road • Site 206: Charterhouse Road • Site 207: London Road • Site 208: Mile Lane • Site 209: Quinton Road • Site 210: Warwick Road • Site 211: Butts Road • Site 212: Holyhead Road • Site 213: Coundon Road • Site 214: Radford Road • Site 215 : Walsgrave Road • Site 216 : Clay Street

Figure 29 Locations of Inner Cordon Counts

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 34 of 135

5.3.2 Outer Cordon Radial

The outer cordon radial bus passenger flow counts were surveyed in 2008. These counts were surveyed on the radial bus routes shown in Figure 30. The main objective of these counts was to estimate passenger flows outside the city centre cordon particularly on major corridors such as the University bus routes and Foleshill Road. The Outer Cordon Radial sites are:

• Site 1: Foleshill Road • Site 2: Bell Green Lane • Site 3: Blackberry Lane • Site 4: Ansty Road • Site 5: Binley Road • Site 6: London Road (Inbound direction only) • Site 7: Leamington Road • Site 8: Kenilworth Road (Inbound direction only) • Site 9: Kirby Corner Road • Site 10: Herald Avenue • Site 11: Tile Hill Lane • Site 12: Broad Lane Butts Road • Site 14: Holyhead Road • Site 15: Barkers Butt Lane • Site 16: Radford Road • Site 17: Cheveral Avenue • Site 18: Lockhurst Lane

Figure 30 Locations of Outer Cordon Radial Counts

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 35 of 135

5.3.3 Outer Cordon Orbital

The outer cordon orbital counts were surveyed at the same time as the outer cordon radial counts. These counts are mainly located in the north of Coventry as most of the orbital bus routes are in that part of the city. The objective of these counts was to estimate bus passenger movements on orbital services. The locations of these counts are:

• Site 1: Lythalls Lane • Site 2: Sewell Highway / Blackberry Lane • Site 3: Sewell Highway/ Ansty Road • Site 4: Belgrave Road • Site 5: Attoxhall Road • Site 7: Kingsbury Road • Site 8: Norman Place Road • Site 9: Burnaby Road

Figure 31 Locations of Outer Cordon Orbital Counts

5.3.4 Bus Boarding and Alighting (Area) Counts

The bus boarding and alighting counts for specific areas were amalgamated from the counts at the interview sites to control the matrix estimation process. The locations of the boarding and alighting area counts are shown in Figure 32 and consist of:

• 2008 counts: o Mill Street, Bedworth. o Nuneaton Bus Station. o Pool Meadow Bus Station. Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 36 of 135

o Tesco Arena. o Walsgrave Hospital. o Warwick University.

• 2009 counts: o Park and Ride North. o Park and Ride South.

Figure 32 Locations of Bus Boarding and Alighting Counts

5.3.5 Rail Boarding and Alighting

The rail boarding and alighting counts comprised the 2008 boarding and alighting counts by train from Centro and 2008 origin destination counts at Warwickshire stations collected for the Station Travel Plans study. The Centro surveys were conducted at rail stations between Birmingham International and Coventry and Warwick Parkway and Leamington Spa. The following are the train stations counts used for calibration (shown in Figure 33):

• Birmingham International • Hampton-In-Arden • Berkswell • Tile Hill • Canley • Coventry • Warwick Parkway • Warwick • Leamington Spa • Bedworth

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 37 of 135

Figure 33 Locations of Rail Boarding and Alighting Counts

5.3.6 Rail Link Flow Counts

Rail link flow counts were taken from the West Midland Regional (Rail) Planning Assessment (RPA) model. The RPA model was based on rail ticket sales from 2002/03 from MOIRA / Capri by ticket type, taking account of Centro area pre-paid ticket volumes from Centro data. Assignment to routes / links was based on MOIRA ‘Data Inspector’ outputs. Forecast flows for 2006/07 were based on the RPA exogenous growth model taking account of background economic growth, planning assumptions and car ownership change (based on PDFHv3). The aggregate link flows were extracted for the key links in the study area and projected to 2008 based on recent Centro rail count data. The locations of the rail link flow counts are shown in Figure 34. Figure 34 Locations of Rail Link Flow Counts

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 38 of 135

5.3.7 Screenline 1

The objective of the screenlines was to verify the overall passenger demand flow on each corridor. Screenline 1 (Figure 35) is located in the North of Coventry covering the B4113 Foleshill Road / B41118 Lockhurst Lane corridors. The count sites that formed the screenline are:

• Lockhurst Lane. • Foleshill Road. • Lythalls Lane. • Coventry to Bedworth (Rail link). Figure 35 Screenline 1

5.3.8 Screenline 2

The outer cordon radial counts in the East of Coventry and rail link between Tile Hill and Canley formed Screenline 2. The screenline consists of the following count sites:

• Broad Lane. • Tile Hill Lane. • Herald Avenue. • Tile Hill to Canley (Rail link). Figure 36 Screenline 2

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 39 of 135

5.4 Prior Matrix Calibration Results

5.4.1 Introduction

This sub-section of the report presents the prior matrix calibration results. The results show how robust the prior matrices of the respective time periods were before any matrix estimation process was employed. The detailed prior matrix calibration results of the respective time periods are presented in Appendices C-E.

5.4.2 Inner Cordon Summary

Table 18 shows the prior matrix calibration results for the 3 time periods at the inner cordon level. At the individual count level, 80% to 93% of the counts were within the ±25% of observed counts or GEH less than 5 criteria for all time periods. At the total demand level, all the time periods were within ± 15% of the observed values criteria.

From the summary tables it can be concluded that the 2008 survey was able to capture the actual demand movements to and from the city centre fairly accurately as shown in Table 18.

Table 17 Prior Matrix Inner Cordon Summary Tables

Individual Count Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 12 14 14 No of counts 15 15 15 % Passes 80% 93% 93%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 12 13 12 No of counts 15 15 15 % Passes 80% 87% 80%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 6,773 5,693 4,177 Observed Flow 6,745 5,905 4,689 Mod/Obs (%) 100% 96% 89%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,605 4,964 7,447 Observed Flow 3,658 5,237 7,892 Mod/Obs (%) 99% 95% 94%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 40 of 135

5.4.3 Outer Cordon Radial Summary

The prior matrix calibration results at the outer cordon level did not achieve the same level of results as the inner cordon. There were only 50% to 69% of the counts within the ±25% of observed counts or GEH less than 5 criteria (See Table 19). The outer cordon radial total demand were mainly 10% to 20% more than the observed demand.

Table 18 Prior Matrix Outer Cordon Radial Summary Tables Individual Count Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 11 9 12 No of counts 16 16 16 % Passes 69% 56% 75%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 977 No of counts 14 14 14 % Passes 64% 50% 50%

Demand Level

Inbound IP IP PM Modelled Flow 4,676 3,632 4,226 Observed Flow 3,883 4,054 3,595 Mod/Obs (%) 120% 90% 118%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,237 3,073 4,842 Observed Flow 2,815 2,763 4,421 Mod/Obs (%) 115% 111% 110%

5.4.4 Outer Cordon Orbital Summary

There is a similar range in the outer cordon orbital data. A substantial of the counts were not within the ±25% of observed flows or GEH less than 5 criteria. The number of passed counts ranged in between 50% to 88% for the respective time periods. Only the AM time period (outbound direction) satisfied the ±15% passed counts criteria as shown in Table 20.

From Table 20, it can be seen that the overall demand was on the higher side for nearly all time periods compared to the observed demand. Only the Inter-Peak time period results (both inbound and outbound) were within the acceptable criteria of ±15%. This could be the result of the change in employment and manufacturing industries around Coventry which have changed significantly since 1999. Factoring the 1999 VIPS to 2008 level could have caused an over-estimated flow for certain OD movements.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 41 of 135

Table 19 Prior Matrix Outer Cordon Orbital Summary Tables Individual Count Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 756 No of counts 868 % Passes 88% 83% 75%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 465 No of counts 888 % Passes 50% 75% 63%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 625 343 768 Observed Flow 514 346 743 Mod/Obs (%) 122% 99% 103%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 695 548 798 Observed Flow 603 541 568 Mod/Obs (%) 115% 101% 140%

5.4.5 Screenline 1

Most of the counts passed the satisfactory criteria at the individual count level. At the demand level, only the the AM peak demand was within the acceptable range for the inbound direction and IP and PM for the outbound direction as shown in table 21.

Table 20 Prior Matrix Screenline 1 Summary Tables

Individual Count Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 433 No of counts 444 % Passes 100% 75% 75%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 243 No of counts 444 % Passes 50% 100% 75%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 42 of 135

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 865 573 493 Observed Flow 811 775 609 Mod/Obs (%) 107% 74% 81%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 398 719 1,173 Observed Flow 473 708 1,152 Mod/Obs (%) 84% 102% 102%

5.4.6 Screenline 2

At the individual count level, the percentage of counts passing the acceptable criteria ranged from 50% and 75% as shown in Table 22. Only 2 counts passed in the IP and PM peak for the outbound direction. These counts failed the criteria due to high modelled flows on the counts. One probable cause of this was the infilling of the factored VIPS matrices. Table 21 Prior Matrix Screenline 2 Summary Tables

Individual Count Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 333 No of counts 444 % Passes 75% 75% 75%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 322 No of counts 444 % Passes 75% 50% 50%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,598 2,000 3,096 Observed Flow 3,400 2,479 3,994 Mod/Obs (%) 106% 81% 78%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,739 2,491 3,481 Observed Flow 3,566 2,321 3,552 Mod/Obs (%) 105% 107% 98%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 43 of 135

5.4.7 Bus Boarding and Alighting Summary

The percentage passes for the bus boarding and alighting counts ranged from 40% to 80% for all time periods as shown in Table 23 and 24. The majority of the failed counts had a GEH less than 10 and are higher than the observed counts as shown in Appendix C-E. One possible reason could be that double counted ODs issues were not considered to interview sites such as Walsgrave Hospital in the bus survey matrix building. For example a trip that was surveyed at Warwick University and interchange at Walsgrave Hospital to travel towards Bell Green might be surveyed again at the hospital site.

Table 22 Prior Matrix Bus Boarding Summary Bus Boarding AM IP PM No of passes 648 No of counts 10 10 10 % Passes 60% 40% 80% Table 23 Prior Matrix Bus Alighting Summary Bus Alighting AM IP PM No of passes 584 No of counts 10 10 10 % Passes 50% 80% 40% d

5.4.8 Rail Boarding and Alighting Summary

Only the AM boarding and IP alighting rail counts failed the ±15% number of passed counts criteria as shown in Tables 25 and 26. However, the majority of these failed counts for all time periods had a GEH value of less than 10.

Table 24 Prior Matrix Rail Boarding Summary Rail Boarding AM IP PM No of passes 997 No of counts 10 10 9 % Passes 90% 90% 78% Table 25 Prior Matrix Rail Alighting Summary

Rail Alighting AM IP PM No of passes 10 10 8 No of counts 10 10 9 % Passes 100% 100% 89%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 44 of 135

5.4.9 Rail Link Flow Counts

The rail link flow counts did not meet the ±15% number of passed counts criteria. The percentage passes were between 46% and 85%. Most of the failed counts had a GEH less than 12. Table 26 Prior Matrix Rail Link Flow Counts AM IP PM No of passes 21 12 22 No of counts 26 26 26 % Passes 81% 46% 85%

5.4.10 Conclusion

From the calibration results, it can be concluded that the prior matrix calibrated reasonably well at the inner cordon level. The percentage of counts within the criteria was 80% to 93% for all time periods. The demand flows were within ± 15% of observed demand for all time periods. The probable reason for this is that the majority of the 2008 bus survey was conducted in Coventry City Centre and was able to capture the actual passenger movements travelling in and out of the city centre.

The outer cordon results were not at the same level as those for the inner cordons. The overall demands at the outer cordons were on the high side when compared to the observed demand. One possible cause of this was the infilling of factored VIPS matrices. The VIPS matrices were 1999 demands and later factored to 2008 levels based on the city centre cordon counts. There has been significant change in the amount and location of manufacturing industries and therefore employment locations in Coventry since 1999, the factored matrix might not therefore reflect the actual trip pattern and over-estimated the 2008 demand movements in certain corridors. This over-estimation would be adjusted in the matrix estimation process.

The bus and rail (boarding and alighting) and rail link flow counts results were reasonably acceptable for a prior matrix. The failed counts were mainly due to the prior matrix itself and not due to routing paths issues. Matrix estimation would correct these flows.

5.5 Calibration Results

5.5.1 Introduction

The VISUM matrix estimation tool TFlowFuzzy module was used for the calibration of the models. Network adjustments and checks were made before the matrix estimation process to produce the best results with the prior matrix. The matrix estimation was carried out at the 2 demand segments, Fares (Fa) and No Fares (NFa).

Two types of test were carried out for matrix estimation to ascertain which methodology would provide the most robust result. The first test utilised the outer cordon and rail counts for calibration and the inner cordon counts for validation. The second test used all the observed counts for the matrix estimation. The outcomes of the tests are as follows:

• Outer Cordon Test o The model calibrates well for all time periods. o The Inner cordon validation is poorer than the prior matrix, AM (79%), IP (93%) and PM (43%-57%).

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 45 of 135

o Percentage change in matrix total AM (-10%), IP (-4%) and PM (-12%). • Matrix estimation using all counts o The model calibrates well at all levels for all time periods o Slightly increase in the proportion of short distance trips o Percentage change in matrix total AM (-4%), IP (6%) and PM (1%)

It was concluded that all the counts had to be introduced in the matrix estimation process. Utilising both the inner and outer cordon counts would control the demand flow of both cordons accurately and also the short distance trips in the matrix. The following sub-sections show the calibration results, difference in matrix totals and trip length distribution changes after matrix estimation.

5.5.2 Inner Cordon

The inner cordon for all three time periods calibrated well at the both individual and demand level after matrix estimation (See Table 28). All the counts (both inbound and outbound direction) satisfied the acceptable criteria of ± 25% of observed flow or GEH of less than 5. At the overall demand level the results were between 96% and 100% of observed demand. Appendices F-H show the time periods calibration results in detail. Table 27 Inner Cordon Calibration Results Individual Count Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 15 15 15 No of counts 15 15 15 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 15 15 15 No of counts 15 15 15 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 6,445 5,922 4,605 Observed Flow 6,745 5,905 4,689 Mod/Obs (%) 96% 100% 98%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,534 5,221 7,818 Observed Flow 3,658 5,237 7,892 Mod/Obs (%) 97% 100% 99%

5.5.3 Outer Cordon Radial

The calibration results of the outer cordon radial were similar to the inner cordon. Table 29 shows that 100% of the outer cordon radial counts were within the satisfactory criteria at the individual count level for all time periods. The detailed results of the Outer Cordon Radial are located in Appendices F-H. At the overall demand levels, the modelled flows were between 99% and 106% of the observed flows.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 46 of 135

Table 28 Outer Cordon Radial Calibration Results Individual Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 16 16 16 No of counts 16 16 16 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 14 14 14 No of counts 14 14 14 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,968 3,996 3,722 Observed Flow 3,883 4,054 3,595 Mod/Obs (%) 102% 99% 104%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 2,837 2,816 4,668 Observed Flow 2,815 2,763 4,421 Mod/Obs (%) 101% 102% 106%

5.5.4 Outer Cordon Orbital

All the outer cordon orbital counts achieved the satisfactory criteria for all time periods. The results of the individual counts are shown in Appendices F-H. The overall modelled demands were between 90% and 106% of the overall observed demands and satisfied the ±15% criteria.

Table 29 Outer Cordon Orbital Calibration Results Individual Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 868 No of counts 868 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 888 No of counts 888 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 47 of 135

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 514 343 672 Observed Flow 514 346 743 Mod/Obs (%) 100% 99% 90%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 542 543 604 Observed Flow 603 541 568 Mod/Obs (%) 90% 100% 106%

5.5.5 Screenline 1

Table 31 shows the Screenline 1 calibration results at the individual count and overall demand levels. All the respective time period counts satisfied the ± 25% of the observed flows or GEH less than 5 criteria. The overall demand flows were between 90% and 114% of the observed demand.

Table 30 Screenline 1 Calibration Results Individual Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 444 No of counts 444 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 444 No of counts 444 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 844 771 625 Observed Flow 811 775 609 Mod/Obs (%) 104% 99% 103%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 425 728 1,311 Observed Flow 473 708 1,152 Mod/Obs (%) 90% 103% 114%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 48 of 135

5.5.6 Screenline 2

Screenline 2 calibrated well for all the time periods with 100% of the counts passing the satisfactory criteria as shown in Table 32. At the overall demand level, the overall modelled flows were between 97% and 102% of the overall observed flow and within the ± 15% of the observed flow criteria.

Table 31 Screenline 2 Calibration Results Individual Level

Inbound AM IP PM No of passes 444 No of counts 444 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Outbound AM IP PM No of passes 444 No of counts 444 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Demand Level

Inbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,353 2,402 3,903 Observed Flow 3,400 2,479 3,994 Mod/Obs (%) 99% 97% 98%

Outbound AM IP PM Modelled Flow 3,612 2,344 3,611 Observed Flow 3,566 2,321 3,552 Mod/Obs (%) 101% 101% 102%

5.5.7 Bus Boarding and Alighting

The bus boarding and alighting counts for all time periods satisfied the ± 25% of observed flow counts or GEH less than 5 criteria. Table 33 shows the summary of the results. The detailed results are located in Appendices F-H. Table 32 Bus Boarding and Alighting Calibration Results Bus Boarding AM IP PM No of passes 10 10 10 No of counts 10 10 10 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Bus Alighting AM IP PM No of passes 10 10 10 No of counts 10 10 10 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 49 of 135

5.5.8 Rail Boarding and Alighting

All the rail boarding and alighting counts calibrated well and satisfied the ± 25% of observed flow counts or GEH less than 5 criteria. Table 34 shows the summary of the results. The detailed results are located in Appendices F-H.

Table 33 Rail Boarding and Alighting Calibration Results Rail Boarding AM IP PM No of passes 10 10 9 No of counts 10 10 9 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Rail Alighting AM IP PM No of passes 10 10 9 No of counts 10 10 9 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

5.5.9 Rail Link Flow Counts

The matrix estimation adjusted the prior matrix and resulted in all the rail link flow counts satisfying the ± 25% of observed flow counts or GEH less than 5 criteria. The detailed link flow counts results for the respective time period are shown in Appendices F-H.

Table 34 Rail Link Flow Calibration Results Rail Link Flows AM IP PM No of passes 26 26 26 No of counts 26 26 26 % Passes 100% 100% 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 50 of 135

5.5.10 Sector to Sector Analysis

The purpose of the sector to sector analysis was to gain a better insight of the changes to the matrices after the matrix estimation process. The before and after matrix estimation matrices were grouped into the following sectors:

• Sector 1 – Zones in Northwest Coventry • Sector 2 – Zones in Northeast Coventry • Sector 3 – Zones in East Coventry • Sector 4 – Zones in South Coventry • Sector 5 – Zones in West Coventry • Sector 6 – Zones in Coventry City Centre • Sector 7 – Zones in South Warwickshire • Sector 8 – Zones in Bedworth and Nuneaton • Sector 9 – Zones in North Warwickshire • Sector 10 – Zones in Rugby • Sector 11 – Zones in Solihull • Sector 12 – Rail and external zones • Sector 500 – Park and Ride North zone • Sector 501 – Park and Ride South zone

Figure 37 Sector Definition

(a) AM Analysis

The matrix estimation process decreased the prior matrix by 4%, from 27,251 trips to 26,262 trips as shown in Table 36. The table also shows that the majority of the changes occurred between the following sectors:

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 51 of 135

• Sector 5 to 5 (decrease of 98 trips) • Sector 11 to 6 (decrease of 148 trips) • Sector 12 to 12 (increased 202 trips)

The reductions of trips from sector 5 to 5 movements relates to the VIPS matrix that was used to infill unobserved movements in the 2008 bus matrix. The factoring of the 1999 to 2008 VIPS matrix might have caused an over-estimation for certain O-D trips especially where manufacturing industries have changed. These O-D trips had changed tremendously since 1999 with the closure of several major industries in Coventry. Also, in Sector 5, Tile Hill College has closed. The decreased of 170 trips from sector 11 to 6 are mainly trips from the Birmingham airport zone to the city centre. The merging of Coventry rail station matrix might have overestimated such movements. The increased of 166 trips in the sector 12 to 12 movements are mainly the external to external rail trips that were corrected in the matrix estimation process.

(b) IP Analysis

Table 37 shows the 14 by 14 sector matrix of the IP time period for both before and after matrix estimation matrices. The overall demand matrix had increased from 25,130 to 26,619 trips (6%) after the process. The largest changes had occurred in trip movements from and to sector 6 (Coventry City Centre):

• Sector 2 to 6 (increase by 111 trips) • Sector 6 to 1 (increase by 101 trips) • Sector 6 to 2 (increase by 229 trips) • Sector 6 to 5 (decrease by 206 trips)

The reductions of trips could be possibly be due to the usage of the 2007 November city cordon counts to the Spring 2008 IP flows in the matrix estimation process. The passenger flows from these sectors could have increased since 2007. Another reason could be during matrix estimation, the model had chosen to adjust the city centre OD movements instead of the infill VIPS matrix of through trips.

There was also an increased of 441 trips from sector 8 to sector 8 movements. These are the movements between Bedworth and Nuneaton zones. The increase could be due to the introduction of boarding and alighting counts at the Mill Street, Bedworth and Nuneaton bus station in the matrix estimation process.

(c) PM Analysis

The matrix increased from 31,254 to 32,019 trips after matrix estimation, an increased of 3%. The major changes occurred at the following sector to sector movements as shown in Table 38:

• Sector 5 to 2 (increase by 142 trips) • Sector 6 to 2 (increase by 339 trips) • Sector 5 to 12 (decrease by 113 trips) • Sector 12 to 2 (decrease by 131 trips) • Sector 12 to 11 (increase by 148 trips) • Sector 12 to 12 (decrease by 215 trips)

The majority of trip changes occurred to and from sector 2. This is likely to relate to the introduction of counts at Tesco Arena, Clay Street and Walsgrave Road in the matrix estimation process which has corrected movements to and from the sector.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 52 of 135

Table 35 AM Before and After Matrix Estimation Sector Analysis Table

Prior Matrix 123456789101112500501TotalSector Description 1 68930621218224339767070119001,986 2 297 941 360 95 396 963 47 80 8 26 54 310 0 0 3,577 1 Northwest Coventry 3 6328457937207449283085117001,778 2 Northeast Coventry 4 82193110421222312150012125001,482 3East Coventry 5 102 334 204 87 1,619 670 69 40 5 8 76 394 0 0 3,608 4 South Coventry 6 34 142 90 19 119 22 35 10 2 4 32 111 0 0 621 5West Coventry 7 11 74 20 8 166 84 536 0 1 12 1 138 0 0 1,051 8 69 96 53 15 30 231 13 630 19 9 0 136 0 0 1,301 6 Coventry City Centre 9 07801319055000900110 7 South Warwickshire 10 1726490287532140 7141490 0440 8 Bedworth and Nuneaton 11 13 10 23 0 11 258 5 0 0 0 2,074 803 0 0 3,198 9 North Warwickshire 12 44 132 95 88 183 346 92 76 3 16 638 6,299 0 0 8,014 500 02000450000040052 10 Rugby 501 01101300000000033 11 Solihull Total 1,421 2,549 1,805 787 3,218 3,842 880 974 39 97 3,024 8,614 0 0 27,251 12 Rail and External Zones 500 Park and Ride North 501 Park and Ride South Matrix Estimation 123456789101112500501Total 1 6523252082716731385208058001,817 2 268 878 340 155 382 957 54 75 8 33 30 254 0 0 3,434 3 602705533520542230307570001,661 4 8020110242918133414001289001,431 5 106 279 201 96 1,521 634 67 31 2 19 45 328 0 0 3,329 6 35 166 97 27 121 22 41 10 0 6 25 104 0 0 652 7 6 38 20 3 107 66 529 0 1 14 0 107 0 0 891 8 71 88 42 13 25 222 9 623 18 8 0 111 0 0 1,231 9 035071305500070090 10 91437026503112061564900391 11 6 4 17 0 7 110 3 0 0 0 2,072 877 0 0 3,095 12 31 62 93 84 187 287 97 117 3 21 594 6,501 0 0 8,077 500 04000651000060075 501 04201810000000088 Total 1,323 2,336 1,716 869 2,937 3,576 883 977 33 122 2,929 8,560 0 0 26,262

Difference (ME - Prior) 123456789101112500501Total 1 -3720-49-57-261-15010-6100-168 2 -29 -63 -21 61 -14 -6 7 -5 0 7 -24 -56 0 0 -142 3 -3 -14 -26 -2 -2 -26 2 0 0 -1 0 -46 0 0 -117 4 -28-88-4122-1000-1-3600-52 5 4-54-39-98-36-2-9-411-31-660 0-279 6 023782050-22-7-70031 7 -5 -36 -1 -5 -59 -18 -7 0 0 2 -1 -31 0 0 -161 8 1-8-11-2-5-9-3-7000-2600-70 9 0-4-30-6-500000-200-20 10 -8-12-120-2-25-2-20014000-48 11 -7 -6 -6 0 -4 -148 -2 0 0 0 -3 74 0 0 -103 12 -13 -71 -3 -4 4 -59 5 41 0 5 -43 202 0 0 63 500 01000200000020023 501 02100510000000055 Total -98 -213 -89 82 -281 -266 3 3 -6 25 -95 -53 0 0 -989

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 53 of 135

Table 36 IP Before and After Matrix Estimation Sector Analysis Table

Prior Matrix 123456789101112500501TotalSector Description 1 15622491277660425505128001,270 2 188 744 298 103 215 1,042 13 43 11 23 18 170 1 0 2,869 1 Northwest Coventry 3 76 289 282 95 190 516 8 21 5 17 8 68 0 0 1,575 2 Northeast Coventry 4 17788932674951140626000861 3 East Coventry 5 71 190 148 64 898 840 138 16 0 6 11 161 0 0 2,544 4 South Coventry 6 368 1,062 380 414 760 81 52 128 25 59 143 148 19 20 3,660 5 West Coventry 7 2 15 14 11 192 57 1,342 4 2 22 1 132 0 0 1,795 6 Coventry City Centre 8 45 43 24 6 14 134 3 2,324 137 15 0 136 0 0 2,882 7 South Warwickshire 9 071002221238001000172 10 22817757322190615600236 8 Bedworth and Nuneaton 11 164285000011,555325001,951 9 North Warwickshire 12 21 282 61 39 162 171 129 83 4 21 369 3,877 1 1 5,220 10 Rugby 500 01000210100010024 11 Solihull 501 01000670000040072 12 Rail and External Zones Total 947 2,969 1,409 799 2,588 4,173 1,721 2,820 192 183 2,110 5,177 21 22 25,130 500 Park and Ride North 501 Park and Ride South Matrix Estimation 123456789101112500501Total 1 19227473345966016502130001,392 2 266 800 282 117 374 1,153 11 46 10 22 4 128 2 1 3,215 3 100 287 279 104 186 499 8 16 4 15 5 65 0 0 1,569 4 3711167337362213404160001,025 5 631921487894681518613046120002,572 6 470 1,290 495 441 554 84 37 151 25 56 72 150 31 65 3,921 7 2 17 4 14 115 59 1,379 2 2 44 0 111 0 0 1,750 8 49 61 17 8 18 189 3 2,768 162 13 0 135 1 0 3,424 9 0920026231308001000208 10 21713685410230608900227 11 111062300011,576283001,891 12 8 181 47 53 134 106 123 92 5 85 319 4,168 1 7 5,328 500 01000200100010023 501 01000650000060073 Total 1,189 3,242 1,429 889 2,472 4,376 1,794 3,311 216 251 1,984 5,357 35 74 26,619

Difference (ME - Prior) 123456789101112500501Total 1 3750-188-1756-1110-3-1200122 2 78 56 -16 14 159 111 -2 2 -1 -2 -15 -42 1 1 345 3 24-2-39-3-170-5-1-2-3-30 0-6 4 2033-2116127200-3-1100165 5 -8 2 0 14 47 -25 49 -3 0 -2 -5 -41 0 0 28 6 101 229 115 27 -206 3 -15 23 0 -2 -72 2 12 45 261 7 02-93-77337-2021-1-2200-44 8 4 19 -7 2 3 55 -1 444 25 -2 0 -1 1 0 542 9 02100422700000036 10 -1-11-4-13-19-12500-13200-9 11 0-5-3-2-2-27000021-4100-59 12 -13 -101 -14 15 -28 -65 -6 9 1 63 -51 291 0 6 109 500 00000-100000000-1 501 00000-2000003001 Total 241 273 20 90 -116 202 74 492 24 69 -127 180 13 52 1,489

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 54 of 135

Table 37 PM Before and After Matrix Estimation Sector Analysis Table

Prior Matrix 123456789101112500501Total Sector Description 1 898 333 41 61 99 24 10 89 0 24 12 21 0 0 1,611 1 Northwest Coventry 2 414 1,264 360 132 421 195 70 115 8 29 20 154 1 3 3,188 3 241 545 725 141 329 114 22 60 6 46 24 106 0 3 2,364 2 Northeast Coventry 4 39 203 53 524 158 28 3 25 0 0 6 95 0 0 1,133 3East Coventry 191 324 141 259 2,277 113 301 20 17 9 6 296 0 2 3,954 4 South Coventry 6 397 1,302 523 390 808 38 129 237 25 94 69 344 29 62 4,447 5West Coventry 7 5 38 29 19 188 35 1,093 16 0 63 0 177 0 0 1,662 6 Coventry City Centre 8 79 114 6 4 40 20 0 1,301 128 28 0 185 0 0 1,904 9 013004313000070058 7 South Warwickshire 10 8319227826406171900158 8 Bedworth and Nuneaton 11 661035150100761,046811002,105 9 North Warwickshire 12 95 303 178 109 358 101 196 137 2 70 771 6,348 2 0 8,671 10 Rugby 500 000000000000000 11 Solihull 501 000000000000000 Total 2,371 4,531 2,065 1,643 4,759 729 1,853 2,034 187 446 1,971 8,564 32 69 31,254 12 Rail and External Zones 500 Park and Ride North 501 Park and Ride South Matrix Estimation 123456789101112500501Total 1 882 338 71 115 80 73 22 97 0 19 13 19 0 0 1,730 2 478 1,340 360 154 498 293 72 96 5 24 14 122 4 5 3,465 3 250 514 687 124 278 104 19 43 4 33 10 107 0 4 2,179 4 61 235 48 453 128 35 7 28 0 0 7 58 0 0 1,060 5 169 466 238 220 2,277 106 369 34 19 9 6 184 0 6 4,102 6 414 1,641 473 394 685 40 116 242 28 81 44 346 78 114 4,696 7 5 59 28 11 150 24 1,099 15 0 32 0 180 0 0 1,604 8 55 116 4 5 48 27 0 1,408 142 29 0 208 0 0 2,044 9 019005303000080065 10 14358223624406252100168 11 4200437151001181,056841002,096 12 33 172 116 107 346 57 195 156 2 143 920 6,563 2 0 8,810 500 000000000000000 501 000000000000000 Total 2,365 4,956 2,034 1,590 4,556 783 1,923 2,154 201 495 2,095 8,656 84 129 32,019

Difference (ME - Prior) 123456789101112500501Total 1 -1553154-19501290-51-200119 2 64 76 -1 22 77 98 1 -18 -3 -6 -6 -32 2 2 277 3 9-31-37-16-51-11-3-16-2-13-14101-185 4 2233-5-71-30843002-3700-73 5 -22 142 97 -38 0 -7 68 14 2 0 0 -113 0 4 147 6 18 339 -50 5 -123 2 -14 5 3 -13 -25 2 49 52 249 7 021-1-8-37-127-10-310300-58 8 -242-1297010814102400140 9 070011-100000007 10 64-20-4-3-2000820010 11 -2-4101-13-35-10042103000-9 12 -62 -131 -62 -3 -12 -44 -2 18 0 73 148 215 0 0 140 500 000000000000000 501 000000000000000 Total -6 425 -31 -54 -203 54 70 120 13 49 124 92 52 59 765

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 55 of 135

5.5.11 Trip Length Distribution Analysis

Trip length distribution analysis was carried out for each time period matrix. The analysis indicates which trips have changed during the matrix estimation process and provides a better insight into how well distributed and robust the matrices are.

Figures 38 to 40 shows the respective time periods trip length distributions. The before and after matrix estimation (ME) matrices were plotted against distance. From the graphs it can be concluded that matrix estimation has resulted in marginal changes to the trip length distribution with slightly different changes in each time period.

Figure 38 AM Trip Length Distribution

TLD AM Matrices

25.0% Before ME

After ME

20.0%

15.0% % of % of trips 10.0%

5.0%

0.0% < 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 15 15 to 25 25 to 35 35 > Distance (km)

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 56 of 135

Figure 39 IP Trip Length Distribution

TLD IP Matrices

25.0% Before ME

After ME

20.0%

15.0% % of trips % of 10.0%

5.0%

0.0% < 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 15 15 to 25 25 to 35 35 > Distance (km)

Figure 40 PM Trip Length Distribution

TLD PM Matrices 25.0% Before ME After ME 20.0%

15.0%

% of trips 10.0%

5.0%

0.0% < 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 15 15 to 25 25 to 35 35 > Distance (km)

5.5.12 Conclusion

The models calibrated well after matrix estimation and satisfied the acceptablity criteria at all levels. The percentage changes of the matrices were -4% AM peak, 6% Inter peak and 3% PM peak. The introduction of the inner cordon counts together with the other counts in matrix estimation has calibrated the model well, resulting in an increase in short distance trips (around 1 to 2 km).

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 57 of 135

5.6 Corridor Validation Results

5.6.1 Introduction

As all link counts were employed in the matrix calibration process, other data was examined to check how well the matrices validate existing travel patterns.

The 2008 Coventry Primelines bus boarding and alight counts were used to validate the models. Primelines is the local identity of the wider bus showcase schemes in the West Midlands. The Primelines data available were:

• Corridor 58 (Lockhurst to Hollbrook Lane) • Corrdior 3 (Ansty Road) • Willenhall corridor • Corridor 3a (Longfellow Road to Stoke Hill Estate)

It should be noted that the Primelines surveys contain very detailed data in terms of boarding and alighting, whereas within the transport model boarding and alighting is dependent on centroid connectors which cannot represent each bus stop. The analysis is therefore seeking broad correspondence along the route.

5.6.2 Corridor 58 Boarding and Alighting Validation

Corridor 58 is the route between Lockhurst Lane to Holbrook Lane that follows the route of bus services 4, 55, 56 and 57 as shown in Figure 41. The number of passengers boarding and alighting counts were counted at the bus stops along the corridor.

Table 39 summarises the overall boarding and alighting validation results for the respective time periods. The GEH values ranged from 0.8 to 4.9 and with all of overall demand of both boarding and alighting passenger counts satisfied the acceptable criteria. Figure 41 Location of the Corridor 58 B&A counts

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 58 of 135

Table 38 Corridor 58 B&A Validation Summary Table Time Period Direction Boarding Alighting

Obs Mod GEH % Obs Mod GEH % AM IB 146 137 0.8 93.84% 46 41 0.8 89.13% OB 115 82 3.3 71.30% 82 92 1.1 112.20% IP IB 93 115 2.2 123.66% 53 23 4.9 43.40% OB 62 38 3.4 61.29% 117 139 1.9 118.80% PM IB 76 83 0.8 109.21% 52 39 1.9 75.00% OB 39 50 1.6 128.21% 176 200 1.8 113.64%

Figure 42 Corridor 58: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

AM (Inbound)

70 Boarding Obs

Boarding Mod

60 Alighting Obs

Alighting Mod 50

40

30

20

10

0 LL17 LL15 LL13 LL11 LL09 LL08 LL05 LL03 LL01

162 161 160 129 128 127 223 222 221

Figure 43 Corridor 58: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

AM (Outbound)

Boarding Obs 70 Boarding Mod 60 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 50

40

30

20

10

0 LL17 LL15 LL13 LL11 LL09 LL08 LL05 LL03 LL01 162 161 160 129 128 127 223 222 221

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 59 of 135

Figure 44 Corridor 58: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

IP (Inbound) 70 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod

Alighting Obs 60 Alighting Mod

50

40

30

20

10

0 LL17 LL15 LL13 LL11 LL09 LL08 LL05 LL03 LL01 162 161 160 129 128 127 223 222 221

Figure 45 Corridor 58: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

IP (Outbound)

70 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 60 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 50

40

30

20

10

0 LL17 LL15 LL13 LL11 LL09 LL08 LL05 LL03 LL01 162 161 160 129 128 127 223 222 221

Figure 46 Corridor 58: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

PM(Inbound) 70 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod Alighting Obs 60 Alighting Mod

50

40

30

20

10

0 LL17 LL15 LL13 LL11 LL09 LL08 LL05 LL03 LL01

162 161 160 129 128 127 223 222 221

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 60 of 135

Figure 47 Corridor 58: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

PM (Outbound)

70 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 60 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 50

40

30

20

10

0 LL17 LL15 LL13 LL11 LL09 LL08 LL05 LL03 LL01 162 161 160 129 128 127 223 222 221

5.6.3 Corridor 3 Boarding and Alighting Validation

The corridor 3 boarding and alighting counts were conducted along the Ansty Road between Upper Stoke to Walsgrave. The corridor follows the route of bus services 32, 32C, 33, 74, 75 and X6. Figure 48 shows the location of the bus stop where the survey was carried out.

Figure 48 Location of Corridor 3 B&A counts

The overall boarding and alighting validation results are summarised in Table 40. The GEH values of the overall demand for both boarding and alighting passenger counts were between 0.1 and 10. The counts failed to meet the acceptable criteria for the following demand flows:

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 61 of 135

• AM – Boarding demand for outbound direction (GEH of 6.4) • IP - Boarding demand for outbound direction (GEH of 6.9) • IP - Alighting demand for inbound direction (GEH of 9.6) • PM – Alighting demand for inbound direction (GEH 6.9) • PM – Alighting demand for outbound direction (GEH 5.7)

From the Table 40, it can be concluded that the demand in the AM and IP period to and from north of the corridor were on the lower side. These could be due to the short distance trips that were infilled from the VIPS matrix that underestimates the demand.

In the AM peak, boarding in the inbound direction and alighting in the outbound direction are higher in the model compared to the overall observed demand. The modelled boarding at bus stop AN7 and AN8 and alighting at bus stop AN11 and AN12 are the cause of the higher demand as shown in Figure 49 and 50. Similar boarding and alighting patterns happened in the IP and PM peaks results (Figure 51 – 54).

Analysis was carried to understand with the large number of modelled boarders and alighters on those bus stops. It is possible that the zone definition, connectors and zone centroids of zones 21314 and 21612 are the cause of higher loadings at the bus stops. Figures 55 and 56 show the location of the zones and connectors to the bus stop. The zone centroid for zone 21314 may not reflect the actual demographic layout of the zone and may bias the proportion of trips to the bus stop on Ansty Road that has more bus services running on the corridor.

Overall the boarding and alighting validation was acceptable except for the issues of boarding and alighting at the bus stop in the south part of the corridor. Further improvements such as disaggregating zone 21314 to reflect the actual demographic pattern are recommended if the model is to be applied to appraise public transport schemes in this corridor.

Table 39 Corridor 3 B&A Validation Summary Table Boarding Alighting Time Period Direction Obs Mod GEH % Obs Mod GEH % IB 250 266 1.0 106.40% 75 41 4.5 54.67% AM OB 148 80 6.4 54.05% 70 116 4.8 165.71% IB 132 122 0.9 92.66% 78 13 9.6 16.74% IP OB 47 10 6.9 21.43% 135 196 4.7 145.19% IB 118 118 0.0 100.00% 57 122 6.9 214.04% PM OB 56 57 0.1 101.79% 187 273 5.7 145.99%

Figure 49 Corridor 3: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

AM (Inbound)

120 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 100 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 80

60

40

20

0 AN01 AN02 AN03 AN04 AN05 AN06 AN07 AN08 AN09

358 357 374 356 339 338 370 337 336

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 62 of 135

Figure 50 Corridor 3: AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

AM (Outbound) 120 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 100 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod

80

60

40

20

0 AN10 AN11 AN12 AN13 AN14 AN15 AN16 AN17 AN18 336 337 370 338 339 356 374 357 358

Figure 51 Corridor 3: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

IP (Inbound) 120 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 100 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 80

60

40

20

0 AN01 AN02 AN03 AN04 AN05 AN06 AN07 AN08 AN09 358 357 374 356 339 338 370 337 336

Figure 52 Corridor 3: IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

IP (Outbound) 120 Boarding Obs 100 Boarding Mod Alighting Obs 80 Alighting Mod

60

40

20

0 AN10 AN11 AN12 AN13 AN14 AN15 AN16 AN17 AN18

336 337 370 338 339 356 374 357 358

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 63 of 135

Figure 53 Corridor 3: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

PM (Inbound) 120 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 100 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 80

60

40

20

0 AN01 AN02 AN03 AN04 AN05 AN06 AN07 AN08 AN09 358 357 374 356 339 338 370 337 336

Figure 54 Corridor 3: PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

PM (Outbound) 135 Boarding Obs 115 Boarding Mod Alighting Obs 95 Alighting Mod

75

55

35

15

-5 AN10 AN11 AN12 AN13 AN14 AN15 AN16 AN17 AN18 336 337 370 338 339 356 374 357 358

Figure 55 Zone 21314 and 21612 connectors

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 64 of 135

Figure 56 Zone 21314 and 21612 demographic layout

5.6.4 Corridor 3a Link Flow Validation

Corridor 3a follows the bus route service 27 between Longfellow Road and Stoke Hill Estate shown in Figure 57. The boarding and alighting survey of the corridor was conducted by enumerators on the bus. The number of passengers boarding, alighting and on the bus on departure were recorded at each bus stop.

The observed link flows at bus stop (WA41/WA13) on Longfellow Road and (WAL2/ WAL10) on Harry Rose Road were tabulated from the survey data. The modelled flows were compared to these observed flows for validation. Table 41 shows the summary of corridor 3a link flow validation results.

The model validated well at all link flow counts for all time periods with GEH values between 0.2 and 3.0. All the modelled flows were within the acceptable criteria. Figure 57 Location of Corridor 3a B&A Counts

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 65 of 135

Table 40 Corridor 3a Link Flow Validation Results Time Period Location Site Obs Mod GEH % IB 228 214 0.9 93.86% Longfellow Road OB 206 176 2.2 85.44% IB 147 128 1.6 87.07% AM Harry Rose Road OB 204 163 3.0 79.90% IB 302 317 0.9 105.08% Longfellow Road OB 230 246 1.0 106.96% IB 220 203 1.2 92.27% IP Harry Rose Road OB 165 161 0.3 97.58% IB 193 196 0.2 101.55% Longfellow Road OB 201 214 0.9 106.47% IB 163 166 0.2 101.84% PM Harry Rose Road OB 83 80 0.3 96.39%

5.6.5 Willenhall Corridor Boarding and Alighting Validation

The Willenhall corridor boarding and alighting counts were conducted between Willenhall and Coventry City Centre. The corridor follows the route of bus service 21 shown in Figure 58.

Table 42 summarises the overall boarding and alighting along the corridor for all time periods. In the AM peak, the overall boarding and alighting were within the acceptable criteria for both directions. The IP inbound and outbound alighting demand failed to meet the satisfactory criteria with GEH values of 7.9 and 7.2 respectively. Nearly all the demand for the PM peak validates well except for the outbound alighting demand with a GEH of 6.4.

Bus passenger flow counts are advised to be carried out if there are any future transport improvements to be tested in the model in this corridor.

Figure 58 Location of Willenhall Corridor B&A Counts

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 66 of 135

Table 41 Willenhall Corridor B&A Validation Summary Table Boarding Alighting Time Period Direction Obs Mod GEH % Obs Mod GEH % IB 282 348 3.7 123.40% 65 49 2.1 75.38% AM OB 42 74 4.2 176.19% 110 161 4.4 146.36% IB 240 175 4.5 72.82% 99 36 7.6 36.49% IP OB 53 37 2.4 69.81% 168 279 7.4 166.07% IB 243 223 1.3 91.77% 89 104 1.5 116.85% PM OB 64 70 0.7 109.38% 231 142 6.5 61.47%

Figure 59 Willenhall Corridor : AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

AM (Inbound) 160 Boarding Obs 140 Boarding Mod Alighting Obs 120 Alighting Mod

100

80

60

40

20

0 W102 W103 W104 W105 W106 W107 W109 W110 W111 W112 W114 W115 555 554 553 552 551 535 533 507 506 505 503 500

Figure 60 Willenhall Corridor : AM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

AM (Outbound)

160 Boarding Obs 140 Boarding Mod 120 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 100

80

60

40

20

0 W121 W122 W123 W124 W125 W126 W128 W130 W132 W133 500 503 504 505 506 507 534 551 553 567

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 67 of 135

Figure 61 Willenhall Corridor : IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

IP (Inbound) 160

140 Boarding Obs Boarding Mod 120 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 100

80

60

40

20

0 W102 W103 W104 W105 W106 W107 W109 W110 W111 W112 W114 W115

555 554 553 552 551 535 533 507 506 505 503 500

Figure 62 Willenhall Corridor : IP Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

IP (Outbound)

160

Boarding Obs 140 Boarding Mod 120 Alighting Obs Alighting Mod 100

80

60

40

20

0 W120 W121 W122 W123 W124 W125 W126 W128 W130 W132 W133

510 500 503 504 505 506 507 534 551 553 567

Figure 63 Willenhall Corridor : PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Inbound)

PM (Inbound) 160 Boarding Obs 140 Boarding Mod Alighting Obs 120 Alighting Mod

100

80

60

40

20

0 W102 W103 W104 W105 W106 W107 W109 W110 W111 W112 W114 W115

555 554 553 552 551 535 533 507 506 505 503 500

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 68 of 135

Figure 64 Willenhall Corridor : PM Observed vs Modelled B&A (Outbound)

PM (Outbound) 160 Boarding Obs 140 Boarding Mod Alighting Obs 120 Alighting Mod 100

80

60

40

20

0 W120 W121 W122 W123 W124 W125 W126 W128 W130 W132 W133 510 500 503 504 505 506 507 534 551 553 567

The public transport model validated reasonably well in terms of individual route sections – though it is recommended that this is examined closely when applying the model to individual schemes.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 69 of 135

6 JOURNEY TIME VALIDATION

The VISUM model contains the published bus timetables at Spring 2008. An assessment of the modelled journey times against observed journey times was undertaken based on the surveys undertaken for the Bus Showcase Review study.

It should be noted that only a portion of the bus routes were surveyed for the Bus Showcase study, rather than terminus to terminus. The comparison is shown for each corridor in Figure 65. The table lists the corridors surveyed and the average number of observations made for each bus route. The average number of observations for some of the bus routes in the inter peak is relatively high, probably as there are more off peak hours on the survey day.

The graphs show the difference between the modelled journey time and observed journey for a particular section on the bus route, typically outside Coventry Ring road to the end of the radial corridor. These journey times are plotted between the upper and lower limit values of the observed data. In a few cases the difference between the modelled and observed journey times is greater than the range in the observed data and the values of the modelled journey time values are plotted outside the marked range (for example, AM inbound R19).

For the AM peak inbound data there is reasonable alignment of observed and modelled journey times for many corridors. There are large differences in observed and modelled journey times for R19 (Charter Avenue), X17 (Kenilworth Road), R56 (Wheelwright Lane), R57 (Wheelwright Lane) and R34 (Broad Lane). In most, the modelled journey time is higher than the observed journey time. However, this difference is considerably large only in case of R19. The graphs for the Inter-Peak inbound and outbound traffic and PM peak inbound traffic are similar to the AM peak outbound in nature, while the graph for the PM peak outbound traffic is quite similar to that of the AM peak inbound.

One problem with interpretation of the graphs is that the observed data does not cover the whole bus route. We assume that the timetabled journey times used in our model include some allowance for recovery in the event of late running. Furthermore, delays may be more likely to occur in the city centre than in the outer sections of the bus routes. As a result, if a bus is late entering the surveyed section (e.g. because it is delayed in the city centre) it may well tend to travel faster than timetabled through the outer section in order to recover the lost time.

It is suggested that the graphs are used to inform analysis of the model when used for particular studies and where there are significant differences consideration should be given to further journey time surveys to establish sensitivity in the modelled times.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, September 2009 Page 70 of 135

Figure 65 Journey Time Validation Corridors

Average Number of Service Sector under consideration Corridor Direction Observations From To AM IP PM R32 Hall Lane Swan Lane Ansty Road (Coventry from Inbound 30 29 27 Roseberry Treminus) Swan Lane Hall Lane Outbound 21 25 29 R10 Broad Lane START Glendower Ave/Lyndale Rd Inbound 20 13 14 Broad Lane Glendower Ave/Lyndale Rd Broad Lane START Outbound 18 13 13 R20 Foleshill Rd/Oban Rd Cash's Lane Foleshill Rd Coventry Inbound 30 26 29 Cash's Lane Foleshill Rd/Oban Rd Outbound 28 24 20 R32 Tile Hill Lane/Bushbury Ave Hearsall Lane/Spon End Inbound 36 33 43 Goodman Way Hearsall Lane/Spon End Tile Hill Lane/Bushbury Ave Outbound 34 25 21 Kirby Corner Road/ Gibbet Hill R12 Spencer Road/ Dalton Road Inbound 13 17 19 Road Rb - Stop Line University Corridor Kirby Corner Road/ Gibbet Hill Road Spencer Road/ Dalton Road Outbound 17 23 9 RB - Stop Line R21 Daventry Rd/London Rd The Mount/John Grace St Inbound 19 18 20 Willenhall Corridor The Mount/John Grace St Daventry Rd/London Rd Outbound 17 16 17 Ringway Rudge, Ringway Hill R900 Showell Lane, Birmingham Road Coventry - Allesley Eastbound 31 112 27 Cross

Ringway Rudge, Ringway Hill Cross Showell Lane, Birmingham Road Westbound 28 102 31 Stoney Station Road, Harnall Lane Winston Avenue, Petitor R21 Northbound 32 171 18 East Crescent Coventry - Bell Green Stoney Station Road, Harnall Winston Avenue, Petitor Crescent Southbound 27 27 27 Lane East R19 Wolfe Road, Charter Avenue Butts Road, Albany Road Coventry - Canley Eastbound 64 241 85 Butts Road, Albany Road Wolfe Road, Charter Avenue Westbound 64 232 76 R34 Farcroft Avenue, Broad Lane Butts Road, Albany Road Eastbound 36 253 36 Eastern Green Butts Road, Albany Road Farcroft Avenue, Broad Lane Westbound 36 223 32 48 (20) Hales Street Longford Road Foleshill Rd Coventry Northbound 60 427 57 Longford Road Hales Street Southbound 64 446 67 48 (40) Hales Street Roseberry Avenue Northbound 53 367 50 Foleshill Rd Coventry Roseberry Avenue Hales Street Southbound 58 388 60 48 (50) Hales Street Longford Road Foleshill Rd Coventry Northbound 60 427 57

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 71 of 135

Longford Road Hales Street Southbound 64 446 67 Stoneleigh Road, Kenilworth Road, Kenilworth Road, Cryfield X17 Northbound 10 94 20 Gibbet Hill Road Grange Road Gibbet Hill Route Kenilworth Road, Cryfield Grange Stoneleigh Road, Kenilworth Southbound 19 115 20 Road Road, Gibbet Hill Road R13(13A) Radford Road, Light Lane Wheelwright Lane, Nunts Lane Northbound 19 184 26 Jubilee Crescent Route Wheelwright Lane, Nunts Lane Radford Road, Light Lane Southbound 26 214 20 Ringway St Nicholas, Ringway Hill 45 (36) Exhall Road, Beaumont Road Northbound 26 169 27 Cross Keresley Heath Route Ringway St Nicholas, Ringway Exhall Road, Beaumont Road Southbound 21 191 26 Hill Cross Walsgrave Road, Longfellow 50 (27) Pool Meadow Bus Station Potters Green Route Eastbound 54 402 56 Road

Walsgrave Road, Longfellow Road Pool Meadow Bus Station Westbound 50 339 50 50 (32) White Frairs Street, Jordan Well Ansty Road, Clifford Bridge Road Eastbound 43 338 51 Potters Green Route Ansty Road, Clifford Bridge Road White Frairs Street, Jordan Well Westbound 45 298 45 Wheelwright Lane, Roland 58 (4) Foleshill Road, Eagle Street Northbound 28 198 28 Avenue, Hen Lane Rowleys Green Route Wheelwright Lane, Roland Avenue, Foleshill Road, Eagle Street Southbound 36 216 35 Hen Lane Wheelwright Lane, Roland 58 (56) Hales Street, Corporation Street Northbound 35 218 35 Avenue, Rowleys Green Route Wheelwright Lane, Roland Avenue, Hales Street, Corporation Street Southbound 45 267 46 Wheelwright Lane, Roland 58 (57) Hales Street, Corporation Street Rowleys Green Route Northbound 35 218 35 Avenue,

Wheelwright Lane, Roland Avenue, Hales Street, Corporation Street Southbound 45 267 46 New Union Street, Little Park R15 Warwick Road, Leamington Road Northbound 24 213 34 Street Stivichall Route Warwick Road, Leamington New Union Street, Little Park Street Southbound 24 219 34 Road 47 (12) Vauxhall Avenue Warwick Road Railway Bridge Tanyard Farm Route Eastbound 39 258 46 Warwick Road Railway Bridge Vauxhall Avenue Westbound 37 233 36 47 (34) Torrington Avenue, Station Avenue Farcroft Avenue, Broad Lane Northbound 10 89 7 Tanyard Farm Route Torrington Avenue, Station Farcroft Avenue, Broad Lane Southbound 18 115 15 Avenue St. James' Lane, Remembrance 52 (21) The Mount/John Grace St Eastbound 19 157 27 Road Willenhall Route St. James' Lane, Remembrance The Mount/John Grace St Westbound 30 144 26 Road

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 72 of 135

AM Inbound traffic towards City Centre

00:36

00:28

00:21 Observed Upper Confidence (secs) Observed Average Journey Time Observed Lower Confidence (secs) Modelled Time table 00:14 Journey Time (hh:mm:ss) Journey Time

00:07

00:00

0 32 21 40 50 17 27 32 R4 34 21 * Refer Table for Route details R R10 R20 R32 R12 R R21 R19 R34 R20 R R X R36 R R R56 R57 R15 R12 R R R90 (13A) R13 Bus Services

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 73 of 135

AM Outbound from towards City Centre

00:36

00:28

00:21 Observed Upper Confidence (secs) Observed Average Journey Time Observed Lower Confidence (secs) Modelled Time table 00:14 Journey Time (hh:mm:ss)

00:07

00:00

0 9 ) 0 R4 15 * Refer Table for Route details R20 R32 R12 R21 R21 R1 R34 R20 R40 R50 X17 R36 R27 R32 R56 R57 R R12 R34 R21 R32 R1 R90 (13A R13 Bus Services

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 74 of 135

IP Inbound traffic towards City Centre

00:36

00:28

00:21 Observed Upper Confidence (secs) Observed Average Journey Time Observed Lower Confidence (secs) Modelled Time table 00:14 Journey Time (hh:mm:ss) Time Journey

00:07

00:00

0 4 7 ) 7 2 7 1 * Refer Table for Route details 2 00 3 R4 2 R32 R10 R R32 R12 R21 R21 R19 R3 R20 R40 R50 X1 3A R36 R2 R R56 R5 R15 R12 R34 R R9 3(1 1 R Bus Services

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 75 of 135

IP Outbound traffic from City Centre

00:36

00:28

00:21 Observed Upper Confidence (secs) Observed Average Journey Time Observed Lower Confidence (secs) Modelled Time table 00:14 Journey Time (hh:mm:ss)

00:07

00:00

0 4 4 2 3 R * Refer Table for Route details R32 R10 R R32 R12 R21 R21 R19 R R20 R40 R50 X17 R36 R27 R32 R56 R57 R15 R12 R34 R21 R900 R13(13A) Bus Services

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 76 of 135

PM Inbound traffic towards City Centre

00:36

00:28

00:21 Observed Upper Confidence (secs) Observed Average Journey Time Observed Lower Confidence (secs) Modelled Time table 00:14 Journey Time (hh:mm:ss)

00:07

00:00

2 0 2 2 1 0 1 4 0 0 0 7 6 7 2 6 7 5 2 4 1 1 3 R4 1 * Refer Table for Route details R3 R10 R2 R3 R1 R2 R2 R19 R3 R2 R4 R5 X R R2 R3 R5 R5 R1 R R3 R2 R90 (13A) R13 Bus Services

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 77 of 135

PM Outbound traffic from City Centre

00:36

00:28

00:21 Observed Upper Confidence (secs) Observed Average Journey Time Observed Lower Confidence (secs) Modelled Time table 00:14 Journey Time (hh:mm:ss)

00:07

00:00

2 1 0 7 ) 4 2 4 32 10 0 21 19 34 20 1 36 27 32 R 21 * Refer Table for Route details R R R20 R32 R1 R2 9 R R R R R40 R50 X 3A R R R R56 R57 R15 R1 R3 R R 13(1 R Bus Services

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 78 of 135

7 CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion,

• The prior matrix calibration was reasonably good, although worse at outer cordon level compared to the inner cordon. The results were largely within a GEH less than 10 criteria.

• The matrix estimation provided very good calibration against all counts.

• The corridor validation was very good for some corridors and showed likely individuals problems for other corridors and suggesting some further data collection and validation maybe required for specific schemes appraisals using the model.

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 79 of 135

APPENDIX A - BUS AND TRAIN ROUTES WITHIN THE MODEL

Bus Services

Bus Route Operator 101 ALI 10 TCV 11 TCV 12 TCV 13A TCV 13 TCV 14 TCV 158 AFC 15 SMR 15 TCV 16 SMR 17A SMR 17B SMR 17 SMR 18A SMR 18 SMR 192 TWM 194 TWM 19W TCV 19 TCV 1 SMR 1 TCV 20 TCV 211 AMG 213 AMG 21C TCV 21W TCV 21 TCV 221 AMG 226 AMG 228 AMG 22A COU 22 COU 232 AAM 23C TCV 23S TCV 23 TCV 241 AMG 242 AMG 27 TCV 2 SMR 2 TCV 30A TCV 30C TCV 31 TCV

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 80 of 135

32C TCV 32 TCV 33 TCV 34 TCV 36 TCV 37 SMR 40 COU 40 TCV 41 SMR 42 COU 42 TCV 43A COU 43S COU 43 COU 47 SMR 48 SMR 497 AMG 498 AMG 4 TCV 507 AMG 509 AMG 50 TCV 511 AMG 513 AAM 514 AAM 51 TCV 538 JOH 539 JOH 53 COU 540 JOH 54 SMR 55A SMR 55 SMR 56 SMR 570 COU 57 SMR 580 COU 585 COU 58A TCV 59 TCV 5A SMR 5B SMR 5 SMR 5 TCV 60 TCV 63 SMR 64 SMR 67 SMR 68 SMR 69 AMG 6A SMR 6 SMR 701 COU Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 81 of 135

703 COU 704 COU 70 TCV 717 SMR 735 COU 736 COU 737 COU 74 COU 75 COU 75 TCV 766 778 COU 77 SMR 7 TCV 801 TCV 81A TCV 81E TCV 81W TCV 81 DIA 81 TCV 86 SMR 900 TWM 9 SMR E KIM G1 SMR H1 HRN U1 SMR U2 SMR X17 SMR X48 SMR X6 COU PRN CCN PRS COU

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 82 of 135

Train Services

Train service Operator London-Wolverhampton Virgin Wolverhampton-London Virgin Atherstone-London Virgin London-Atherstone Virgin London-Stafford Virgin Stafford-London Virgin Nuneaton-Rugby Virgin Rugby-Slow - Nuneaton Virgin Rugby-Nuneaton Virgin Nuneaton- Rugby Virgin Birmingham International Airport-Birmingham New Street LondonMidland Birmingham New Street-Birmingham International Airport LondonMidland Birmingham New Street-Coventry LondonMidland Birmingham New Street-Coventry-Slow LondonMidland Coventry - Birmingham New Street LondonMidland Coventry - Birmingham New Street- Slow LondonMidland Birmingham New Street-Northampton LondonMidland Northampton-Birmingham New Street LondonMidland Coventry-Birmingham New Street LondonMidland Birmingham New Street- Coventry LondonMidland Coventry-Birmingham New Street-Slow LondonMidland Birmingham New Street- Coventry-Slow LondonMidland Northampton-Wolverh LondonMidland Wolverhampton-Northampton LondonMidland Coventry-Nuneaton LondonMidland Nuneaton-Coventry LondonMidland Atherstone-Rugby LondonMidland Rugby-Atherstone LondonMidland Birmingham-Leamington LondonMidland Leamington-Birmingham LondonMidland Birmingham-London Chiltern London-Birmingham Chiltern Leamington - Birmingham Chiltern Birmingham- Leamington Chiltern London-Stratford Chiltern Stratford-London Chiltern Birmingham -Leamington CrossCountry Leamington- Birmingham CrossCountry Atherstone-London CrossCountry London-Atherstone CrossCountry Birmingham- Leicester CrossCountry Leicester- Birmingham CrossCountry

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 83 of 135

APPENDIX B - ZONE HEIRARCHY

Ward S.No Code Zone Area Ward Name Number Name of Zone

A. Internal Zones Coventry 1 Coventry Westwood FQ 20111 Lime Tree Park 2 Coventry Westwood FQ 20112 South Lime Tree Park Lime Tree Park Commercial 3 Coventry Westwood FQ 20113 Area 4 Coventry Westwood FQ 20121 South Westwood Heath 5 Coventry Westwood FQ 20122 Westwood Heath 6 Coventry Westwood FQ 20123 The University Of Warwick 7 Coventry Westwood FQ 20131 Nailcote Ave/Conway Ave 8 Coventry Westwood FQ 20132 Tile Hill 9 Coventry Westwood FQ 20133 West Side Business Centre 10 Coventry Westwood FQ 20141 West Park Wood 11 Coventry Westwood FQ 20143 North Park Wood 12 Coventry Westwood FQ 20151 South Business Park Offices, University of 13 Coventry Westwood FQ 20152 Warwick 14 Coventry Westwood FQ 20153 West Canley 15 Coventry Wainbody FP 20211 North Green Lane 16 Coventry Wainbody FP 20212 Southwest Stivichall 17 Coventry Wainbody FP 20213 Finham 18 Coventry Wainbody FP 20214 West Finham 19 Coventry Wainbody FP 20215 South Green Lane 20 Coventry Wainbody FP 20216 West Green Lane 21 Coventry Wainbody FP 20221 West Wainbody Wood 22 Coventry Wainbody FP 20222 East Wainbody Wood 23 Coventry Wainbody FP 20223 West Gibbet Hill Cannon Park 24 Coventry Wainbody FP 20224 Road/Fairlands Park 25 Coventry Wainbody FP 20225 South Gibbet Hill 26 Coventry Wainbody FP 20231 Canley Garden Cemetery East of University of 27 Coventry Wainbody FP 20232 Warwick 28 Coventry Wainbody FP 20233 Tutbury Avenue 29 Coventry Wainbody FP 20241 University Viscount Centre 30 Coventry Wainbody FP 20242 University of Warwick East of University of 31 Coventry Wainbody FP 20243 Warwick University of Warwick/Tocil 32 Coventry Wainbody FP 20244 Wood 33 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20311 Stivichall North Finham/Southeast 34 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20312 Stivichall 35 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20313 Southwest Whitley Burnsall Road, Commercial 36 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20321 Area 37 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20331 West Earlsdon 38 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20332 Central Six Retail Park 39 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20333 Meml Stone 40 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20334 East Earlsdon 41 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20335 South Earlsdon Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 84 of 135

42 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20336 War Memorial Park 43 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20337 Central Six Retail Park 44 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20341 Westwood Gardens 45 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20342 Hearsall Golf Course 46 Coventry Earlsdon FD 20343 West Hearsall Golf Course 47 Coventry Woodlands FS 20411 Hockley Commercial area 48 Coventry Woodlands FS 20412 North Tilehill Wood 49 Coventry Woodlands FS 20413 South Tilehill Wood Pig Wood/North Tile Hill 50 Coventry Woodlands FS 20414 Wood 51 Coventry Woodlands FS 20415 West Tilehill Wood Northwest Upper Eastern 52 Coventry Woodlands FS 20421 Green Northeast Upper Eastern 53 Coventry Woodlands FS 20422 Green 54 Coventry Woodlands FS 20423 East Upper Eastern Green 55 Coventry Woodlands FS 20431 Floyds Field 56 Coventry Woodlands FS 20432 North Limbrick Wood 57 Coventry Woodlands FS 20433 Northeast Tile Hill 58 Coventry Woodlands FS 20434 Limbrick Wood 59 Coventry Woodlands FS 20435 Northeast Tilehill Wood 60 Coventry Woodlands FS 20441 Allesley Green West 61 Coventry Woodlands FS 20442 Lower Eastern Green 62 Coventry Woodlands FS 20443 South Lower Eastern Green 63 Coventry Woodlands FS 20444 North Lime Tree Park 64 Coventry Whoberley FR 20511 West Allesley Park 65 Coventry Whoberley FR 20512 West Lower Eastern Green 66 Coventry Whoberley FR 20513 Buckingham Rise 67 Coventry Whoberley FR 20514 East Allesley Park 68 Coventry Whoberley FR 20515 Southeast Allesley Park 69 Coventry Whoberley FR 20521 Northeast Lime Tree Park 70 Coventry Whoberley FR 20522 Northeast Whoberley 71 Coventry Whoberley FR 20523 South Whoberley 72 Coventry Whoberley FR 20524 Northwest Whoberley 73 Coventry Whoberley FR 20531 Northeast Hearsall Common Southeast Hearsall 74 Coventry Whoberley FR 20532 Common 75 Coventry Whoberley FR 20533 City College Coventry 76 Coventry Whoberley FR 20534 South Spon End West Coventry Business 77 Coventry Whoberley FR 20541 Park East Coventry Business 78 Coventry Whoberley FR 20542 Park Southwest Hearsall 79 Coventry Whoberley FR 20543 Common 80 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20611 Southwest Coundon 81 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20612 Northwest Chapel Fields 82 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20613 North Chapel Fields 83 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20614 West Coundon 84 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20615 North Chapel Fields 85 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20616 East Allesley Park 86 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20621 Spon End 87 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20622 North Spon End 88 Coventry Sherbourne FM 20623 East Spon End 89 Coventry Holbrook FG 20711 South Keresley 90 Coventry Holbrook FG 20712 West Keresley 91 Coventry Holbrook FG 20713 East Keresley 92 Coventry Holbrook FG 20714 Southeast Keresley

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 85 of 135

93 Coventry Holbrook FG 20715 West Holbrooks 94 Coventry Holbrook FG 20721 South Whitmore Park 95 Coventry Holbrook FG 20722 St Pauls Cemetery 96 Coventry Holbrook FG 20731 Roland Avenue 97 Coventry Holbrook FG 20732 Holbrooks 98 Coventry Holbrook FG 20733 North Whitmore Park 99 Coventry Holbrook FG 20741 West Rowley's Green 100 Coventry Holbrook FG 20742 Southwest Rowley's Green 101 Coventry Holbrook FG 20743 Northeast Monks Park 102 Coventry Holbrook FG 20751 East Rowley's Green 103 Coventry Holbrook FG 20752 Hales Park Industrial Estate 104 Coventry Holbrook FG 20753 West Woodshires Green 105 Coventry Bablake FA 20811 Agriculture Area 106 Coventry Bablake FA 20812 Agriculture Area 107 Coventry Bablake FA 20813 Agriculture Area 108 Coventry Bablake FA 20821 North Allesley Park 109 Coventry Bablake FA 20822 South Allesley 110 Coventry Bablake FA 20823 South Allesley/Frogmere 111 Coventry Bablake FA 20831 Agriculture Area 112 Coventry Bablake FA 20832 Hawkes End Wood 113 Coventry Bablake FA 20833 Agriculture Area 114 Coventry Bablake FA 20841 Allesley Commercial Area 115 Coventry Bablake FA 20842 Agriculture Area 116 Coventry Bablake FA 20843 Agriculture Area 117 Coventry Bablake FA 20851 Coundon Hall Park 118 Coventry Bablake FA 20852 Coundon Green 119 Coventry Bablake FA 20853 East Coundon Green Cardinal Newman RC School & Community 120 Coventry Bablake FA 20861 College 121 Coventry Bablake FA 20862 West Whitmore Park Dickens Road/Wallace 122 Coventry Bablake FA 20863 Road 123 Coventry Longford FH 20911 East Bell Green 124 Coventry Longford FH 20921 Foleshill 125 Coventry Longford FH 20922 East Foleshill 126 Coventry Longford FH 20923 West Bell Green 127 Coventry Longford FH 20931 Longford Park 128 Coventry Longford FH 20932 West Manor House 129 Coventry Longford FH 20933 Liby&Pol Sta 130 Coventry Longford FH 20941 North Foxford 131 Coventry Longford FH 20942 East Foxford 132 Coventry Longford FH 20943 Manor House 133 Coventry Longford FH 20944 Grange Farm 134 Coventry Longford FH 20945 North Foxford Coventry Walsgrave 135 Coventry Henley FF 21011 Triangle 136 Coventry Henley FF 21012 Walsgrave Retail Park 137 Coventry Henley FF 21021 Lention's Lane Farm 138 Coventry Henley FF 21022 Wyken Slough 139 Coventry Henley FF 21031 North Woodway Park 140 Coventry Henley FF 21032 Potter's Green 141 Coventry Henley FF 21033 South Walsgrave On Sowe 142 Coventry Henley FF 21034 University Hospital 143 Coventry Henley FF 21041 WoodEnd 144 Coventry Henley FF 21042 Moat House Park 145 Coventry Henley FF 21043 Henley Green

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 86 of 135

146 Coventry Foleshill FE 21111 Three Spires Junction 147 Coventry Foleshill FE 21112 Northwest Little Heath 148 Coventry Foleshill FE 21113 Little Heath 149 Coventry Foleshill FE 21114 Tesco Arena 150 Coventry Foleshill FE 21121 Parting of the Heaths 151 Coventry Foleshill FE 21122 Edgwick Park Edgwick Park Industrial 152 Coventry Foleshill FE 21123 Area 153 Coventry Foleshill FE 21131 North Bishopgate Green 154 Coventry Foleshill FE 21132 East Bishopgate Green 155 Coventry Foleshill FE 21133 South Bishopgate Green 156 Coventry Foleshill FE 21141 Great Heath 157 Coventry Foleshill FE 21142 Paradise 158 Coventry Foleshill FE 21143 Central City Industrial Estate 159 Coventry Foleshill FE 21151 South Parting of the Heaths 160 Coventry Foleshill FE 21152 Southwest Great Heath 161 Coventry Foleshill FE 21153 North Cash's Bridge 162 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21211 City Centre, Car Park 163 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21212 City Centre, Office 164 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21213 City Centre 165 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21214 City Centre, Car park 166 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21215 City Centre, shopping centre 167 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21216 City Centre 168 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21217 Coventry University 169 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21218 City Centre 170 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21219 City Centre, Office 171 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21221 North Hillfields 172 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21222 Hillfields 173 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21223 East Hillfields 174 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21231 Coventry University 175 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21232 West Gosford Green 176 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21233 Blue Coat CE School All Saints CE Primary 177 Coventry St. Michael's FL 21234 School 178 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21311 North Stoke Heath 179 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21312 North Middle Stoke 180 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21313 North Upper Stoke 181 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21314 Church End 182 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21315 North Gosford Green 183 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21316 Northwest Wyken Green 184 Coventry Upper Stoke FN 21317 Southeast Stoke Heath 185 Coventry Wyken FT 21411 North Wyken 186 Coventry Wyken FT 21412 East Wyken 187 Coventry Wyken FT 21421 Southwest Belgrave Square 188 Coventry Wyken FT 21422 Cauldon Castle School 189 Coventry Wyken FT 21423 North Binley 190 Coventry Wyken FT 21431 Glebefarm GV 191 Coventry Wyken FT 21432 Hungerley Hall Farm West Combe Abbey Country 192 Coventry Wyken FT 21433 Park 193 Coventry Wyken FT 21434 Dorchester way 194 Coventry Wyken FT 21441 West Wyken 195 Coventry Wyken FT 21442 Wyken 196 Coventry Wyken FT 21443 Wyken Industrial Area 197 Coventry Wyken FT 21444 Northeast Belgrave Square 198 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21511 Northeast Willenhall 199 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21512 Southwest Willenhall

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 87 of 135

200 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21513 North Willenhall Wood 201 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21514 North Tollbar End 202 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21521 Binley Business Park 203 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21522 West Rugby Football Club 204 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21523 Binley Industrial Area 205 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21531 East Binley 206 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21533 South Binley 207 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21541 Southwest Binley School and Community 208 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21542 College 209 Coventry Binley and Willenhall FB 21543 West Binley 210 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21611 Stoke Park 211 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21612 East Church End 212 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21613 Southeast Church End 213 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21621 South Lower Stoke 214 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21631 Southeast Gosford Green 215 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21632 West Stoke 216 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21633 Stoke Aldermoor 217 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21641 New Century Park 218 Coventry Lower Stoke FJ 21642 Stoke, Cricket Ground 219 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21711 Sunnybank Avenue 220 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21712 Stonebridge Trading Estate 221 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21721 North Coventry Airport 222 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21722 Southwest Pinley Gardens 223 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21723 Pinley South Whitley Commercial 224 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21731 Area 225 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21732 Whitley 226 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21733 East Whitley Coventry University 227 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21741 Technocentre 228 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21742 North Cheylesmore 229 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21743 West Cheylesmore 230 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21744 North Coventry Station 231 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21745 Leamington Junction 232 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21746 East Cheylesmore 233 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21747 South Cheylesmore 234 Coventry Cheylesmore FC 21748 Cheylesmore 235 Coventry Radford FK 21811 North Radford 236 Coventry Radford FK 21812 Rugby Football Ground 237 Coventry Radford FK 21813 Southwest Draper's Fields 238 Coventry Radford FK 21814 Northwest Draper's Fields 239 Coventry Radford FK 21815 Radford Common 240 Coventry Radford FK 21816 Radford 241 Coventry Radford FK 21817 Southeast Radford 242 Coventry Radford FK 21818 East north Radford 243 Coventry Radford FK 21819 Radford TA Centre 244 Coventry Radford FK 21820 East south Radford 245 Coventry Radford FK 21821 Bishopgate Green 246 Coventry Radford FK 21822 Draper's Fields 247 500 Park and Ride North 248 501 Park and Ride South Warwick 249 Warwick Abbey FX 11013 Agriculture Area 250 Warwick Abbey FX 11012 Northwest Kenilworth 251 Warwick Abbey FX 11011 Southwest Kenilworth 252 Warwick Abbey FX 11014 Agriculture Area

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 88 of 135

Southeast Leamington Spa 253 Warwick Brunswick FZ 11031 Rail Station Southwest Leamington Spa 254 Warwick Brunswick FZ 11032 Rail Station 255 Warwick Budbrooke GA 11042 Grove Park/Agriculture Area 256 Warwick Budbrooke GA 11041 Barford 257 Warwick Clarendon GB 11052 Newbold Comyn Golf Club West Newbold Comyn Golf 258 Warwick Clarendon GB 11051 Club 259 Warwick Crown GC 11061 Northeast Lillington 260 Warwick Crown GC 11062 Lillington 261 Warwick Cubbington GD 11073 Cubbington 262 Warwick Cubbington GD 11074 Agriculture Area 263 Warwick Cubbington GD 11075 Agriculture Area 264 Warwick Cubbington GD 11076 Bubbenhall 265 Warwick Lapworth GE 11081 Lapworth 266 Warwick Leek Wootton GF 11093 Hill Wootton 267 Warwick Leek Wootton GF 11091 Chadwick End 268 Warwick Leek Wootton GF 11092 Wedgnock Agriculture Area 269 Warwick Manor GG 11102 Northeast Leamington Spa 270 Warwick Manor GG 11103 Southeast Old Milverton 271 Warwick Manor GG 11101 Leicester Ln/Cubbington Rd 272 Warwick Milverton GH 11111 West Kenilworth Northwest Leamington Spa 273 Warwick Milverton GH 11112 Rail Station 274 Warwick Milverton GH 11113 Northwest Leamington 275 Warwick Park Hill GJ 11121 East Kenilworth 276 Warwick Park Hill GJ 11122 Southeast Kenilworth 277 Warwick Park Hill GJ 11123 Northeast Kenilworth 278 Warwick Radford Semele GK 11131 Agriculture Area 279 Warwick St John's GL 11141 Southwest Kenilworth 280 Warwick St John's GL 11142 Kenilworth 281 Warwick Stoneleigh GM 11153 Coventry Airport 282 Warwick Stoneleigh GM 11151 Stareton 283 Warwick Warwick North GN 11161 Woodloes Park 284 Warwick Warwick North GN 11162 Northeast Warwick 285 Warwick Warwick South GP 11171 Agriculture Area East Warwick/Emscote 286 Warwick Warwick South GP 11174 Road 287 Warwick Warwick South GP 11173 Heathcote 288 Warwick Warwick South GP 11172 Agriculture Area 289 Warwick Warwick West GQ 11184 Southwest Warwick 290 Warwick Warwick West GQ 11181 Lonbridge 291 Warwick Warwick West GQ 11182 West Warwick 292 Warwick Warwick West GQ 11183 Warwick Hospital Leamington and County 293 Warwick Whitnash GR 11191 Golf Club 294 Warwick Whitnash GR 11192 West Whitenash 295 Warwick Whitnash GR 11193 East Whitenash 296 Warwick Willes GS 11201 Sydenham 297 Warwick Willes GS 11202 East Leamington Spa Northeast Leamington Spa 298 Warwick Willes GS 11203 Rail Station 299 Warwick Stoneleigh GM 11154 Agriculture Area 300 Warwick Stoneleigh GM 11152 Agriculture Area 301 Warwick Cubbington GD 11071 Old Milverton 302 Warwick Cubbington GD 11072 Agriculture Area 303 Warwick Bishop's Tachbrook FY 11021 Heathcote

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 89 of 135

Nuneaton and Bedworth Nuneaton and 304 Bedworth Abbey FR 12011 East Nuneaton Nuneaton and 305 Bedworth Abbey FR 12012 North Nuneaton Nuneaton and 306 Bedworth Abbey FR 12013 Northwest Nuneaton Nuneaton and 307 Bedworth Arbury FS 12021 Agriculture Area Nuneaton and 308 Bedworth Arbury FS 12022 Agriculture Area Nuneaton and 309 Bedworth Arbury FS 12023 Bermuda Nuneaton and Southeast 310 Bedworth Attleborough FT 12031 Nuneaton,greenland Nuneaton and 311 Bedworth Attleborough FT 12032 Southwest Whitestone Nuneaton and 312 Bedworth Bar Pool FU 12041 East Stockingford Nuneaton and 313 Bedworth Bar Pool FU 12042 South Stockingford Nuneaton and 314 Bedworth Bar Pool FU 12043 North Stockingford Nuneaton and 315 Bedworth Bede FW 12051 Northeast Bedworth Heath Nuneaton and 316 Bedworth Bede FW 12052 Southeast Collycroft Nuneaton and 317 Bedworth Bulkington FX 12061 Marston Jabbett Nuneaton and 318 Bedworth Bulkington FX 12064 Northeast Bulkington Nuneaton and South Bulkington 319 Bedworth Bulkington FX 12062 Commercial Area Nuneaton and 320 Bedworth Bulkington FX 12063 Northwest Bulkington Nuneaton and 321 Bedworth Camp Hill FY 12071 South Hartshill Nuneaton and 322 Bedworth Camp Hill FY 12072 B4114/B4111 Nuneaton and 323 Bedworth Exhall FZ 12081 South Egoodyers End Nuneaton and 324 Bedworth Exhall FZ 12082 South Exhall Nuneaton and 325 Bedworth Exhall FZ 12083 South Wagon Overthrow Nuneaton and 326 Bedworth Exhall FZ 12084 East Bedworth Little Heath Nuneaton and 327 Bedworth Galley Common GA 12091 Northeast Ansley Nuneaton and 328 Bedworth Galley Common GA 12092 Northeast Galley Common Nuneaton and 329 Bedworth Galley Common GA 12093 Southeast Galley Common Nuneaton and 330 Bedworth Heath GB 12101 Northwest Goodyers End Nuneaton and Southwest Bedworth Little 331 Bedworth Heath GB 12102 Heath Nuneaton and 332 Bedworth Heath GB 12103 West Bedworth Heath Nuneaton and 333 Bedworth Kingswood GC 12111 South Ansley Nuneaton and 334 Bedworth Kingswood GC 12112 Northwest Stockingford Nuneaton and 335 Bedworth Poplar GD 12123 Bayton Road Industrial Area Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 90 of 135

Nuneaton and 336 Bedworth Poplar GD 12122 South Blackbank Nuneaton and 337 Bedworth Poplar GD 12121 Northwest Bedworth Nuneaton and 338 Bedworth St Nicolas GE 12132 South Weddington Nuneaton and 339 Bedworth St Nicolas GE 12133 East Nuneaton/A47,A4254 Nuneaton and 340 Bedworth St Nicolas GE 12131 Agriculture Area Nuneaton and 341 Bedworth Slough GF 12141 Northwest Bedworth Heath Nuneaton and 342 Bedworth Slough GF 12142 Collycroft Nuneaton and 343 Bedworth Weddington GG 12153 Northwest Weddington Nuneaton and 344 Bedworth Weddington GG 12152 Weddington Nuneaton and 345 Bedworth Weddington GG 12151 Northeast Weddington Nuneaton and Northeast 346 Bedworth Wem Brook GH 12161 Collycroft/Agriculture Area Nuneaton and 347 Bedworth Wem Brook GH 12163 South Nuneaton/Coton Rd Nuneaton and South Nuneaton/Coventry 348 Bedworth Wem Brook GH 12162 Rd Nuneaton and 349 Bedworth Wem Brook GH 12164 Agriculture Area Nuneaton and 350 Bedworth Whitestone GJ 12171 Agriculture Area Nuneaton and 351 Bedworth Whitestone GJ 12172 Southeast Whitestone Nuneaton and Southeast 352 Bedworth Whitestone GJ 12173 Nuneaton/Eastbooro Way North Warwickshire North 353 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14011 Ansley North 354 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14041 West Fillongley East Birmingham North International 355 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14051 Airport/Agriculture Area North 356 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14061 Maxstoke North 357 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14021 Corley North 358 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14031 Fillongley North 359 Warwickshire Fillongley GF 14071 East Shustoke North 360 Warwickshire Arley and Whitacre FW 14081 West Ansley North 361 Warwickshire Hartshill GG 14091 North Hartshill North 362 Warwickshire Hurley and Wood End GH 14101 Whateley North Baddesley and 363 Warwickshire Grendon GA 14111 Agriculture Area North 364 Warwickshire Atherstone Central FX 14121 Atherstone Central North 365 Warwickshire Atherstone North FY 14131 Atherstone North North Atherstone South and 366 Warwickshire Mancetter FZ 14141 Atherstone South/Mancetter

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 91 of 135

Rugby Earl Craven and 367 Rugby Wolston GH 13011 Wolston 368 Rugby Ryton-on-Dunsmore GT 13021 Ryton-on-Dunsome 369 Rugby Fosse GK 13031 Monks Kirby 370 Rugby Admirals FZ 13041 Rugby Dunchurch and 371 Rugby Knightlow GG 13051 South Rugby Solihull 372 Solihull Meriden FJ 50713 North Meriden 373 Solihull Meriden FJ 50712 Meriden 374 Solihull Meriden FJ 50711 East Hampton In Arden 375 Solihull Meriden FJ 50721 Northwest Balsall Common 376 Solihull Meriden FJ 50722 Northeast Berkswell 377 Solihull Meriden FJ 50723 Burton Green 378 Solihull Meriden FJ 50733 East Balsall 379 Solihull Meriden FJ 50732 West Balsall 380 Solihull Meriden FJ 50731 East Dorridge Birmingham International 381 Solihull Bickenhill FA 50651 Airport 382 Solihull Bickenhill FA 50611 Hampton In Arden 383 Solihull Knowle FG 50821 Dorridge 384 Solihull Castle Bromwich FB 50111 North Marston Green 385 Solihull Shirley South FP 51021 Solihull 386 Solihull Packwood FL 50951 East Earlswood

B. Railway Stations Zones 387 81610 Hampton In Arden Station 388 99901 Coventry Railway Station 389 99902 Nuneaton Railway Station 390 99903 Atherstone Railway Station 391 99904 Bedworth Railway Station 392 99905 Canley Railway Station 393 99906 Tile Hill Railway Station 394 99907 Berkswell Railway Station 395 99908 Rugby Railway Station Leamington Spa Railway 396 99909 Station 397 99910 Warwick Railway Station Birmingham International 398 99911 Airport Railway Station 399 99913 Leicester Railway Station 400 99926 Solihull Railway Station Warwick Parkway Railway 401 99930 Station

C. External Zones 402 99912 Rail to/from Oxford Bus and Rail to/from 403 99914 Birmingham 404 99915 Rail to/from Milton Keynes Rail to/from Stafford 405 99916 Direction Rail to/from London 406 99917 Marylebone Railway 407 99919 London Bus External 408 99920 Leicester Bus External 409 99921 Cambridge Bus External 410 99922 Southam Bus External

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 92 of 135

Bus and Rail to/from 411 99923 Strafford upon Avon 412 99924 Wellesbourne External 413 99925 North Warwickshire External 414 99927 Sheldon External 415 99928 Coleshill External 416 99929 Harbury External

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 93 of 135

APPENDIX C - PRIOR MATRIX AM CALIBRATION TABLES

C.1.1 AM Inner Cordon

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 1037 1008 0.9 97.2% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 636 538 4.0 84.6% 203 Harnell Lane East 400 357 2.2 89.3% 205 Binley Road 368 466 4.8 126.6% 206 Charterhouse Rd 266 236 1.9 88.7% 207 London Road 16 44 5.1 275.0% 208 Mile Lane 514 479 1.6 93.2% 209 Quinton Rd 172 98 6.4 57.0% 210 Warwick Rd 630 595 1.4 94.4% 211 Butts Road 790 929 4.7 117.6% 212 Holyhead Road 326 311 0.8 95.4% 213 Coundon Road 222 332 6.6 149.5% 214 Radford Road 448 486 1.8 108.5% 215 Walsgrave Road 741 692 1.8 93.4% 216 Clay Street 179 202 1.7 112.8% Total 6745 6773 Mod/Obs (%) 100%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 12 GEH <5 12 Total 12 Overall % In criteria 80%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 369 388 1.0 105.1% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 217 297 5.0 136.9% 203 Harnell Lane East 222 161 4.4 72.5% 205 Binley Road 245 137 7.8 55.9% 206 Charterhouse Rd 256 218 2.5 85.2% 207 London Road 28 23 1.0 82.1% 208 Mile Lane 240 140 7.3 58.3% 209 Quinton Rd 95 28 8.5 29.5% 210 Warwick Rd 350 383 1.7 109.4% 211 Butts Road 626 710 3.3 113.4% 212 Holyhead Road 181 128 4.3 70.7% 213 Coundon Road 123 161 3.2 130.9% 214 Radford Road 424 467 2.0 110.1% 215 Walsgrave Road 214 259 2.9 121.0% 216 Clay Street 68 105 4.0 154.4% Total 3658 3605 Mod/Obs (%) 99%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 7 GEH <5 12 Total 12 Overall % In criteria 80%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 94 of 135

C.1.2 AM Outer Cordon Radial

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 442 519 3.5 117.4% 2 Bell Green Road 238 292 3.3 122.7% 3 Blackberry Lane 90 107 1.7 118.9% 4 Ansty Road 367 427 3.0 116.3% 5 Binley Road 270 358 5.0 132.6% 6 London Rd 372 487 5.5 130.9% 7 Leamington Road 22 115 11.2 522.7% 8 Kenilworth Road 198 330 8.1 166.7% 10 Herald Avenue 409 342 3.5 83.6% 11 Tile Hill Lane 183 195 0.9 106.6% 12 Broad Lane 205 321 7.2 156.6% 14 HolyHead Road 55 150 9.4 272.7% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 231 270 2.5 116.9% 16 Radford Road Outer 192 232 2.7 120.8% 17 Cheveral Avenue 291 212 5.0 72.9% 18 Lockhurst Lane 318 319 0.1 100.3% Total 3883 4676 Mod/Obs (%) 120%

No of links 16 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 11 Total Pass 11 Overall % In criteria 69%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 235 163 5.1 69.4% 2 Bell Green Road 151 145 0.5 96.0% 3 Blackberry Lane 40 53 1.9 132.5% 4 Ansty Road 407 356 2.6 87.5% 5 Binley Road 306 320 0.8 104.6% 7 Leamington Road 70 91 2.3 130.0% 10 Herald Avenue 694 795 3.7 114.6% 11 Tile Hill Lane 244 259 0.9 106.1% 12 Broad Lane 125 242 8.6 193.6% 14 HolyHead Road 64 140 7.5 218.8% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 88 213 10.2 242.0% 16 Radford Road Outer 76 141 6.2 185.5% 17 Cheveral Avenue 138 126 1.0 91.3% 18 Lockhurst Lane 177 193 1.2 109.0% Total 2815 3237 Mod/Obs (%) 115%

No of links 14 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 7 GEH <5 9 Total Pass 9 Overall % In criteria 64%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 95 of 135

C.1.3 AM Outer Cordon Orbital

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 8 5 1.2 62.5% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 164 190 2.0 115.9% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 60 99 4.4 165.0% 4 Belgrave Road 14 13 0.3 92.9% 5 Attoxhall Rd 106 87 1.9 82.1% 7 Kingsbury Rd 95 98 0.3 103.2% 8 Norman Place Rd 58 126 7.1 217.2% 9 Burnaby Rd 9 7 0.7 77.8% Total 514 625 Mod/Obs (%) 122%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 5 GEH <5 7 Total Pass 7 Overall % In criteria 88%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 14 0 5.3 0.0% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 154 185 2.4 120.1% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 48 14 6.1 29.2% 4 Belgrave Road 69 90 2.4 130.4% 5 Attoxhall Rd 198 142 4.3 71.7% 7 Kingsbury Rd 70 136 6.5 194.3% 8 Norman Place Rd 41 113 8.2 275.6% 9 Burnaby Rd 9 15 1.7 166.7% Total 603 695 Mod/Obs (%) 115%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 1 GEH <5 4 Total Pass 4 Overall % In criteria 50%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 96 of 135

C.1.4 AM Screenline 1

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 318 319 0.1 100.31% Foleshill Road 442 519 3.5 117.42% Lythalls Lane 8 5 1.2 62.50% Coventry to Bedworth 43 22 3.7 51.16% Total 811 865 1.9 106.66%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 177 193 1.2 109.04% Foleshill Road 235 163 5.1 69.36% Lythalls Lane 14 0 5.3 0.00% Coventry to Bedworth 47 42 0.7 89.36% Total 473 398 3.6 84.14%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 2 GEH <5 2 Total 2 Overall % In criteria 50%

C.1.5 AM Screenline 2

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 205 321 7.2 156.59% Tile Hill Lane 183 195 0.9 106.56% Tile Hill to Canley 2603 2740 2.7 105.26% Herald Avenue 409 342 3.5 83.62% Total 3400 3598 3.3 105.82%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 2 GEH <5 2 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 125 242 8.6 193.60% Tile Hill Lane 244 259 0.9 106.15% Canley to Tile Hill 2503 2443 1.2 97.60% Herald Avenue 694 795 3.7 114.55% Total 3566 3739 2.9 104.85%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 3 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 97 of 135

C.1.6 AM Bus Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 77 52 3.1 67.53% Park and Ride South 94 33 0.0 35.11% Warwick Road (SB) 74 49 3.2 66.22% Warwick Road (NB) 9 136 14.9 1511.11% Station Square 102 99 0.3 97.06% Tesco Arena 57 57 0.0 100.00% Warwick Uni 25 132 12.1 528.00% Walsgrave Hospital 61 127 6.8 208.20% Bedworth Mill St 125 127 0.2 101.60% Nuneaton Bus Station 234 121 8.5 51.71%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 6 GEH <5 6 Total 6 Overall % In criteria 60%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 0 0 0.0 100.00% Park and Ride South 0 0 0.0 100.00% Warwick Road (SB) 35 88 6.8 251.43% Warwick Road (NB) 74 160 8.0 216.22% Station Square 121 315 13.1 260.33% Tesco Arena 52 59 0.9 113.46% Warwick Uni 394 525 6.1 133.25% Walsgrave Hospital 405 522 5.4 128.89% Bedworth Mill St 113 113 0.0 100.00% Nuneaton Bus Station 215 224 0.6 104.19%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 5 GEH <5 5 Total 5 Overall % In criteria 50%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 98 of 135

C.1.7 AM Rail Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 965 973 0.3 100.83% Hampton In Arden 102 125 2.2 122.55% Coventry 1811 1921 2.5 106.07% Leamington Spa 895 651 8.8 72.74% Canley 140 137 0.3 97.86% Tile Hill 235 289 3.3 122.98% Berkswell 146 159 1.1 108.90% Warwick Parkway 314 316 0.1 100.64% Warwick 174 176 0.2 101.15% Bedworth 18 35 3.3 194.44%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 9 Total 9 Overall % In criteria 90%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 1015 1139 3.8 112.22% Hampton In Arden 14 28 3.1 200.00% Coventry 1005 1236 6.9 122.99% Leamington Spa 317 387 3.7 122.08% Canley 46 51 0.7 110.87% Tile Hill 93 78 1.6 83.87% Berkswell 17 17 0.0 100.00% Warwick Parkway 30 33 0.5 110.00% Warwick 135 142 0.6 105.19% Bedworth 7 3 1.8 42.86%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 9 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 99 of 135

C.1.8 AM Rail Flow Count

Train Link Flow Results (overall) Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Line Location Observed Modelled GEH % External Zone to Birmingham Int 2853 2501 6.8 87.66% Birmingham Int to Hampton in Arden 2646 2644 0.0 99.92% Hampton in Arden to Berkswell 2634 2688 1.0 102.05% Berkswell to Tile Hill 2634 2741 2.1 104.06% Tile Hill to Canley 2603 2740 2.7 105.26% Canley to Coventry 2586 2721 2.6 105.22% Coventry to Rugby 1891 2280 8.5 120.57% Rugby to Coventry 1272 1027 7.2 80.74% Coventry to Canley 2463 2337 2.6 94.88% Canley to Tile Hill 2503 2443 1.2 97.60% Tile Hill to Berskwell 2582 2655 1.4 102.83% Berkswell to Hampton in Arden 2630 2743 2.2 104.30% Hampton in Arden to Birmingham Int 2658 2796 2.6 105.19% Birmingham NS to Rugby Birmingham Int to External Zone 2742 2487 5.0 90.70% Leamington Spa to Coventry 507 505 0.1 99.61% Leamington Spa to Coventry Coventry to Leamington Spa 404 341 3.3 84.41% Bedworth to Coventry 47 42 0.7 89.36% Nuneaton to Coventry Coventry to Bedworth 43 22 3.7 51.16% Ext to Leamington Spa 448 668 9.3 149.11% Leamington Spa to Warwick 618 482 5.8 77.99% Warwick to Warwick Parkway 799 523 10.7 65.46% Warwick Parkway to Hatton 881 613 9.8 69.58% Hatton to Warwick Parkway 645 654 0.4 101.40% Warwick Parkway to Warwick 714 847 4.8 118.63% Warwick to Leamington Spa 662 841 6.5 127.04% Birmingham SH to Leamington Spa Leamington Spa to Ext 848 1128 8.9 133.02%

No of links 26 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 16 GEH <5 16 Total 21 Overall % In criteria 81%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 100 of 135

APPENDIX D - PRIOR MATRIX IP CALIBRATION TABLES

D.1.1 IP Inner Cordon

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 957 667 10.2 69.7% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 402 426 1.2 106.0% 203 Harnell Lane East 199 163 2.7 81.9% 205 Binley Road 323 362 2.1 112.1% 206 Charterhouse Rd 229 253 1.5 110.5% 207 London Road 30 21 1.8 70.0% 208 Mile Lane 284 246 2.3 86.6% 209 Quinton Rd 206 145 4.6 70.4% 210 Warwick Rd 477 541 2.8 113.4% 211 Butts Road 734 852 4.2 116.1% 212 Holyhead Road 432 365 3.4 84.5% 213 Coundon Road 220 179 2.9 81.4% 214 Radford Road 458 519 2.8 113.3% 215 Walsgrave Road 730 718 0.4 98.4% 216 Clay Street 224 236 0.8 105.4% Total 5905 5693 Mod/Obs (%) 96%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 12 GEH <5 14 Total 14 Overall % In criteria 93%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 1169 771 12.8 66.0% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 356 400 2.3 112.4% 203 Harnell Lane East 122 197 5.9 161.5% 205 Binley Road 296 296 0.0 100.0% 206 Charterhouse Rd 193 173 1.5 89.6% 207 London Road 23 16 1.6 69.6% 208 Mile Lane 313 286 1.6 91.4% 209 Quinton Rd 126 101 2.3 80.2% 210 Warwick Rd 339 382 2.3 112.7% 211 Butts Road 805 871 2.3 108.2% 212 Holyhead Road 265 263 0.1 99.2% 213 Coundon Road 135 136 0.1 100.7% 214 Radford Road 615 489 5.4 79.5% 215 Walsgrave Road 279 309 1.7 110.8% 216 Clay Street 202 274 4.7 135.6% Total 5238 4964 Mod/Obs (%) 95%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 11 GEH <5 12 Total 13 Overall % In criteria 87%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 101 of 135

D.1.2 PM Outer Cordon Radial

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 473 382 4.4 80.8% 2 Bell Green Road 285 180 6.9 63.2% 3 Blackberry Lane 69 40 3.9 58.0% 4 Ansty Road 322 552 11.0 171.4% 5 Binley Road 284 264 1.2 93.0% 6 London Rd 451 316 6.9 70.1% 7 Leamington Road 15 64 7.8 426.7% 8 Kenilworth Road 277 268 0.5 96.8% 10 Herald Avenue 426 395 1.5 92.7% 11 Tile Hill Lane 206 162 3.2 78.6% 12 Broad Lane 264 285 1.3 108.0% 14 HolyHead Road 117 174 4.7 148.7% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 228 135 6.9 59.2% 16 Radford Road Outer 115 131 1.4 113.9% 17 Cheveral Avenue 282 133 10.3 47.2% 18 Lockhurst Lane 240 151 6.4 62.9% Total 4054 3632 Mod/Obs (%) 90%

No of links 16 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 7 GEH <5 9 Total Pass 9 Overall % In criteria 56%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 367 455 4.3 124.0% 2 Bell Green Road 217 112 8.2 51.6% 3 Blackberry Lane 58 109 5.6 187.9% 4 Ansty Road 232 412 10.0 177.6% 5 Binley Road 364 264 5.6 72.5% 7 Leamington Road 37 42 0.8 113.5% 10 Herald Avenue 498 656 6.6 131.7% 11 Tile Hill Lane 128 225 7.3 175.8% 12 Broad Lane 148 211 4.7 142.6% 14 HolyHead Road 81 115 3.4 142.0% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 137 109 2.5 79.6% 16 Radford Road Outer 103 92 1.1 89.3% 17 Cheveral Avenue 153 97 5.0 63.4% 18 Lockhurst Lane 240 174 4.6 72.5% Total 2763 3073 Mod/Obs (%) 111%

No of links 14 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 7 Total Pass 7 Overall % In criteria 50%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 102 of 135

D.1.3 IP Outer Cordon Orbital

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 32 13 4.0 40.6% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 119 128 0.8 107.6% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 40 53 1.9 132.5% 4 Belgrave Road 80 39 5.3 48.8% 5 Attoxhall Rd 51 66 2.0 129.4% 7 Kingsbury Rd 24 44 3.4 183.3% Total 346 343 Mod/Obs (%) 99%

No of links 6 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 1 GEH <5 5 Total Pass 5 Overall % In criteria 83%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 27 31 0.7 114.8% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 126 210 6.5 166.7% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 49 56 1.0 114.3% 4 Belgrave Road 32 53 3.2 165.6% 5 Attoxhall Rd 173 67 9.7 38.7% 7 Kingsbury Rd 51 59 1.1 115.7% 8 Norman Place Rd 58 66 1.0 113.8% 9 Burnaby Rd 25 6 4.8 24.0% Total 541 548 Mod/Obs (%) 101%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 6 Total Pass 6 Overall % In criteria 75%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 103 of 135

D.1.4 IP Screenline 1

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 240 151 6.4 62.92% Foleshill Road 473 382 4.4 80.76% Lythalls Lane 32 13 4.0 40.63% Coventry to Bedworth 30 27 0.6 90.00% Total 775 573 7.8 73.94%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 3 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 240 174 4.6 72.50% Foleshill Road 367 455 4.3 123.98% Lythalls Lane 27 31 0.7 114.81% Coventry to Bedworth 74 59 1.8 79.73% Total 708 719 0.4 101.55%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

D.1.5 IP Screenline 2

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 264 285 1.3 107.95% Tile Hill Lane 206 162 3.2 78.64% Tile Hill to Canley 1583 1158 11.5 73.15% Herald Avenue 426 395 1.5 92.72% Total 2479 2000 10.1 80.68%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 3 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 148 211 4.7 142.57% Tile Hill Lane 128 225 7.3 175.78% Canley to Tile Hill 1547 1399 3.9 90.43% Herald Avenue 498 656 6.6 131.73% Total 2321 2491 3.5 107.32%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 2 GEH <5 2 Total 2 Overall % In criteria 50%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 104 of 135

D.1.6 IP Bus Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 24 24 0.0 100.00% Park and Ride South 74 72 0.2 97.30% Warwick Road (SB) 74 81 0.8 109.46% Warwick Road (NB) 13 73 9.1 561.54% Station Square 148 83 6.0 56.08% Tesco Arena 190 93 8.2 48.95% Warwick Uni 295 351 3.1 118.98% Walsgrave Hospital 283 444 8.4 156.89% Bedworth Mill St 494 364 6.3 73.68% Nuneaton Bus Station 968 620 12.4 64.05%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 40%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 37 21 3.0 56.76% Park and Ride South 80 21 0.0 26.25% Warwick Road (SB) 37 37 0.0 100.00% Warwick Road (NB) 75 74 0.1 98.67% Station Square 127 171 3.6 134.65% Tesco Arena 165 139 2.1 84.24% Warwick Uni 475 501 1.2 105.47% Walsgrave Hospital 273 443 9.0 162.27% Bedworth Mill St 359 268 5.1 74.65% Nuneaton Bus Station 467 396 3.4 84.80%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 37 21 3.0 56.76% Park and Ride South 80 21 0.0 26.25% Warwick Road (SB) 37 37 0.0 100.00% Warwick Road (NB) 75 74 0.1 98.67% Station Square 127 171 3.6 134.65% Tesco Arena 165 139 2.1 84.24% Warwick Uni 475 501 1.2 105.47% Walsgrave Hospital 273 443 9.0 162.27% Bedworth Mill St 359 268 5.1 74.65% Nuneaton Bus Station 467 396 3.4 84.80%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 105 of 135

D.1.7 IP Rail Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 486 562 3.3 115.64% Hampton In Arden 21 33 2.3 157.14% Coventry 830 910 2.7 109.64% Leamington Spa 231 287 3.5 124.24% Canley 35 43 1.3 122.86% Tile Hill 49 128 8.4 261.22% Berkswell 40 47 1.1 117.50% Warwick Parkway 77 80 0.3 103.90% Warwick 78 71 0.8 91.03% Bedworth 3 13 3.5 433.33%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 9 Total 9 Overall % In criteria 90%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 526 629 4.3 119.58% Hampton In Arden 18 37 3.6 205.56% Coventry 650 745 3.6 114.62% Leamington Spa 186 203 1.2 109.14% Canley 34 42 1.3 123.53% Tile Hill 32 63 4.5 196.88% Berkswell 26 34 1.5 130.77% Warwick Parkway 58 60 0.3 103.45% Warwick 69 76 0.8 110.14% Bedworth 3 8 2.1 266.67%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 106 of 135

D.1.8 IP Rail Flow Count

Train Link Flow Results (overall) Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Line Location Observed Modelled GEH % External Zone to Birmingham Int 1738 1259 12.4 72.44% Birmingham Int to Hampton in Arden 1636 1158 12.8 70.78% Hampton in Arden to Berkswell 1626 1166 12.3 71.71% Berkswell to Tile Hill 1612 1163 12.1 72.15% Tile Hill to Canley 1583 1158 11.5 73.15% Canley to Coventry 1568 1132 11.9 72.19% Coventry to Rugby 939 856 2.8 91.16% Rugby to Coventry 868 928 2.0 106.91% Coventry to Canley 1529 1372 4.1 89.73% Canley to Tile Hill 1547 1399 3.9 90.43% Tile Hill to Berskwell 1582 1468 2.9 92.79% Berkswell to Hampton in Arden 1600 1484 3.0 92.75% Hampton in Arden to Birmingham Int 1613 1472 3.6 91.26% Birmingham NS to Rugby Birmingham Int to External Zone 1670 1506 4.1 90.18% Leamington Spa to Coventry 377 168 12.7 44.56% Leamington Spa to Coventry Coventry to Leamington Spa 388 199 11.0 51.29% Bedworth to Coventry 74 59 1.8 79.73% Nuneaton to Coventry Coventry to Bedworth 30 27 0.6 90.00% Ext to Leamington Spa 647 609 1.5 94.13% Leamington Spa to Warwick 380 562 8.4 147.89% Warwick to Warwick Parkway 410 563 6.9 137.32% Warwick Parkway to Hatton 402 552 6.9 137.31% Hatton to Warwick Parkway 392 639 10.9 163.01% Warwick Parkway to Warwick 414 670 11.0 161.84% Warwick to Leamington Spa 391 665 11.9 170.08% Birmingham SH to Leamington Spa Leamington Spa to Ext 672 827 5.7 123.07%

No of links 26 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 11 GEH <5 11 Total 12 Overall % In criteria 46%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 107 of 135

APPENDIX E - PRIOR MATRIX PM CALIBRATION TABLES

E.1.1 PM Inner Cordon

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 748 497 10.1 66.4% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 261 252 0.6 96.6% 203 Harnell Lane East 283 223 3.8 78.8% 205 Binley Road 290 285 0.3 98.3% 206 Charterhouse Rd 326 287 2.2 88.0% 207 London Road 36 32 0.7 88.9% 208 Mile Lane 292 253 2.4 86.6% 209 Quinton Rd 121 101 1.9 83.5% 210 Warwick Rd 364 405 2.1 111.3% 211 Butts Road 596 489 4.6 82.0% 212 Holyhead Road 231 235 0.3 101.7% 213 Coundon Road 157 104 4.6 66.2% 214 Radford Road 279 276 0.2 98.9% 215 Walsgrave Road 575 629 2.2 109.4% 216 Clay Street 130 109 1.9 83.8% Total 4689 4177 Mod/Obs (%) 89%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 13 GEH <5 13 Total 14 Overall % In criteria 93%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 1873 1278 15.0 68.2% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 431 413 0.9 95.8% 203 Harnell Lane East 459 488 1.3 106.3% 205 Binley Road 457 411 2.2 89.9% 206 Charterhouse Rd 305 362 3.1 118.7% 207 London Road 18 70 7.8 388.9% 208 Mile Lane 345 379 1.8 109.9% 209 Quinton Rd 197 111 6.9 56.3% 210 Warwick Rd 723 783 2.2 108.3% 211 Butts Road 1056 1177 3.6 111.5% 212 Holyhead Road 374 316 3.1 84.5% 213 Coundon Road 255 214 2.7 83.9% 214 Radford Road 683 669 0.5 98.0% 215 Walsgrave Road 447 465 0.8 104.0% 216 Clay Street 268 341 4.2 127.2% Total 7891 7477 Mod/Obs (%) 95%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 11 GEH <5 12 Total 12 Overall % In criteria 80%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 108 of 135

E.1.2 PM Outer Cordon Radial

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 332 270 3.6 81.3% 2 Bell Green Road 193 133 4.7 68.9% 3 Blackberry Lane 58 34 3.5 58.6% 4 Ansty Road 354 454 5.0 128.2% 5 Binley Road 348 383 1.8 110.1% 6 London Rd 285 344 3.3 120.7% 7 Leamington Road 102 147 4.0 144.1% 8 Kenilworth Road 138 555 22.4 402.2% 10 Herald Avenue 724 700 0.9 96.7% 11 Tile Hill Lane 356 149 13.0 41.9% 12 Broad Lane 183 172 0.8 94.0% 14 HolyHead Road 64 247 14.7 385.9% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 71 216 12.1 304.2% 16 Radford Road Outer 111 157 4.0 141.4% 17 Cheveral Avenue 108 114 0.6 105.6% 18 Lockhurst Lane 168 151 1.3 89.9% Total 3595 4226 Mod/Obs (%) 118%

No of links 16 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 7 GEH <5 12 Total Pass 12 Overall % In criteria 75%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 698 633 2.5 90.7% 2 Bell Green Road 218 206 0.8 94.5% 3 Blackberry Lane 131 229 7.3 174.8% 4 Ansty Road 357 561 9.5 157.1% 5 Binley Road 404 393 0.6 97.3% 7 Leamington Road 32 127 10.7 396.9% 10 Herald Avenue 590 595 0.2 100.8% 11 Tile Hill Lane 267 370 5.8 138.6% 12 Broad Lane 299 418 6.3 139.8% 14 HolyHead Road 98 124 2.5 126.5% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 246 214 2.1 87.0% 16 Radford Road Outer 280 238 2.6 85.0% 17 Cheveral Avenue 425 253 9.3 59.5% 18 Lockhurst Lane 376 481 5.1 127.9% Total 4421 4842 Mod/Obs (%) 110%

No of links 14 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 6 GEH <5 7 Total Pass 7 Overall % In criteria 50%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 109 of 135

E.1.3 PM Outer Cordon Orbital

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 28 0 7.5 0.0% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 225 187 2.6 83.1% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 38 28 1.7 73.7% 4 Belgrave Road 101 115 1.3 113.9% 5 Attoxhall Rd 176 180 0.3 102.3% 7 Kingsbury Rd 102 107 0.5 104.9% 8 Norman Place Rd 60 114 5.8 190.0% 9 Burnaby Rd 13 37 4.8 284.6% Total 743 768 Mod/Obs (%) 103%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 6 Total Pass 6 Overall % In criteria 75%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 27 23 0.8 85.2% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 239 357 6.8 149.4% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 48 129 8.6 268.8% 4 Belgrave Road 11 26 3.5 236.4% 5 Attoxhall Rd 76 70 0.7 92.1% 7 Kingsbury Rd 69 132 6.3 191.3% 8 Norman Place Rd 85 56 3.5 65.9% 9 Burnaby Rd 13 5 2.7 38.5% Total 568 798 Mod/Obs (%) 140%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 2 GEH <5 5 Total Pass 5 Overall % In criteria 63%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 110 of 135

E.1.4 PM Screenline 1

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 168 151 1.3 89.88% Foleshill Road 332 270 3.6 81.33% Lythalls Lane 28 0 7.5 0.00% Coventry to Bedworth 81 72 1.0 88.89% Total 609 493 4.9 80.95%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 3 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 376 481 5.1 127.93% Foleshill Road 698 633 2.5 90.69% Lythalls Lane 27 23 0.8 85.19% Coventry to Bedworth 51 36 2.3 70.59% Total 1152 1173 0.6 101.82%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 3 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

E.1.5 PM Screenline 2

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 183 172 0.8 93.99% Tile Hill Lane 356 149 13.0 41.85% Tile Hill to Canley 2731 2075 13.4 75.98% Herald Avenue 724 700 0.9 96.69% Total 3994 3096 15.1 77.52%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 2 GEH <5 2 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75%

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 183 172 0.8 93.99% Tile Hill Lane 356 149 13.0 41.85% Tile Hill to Canley 2731 2075 13.4 75.98% Herald Avenue 724 700 0.9 96.69% Total 3994 3096 15.1 77.52%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 3 Total 3 Overall % In criteria 75% Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 111 of 135

E.1.6 PM Bus Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 0 0 0.0 100.00% Park and Ride South 0 0 0.0 100.00% Warwick Road (SB) 44 34 1.6 77.27% Warwick Road (NB) 3 21 5.2 700.00% Station Square 55 49 0.8 89.09% Tesco Arena 41 28 2.2 68.29% Warwick Uni 236 269 2.1 113.98% Walsgrave Hospital 113 188 6.1 166.37% Bedworth Mill St 58 67 1.1 115.52% Nuneaton Bus Station 283 223 3.8 78.80%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 8 GEH <5 8 Total 8 Overall % In criteria 80%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 88 32 7.2 36.36% Park and Ride South 133 69 6.4 51.88% Warwick Road (SB) 27 113 10.3 418.52% Warwick Road (NB) 77 208 11.0 270.13% Station Square 140 161 1.7 115.00% Tesco Arena 120 93 2.6 77.50% Warwick Uni 200 295 6.0 147.50% Walsgrave Hospital 117 168 4.3 143.59% Bedworth Mill St 137 155 1.5 113.14% Nuneaton Bus Station 370 242 7.3 65.41%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 40%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 112 of 135

E.1.7 PM Rail Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 961 979 0.6 101.87% Hampton In Arden 24 9 3.7 37.50% Coventry 1314 1428 3.1 108.68% Leamington Spa 344 216 7.6 62.79% Canley 54 64 1.3 118.52% Tile Hill 75 130 5.4 173.33% Berkswell 31 51 3.1 164.52% Warwick Parkway 78 81 0.3 103.85% Warwick 208 233 1.7 112.02%

No of Stations 9 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 6 GEH <5 6 Total 7 Overall % In criteria 78%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 952 805 5.0 84.56% Hampton In Arden 89 63 3.0 70.79% Coventry 1369 1464 2.5 106.94% Leamington Spa 633 687 2.1 108.53% Canley 125 92 3.2 73.60% Tile Hill 181 163 1.4 90.06% Berkswell 100 182 6.9 182.00% Warwick Parkway 249 250 0.1 100.40% Warwick 120 128 0.7 106.67%

No of Stations 9 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 7 GEH <5 7 Total 8 Overall % In criteria 89%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 113 of 135

E.1.8 PM Rail Flow Count

Train Link Flow Results (overall) Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Line Location Observed Modelled GEH % External Zone to Birmingham Int 2941 2251 13.5 76.54% Birmingham Int to Hampton in Arden 2867 2251 12.2 78.51% Hampton in Arden to Berkswell 2843 2227 12.2 78.33% Berkswell to Tile Hill 2799 2148 13.1 76.74% Tile Hill to Canley 2731 2075 13.4 75.98% Canley to Coventry 2697 2000 14.4 74.16% Coventry to Rugby 1555 1339 5.7 86.11% Rugby to Coventry 1522 1478 1.1 97.11% Coventry to Canley 2384 2052 7.0 86.07% Canley to Tile Hill 2396 2098 6.3 87.56% Tile Hill to Berskwell 2419 2139 5.9 88.42% Berkswell to Hampton in Arden 2418 2086 7.0 86.27% Hampton in Arden to Birmingham Int 2427 2056 7.8 84.71% Birmingham NS to Rugby Birmingham Int to External Zone 2667 2230 8.8 83.61% Leamington Spa to Coventry 509 317 9.4 62.28% Leamington Spa to Coventry Coventry to Leamington Spa 414 330 4.4 79.71% Bedworth to Coventry 51 36 2.3 70.59% Nuneaton to Coventry Coventry to Bedworth 81 72 1.0 88.89% Ext to Leamington Spa 800 1072 8.9 134.00% Leamington Spa to Warwick 557 687 5.2 123.34% Warwick to Warwick Parkway 607 730 4.8 120.26% Warwick Parkway to Hatton 587 597 0.4 101.70% Hatton to Warwick Parkway 873 890 0.6 101.95% Warwick Parkway to Warwick 821 856 1.2 104.26% Warwick to Leamington Spa 676 917 8.5 135.65% Birmingham SH to Leamington Spa Leamington Spa to Ext 733 845 4.0 115.28%

No of links 26 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 9 Total 22 Overall % In criteria 85%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 114 of 135

APPENDIX F - POST MATRIX AM CALIBRATION TABLES

F.1.1 AM Inner Cordon

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 1037 992 1.4 95.7% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 636 589 1.9 92.6% 203 Harnell Lane East 400 378 1.1 94.5% 205 Binley Road 368 395 1.4 107.3% 206 Charterhouse Rd 266 248 1.1 93.2% 207 London Road 16 23 1.6 143.8% 208 Mile Lane 514 465 2.2 90.5% 209 Quinton Rd 172 145 2.1 84.3% 210 Warwick Rd 630 529 4.2 84.0% 211 Butts Road 790 825 1.2 104.4% 212 Holyhead Road 326 291 2.0 89.3% 213 Coundon Road 222 250 1.8 112.6% 214 Radford Road 448 453 0.2 101.1% 215 Walsgrave Road 741 679 2.3 91.6% 216 Clay Street 179 183 0.3 102.2% Total 6745 6445 Mod/Obs (%) 96%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 14 GEH <5 15 Total 15 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 369 382 0.7 103.5% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 217 235 1.2 108.3% 203 Harnell Lane East 222 192 2.1 86.5% 205 Binley Road 245 195 3.4 79.6% 206 Charterhouse Rd 256 244 0.8 95.3% 207 London Road 28 27 0.2 96.4% 208 Mile Lane 240 207 2.2 86.3% 209 Quinton Rd 95 66 3.2 69.5% 210 Warwick Rd 350 346 0.2 98.9% 211 Butts Road 626 643 0.7 102.7% 212 Holyhead Road 181 138 3.4 76.2% 213 Coundon Road 123 118 0.5 95.9% 214 Radford Road 424 439 0.7 103.5% 215 Walsgrave Road 214 228 0.9 106.5% 216 Clay Street 68 74 0.7 108.8% Total 3658 3534 Mod/Obs (%) 97%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 14 GEH <5 15 Total 15 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 115 of 135

F.1.2 AM Outer Cordon Radial

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 442 473 1.4 107.0% 2 Bell Green Road 238 265 1.7 111.3% 3 Blackberry Lane 90 98 0.8 108.9% 4 Ansty Road 367 380 0.7 103.5% 5 Binley Road 270 275 0.3 101.9% 6 London Rd 372 387 0.8 104.0% 7 Leamington Road 22 32 1.9 145.5% 8 Kenilworth Road 198 226 1.9 114.1% 10 Herald Avenue 409 377 1.6 92.2% 11 Tile Hill Lane 183 180 0.2 98.4% 12 Broad Lane 205 219 1.0 106.8% 14 HolyHead Road 55 71 2.0 129.1% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 231 214 1.1 92.6% 16 Radford Road Outer 192 187 0.4 97.4% 17 Cheveral Avenue 291 261 1.8 89.7% 18 Lockhurst Lane 318 323 0.3 101.6% Total 3883 3968 Mod/Obs (%) 102%

No of links 16 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 14 GEH <5 16 Total Pass 16 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 235 207 1.9 88.1% 2 Bell Green Road 151 145 0.5 96.0% 3 Blackberry Lane 40 45 0.8 112.5% 4 Ansty Road 407 358 2.5 88.0% 5 Binley Road 306 317 0.6 103.6% 7 Leamington Road 70 76 0.7 108.6% 10 Herald Avenue 694 733 1.5 105.6% 11 Tile Hill Lane 244 234 0.6 95.9% 12 Broad Lane 125 143 1.6 114.4% 14 HolyHead Road 64 82 2.1 128.1% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 88 105 1.7 119.3% 16 Radford Road Outer 76 86 1.1 113.2% 17 Cheveral Avenue 138 131 0.6 94.9% 18 Lockhurst Lane 177 175 0.2 98.9% Total 2815 2837 Mod/Obs (%) 101%

No of links 14 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 13 GEH <5 14 Total Pass 14 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 116 of 135

F.1.3 AM Outer Cordon Orbital

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 8 5 1.2 62.5% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 164 161 0.2 98.2% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 60 69 1.1 115.0% 4 Belgrave Road 14 21 1.7 150.0% 5 Attoxhall Rd 106 95 1.1 89.6% 7 Kingsbury Rd 95 89 0.6 93.7% 8 Norman Place Rd 58 67 1.1 115.5% 9 Burnaby Rd 9 7 0.7 77.8% Total 514 514 Mod/Obs (%) 100%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 6 GEH <5 8 Total Pass 8 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 14 1 4.7 7.1% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 154 160 0.5 103.9% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 48 22 4.4 45.8% 4 Belgrave Road 69 63 0.7 91.3% 5 Attoxhall Rd 198 164 2.5 82.8% 7 Kingsbury Rd 70 72 0.2 102.9% 8 Norman Place Rd 41 50 1.3 122.0% 9 Burnaby Rd 9 10 0.3 111.1% Total 603 542 Mod/Obs (%) 90%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 6 GEH <5 8 Total Pass 8 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 117 of 135

F.1.4 AM Screenline 1

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 318 323 0.3 101.57% Foleshill Road 442 473 1.4 107.01% Lythalls Lane 8 5 1.2 62.50% Coventry to Bedworth 43 43 0.0 100.00% Total 811 844 1.1 104.07%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 177 175 0.2 98.87% Foleshill Road 235 207 1.9 88.09% Lythalls Lane 14 1 4.7 7.14% Coventry to Bedworth 47 42 0.7 89.36% Total 473 425 2.3 89.85%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

F.1.5 AM Screenline 2

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 205 219 1.0 106.83% Tile Hill Lane 183 180 0.2 98.36% Tile Hill to Canley 2603 2577 0.5 99.00% Herald Avenue 409 377 1.6 92.18% Total 3400 3353 0.8 98.62%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 205 219 1.0 106.83% Tile Hill Lane 183 180 0.2 98.36% Tile Hill to Canley 2603 2577 0.5 99.00% Herald Avenue 409 377 1.6 92.18% Total 3400 3353 0.8 98.62%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 118 of 135

F.1.6 AM Bus Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 77 75 0.2 97.40% Park and Ride South 94 88 0.0 93.62% Warwick Road (SB) 74 67 0.8 90.54% Warwick Road (NB) 9 14 1.5 155.56% Station Square 102 98 0.4 96.08% Tesco Arena 57 55 0.3 96.49% Warwick Uni 25 29 0.8 116.00% Walsgrave Hospital 61 64 0.4 104.92% Bedworth Mill St 125 125 0.0 100.00% Nuneaton Bus Station 234 210 1.6 89.74%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 0 0 0.0 100.00% Park and Ride South 0 0 0.0 100.00% Warwick Road (SB) 35 42 1.1 120.00% Warwick Road (NB) 74 81 0.8 109.46% Station Square 121 145 2.1 119.83% Tesco Arena 52 52 0.0 100.00% Warwick Uni 394 425 1.5 107.87% Walsgrave Hospital 405 411 0.3 101.48% Bedworth Mill St 113 116 0.3 102.65% Nuneaton Bus Station 215 217 0.1 100.93%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 119 of 135

F.1.7 AM Rail Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 965 921 1.4 95.44% Hampton In Arden 102 98 0.4 96.08% Coventry 1811 1656 3.7 91.44% Leamington Spa 895 836 2.0 93.41% Canley 140 128 1.0 91.43% Tile Hill 235 220 1.0 93.62% Berkswell 146 138 0.7 94.52% Warwick Parkway 314 298 0.9 94.90% Warwick 174 188 1.0 108.05% Bedworth 18 20 0.5 111.11%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 1015 1063 1.5 104.73% Hampton In Arden 14 17 0.8 121.43% Coventry 1005 1042 1.2 103.68% Leamington Spa 317 336 1.1 105.99% Canley 46 52 0.9 113.04% Tile Hill 93 100 0.7 107.53% Berkswell 17 19 0.5 111.76% Warwick Parkway 30 32 0.4 106.67% Warwick 135 138 0.3 102.22% Bedworth 7 7 0.0 100.00%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 120 of 135

F.1.8 AM Rail Flow Count

Train Link Flow Results (overall) Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Line Location Observed Modelled GEH % External Zone to Birmingham Int 2853 2620 4.5 91.83% Birmingham Int to Hampton in Arden 2646 2535 2.2 95.80% Hampton in Arden to Berkswell 2634 2557 1.5 97.08% Berkswell to Tile Hill 2634 2607 0.5 98.97% Tile Hill to Canley 2603 2577 0.5 99.00% Canley to Coventry 2586 2562 0.5 99.07% Coventry to Rugby 1891 1968 1.8 104.07% Rugby to Coventry 1272 1106 4.8 86.95% Coventry to Canley 2463 2411 1.1 97.89% Canley to Tile Hill 2503 2502 0.0 99.96% Tile Hill to Berskwell 2582 2651 1.3 102.67% Berkswell to Hampton in Arden 2630 2722 1.8 103.50% Hampton in Arden to Birmingham Int 2658 2780 2.3 104.59% Birmingham NS to Rugby Birmingham Int to External Zone 2742 2723 0.4 99.31% Leamington Spa to Coventry 507 489 0.8 96.45% Leamington Spa to Coventry Coventry to Leamington Spa 404 393 0.6 97.28% Bedworth to Coventry 47 42 0.7 89.36% Nuneaton to Coventry Coventry to Bedworth 43 43 0.0 100.00% Ext to Leamington Spa 448 473 1.2 105.58% Leamington Spa to Warwick 618 622 0.2 100.65% Warwick to Warwick Parkway 799 712 3.2 89.11% Warwick Parkway to Hatton 881 859 0.7 97.50% Hatton to Warwick Parkway 645 599 1.8 92.87% Warwick Parkway to Warwick 714 716 0.1 100.28% Warwick to Leamington Spa 662 677 0.6 102.27% Birmingham SH to Leamington Spa Leamington Spa to Ext 848 932 2.8 109.91%

No of links 26 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 26 GEH <5 26 Total 26 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 121 of 135

APPENDIX G - POST MATRIX IP CALIBRATION TABLES

G.1.1 IP Inner Cordon

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 957 939 0.6 98.1% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 402 411 0.4 102.2% 203 Harnell Lane East 199 199 0.0 100.0% 205 Binley Road 323 332 0.5 102.8% 206 Charterhouse Rd 229 231 0.1 100.9% 207 London Road 30 28 0.4 93.3% 208 Mile Lane 284 288 0.2 101.4% 209 Quinton Rd 206 202 0.3 98.1% 210 Warwick Rd 477 488 0.5 102.3% 211 Butts Road 734 760 1.0 103.5% 212 Holyhead Road 432 421 0.5 97.5% 213 Coundon Road 220 234 0.9 106.4% 214 Radford Road 458 472 0.6 103.1% 215 Walsgrave Road 730 692 1.4 94.8% 216 Clay Street 224 225 0.1 100.4% Total 5905 5922 Mod/Obs (%) 100%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 15 GEH <5 15 Total 15 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 1169 1115 1.6 95.4% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 356 374 0.9 105.1% 203 Harnell Lane East 122 131 0.8 107.4% 205 Binley Road 296 307 0.6 103.7% 206 Charterhouse Rd 193 192 0.1 99.5% 207 London Road 23 23 0.0 100.0% 208 Mile Lane 313 313 0.0 100.0% 209 Quinton Rd 126 124 0.2 98.4% 210 Warwick Rd 339 356 0.9 105.0% 211 Butts Road 805 789 0.6 98.0% 212 Holyhead Road 265 275 0.6 103.8% 213 Coundon Road 135 146 0.9 108.1% 214 Radford Road 615 583 1.3 94.8% 215 Walsgrave Road 279 280 0.1 100.4% 216 Clay Street 202 213 0.8 105.4% Total 5238 5221 Mod/Obs (%) 100%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 15 GEH <5 15 Total 15 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 122 of 135

G.1.2 IP Outer Cordon Radial

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 473 475 0.1 100.4% 2 Bell Green Road 285 273 0.7 95.8% 3 Blackberry Lane 69 67 0.2 97.1% 4 Ansty Road 322 343 1.2 106.5% 5 Binley Road 284 279 0.3 98.2% 6 London Rd 451 442 0.4 98.0% 7 Leamington Road 15 17 0.5 113.3% 8 Kenilworth Road 277 267 0.6 96.4% 10 Herald Avenue 426 424 0.1 99.5% 11 Tile Hill Lane 206 195 0.8 94.7% 12 Broad Lane 264 261 0.2 98.9% 14 HolyHead Road 117 123 0.5 105.1% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 228 212 1.1 93.0% 16 Radford Road Outer 115 113 0.2 98.3% 17 Cheveral Avenue 282 267 0.9 94.7% 18 Lockhurst Lane 240 238 0.1 99.2% Total 4054 3996 Mod/Obs (%) 99%

No of links 16 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 16 GEH <5 16 Total Pass 16 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 367 387 1.0 105.4% 2 Bell Green Road 217 210 0.5 96.8% 3 Blackberry Lane 58 59 0.1 101.7% 4 Ansty Road 232 250 1.2 107.8% 5 Binley Road 364 347 0.9 95.3% 7 Leamington Road 37 38 0.2 102.7% 10 Herald Avenue 498 521 1.0 104.6% 11 Tile Hill Lane 128 133 0.4 103.9% 12 Broad Lane 148 154 0.5 104.1% 14 HolyHead Road 81 83 0.2 102.5% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 137 128 0.8 93.4% 16 Radford Road Outer 103 105 0.2 101.9% 17 Cheveral Avenue 153 153 0.0 100.0% 18 Lockhurst Lane 240 248 0.5 103.3% Total 2763 2816 Mod/Obs (%) 102%

No of links 14 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 14 GEH <5 14 Total Pass 14 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 123 of 135

G.1.3 IP Outer Cordon Orbital

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 32 29 0.5 90.6% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 119 119 0.0 100.0% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 40 39 0.2 97.5% 4 Belgrave Road 80 78 0.2 97.5% 5 Attoxhall Rd 51 52 0.1 102.0% 7 Kingsbury Rd 24 26 0.4 108.3% Total 346 343 Mod/Obs (%) 99%

No of links 6 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 6 GEH <5 6 Total Pass 6 Overall % In criteria 100%

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 32 29 0.5 90.6% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 119 119 0.0 100.0% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 40 39 0.2 97.5% 4 Belgrave Road 80 78 0.2 97.5% 5 Attoxhall Rd 51 52 0.1 102.0% 7 Kingsbury Rd 24 26 0.4 108.3% Total 346 343 Mod/Obs (%) 99%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 8 GEH <5 8 Total Pass 8 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 124 of 135

G.1.4 IP Screenline 1

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 240 238 0.1 99.17% Foleshill Road 473 475 0.1 100.42% Lythalls Lane 32 29 0.5 90.63% Coventry to Bedworth 30 29 0.2 96.67% Total 775 771 0.1 99.48%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 240 248 0.5 103.33% Foleshill Road 367 387 1.0 105.45% Lythalls Lane 27 26 0.2 96.30% Coventry to Bedworth 74 67 0.8 90.54% Total 708 728 0.7 102.82%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

G.1.5 IP Screenline 2

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 264 261 0.2 98.86% Tile Hill Lane 206 195 0.8 94.66% Tile Hill to Canley 1583 1522 1.5 96.15% Herald Avenue 426 424 0.1 99.53% Total 2479 2402 1.6 96.89%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 148 154 0.5 104.05% Tile Hill Lane 128 133 0.4 103.91% Canley to Tile Hill 1547 1536 0.3 99.29% Herald Avenue 498 521 1.0 104.62% Total 2321 2344 0.5 100.99%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 125 of 135

G.1.6 IP Bus Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 24 24 0.0 100.00% Park and Ride South 74 73 0.0 98.65% Warwick Road (SB) 74 73 0.1 98.65% Warwick Road (NB) 13 26 2.9 200.00% Station Square 148 138 0.8 93.24% Tesco Arena 190 182 0.6 95.79% Warwick Uni 295 295 0.0 100.00% Walsgrave Hospital 283 285 0.1 100.71% Bedworth Mill St 494 490 0.2 99.19% Nuneaton Bus Station 968 950 0.6 98.14%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 37 35 0.3 94.59% Park and Ride South 80 74 0.0 92.50% Warwick Road (SB) 37 36 0.2 97.30% Warwick Road (NB) 75 74 0.1 98.67% Station Square 127 127 0.0 100.00% Tesco Arena 165 163 0.2 98.79% Warwick Uni 475 491 0.7 103.37% Walsgrave Hospital 273 281 0.5 102.93% Bedworth Mill St 359 354 0.3 98.61% Nuneaton Bus Station 467 467 0.0 100.00%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 126 of 135

G.1.7 IP Rail Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 486 491 0.2 101.03% Hampton In Arden 21 21 0.0 100.00% Coventry 830 837 0.2 100.84% Leamington Spa 231 232 0.1 100.43% Canley 35 37 0.3 105.71% Tile Hill 49 52 0.4 106.12% Berkswell 40 40 0.0 100.00% Warwick Parkway 77 72 0.6 93.51% Warwick 78 73 0.6 93.59% Bedworth 3 6 1.4 200.00%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 526 544 0.8 103.42% Hampton In Arden 18 19 0.2 105.56% Coventry 650 698 1.8 107.38% Leamington Spa 186 189 0.2 101.61% Canley 34 38 0.7 111.76% Tile Hill 32 35 0.5 109.38% Berkswell 26 28 0.4 107.69% Warwick Parkway 58 55 0.4 94.83% Warwick 69 66 0.4 95.65% Bedworth 3 5 1.0 166.67%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 127 of 135

G.1.8 IP Rail Flow Count

Train Link Flow Results (overall) Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Line Location Observed Modelled GEH % External Zone to Birmingham Int 1738 1683 1.3 96.84% Birmingham Int to Hampton in Arden 1636 1550 2.2 94.74% Hampton in Arden to Berkswell 1626 1542 2.1 94.83% Berkswell to Tile Hill 1612 1532 2.0 95.04% Tile Hill to Canley 1583 1522 1.5 96.15% Canley to Coventry 1568 1490 2.0 95.03% Coventry to Rugby 939 1025 2.7 109.16% Rugby to Coventry 868 877 0.3 101.04% Coventry to Canley 1529 1504 0.6 98.36% Canley to Tile Hill 1547 1536 0.3 99.29% Tile Hill to Berskwell 1582 1563 0.5 98.80% Berkswell to Hampton in Arden 1600 1585 0.4 99.06% Hampton in Arden to Birmingham Int 1613 1595 0.4 98.88% Birmingham NS to Rugby Birmingham Int to External Zone 1670 1675 0.1 100.30% Leamington Spa to Coventry 377 340 2.0 90.19% Leamington Spa to Coventry Coventry to Leamington Spa 388 355 1.7 91.49% Bedworth to Coventry 74 67 0.8 90.54% Nuneaton to Coventry Coventry to Bedworth 30 29 0.2 96.67% Ext to Leamington Spa 647 635 0.5 98.15% Leamington Spa to Warwick 380 404 1.2 106.32% Warwick to Warwick Parkway 410 418 0.4 101.95% Warwick Parkway to Hatton 402 422 1.0 104.98% Hatton to Warwick Parkway 392 404 0.6 103.06% Warwick Parkway to Warwick 414 417 0.1 100.72% Warwick to Leamington Spa 391 410 0.9 104.86% Birmingham SH to Leamington Spa Leamington Spa to Ext 672 699 1.0 104.02%

No of links 26 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 26 GEH <5 26 Total 26 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 128 of 135

APPENDIX H - POST MATRIX PM CALIBRATION TABLES

H.1.1 PM Inner Cordon

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 748 723 0.9 96.7% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 261 265 0.2 101.5% 203 Harnell Lane East 283 278 0.3 98.2% 205 Binley Road 290 289 0.1 99.7% 206 Charterhouse Rd 326 326 0.0 100.0% 207 London Road 36 36 0.0 100.0% 208 Mile Lane 292 287 0.3 98.3% 209 Quinton Rd 121 120 0.1 99.2% 210 Warwick Rd 364 343 1.1 94.2% 211 Butts Road 596 597 0.0 100.2% 212 Holyhead Road 231 217 0.9 93.9% 213 Coundon Road 157 152 0.4 96.8% 214 Radford Road 279 274 0.3 98.2% 215 Walsgrave Road 575 569 0.3 99.0% 216 Clay Street 130 129 0.1 99.2% Total 4689 4605 Mod/Obs (%) 98%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 15 GEH <5 15 Total 15 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 201 Foleshill Road 1873 1795 1.8 95.8% 202 Stoney Stanton Road 431 436 0.2 101.2% 203 Harnell Lane East 459 471 0.6 102.6% 205 Binley Road 457 459 0.1 100.4% 206 Charterhouse Rd 305 309 0.2 101.3% 207 London Road 18 20 0.5 111.1% 208 Mile Lane 345 345 0.0 100.0% 209 Quinton Rd 197 191 0.4 97.0% 210 Warwick Rd 723 726 0.1 100.4% 211 Butts Road 1056 1043 0.4 98.8% 212 Holyhead Road 374 387 0.7 103.5% 213 Coundon Road 255 258 0.2 101.2% 214 Radford Road 683 667 0.6 97.7% 215 Walsgrave Road 447 437 0.5 97.8% 216 Clay Street 268 274 0.4 102.2% Total 7891 7818 Mod/Obs (%) 99%

No of Links 15 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 15 GEH <5 15 Total 15 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 129 of 135

H.1.2 PM Outer Cordon Radial

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 332 345 0.7 103.9% 2 Bell Green Road 193 175 1.3 90.7% 3 Blackberry Lane 58 52 0.8 89.7% 4 Ansty Road 354 387 1.7 109.3% 5 Binley Road 348 353 0.3 101.4% 6 London Rd 285 297 0.7 104.2% 7 Leamington Road 102 114 1.2 111.8% 8 Kenilworth Road 138 187 3.8 135.5% 10 Herald Avenue 724 753 1.1 104.0% 11 Tile Hill Lane 356 281 4.2 78.9% 12 Broad Lane 183 186 0.2 101.6% 14 HolyHead Road 64 87 2.6 135.9% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 71 91 2.2 128.2% 16 Radford Road Outer 111 120 0.8 108.1% 17 Cheveral Avenue 108 113 0.5 104.6% 18 Lockhurst Lane 168 181 1.0 107.7% Total 3595 3722 Mod/Obs (%) 104%

No of links 16 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 13 GEH <5 16 Total Pass 16 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Foleshill Road 698 789 3.3 113.0% 2 Bell Green Road 218 218 0.0 100.0% 3 Blackberry Lane 131 145 1.2 110.7% 4 Ansty Road 357 457 5.0 128.0% 5 Binley Road 404 399 0.2 98.8% 7 Leamington Road 32 43 1.8 134.4% 10 Herald Avenue 590 566 1.0 95.9% 11 Tile Hill Lane 267 296 1.7 110.9% 12 Broad Lane 299 326 1.5 109.0% 14 HolyHead Road 98 103 0.5 105.1% 15 Barkers Butt Lane 246 241 0.3 98.0% 16 Radford Road Outer 280 262 1.1 93.6% 17 Cheveral Avenue 425 368 2.9 86.6% 18 Lockhurst Lane 376 455 3.9 121.0% Total 4421 4668 Mod/Obs (%) 106%

No of links 14 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 12 GEH <5 14 Total Pass 14 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 130 of 135

H.1.3 PM Outer Cordon Orbital

Inbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 28 19 1.9 67.9% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 225 217 0.5 96.4% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 38 28 1.7 73.7% 4 Belgrave Road 101 65 4.0 64.4% 5 Attoxhall Rd 176 158 1.4 89.8% 7 Kingsbury Rd 102 91 1.1 89.2% 8 Norman Place Rd 60 76 1.9 126.7% 9 Burnaby Rd 13 18 1.3 138.5% Total 743 672 Mod/Obs (%) 90%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 3 GEH <5 8 Total Pass 8 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Site Location Observed Modelled GEH % 1 Lythalls Lane 27 17 2.1 63.0% 2 Seawall Hwy/Blackberry Lane 239 249 0.6 104.2% 3 Seawall Highway/Ansty Rd 48 67 2.5 139.6% 4 Belgrave Road 11 16 1.4 145.5% 5 Attoxhall Rd 76 80 0.5 105.3% 7 Kingsbury Rd 69 82 1.5 118.8% 8 Norman Place Rd 85 83 0.2 97.6% 9 Burnaby Rd 13 10 0.9 76.9% Total 568 604 Mod/Obs (%) 106%

No of links 8 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 5 GEH <5 8 Total Pass 8 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 131 of 135

H.1.4 PM Screenline 1

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 168 181 1.0 107.74% Foleshill Road 332 345 0.7 103.92% Lythalls Lane 28 19 1.9 67.86% Coventry to Bedworth 81 80 0.1 98.77% Total 609 625 0.6 102.63%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Lockhurst Lane 376 455 3.9 121.01% Foleshill Road 698 789 3.3 113.04% Lythalls Lane 27 17 2.1 62.96% Coventry to Bedworth 51 50 0.1 98.04% Total 1152 1311 4.5 113.80%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

H.1.5 PM Screenline 2

Inbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 183 186 0.2 101.64% Tile Hill Lane 356 281 4.2 78.93% Tile Hill to Canley 2731 2676 1.1 97.99% Herald Avenue 724 753 1.1 104.01% Total 3994 3896 1.6 97.55%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Outbound (Total) <5.0 75%-125% Location Observed Modelled GEH % Broad Lane 299 326 1.5 109.03% Tile Hill Lane 267 296 1.7 110.86% Canley to Tile Hill 2396 2428 0.7 101.34% Herald Avenue 590 566 1.0 95.93% Total 3552 3616 1.1 101.80%

No of links 4 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 4 GEH <5 4 Total 4 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 132 of 135

H.1.6 PM Bus Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 0 0 0.0 100.00% Park and Ride South 0 0 0.0 100.00% Warwick Road (SB) 149 145 0.3 97.32% Warwick Road (NB) 14 17 0.8 121.43% Station Square 205 197 0.6 96.10% Tesco Arena 110 106 0.4 96.36% Warwick Uni 742 734 0.3 98.92% Walsgrave Hospital 363 368 0.3 101.38% Bedworth Mill St 185 194 0.7 104.86% Nuneaton Bus Station 849 847 0.1 99.76%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Park and Ride North 88 83 0.5 94.32% Park and Ride South 133 129 0.3 96.99% Warwick Road (SB) 27 29 0.4 107.41% Warwick Road (NB) 77 77 0.0 100.00% Station Square 140 139 0.1 99.29% Tesco Arena 120 116 0.4 96.67% Warwick Uni 200 206 0.4 103.00% Walsgrave Hospital 117 119 0.2 101.71% Bedworth Mill St 137 151 1.2 110.22% Nuneaton Bus Station 370 366 0.2 98.92%

No of Stations 10 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 10 GEH <5 10 Total 10 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 133 of 135

H.1.7 PM Rail Boarding & Alighting

Boarding Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 961 1002 1.3 104.27% Hampton In Arden 24 24 0.0 100.00% Coventry 1314 1312 0.1 99.85% Leamington Spa 344 350 0.3 101.74% Canley 54 56 0.3 103.70% Tile Hill 75 80 0.6 106.67% Berkswell 31 33 0.4 106.45% Warwick Parkway 78 78 0.0 100.00% Warwick 208 196 0.8 94.23%

No of Stations 9 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 9 Total 9 Overall % In criteria 100%

Alighting Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Station Name Observed Modelled GEH % Birmingham International 952 931 0.7 97.79% Hampton In Arden 89 86 0.3 96.63% Coventry 1369 1439 1.9 105.11% Leamington Spa 633 610 0.9 96.37% Canley 125 124 0.1 99.20% Tile Hill 181 176 0.4 97.24% Berkswell 100 101 0.1 101.00% Warwick Parkway 249 239 0.6 95.98% Warwick 120 125 0.5 104.17%

No of Stations 9 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 9 GEH <5 9 Total 9 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 134 of 135

H.1.8 PM Rail Flow Count

Train Link Flow Results (overall) Satisfaction Criteria <5.0 75%-125% Line Location Observed Modelled GEH % External Zone to Birmingham Int 2941 2963 0.4 100.75% Birmingham Int to Hampton in Arden 2867 2873 0.1 100.21% Hampton in Arden to Berkswell 2843 2832 0.2 99.61% Berkswell to Tile Hill 2799 2785 0.3 99.50% Tile Hill to Canley 2731 2676 1.1 97.99% Canley to Coventry 2697 2572 2.4 95.37% Coventry to Rugby 1555 1569 0.4 100.90% Rugby to Coventry 1522 1495 0.7 98.23% Coventry to Canley 2384 2393 0.2 100.38% Canley to Tile Hill 2396 2428 0.7 101.34% Tile Hill to Berskwell 2419 2441 0.4 100.91% Berkswell to Hampton in Arden 2418 2419 0.0 100.04% Hampton in Arden to Birmingham Int 2427 2398 0.6 98.81% Birmingham NS to Rugby Birmingham Int to External Zone 2667 2561 2.1 96.03% Leamington Spa to Coventry 509 464 2.0 91.16% Leamington Spa to Coventry Coventry to Leamington Spa 414 411 0.1 99.28% Bedworth to Coventry 51 50 0.1 98.04% Nuneaton to Coventry Coventry to Bedworth 81 80 0.1 98.77% Ext to Leamington Spa 800 841 1.4 105.13% Leamington Spa to Warwick 557 534 1.0 95.87% Warwick to Warwick Parkway 607 639 1.3 105.27% Warwick Parkway to Hatton 587 586 0.0 99.83% Hatton to Warwick Parkway 873 877 0.1 100.46% Warwick Parkway to Warwick 821 768 1.9 93.54% Warwick to Leamington Spa 676 734 2.2 108.58% Birmingham SH to Leamington Spa Leamington Spa to Ext 733 728 0.2 99.32%

No of links 26 %AGE difference within 75 -125% 26 GEH <5 26 Total 26 Overall % In criteria 100%

Coventry PT Model Development, Local Model Validation Report, November 2009 Page 135 of 135